Northern's Problems in the North West

[jizzer]

You have yet to substantiate the hearsay about 7 hour training days . At the depots I know of drivers released for road learning and traction training do so on their booked hours . So if they where supposed to work a 9 hr day they are expected to road learn for the same amount . The only 7 hour training days I know of and have seen are when the training is done using RDW . There might be local agreements or informal practices at other depots . But those could be gotten rid of with the will of management .

It's not hearsey. At a depot that i know i would say all route learning and traction training involves drivers not coming at their booked link time (0310/0555/1645 OR whatever) cant really road learn at 0300 when the first train is 0600 ish and in autumn winter road learning in the dark is not really ideal. The management shouldn't be allowed to mix and match either when it suits. It may be different at other depots but the one where my acquaintances work at, it is most definitely 7 hrs a day.

This agreement is from a few years back and is shooting management in the foot as a driver's average day length is 0845 hrs. They should have compromised at 8 hrs but too late now.

 

[muz379]

I suggest you take that up with the person who posted about 7hr on this message board. Which depots are you familiar with? This sounds like politician speak for talking about something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Ahh thanks for confirming that it is unsubstantiated hearsay

As there is a fatigue index there is no reason for ASLEF to think it needs to micromanage individual traincrew fatigue. That is the employers job.

So you now accept that there is a fatigue index ? Honestly this is embarrassing .



The ramifications of a driver having an incident whilst fatigued are massive . The union is right to be concerned about the issue of fatigue , simply saying it is the employers responsibility would be a massive dereliction of the unions duty to protect its members . I get it , you dont like unions , you dont like how they pay attention to issues in the workplace and protect their members as best they can , you dont like how they have fought for decent pay and conditions for their members. But unfortunately for you the unions on the railway are a prominent feature that are here to stay .

I would have thought it fairly obvious why the union would be interested in ensuring that members are not exposed to the risk of excessive fatigue and why the company might put other things ahead of that risk .

Despite various insults you have failed to make any substantive points - you are sadly another example of someone inside the railway who thinks nobody else outside has a right to an opinion on it.

I have made many substantive points in response to your attempts to portray the problems as being caused by Aslef . I note for example you did not respond to my point that there is no evidence that relocation is needed to resolve the issues , in fact it would probably make matters worse .

I have not once insulted you . I have merely pointed out that you clearly lack knowledge required to form a worthwhile opinion .Attempting to discuss the nuances of RDW without knowing about or understanding the fatigue index is just one example . Thinking that somehow the union standing in the way of relocation is evidence of the unions blame for the problems being another . The TOC in this case has not even raised the possibility of relocation .

I have no issue with people outside of the industry having an opinion on it . I dont even think that you should be denied an opinion . But I do think if you post a very clearly uninformed opinion on a public forum you should definitely expect to be called out on that as you have been multiple times . If I had an issue with people outside of the industry having an opinion this would surely be the last forum I would want to visit . I have a great respect for many of the non industry posters on here .

Were the railways North and South not in a state of total chaos you might have a point, but again we see an operation failing and the people operating it demonstrating open hostility to anyone who isn't in the tent.

I dont disagree that there is total chaos . But I do disagree that the blame for that is anything to do with Aslef as you suggest .

 

[kevconnor]

Interesting. This from the Labour List here. Mind you it is nearly a year old.

https://labourlist.org/2017/07/the-top-corbyn-allies-who-won-financial-backing-from-the-rmt-union/

This is the full list of Labour MPs who received donations, or donations in kind, from the RMT union, according to the new entry in the Register of Members’ Interests. The union is not affiliated to Labour but its gifts follow bouts of speculation that it could rejoin the ranks of official backers of the party.

I don't wish to drag this thread any further off topic than it is already and would suggest any more discussion on this point is moved to a new thread, suffice to say the information I was quoting from came from a manual search of the declaration of members interests on Parliaments website and was clearly rather incomplete. I managed to find the following link on the Electoral Commissions website where there is far more declared donations.

 

[PR1Berske]

redundant, there will be little complaint from outside the staff component.

This is the ticking clock nobody should ignore. A more technological railway will be coming, is coming. Much of this discussion about who can work specific routes and when will look small fry in time.

 

[Bovverboy]

But this is what I keep banging on about - the muddle of services, so that (when the timetables are working properly) you have Piccadilly - Wallgate, Piccadilly - North Western and Victoria - Wallgate - which makes the timetable very fragile as any disruption is hard to contain across three separate routes. If we had all Wigan services running from (say) Piccadilly then that would make things much more resilient when things go wrong (with plenty of scope for changing at Salford Central/ Oxford Road for passengers who absolutely must travel to Victoria).

Instead, we have a muddle where a Wiganer doesn't know which station in Manchester to head to when trying to get home, since services are awkwardly split between them.

I don't think that 'yorksrob' had any complaint about Wigan services being split between Victoria and Piccadilly, his complaint was that an ex-Victoria train was cancelled, then he went to Piccadilly to be told that no trains (to Wigan, presumably) were running - which, in the event, wasn't true.

I suspect that what happened was that having discovered that the 1136 ex-Victoria was cancelled, he then made his way to Piccadilly, but presumably missed the 1147 Blackpool (which actually didn't depart until 1159). The 1247 departure was indeed cancelled.

I don't think the average Wiganer would complain about having a choice of three rail routes into Manchester, one faster than the other two, and the second and third having intermediate stops at which he might have reason to wish to alight. I don't think it's a realistic argument that, in cases of disruption, a single route would be easier to manage. All trains should run, shouldn't they?

My only criticism of 'yorksrob' is that someone who is capable of posting messages to this forum while travelling should know how to track the whereabouts of trains using such as 'Realtime Trains'.

 

[Moonshot]

Can I just clear up a few misconceptions here on this thread. Guards and drivers are rostered to work a 4 day week, but the actual hours on a daily basis will be anything between 6 and 10. Anyone who is route learning will normally book on at the time they are booked to for that day, but that can be flexed according to daylight hours etc. Nobody can actually work more than 12 hours in a shift , and there has to be at least 12 hours in-between shifts. ASLEF are currently pushing for a 14 hour gap inbetween shifts, this has been a bone of contention for some while with them.

 

[R Trevithick]

So my point stands ASLEF has too much power and also has many of the local politicians in its pocket.

In what way did Northern abuse their very well paid staff by working more than 4 days a week?

Thanks for that. It is interesting that you have tried to misrepresent what I have said. Please don’t do I again.

I did not say northern have abused their staff in any way. As for the four day week, that is the contract. Nobody has to work more than that no matter how much you feel they should.

I said northern have consistently broken agreements. Now whether you believe in those agreements or not the fact is that they are in place and cannot just be broken at will.

That is the reason for no rdw.

If you believe Aslef has too much power that is your prerogative but their members clearly do not. And as I said before that is there reason for existing not to appease keyboard warriors on social media

 

[B&I]

Where did I suggest anything like that ? . More crazy postings from someone intent on posting more times than anyone else.

You are very critical towards anyone who suggests that there are people who may have difficulties travelling by bus because train services aren't available. I therefore assume that you have no issues personally travelling by bus and therefore asked why you would ever travel by train instead. What's crazy about that ?

 

[B&I]

So my point stands ASLEF has too much power and also has many of the local politicians in its pocket.

In what way did Northern abuse their very well paid staff by working more than 4 days a week?

Wait a minute. Even if ASLEF has any local politicians in its power, so what ? The franchise is controlled completely by the DfT, which is in turn run by Tory ministers from London. (Perhaps if there was any.local democratic control.over transport services in the regions, they might work a bit better.) Can you explain how the evil ASLEF manages to exert any power over it at all ?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Anything that involves crew changing trains on route is a recipe for delays. You need long inefficient breaks at the changeover to make it work. The best way if possible is to have the crew stay with the same train. But this doesn't work when you have crazy long distance stopping services over 3hr that are really 3 local trains merged together.

Hmm. Bedford-Brighton might have been thought daft at one time, but is now the backbone of the Thameslink service.
Liverpool/Blackpool-Crewe/Stoke are in principle no different, and are shorter than many GTR routes.
Cross-Manchester services (via Victoria ) go back to the L&Y over a century ago, eg Leeds-Liverpool.
Cross-Birmingham services via New St and Snow Hill services have been a feature since the routes were constructed.
Glasgow local services are built round the Argyll and Queen St low level cross-city routes.
Plus Paris RER, any German S-bahn etc etc.
Aachen-Hamm (RE1 through Köln) is 135 miles with 25 stops, and is no different in character to a Northern inter-urban service like Liverpool-Manchester-Crewe.
It links several urban centres with many conflicting junctions on the way.
The Castlefield corridor has had a fortune spent on it in recent years with repeated resignalling, so should be capable of the services demanded of it.
Interestingly, the Northern TOC is owned by the same people who run RE1 in Germany...

 

[jayah]

Ahh thanks for confirming that it is unsubstantiated hearsay

So you now accept that there is a fatigue index ? Honestly this is embarrassing .



The ramifications of a driver having an incident whilst fatigued are massive . The union is right to be concerned about the issue of fatigue , simply saying it is the employers responsibility would be a massive dereliction of the unions duty to protect its members . I get it , you dont like unions , you dont like how they pay attention to issues in the workplace and protect their members as best they can , you dont like how they have fought for decent pay and conditions for their members. But unfortunately for you the unions on the railway are a prominent feature that are here to stay .

I would have thought it fairly obvious why the union would be interested in ensuring that members are not exposed to the risk of excessive fatigue and why the company might put other things ahead of that risk .



I have made many substantive points in response to your attempts to portray the problems as being caused by Aslef . I note for example you did not respond to my point that there is no evidence that relocation is needed to resolve the issues , in fact it would probably make matters worse .

I have not once insulted you . I have merely pointed out that you clearly lack knowledge required to form a worthwhile opinion .Attempting to discuss the nuances of RDW without knowing about or understanding the fatigue index is just one example . Thinking that somehow the union standing in the way of relocation is evidence of the unions blame for the problems being another . The TOC in this case has not even raised the possibility of relocation .

I have no issue with people outside of the industry having an opinion on it . I dont even think that you should be denied an opinion . But I do think if you post a very clearly uninformed opinion on a public forum you should definitely expect to be called out on that as you have been multiple times . If I had an issue with people outside of the industry having an opinion this would surely be the last forum I would want to visit . I have a great respect for many of the non industry posters on here .

I dont disagree that there is total chaos . But I do disagree that the blame for that is anything to do with Aslef as you suggest .

How is saying someone does not have an opinion worth listening to not insulting?

My message about a fatigue index was in reply to someone who had just mentioned it, therefore my point based upon that message stands. You still haven't made any attempt to explain why a trade union which doesn't even represent many train drivers feels it needs to micromanage overtime, rosters and fatigue. This doesn't happen in other industries.

So despite being a correctly informed and a perfect opinion valid you continue to accuse me of hearsay, not the people saying here most definitely Northern West are on a 7hr training day.

As for total chaos, yes there is.

 

[jayah]

Thanks for that. It is interesting that you have tried to misrepresent what I have said. Please don’t do I again.

I did not say northern have abused their staff in any way. As for the four day week, that is the contract. Nobody has to work more than that no matter how much you feel they should.

I said northern have consistently broken agreements. Now whether you believe in those agreements or not the fact is that they are in place and cannot just be broken at will.

That is the reason for no rdw.

If you believe Aslef has too much power that is your prerogative but their members clearly do not. And as I said before that is there reason for existing not to appease keyboard warriors on social media

You said that Northern had "continually abused" previous agreements. I am asking for more detail on exactly how? Generally speaking, the contracted hours seem very low, the pay very high and there seems little if zero scope for people to be working without earning. If overtime is voluntary, then unless safety is at stake it is hard to see the problem?

I perfectly understand ASLEFs role to its members and that it's members may desire this, or yet power and gold, but it still has got too much power.

 

[6Gman]

As explained, no TOC or any organisation could ever employ people to run a reliable service in the sort of absurd framework that ASLEF have forced on the railway. Every shortage forces another capitulation that makes the shortage worse.

35hr week, 10hr day, 4 day week, no RDW, 7hr training days, retirement at 60. Next it will be a 32hr week and so on.

ASLEF haven't "forced" anything on anybody.

They have negotiated terms and conditions.

ASLEF may have a stronger hand than some other trades unions but they're just doing their job.

 

[yorksrob]

Quick glance at Oxford Road departures - at time of looking (1420) it shows the next ten trains, one is cancelled, two are running late (so far by less than 8 minutes) and the rest are as scheduled. Could be argued that it's better than a normal Saturday!
Of course with the Bolton line closure there aren't as many trains going through to clog the system up!!

Well, I had to get to Wigan for a particular fixture, so waiting around until the trains started to run wasn't an option.

Unless the issue is not to listen to people in information booths who are supposed to know what is happening.

 

[yorksrob]

Yorksrob has a point. Because of the ongoing electrification works, there's only one train per hour scheduled to operate between Manchester Victoria and Wigan Wallgate, instead of the usual three (I think). Other than that, there's only replacement buses.
But one round trip has missed - 1018 Southport - Vic terminated at Wigan Wallgate, 1136 Vic - Southport cancelled completely, 1311 Southport - Vic cancelled to Wigan Wallgate.
Yes, there is also the Manchester Airport to Blackpool service, but three northbound journeys on that have missed today so far.

Yorksrob seems to be saying that it's already a significantly reduced service today, but it still isn't being maintained.

Yes, that is spot on.

 

[muz379]

My message about a fatigue index was in reply to someone who had just mentioned it, therefore my point based upon that message stands. You still haven't made any attempt to explain why a trade union which doesn't even represent many train drivers feels it needs to micromanage overtime, rosters and fatigue. This doesn't happen in other industries.

You questioned the existence of the fatigue index . Surely the prudent thing to do when being faced with something you have never heard of is to research . Might save you some embarrassment next time .

I and other people have explained the reason the union has oversight in this area , and the reason they generally restrict RDW agreements to training . There should be no other need for RDW anyway , without drivers being released for training there should be sufficient compliments of staff to cover the train plan and have a reasonable spare compliment to cover late notice sickness , and operational disruption .

Pilots unions too have an involvement in the management of fatigue at some airlines . It is not unheard of in environments when safety is paramount and there are incentives for the company to prioritise other things .

I take it the point about relocation being unnecessary and actually causing further hindrance is well received ?

 

[6Gman]

The fact is that the structure of labour relations on the railway is so inflexible that it is practically impossible to accommodate any significant change. At any one time a handful of TOCs are unable to run the advertised Sunday service, and that is without planning for serious changes like new routes and stock.

But my understanding is that - generally - the trades unions are quite happy to change working practices by bringing Sundays into the standard week. It's the TOCs who refuse to negotiate such a change.

 

[jayah]

But my understanding is that - generally - the trades unions are quite happy to change working practices by bringing Sundays into the standard week. It's the TOCs who refuse to negotiate such a change.

Refuse to negotiate or refuse to agree to the unions demands? I find it hard to believe they don't want a deal at all.

 

[6Gman]

The amount of productive time on 8.75hr might be double for 7hr. I also suspect Union power is behind the fact Northern clearly have the wrong numbers of staff at their various depots and would benefit from the flexibility to say Depot 1 will not go to Station 2 and 5 drivers at Depot 3 are relocating to Depot 4

And I - having worked in the industry - suspect that is not the case.

 

[6Gman]

Refuse to negotiate or refuse to agree to the unions demands? I find it hard to believe they don't want a deal at all.

Refuse to negotiate. AIUI

 

[6Gman]

This is the ticking clock nobody should ignore. A more technological railway will be coming, is coming. Much of this discussion about who can work specific routes and when will look small fry in time.

Or maybe it isn't ...

I'm old enough to remember the TV programme Tomorrow's World. Some of its predictions happened, some sort of happened, a lot now seem ridiculous.

Will Route Knowledge be consigned to history one day?

Maybe.

Maybe not.

 

[jayah]

You questioned the existence of the fatigue index . Surely the prudent thing to do when being faced with something you have never heard of is to research . Might save you some embarrassment next time .

I have not questioned the existence of a fatigue index. I have questioned why given its existence the trade union thinks it needs to manage micro manage the employers business . The quote is below. I suggest you read it, before going further with this line. The index was mentioned numerous times on the previous page. Nor am I questioning this 7hr training day on Northern West which is also mentioned in other comments, which you seem determined to assert is hearsay on my part, without actually providing any facts to the contrary.

If there is a fatigue index then it sounds perfectly straightforward for the company to make sure the shifts worked comply with it without collectively bargaining over the right to work any RD.

I and other people have explained the reason the union has oversight in this area , and the reason they generally restrict RDW agreements to training . There should be no other need for RDW anyway , without drivers being released for training there should be sufficient compliments of staff to cover the train plan and have a reasonable spare compliment to cover late notice sickness , and operational disruption .

Pilots unions too have an involvement in the management of fatigue at some airlines . It is not unheard of in environments when safety is paramount and there are incentives for the company to prioritise other things .

I take it the point about relocation being unnecessary and actually causing further hindrance is well received ?

Some! Not unheard of!

I bet pilots don't get anything like the amount of union micromanagement of the employers business and many airlines of course don't have unions at all, nor do their planes fall out of the sky or even they have a questionable safety record. Clearly when a driver can leave with weeks notice and take months to train it is never going to be possible to operate in the way you suggest and some flexibility would not be unwelcomed by the travelling public in Lancashire. After all, it is not as if they are being asked to work for free?

I look forward to hearing how absurdly expensive and difficult it is in the railway framework to move a number of drivers 40 miles from one depot to another.

 

[6Gman]

I look forward to hearing how absurdly expensive and difficult it is in the railway framework to move a number of drivers 40 miles from one depot to another.

Could be expensive and difficult for the staff involved ...

 

[yorksrob]

I don't think that 'yorksrob' had any complaint about Wigan services being split between Victoria and Piccadilly, his complaint was that an ex-Victoria train was cancelled, then he went to Piccadilly to be told that no trains (to Wigan, presumably) were running - which, in the event, wasn't true.

I suspect that what happened was that having discovered that the 1136 ex-Victoria was cancelled, he then made his way to Piccadilly, but presumably missed the 1147 Blackpool (which actually didn't depart until 1159). The 1247 departure was indeed cancelled.

I don't think the average Wiganer would complain about having a choice of three rail routes into Manchester, one faster than the other two, and the second and third having intermediate stops at which he might have reason to wish to alight. I don't think it's a realistic argument that, in cases of disruption, a single route would be easier to manage. All trains should run, shouldn't they?

My only criticism of 'yorksrob' is that someone who is capable of posting messages to this forum while travelling should know how to track the whereabouts of trains using such as 'Realtime Trains'.

I'm a luddite anyway, but I don't think the average passenger should have to look at "websites" and consult "aps" to find out what is happening to their train.

 

[Bovverboy]

I'm a luddite anyway, but I don't think the average passenger should have to look at "websites" and consult "aps" to find out what is happening to their train.

But that's the point, I don't see you as an average passenger, I see you as someone with a certain amount of knowledge of how railways operate. Of course passengers shouldn't have to consult websites, but information which should be available often isn't, so if someone does know how to track a train's progress they are likely to find that knowledge immensely useful.

 

[muz379]

Could be expensive and difficult for the staff involved ...

Its not even about the staff involved . In this situation transferring drivers from one depot to another would only make matters worse . Any driver that transfers to a new depot will be required to learn the routes and traction of their new depot before they become fully productive , and currently there is already a big enough deficit of training . I however cannot be bothered explaining such basic stuff to someone who claims that them saying "if there is a fatigue index" is not them disputing the existence of such .

 

[Red Devil]

How is saying someone does not have an opinion worth listening to not insulting?

My message about a fatigue index was in reply to someone who had just mentioned it, therefore my point based upon that message stands. You still haven't made any attempt to explain why a trade union which doesn't even represent many train drivers feels it needs to micromanage overtime, rosters and fatigue. This doesn't happen in other industries.

So despite being a correctly informed and a perfect opinion valid you continue to accuse me of hearsay, not the people saying here most definitely Northern West are on a 7hr training day.

As for total chaos, yes there is.

Actually ASLEF represents roughly 98% of drivers. Your remarks on our wages and what we do for them have little relevance in this issue. What you're trying to do is to make this issue all the fault of ASLEF when it is entirely a management issue. ASLEF have been available for discussion over a RDW agreement and Sunday's inside the working week. For the former they've not been approached with any intent and the latter,the company said they couldn't afford it.
I won't bother going into fatigue and complacency issues of working every rest day, that's been covered by fellow drivers on here.
What I will say is you struggle to hide your envy of our terms and conditions but it's typical of someone who wants a race to the bottom. I'm fed up of people saying we get more than nurses, teachers and police constables. Yes we do and I'm appalled at that fact as well but this is were strong unionisation gets you. A decent pay and good terms and conditions, it should be the goal of every worker not just the bosses who are quite happy to feather their nests while their workers toil under zero hours contracts for a minimum wage.

 

[Camden]

Re that strong unionisation, if you're already on a handsome wage with good working conditions, but then what is there to argue over?

By most peoples' standards, Train Drivers are considered to be on "fat cat" wages already so it's very difficult for people at large to empathise or show solidarity when train strikes and disruption put their own (much crappier) jobs at risk.

Drivers didn't get high wages and reasonable working levels by being pushovers, but then neither have bosses who feather their own nests while their workers struggle. To your passengers in those circumstances, there is only a thin sheet of paper between those.

There's compromise in everything and as I said on either this or another thread, if railway staff aren't careful they're going to price themselves out of jobs, with people at large then being only be too happy to see it happen. If you set up an adversarial position, then there is opposition to that. Are you going to win? I think there is a question here as to what "strong unionisation" should mean or aim to achieve, how, and for who.

 

[Moonshot]

Re that strong unionisation, if you're already on a handsome wage with good working conditions, but then what is there to argue over?

By most peoples' standards, Train Drivers are considered to be on "fat cat" wages already so it's very difficult for people at large to empathise or show solidarity when train strikes and disruption put their own (much crappier) jobs at risk.

Drivers didn't get high wages and reasonable working levels by being pushovers, but then neither have bosses who feather their own nests while their workers struggle. To your passengers in those circumstances, there is only a thin sheet of paper between those.

There's compromise in everything and as I said on either this or another thread, if railway staff aren't careful they're going to price themselves out of jobs, with people at large then being only be too happy to see it happen. If you set up an adversarial position, then there is opposition to that. Are you going to win? I think there is a question here as to what "strong unionisation" should mean or aim to achieve, how, and for who.

To add to the above, I can tell you that there is some real concern in our mess room about the image that both ASLEF and RMT are potraying. Whilst we are not at the divide and conquer stage, nonetheless the Union leadership could really do with listening to members a bit more.

 

[nedchester]

Re that strong unionisation, if you're already on a handsome wage with good working conditions, but then what is there to argue over?

By most peoples' standards, Train Drivers are considered to be on "fat cat" wages already so it's very difficult for people at large to empathise or show solidarity when train strikes and disruption put their own (much crappier) jobs at risk.

Drivers didn't get high wages and reasonable working levels by being pushovers, but then neither have bosses who feather their own nests while their workers struggle. To your passengers in those circumstances, there is only a thin sheet of paper between those.

There's compromise in everything and as I said on either this or another thread, if railway staff aren't careful they're going to price themselves out of jobs, with people at large then being only be too happy to see it happen. If you set up an adversarial position, then there is opposition to that. Are you going to win? I think there is a question here as to what "strong unionisation" should mean or aim to achieve, how, and for who.

I would agree with the post above. The rail unions have rightly looked after their members very well, that is their job.

BUT, the issue is that you can bet your bottom dollar that the Tories are looking at clipping the wings of the rail unions by legislation. Basically, be careful how far you push things. Drivers and Guards on 35-hour / 4-day weeks are something that many are envious of but trying to push things further. Just be thankful that the likes of Brexit are distracting the Government from such things at the moment.

I'd agree that workers in the public sector are industrially weak. There are reasons for this though. Are doctors/nurses going to let patients suffer/die? Are teachers going to let children fail? Are the police going to let crime get worse? There is some emotional blackmail here which of course is exploited by Governments. The rail unions do not have the same dilemmas.