Transpennine Industrial Relations

[muz379]

Worth noting that the Driver RDW Agreement didn’t naturally end. ASLEF pulled it a week or two prior to it’s natural expiry.
Think that’s worth noting as some reps are allowing us to believe it simply ended and the company weren’t interested in a renewal, which is untrue.

I was aware it was pulled early but in any event has now expired.

As for the company wanting a renewal I'd be interested on what terms . I can't see the DFT letting Tocs renew them on the same basis as before.

 

[Moonshot]

I was aware it was pulled early but in any event has now expired.

As for the company wanting a renewal I'd be interested on what terms . I can't see the DFT letting Tocs renew them on the same basis as before.

Which is a classic example of micromanaging by the DFT. You would have to wonder going forward in the face of reduced services whether there is a demand for RDW.

 

[baz962]

Maybe not, but it’s debatable to what extent that’s crucial, given todays multitude of monitoring technologies used by the railway make recreating that old school culture you mention up thread of ignoring & covering up incidents virtually impossible

Not really debatable. Those multitude of monitoring technologies you mention and the safety systems , make it hard to cover up and help with not having an incident. But you would still have many without the training. People always mention other jobs like bus or truck drivers. Well I could get in any car , bus or lorry and start and drive them. Before I became a train driver , if you had given me a key for a train , I would in all probability still be sat in the depot . A bus / truck company can call an agency and just have a qualified driver come and drive. As a train driver that has just gone from one toc to another and having to learn new routes and traction , I know that you can't just rock up and do the job. Even when you know how to move a train , you wouldn't know what to do when the systems start making a noise. Even if you knew that , you wouldn't know the station order , braking points etc. I used to be a courier. I could leave fed ex on a Friday , start with DHL Monday and easily do a 100 deliveries in a new area. Train driving is the only job ( I have had many ) where I go to a new company and need several months training again. There is a saying , anybody can drive a train , but not everybody can be a train driver. I like it to football. We could get a rail UK forum team together and play some decent football matches . We could then go and play Manchester city and get done 38 nil. Anybody could move a train if I showed them. But they would get stopped and have an incident by the first station stop. Alternatively they might be able to cope with the safety systems and get from A to B . Would be crawling up the mainline at around 30 mph and quadruple the journey times.

 

[Watershed]

Which is a classic example of micromanaging by the DFT. You would have to wonder going forward in the face of reduced services whether there is a demand for RDW.

That's putting the cart before the horse. Services are being reduced because of the lack of a RDW agreement. Nobody is being straight about what is really happening, and why.

 

[43066]

Maybe not, but it’s debatable to what extent that’s crucial, given todays multitude of monitoring technologies used by the railway make recreating that old school culture you mention up thread of ignoring & covering up incidents virtually impossible

The objective of having competent, well trained drivers is preventing incidents in the first place, and all the consequential delay, inconvenience and risk to life and limb.

I’m not sure why it’s so difficult for people on here to just accept that driving trains around the U.K. rail network in the 21st century is a highly skilled and demanding job which is rewarded commensurately.

 

[Moonshot]

That's putting the cart before the horse. Services are being reduced because of the lack of a RDW agreement. Nobody is being straight about what is really happening, and why.

Services were already reduced before the RDWs were withdrawn. ASLEF are currently putting a ballot together for Northern drivers..... which is likely to end up in strikes running in tandem with TPE.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Services were already reduced before the RDWs were withdrawn. ASLEF are currently putting a ballot together for Northern drivers..... which is likely to end up in strikes running in tandem with TPE.

Excellent. Then the DfT can save even more money! Before long ASLEF & RMT will have so few trains running the DfTs mission is complete and we won't need trains at all as the unions have managed to stop people travelling. The DfT & government will be delighted and the unions will claim they were doing it for their members benefit. Only they don't have members anymore! OK, a bit extreme, but the DfT & government really are very happy for as many strikes as possible.

 

[hello]

Excellent. Then the DfT can save even more money! Before long ASLEF & RMT will have so few trains running the DfTs mission is complete and we won't need trains at all as the unions have managed to stop people travelling. The DfT & government will be delighted and the unions will claim they were doing it for their members benefit. Only they don't have members anymore! OK, a bit extreme, but the DfT & government really are very happy for as many strikes as possible.

There isn’t strikes, they are just having there days off, surely there is an issue if a toc/dft are cutting timetables because drivers are having there booked days off, off, not enough staff in the first place I would say

 

[Dieseldriver]

There isn’t strikes, they are just having there days off, surely there is an issue if a toc/dft are cutting timetables because drivers are having there booked days off, off, not enough staff in the first place I would say

Exactly this. Regardless of opinions of whether the issues are worthy of a rest day working ban, Drivers and Guards are fully entitled to be unavailable to work their rest days. What the disruption caused by a rest day working ban demonstrates is that there aren’t enough Traincrew employee to run the basic service without a heavy reliance on overtime.

 

[Wolfie]

Exactly this. Regardless of opinions of whether the issues are worthy of a rest day working ban, Drivers and Guards are fully entitled to be unavailable to work their rest days. What the disruption caused by a rest day working ban demonstrates is that there aren’t enough Traincrew employee to run the basic service without a heavy reliance on overtime.

I agree with that. I also know, having had the "delights" of dealing with them for 30+ years, that HMT's likely preferred response is a mixture of service reductions and massive, likely highly negative, changes in staff T&C's.

 

[dk1]

I agree with that. I also know, having had the "delights" of dealing with them for 30+ years, that HMT's likely preferred response is a mixture of service reductions and massive, likely highly negative, changes in staff T&C's.

How will they achieve these massive, highly negative changes in T&Cs?

 

[lammergeier]

How will they achieve these massive, highly negative changes in T&Cs?

This time last year I'd have said fire and rehire was likely, although I suspect they've left it too long now as passengers are returning in good numbers. Perhaps, if big changes are wanted, they will leave existing staff alone but bring in new starters on new contracts - similar to the GWR drivers situation and what EMR did a few years ago with Sunday working, albeit with bigger changes (eg substandard pension, longer hours, less pay etc.) Not saying it will happen or would be unopposed, just musing.

 

[dk1]

This time last year I'd have said fire and rehire was likely, although I suspect they've left it too long now as passengers are returning in good numbers.

That sort of nonsense doesn’t happen on the railway & certainly not with traincrew.

 

[DoubleO]

That sort of nonsense doesn’t happen on the railway & certainly not with traincrew.

That's a pretty bold statement statement to make....I hope it doesn't age badly!

 

[dk1]

That's a pretty bold statement statement to make....I hope it doesn't age badly!

Don’t worry, it won’t.

 

[43066]

I agree with that. I also know, having had the "delights" of dealing with them for 30+ years, that HMT's likely preferred response is a mixture of service reductions and massive, likely highly negative, changes in staff T&C's.

In that case the only logical approach for the rail unions is to show that any attempt to impose “massive, highly negative changes in staff Ts and Cs” will lead to an all out war, generate lots of negative headlines, and cost far more in overall terms than any savings made.

As British Gas engineers found out recently meekly doing nothing in these situations doesn't lead to a more favourable outcome.

Let’s hope it doesn’t come to it!

 

[Bald Rick]

How will they achieve these massive, highly negative changes in T&Cs?

How do you think?

 

[Economist]

I'm personally against the introduction of "B scale" terms and conditions for new joiners, it's a classic industrial relations strategy to divide the workforce. I know that in the case of Protected Staff from the BR days such a system exists, however they spent many years on very low pay which newer joiners like myself didn't have to go through. ASLEF need to ensure that if the railway is to be run as a privatised system with competition between TOCs, then such competition applies to the retention of staff. A universal B scale means that employers don't have to work anywhere near as hard to retain those who are on the A scale.

If the DfT don't like the idea of competition pushing up salaries, then they should offer a universal contract with everyone on the same conditions with location (cost of living) and possibly work difficulty allowances. I think it would be reasonable to suggest that 12-car DOO should attract a higher "difficulty" payment than a two car with a guard, other things remaining equal. Obviously, the cost of everyone being on the same deal is that it'd be easier to argue they work for the same employer, hence making one dispute potentially applicable to all locations.

I don't necessarily think it'll be easy for the DfT to reduce traincrew T&Cs across the board, they'd have to decide whether to do it one TOC at a time, or a uniform imposition across the entire network. I don't think the latter has been tried since the Flexible Working Dispute in 1982.

 

[Starmill]

That sort of nonsense doesn’t happen on the railway & certainly not with traincrew.

Really? Maybe you should ask to Southern's former conductors.

 

[DorkingMain]

That sort of nonsense doesn’t happen on the railway & certainly not with traincrew.

Maybe not with drivers, but there's more and more precedent for it to happen to guards.

 

[dk1]

How do you think?

No idea. Never known it in almost 38 years of continuous railway employment.

Maybe not with drivers, but there's more and more precedent for it to happen to guards.

Guards got a cracking deal at my TOC. Same money with far less responsibility.

Really? Maybe you should ask to Southern's former conductors.

I would need reminding of exactly what happened there. I seem to recall ASLEF accepting a good deal where the guards felt betrayed although I don’t recall whether or not the guards actually lost anything financially or their general T&Cs apart from door operation.

 

[Horizon22]

No idea. Never known it in almost 38 years of continuous railway employment.


Guards got a cracking deal at my TOC. Same money with far less responsibility.


I would need reminding of exactly what happened there. I seem to recall ASLEF accepting a good deal where the guards felt betrayed although I don’t recall whether or not the guards actually lost anything financially or their general T&Cs apart from door operation.

And whilst Conductors went through incredibly messy industrial action and poor relations back in 2016-2018, OBSs are still around in force despite many (including people on these forums) expecting them to be slowly abandoned. It's been done before, so the DfT have a strong precedent to consider in future. Whether or not the whole OBS dispute has saved money in the long-term though is debatable.

 

[dk1]

And whilst Conductors went through incredibly messy industrial action and poor relations back in 2016-2018, OBSs are still around in force despite many (including people on these forums) expecting them to be slowly abandoned. It's been done before, so the DfT have a strong precedent to consider in future. Whether or not the whole OBS dispute has saved money in the long-term though is debatable.

Must have been awful for them with the dispute going on for so long. I know it got very nasty & petty with Southern even removing the likes of free parking. Thankfully it’s all worked out & I would hope they’ve retained all other conditions & pay.

 

[the sniper]

OBSs are still around in force despite many (including people on these forums) expecting them to be slowly abandoned.

They were always going to be retained at least until the end of the post transition period following the end of the GTR franchise, which would have ended March '22.

While people couldn't have predicted why, the vulnerability of the OBS is even worse now than we imagined it would be. Only the next 3 to 5 years will prove the naysayers right or wrong.

 

[Starmill]

I would need reminding of exactly what happened there. I seem to recall ASLEF accepting a good deal where the guards felt betrayed although I don’t recall whether or not the guards actually lost anything financially or their general T&Cs apart from door operation.

ASLEF supported a deal which was accepted by the drivers. Conductors were required to move to new roles, on new contracts, without safety critical duties, or take redundancy. Both gained financially, fairly significantly.

The former conductors (among other grades, new starters) now work as onboard supervisors, but some trains run without them onboard, and on some which are worked by 700s, they're no longer even rostered. Some conductors still work 171s and 313s (they may have worked 455s until recently too, I don't know).

 

[dk1]

ASLEF supported a deal which was accepted by the drivers. Conductors were required to move to new roles, on new contracts, without safety critical duties, or take redundancy. Both gained financially, fairly significantly.

Thank you.

 

[Starmill]

And whilst Conductors went through incredibly messy industrial action and poor relations back in 2016-2018, OBSs are still around in force despite many (including people on these forums) expecting them to be slowly abandoned. It's been done before, so the DfT have a strong precedent to consider in future. Whether or not the whole OBS dispute has saved money in the long-term though is debatable.

It's nearly certainly it hasn't saved money, because the deal involved both the drivers and the former conductors being paid more. It wasn't being introduced to save money first and foremost though, it was being done to make a point. The number of services where the second person has been removed is small (though not zero).

I suspect what the department will really want is for the second person to be replaced with someone paid at entry level customer service assistant rate, perhaps £10.50 / hour and £11.50 / hour in London. No doubt less in the first 6 months. Similar to Lidl for example.

 

[Fokx]

…

 

[Starmill]

I agree with that. I also know, having had the "delights" of dealing with them for 30+ years, that HMT's likely preferred response is a mixture of service reductions and massive, likely highly negative, changes in staff T&C's.

The perplexing thing is that, although I don't at all disagree with what you say, there's actually no evidence anywhere in public of the latter yet. We've seen the service cuts coming and indeed already implemented in some cases probably, but been on this road (metaphorically) for nearly two years and no evidence of the latter.

 

[Robertj21a]

They were always going to be retained at least until the end of the post transition period following the end of the GTR franchise, which would have ended March '22.

While people couldn't have predicted why, the vulnerability of the OBS is even worse now than we imagined it would be. Only the next 3 to 5 years will prove the naysayers right or wrong.

I'm sure I recall many on here saying that the new OBS role on Southern would only last 6-12 months. Yet here we are, some years later, with a successful operation that no longer needs a traditional 'guard' but was achieved with a peaceful transition. Why haven't others followed?
Why do you feel that the OBS is now more vulnerable?