Arriva Rail North DOO

[Dave1987]

I think most criticism is actually directed at the RMT themselves rather than the guards. If the Union was better run, and generally more professional, it's quite likely that these various disputes would have been resolved far sooner.

As much as your animosity towards the RMT is apparent, you fail to realise or be willing to see what the RMT have achieved.

The RMT have put into plain public view and consciousness something that the Government wanted to achieve on the sly, namely destaffing of the railway. This Government have long wanted to make franchises more profitable for private companies so more apply to run them. Destaffing on the quiet is one of the ways to do that. Ticket prices will go up every year no matter what by as much as the DFT believe they can get away with no matter how many staff you get rid of. The RMT have brought this smack into the public consciousness. Why do you think Grayling has now made his piecemeal offering about vaiguely promising to retain guards into next franchises. If he really meant it he and this Government would have promised that from the start. There is absolutely zero trust in Grayling or this Government currently. RMT have actually done a good job in exposing the long term destaffing that is going on on the railway. RDG and Government are now trying to backtrack and claim they are recruiting more staff.

 

[northwichcat]

Bringing Serco/Abellio in is pointless as that was a different franchise contract under different terms. Unless you want a conversation about the glory days of that "no growth" franchise. Of course Arriva will make more money, staffing costs will be lower because there will either a) be a non safety critical person with no operation training in charge of just tickets (as per the RSSB DOO report) OR b) have no second person. Arriva then save money.

Tories are following the ill thought out McNulty report with a splash of union bashing. You and I both know that.

You're missing the obvious. For DfT the last Northern franchise was a massive mistake, not because of a lack of investment but because it let the holder walk away with £30m a year in profit while getting a hefty subsidy. DfT have reduced the hefty subsidy and the new franchise will have higher operating costs even post DCO implementation. DCO has never been about Arriva saving money it's always been about DfT wanting more revenue taken - guards going off to do the doors costs money and doesn't bring in any revenue - with more revenue Arriva won't call for more revenue support from DfT or throw back the keys to the franchise.

 

[northwichcat]

As much as your animosity towards the RMT is apparent, you fail to realise or be willing to see what the RMT have achieved.

The RMT have put into plain public view and consciousness something that the Government wanted to achieve on the sly, namely destaffing of the railway. This Government have long wanted to make franchises more profitable for private companies so more apply to run them. Destaffing on the quiet is one of the ways to do that. Ticket prices will go up every year no matter what by as much as the DFT believe they can get away with no matter how many staff you get rid of. The RMT have brought this smack into the public consciousness. Why do you think Grayling has now made his piecemeal offering about vaiguely promising to retain guards into next franchises. If he really meant it he and this Government would have promised that from the start. There is absolutely zero trust in Grayling or this Government currently. RMT have actually done a good job in exposing the long term destaffing that is going on on the railway. RDG and Government are now trying to backtrack and claim they are recruiting more staff.

Grayling was Justice Secretary when the Northern franchise was let. As much as I hate him it's wrong to blame the terms the Northern franchise was let on on Grayling.

 

[47802]

As much as your animosity towards the RMT is apparent, you fail to realise or be willing to see what the RMT have achieved.

The RMT have put into plain public view and consciousness something that the Government wanted to achieve on the sly, namely destaffing of the railway. This Government have long wanted to make franchises more profitable for private companies so more apply to run them. Destaffing on the quiet is one of the ways to do that. Ticket prices will go up every year no matter what by as much as the DFT believe they can get away with no matter how many staff you get rid of. The RMT have brought this smack into the public consciousness. Why do you think Grayling has now made his piecemeal offering about vaiguely promising to retain guards into next franchises. If he really meant it he and this Government would have promised that from the start. There is absolutely zero trust in Grayling or this Government currently. RMT have actually done a good job in exposing the long term destaffing that is going on on the railway. RDG and Government are now trying to backtrack and claim they are recruiting more staff.

I think that is highly questionable, as is the Unions attempt to make it a safety issue, the main aim should be to reduce operating costs, increase revenue which should be largely used to reduce subsidy and provide better quality rolling stock particularly in the case of Northern which is what the new franchise is essentially tasked with doing, and if Arriva manage to achieve those tasks then I don't mind if Arriva make a reasonable profit in the process.

As for Railway de-staffing, well given how many Northern stations you go to these days which are crawling with staff checking and issuing tickets compared to say 5 years ago that would seem unlikely.

 

[Dentonian]

I think that is highly questionable, as is the Unions attempt to make it a safety issue, the main aim should be to reduce operating costs, increase revenue which should be largely used to reduce subsidy and provide better quality rolling stock particularly in the case of Northern which is what the new franchise is essentially tasked with doing, and if Arriva manage to achieve those tasks then I don't mind if Arriva make a reasonable profit in the process.

As for Railway de-staffing, well given how many Northern stations you go to these days which are crawling with staff checking and issuing tickets compared to say 5 years ago that would seem unlikely.

Providing Safety isn't compromised - and that seems to be less and less of the Unions primary argument - I would totally agree. We (mainly the Media) have created a culture in this country that Rail staff and passengers are a "superior" breed that should be protected at all costs, and I mean ALL costs. Yet again today, the news item about a possible Cabinet reshuffle, as well as a seperate one about the strikes themselves, has been used to reminder us of last week's fare increases. According to the Rail North Consultation of 2014 or 2015, Abellio were getting a whacking great £706 million subsidy for running the Northern franchise. Media reports at the time of the change in franchise, suggested Arriva were getting a mere £200 million. That's clearly a big saving for the taxpayer (equal to at least 16,700 years worth of Cancer treatment for instance), but its still the same as the entire gross* subsidy for tendered bus services in England and Wales outside London.

* ie. before the Government claw some back through Fuel Tax and all the other business related taxes.

 

[the sniper]

As for Railway de-staffing, well given how many Northern stations you go to these days which are crawling with staff checking and issuing tickets compared to say 5 years ago that would seem unlikely.

Are these the disposable contractors with relatively poor pay, T&Cs and training that passengers on here are always complaining about? Not a great advert for the future of railway employment if so...

 

[Robertj21a]

As much as your animosity towards the RMT is apparent, you fail to realise or be willing to see what the RMT have achieved.

The RMT have put into plain public view and consciousness something that the Government wanted to achieve on the sly, namely destaffing of the railway. This Government have long wanted to make franchises more profitable for private companies so more apply to run them. Destaffing on the quiet is one of the ways to do that. Ticket prices will go up every year no matter what by as much as the DFT believe they can get away with no matter how many staff you get rid of. The RMT have brought this smack into the public consciousness. Why do you think Grayling has now made his piecemeal offering about vaiguely promising to retain guards into next franchises. If he really meant it he and this Government would have promised that from the start. There is absolutely zero trust in Grayling or this Government currently. RMT have actually done a good job in exposing the long term destaffing that is going on on the railway. RDG and Government are now trying to backtrack and claim they are recruiting more staff.

We will have to agree to differ. The RMT has done very little to resolve the broader issues of DOO, staffing etc. Indeed many people would say that their generally poor performance has contributed to the lengthening of the various disputes. As for the RMT now bringing it 'smack into the public consciousness', I'd have to say that they could have done that months ago - and, in any event, the majority of the general public are not in the least bit interested.

 

[Carlisle]

Are these the disposable contractors with relatively poor pay, T&Cs and training .

In that case what have the railway unions actually done to at least try and improve things for these folk since priviisation, anything constructive at all ?

 

[the sniper]

So what have the railway unions done to try and improve things for these folk since priviisation, anything constructive at all ?

Some Company Councils have done better than others in keeping/bringing work in house. Some TOCs have kept virtually everything in house. Some are a mess. Given how well read some people are here in RMT PR, I'm sure people will be aware of the various wins and losses. Given how much some people here hate the RMT members protecting their own pay/T&Cs though, I wouldn't have thought you'd want to encourage these folk to get organised?

 

[47802]

Are these the disposable contractors with relatively poor pay, T&Cs and training that passengers on here are always complaining about? Not a great advert for the future of railway employment if so...

Well yes even I am not a fan disposable contractors on Low pay, but that not directly relevant to the DCO/DOO argument.

 

[Carlisle]

Well yes even I am not a fan disposable contractors on Low pay, but that not directly relevant to the DCO/DOO argument.

It’s very relevant, as on today’s railway pretty well paid grades work alongside others either on or just above minimum wage, with not a lot of job security or any other benefits., So the constant reminder of the potential consequences of failure to keep the union strong are far more prevelant today than they ever were on 1980s and early 90s BR when most of the original DOO schemes were introduced without any strikes at all

 

[aylesbury]

Northern was a basket case franchise how the DFT could see it as a non growth operation is something to wonder about, did the London concentric civil servants not consider that expansion of the economy could happen in the north? Now of course its all go up there but a certain group of luddites are trying to stall a region growing and they have to be contained ,the north of England is a now a vibrant part of the country and needs efficient transport both road and rail .

 

[Dave1987]

I think that is highly questionable, as is the Unions attempt to make it a safety issue, the main aim should be to reduce operating costs, increase revenue which should be largely used to reduce subsidy and provide better quality rolling stock particularly in the case of Northern which is what the new franchise is essentially tasked with doing, and if Arriva manage to achieve those tasks then I don't mind if Arriva make a reasonable profit in the process.

As for Railway de-staffing, well given how many Northern stations you go to these days which are crawling with staff checking and issuing tickets compared to say 5 years ago that would seem unlikely.

I don't believe that the RMT's safety argument is superfluous or overstated. But what do I know? I only drive trains day in day out for a living and see the absolute worst of human stupidity. I'm well aware that there are numerous individuals on this forum that are quite happy to try and tell me they know more about my job than I do which is why I just don't bother any longer.

 

[Dave1987]

We will have to agree to differ. The RMT has done very little to resolve the broader issues of DOO, staffing etc. Indeed many people would say that their generally poor performance has contributed to the lengthening of the various disputes. As for the RMT now bringing it 'smack into the public consciousness', I'd have to say that they could have done that months ago - and, in any event, the majority of the general public are not in the least bit interested.

That is a pretty big statement to make. I seem to remember our "strong and stable" PM made a massive idiot of herself when she thought she would get a massive majority around this time last year. I have noticed a distinct change i rhetoric from the RDG and Government recently since the RMT have been routinely highlighting staffing cuts. In fact the RDG is in full panic mode at the moment trying to claim that they will increase staff numbers on the railway since public opinion is sliding against them. And suddenly Grayling is willing to offer vague guarantees which he wasn't previously so clearly the RMT campaigning has had an effect. He has a way to go before "optional" won't mean "expendable" though. Just a shame that no one believes a word he or this Government says really isn't it!

 

[WatcherZero]

As much as your animosity towards the RMT is apparent, you fail to realise or be willing to see what the RMT have achieved.

The RMT have put into plain public view and consciousness something that the Government wanted to achieve on the sly, namely destaffing of the railway. This Government have long wanted to make franchises more profitable for private companies so more apply to run them. Destaffing on the quiet is one of the ways to do that. Ticket prices will go up every year no matter what by as much as the DFT believe they can get away with no matter how many staff you get rid of. The RMT have brought this smack into the public consciousness. Why do you think Grayling has now made his piecemeal offering about vaiguely promising to retain guards into next franchises. If he really meant it he and this Government would have promised that from the start. There is absolutely zero trust in Grayling or this Government currently. RMT have actually done a good job in exposing the long term destaffing that is going on on the railway. RDG and Government are now trying to backtrack and claim they are recruiting more staff.

With the exception of Merseyrail (labour administered TOC) all the DOO plans increase staffing levels rather than reduce it, and Merseyrail has committed to no redundancies with staff redeployed on the same terms and conditions.

Also I would refer you to this table posted by Tony Miles which shows how fares rose even faster under BR than they did after privatisation.
http://www.wnxxforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=19623

 

[Robertj21a]

That is a pretty big statement to make. I seem to remember our "strong and stable" PM made a massive idiot of herself when she thought she would get a massive majority around this time last year. I have noticed a distinct change i rhetoric from the RDG and Government recently since the RMT have been routinely highlighting staffing cuts. In fact the RDG is in full panic mode at the moment trying to claim that they will increase staff numbers on the railway since public opinion is sliding against them. And suddenly Grayling is willing to offer vague guarantees which he wasn't previously so clearly the RMT campaigning has had an effect. He has a way to go before "optional" won't mean "expendable" though. Just a shame that no one believes a word he or this Government says really isn't it!

Not sure why you routinely refer to the government all the time but it's very much the RMT way of doing things - deflect issues away from their own poor performance as a union and suggest that others are always to blame.

 

[Dave1987]

Not sure why you routinely refer to the government all the time but it's very much the RMT way of doing things - deflect issues away from their own poor performance as a union and suggest that others are always to blame.

Because this all has to do with the Government. No matter how much Grayling says this is a private company matter blah blah blah he is fully in control of all these disputes except Merseyrail. The TOCs do as the Government tell them to.

 

[47802]

I don't believe that the RMT's safety argument is superfluous or overstated. But what do I know? I only drive trains day in day out for a living and see the absolute worst of human stupidity. I'm well aware that there are numerous individuals on this forum that are quite happy to try and tell me they know more about my job than I do which is why I just don't bother any longer.

I am not trying to tell you whether DCO/DOO is safe or unsafe, but the fact remains DOO has operated for many years, and the Rail Regulator etc, clearly doesn't think its unsafe, therefore unless the Unions can produce strong evidence to the contrary, its looks to many people including myself to be a very questionable argument.

 

[northwichcat]

With the exception of Merseyrail (labour administered TOC) all the DOO plans increase staffing levels rather than reduce it, and Merseyrail has committed to no redundancies with staff redeployed on the same terms and conditions.

It's important to remember Merseyrail's new trains will allow wheelchair users to board and alight without staff assistance and all stations will have staff from first to last train, so if a wheelchair user needs help getting between the platform and station exit they can press the help point and someone will come and assist.

 

[northwichcat]

I am not trying to tell you whether DCO/DOO is safe or unsafe, but the fact remains DOO has operated for many years, and the Rail Regulator etc, clearly doesn't think its unsafe, therefore unless the Unions can produce strong evidence to the contrary, its looks to many people including myself to be a very questionable argument.

Is DCO safe?

Yes, it is the view of RSSB that it is. We have published several research projects over the last 15 years on various aspects of DCO on passenger trains. None of these pieces of work has identified any increased risk from dispatching a train without a guard being present - providing the correct procedures have been followed. In fact, the removal of any possible miscommunication, which could exist between driver and guard could, potentially, deliver some safety benefits. If we had found evidence to suggest that DCO was not safe when done correctly, we would say so.

Further research that we published in July 2017 looked at six years of data and found that safety levels are as good for passengers who board and alight from trains without a guard being present as they are for those using other services. This looked at the risk to passengers as they enter and leave train carriages and as the train departs from a platform when no guard is present and the driver controls the opening and closing of doors (known as driver controlled operation (DCO), and sometimes also referred to as driver only operation or (DOO)). The report concludes that levels of risk across all forms of dispatch are low.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the relevant duty-holder (i.e. the train operating company or the infrastructure manager) to assess the risks and put in place appropriate mitigations. Without putting suitable risk mitigations in place the operator would not be granted the appropriate safety certificate or authorisation and would therefore not be allowed to run the service.

https://www.rssb.co.uk/Pages/driver-controlled-operation.aspx

The RMT rejected the findings of that research because Charles Horton is a non-executive director of the RSSB and he's also employed by Govia. However, it's worth noting he wasn't involved in the DCO research, which consisted of a team of Namrita Kohli, Anita Weltz, Jay Heavisides and Marcus Dacre. Also worth remembering the RMT's first interest is the employment of it's members (not serving the needs of the travelling public) and remaining a powerful union that can cause major disruption when it calls industrial action.

 

[northwichcat]

The TOCs do as the Government tell them to.

That's not the full story. In the case of Northern DfT said 50% of passenger mileage as DCO. It was Arriva who submitted a bid based on semi-fast Northern Connect services becoming DCO - meaning a higher proportion of services will be traditional guard operated services than if commuter services switched. It was rumoured Abellio's bid consisted on more new trains than Arriva's which might well have meant commuter services switching to DCO, which may be more suitable for DCO but at the same time would have needed more services to switch the reach the 50% passenger mileage target.

 

[DarloRich]

The argument about staff numbers is an interesting one. There is a great deal of difference between a body in a company high viz tabbard doing hand holding customer service (on no doubt weak t&c and with poor job security) and a fully trained and competent member of staff . The (reverse?) politics of envy seem to drive many posters to a fetish for the former.

Also worth remembering the RMT's first interest is the employment of it's members, not serving the needs of the travelling public and remaining a powerful union that can cause major disruption when it calls industrial action.

it is this that you any many posters detest: Working people standing up for themselves. Perhaps because you are so powerless you feel all should be. That is the nub of the issue. The sad thing is that you do the work of the Tory for them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The argument about staff numbers is an interesting one. There is a great deal of difference between a body in a company high viz tabbard doing hand holding customer service (on no doubt weak t&c and with poor job security) and a fully trained and competent member of staff . The (reverse?) politics of envy seem to drive many posters to a fetish for the former.

I certainly prefer the latter, but I see no particular reason why they should have to operate the doors.

Indeed, I've said before that I see the future of the ticket office as being a professional service with highly trained staff who understand every in and out of the ticketing system, for you to use if the TVM has failed you, rather than the first line of flogging piles of day returns to the next big city. The former have no purpose in this context.

Security guards aside, I see the future as probably being slightly fewer but better and more directed (in how they are applied) staff. Get people doing the things people are good at - providing professional service on the ground to other people, not acting as a fallible, human robot.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's not the full story. In the case of Northern DfT said 50% of passenger mileage as DCO. It was Arriva who submitted a bid based on semi-fast Northern Connect services becoming DCO - meaning a higher proportion of services will be traditional guard operated services than if commuter services switched. It was rumoured Abellio's bid consisted on more new trains than Arriva's which might well have meant commuter services switching to DCO, which may be more suitable for DCO but at the same time would have needed more services to switch the reach the 50% passenger mileage target.

Yet Arriva's bid will probably mean fewer (if any) single-manned trains - it's well established that commuter DOO means exactly that, only the driver on board, and it's clear to me that on a commuter network with platform staff and the likes the OBS serves no purpose and will quietly go away over time (just watch them standing around doing nothing, looking bored, sad and forlorn). But on long distance services, there's much more need for someone on board to assist passengers in various forms, just as there is on a rural branch line. (Though as I've said I think there would be merit in looking at a multi-skilled but still safety-trained staffing model more like airline cabin crew).

So in terms of preserving jobs, Arriva may well have done the right thing with their bid.

A bid to create a Manchester Merseyrail with new EMUs (and, say, to do Northern Connect using existing DMUs from elsewhere) would have been nice - but I'm certain they would not have had a second member of staff.

 

[northwichcat]

it is this that you any many posters detest: Working people standing up for themselves. Perhaps because you are so powerless you feel all should be. That is the nub of the issue. The sad thing is that you do the work of the Tory for them.

Like I've said before there's a major difference between industrial action to make a point to the employer (which doesn't have to be strike action) and causing maximum disruption to the general public to make a political point. The RMT have opted for the later and expect the public to be on their side! My objection to this is the RMT are causing people in other sectors to lose their jobs or to miss out on employment opportunities due to not being able to get to interviews and employers not wanting to employ people who would rely on the train to get to work when there's so much strike action. I know members of non-rail unions and members of the Labour Party who share my objections as well.

 

[DarloRich]

I certainly prefer the latter, but I see no particular reason why they should have to operate the doors.

Indeed, I've said before that I see the future of the ticket office as being a professional service with highly trained staff who understand every in and out of the ticketing system, for you to use if the TVM has failed you, rather than the first line of flogging piles of day returns to the next big city. The former have no purpose in this context.

Security guards aside, I see the future as probably being slightly fewer but better and more directed (in how they are applied) staff. Get people doing the things people are good at - providing professional service on the ground to other people, not acting as a fallible, human robot.

I want to see 2 properly trained and competent members of staff on the train. I feel it is safer should the worst happen. We hope that the worst will never happen but until we can be certain...........................

Like I've said before there's a major difference between industrial action to make a point to the employer (which doesn't have to be strike action) and causing maximum disruption to the general public to make a political point. The RMT have opted for the later and expect the public to be on their side! My objection to this is the RMT are causing people in other sectors to lose their jobs or to miss out on employment opportunities due to not being able to get to interviews and employers not wanting to employ people who would rely on the train to get to work when there's so much strike action. I know members of non-rail unions and members of the Labour Party who share my objections as well.

So your view is that union members should go, cap in hand to the government and ask them, terribly nicely if they wouldn't mind awfully changing their plans............................

EDIT - in fact your view is union members shouldn't complain. They should know their place and that place is below you in the grand scheme of things?

 

[northwichcat]

So your view is that union members should go, cap in hand to the government and ask them, terribly nicely if they wouldn't mind awfully changing their plans............................

EDIT - in fact your view is union members shouldn't complain. They should know their place and that place is below you in the grand scheme of things?

So you think the RMT are right to directly cause people who can't afford cars to lose their jobs in 2017/2018 just because there's a risk their member's continued employment might end in 2025 if DCO goes ahead? If not then like I said there's alternative methods of industrial action - striking is supposed to be a last resort and even if the last resort is utilised there's way to minimise disruption to the public which the RMT are choosing not to take.

 

[DarloRich]

So you think the RMT are right to directly cause people who can't afford cars to lose their jobs in 2017/2018 just because there's a risk their member's continued employment might end in 2025 if DCO goes ahead? If not then like I said there's alternative methods of industrial action - striking is supposed to be a last resort and even if the last resort is utilised there's way to minimise disruption to the public which the RMT are choosing not to take.

so no answer I see. I will take that as a yes. You think people should know their place and that place is below you.

What is your alternative? Lets hear it oh great one.........................

 

[Wombat]

it is this that you any many posters detest: Working people standing up for themselves. Perhaps because you are so powerless you feel all should be. That is the nub of the issue. The sad thing is that you do the work of the Tory for them.

I'm a working person, and a union member. I think there's a massive gulf between those who work on the railway and those who don't. As someone in the latter camp, the approach from the TOC (no redundancies during the franchise, etc) is so softly-softly that the RMT response looks utterly deranged. I get that staff don't want anything to change, but that's so far from the reality experienced by everyone else that I don't think you'll get much sympathy from the average disinterested spectator, much less those who rely on the trains to get to work.

 

[northwichcat]

so no answer I see. I will take that as a yes. You think people should know their place and that place is below you.

What is your alternative? Lets hear it oh great one.........................

Ahem. You made a ridiculous argument because I said I don't support the RMT causing maximum disruption when their members' jobs are safe until 2025. Yet you ignore the issue that the RMT's stance is causing many people to lose their jobs now, so basically you think everyone else sits below the RMT members and if anyone dares to question you then you start arguing the reverse and labeling them as supporting the Tory's policy.

Alternative approach - approach Northern jointly with ASLEF. ASLEF can say their members refuse to work services unless there is a second member of staff on board who has suitable training and then both the RMT and ASLEF can talk about what that role should be and what training they should have. Maybe it could include some training that guards don't currently have, which could make trains safer?

As you keeping lecturing posters on the benefits of Trade Unions I'm sure you already know the alternative forms of industrial action so don't need me to tell you what you already know.