Northern's Problems in the North West

[northwichcat]

we are contracted to work 35 hours a week like a lot of others

35 isn't *that* unusual as full time - that's what 9am to 5pm with an hour's lunch gives you.

Any less definitely isn't full time, I'd say.

Was there ever a such thing as a 9-5 office based job with an hour unpaid lunch to create 7 hours a day, 5 days a week? While there are a few 35 hour a week office based jobs, they are few and far between with most people doing something like 08:30-5 or 9-5:30 with an hour's unpaid lunch break or 9-5 with 30 minutes unpaid lunch break. Then those jobs which are 35 hours a week aren't generally well paid even on a per hour basis, which suggests most of those doing 35 hour weeks are because their employer can't afford to pay people to work 37.5 hours.

There are even some who work more than 35 hours who don't even work 5 days a week. For example, nurses can end up working 4 x 9 hour days per week, especially if they're doing the overnight shifts.

 

[RickSanchez]

How about looking at it from the point of the reliability of a public service (part of our national infrastructure) that lots of people rely on? Rather than simply a "commercial benefit" - and to whom? The curse that is Management Accounting strikes again! It simply drives a selfish blinkered focus on the "bottom line" of the smallest units and ignores all externalities, which is why infrastructure like the railway needs to be seen in the whole and politically answerable (rather than just financial deliverables) because there are far more important outcomes than "profit." Which is why the NHS recently-revealed deficit for last year isn't such a big deal, the simple fact is that they should have been given more money as the year progressed.

Back to the railway: If the staffing diagrams are currently so tight that knock-on delays cripple lots of other services then there is a good argument for making them less intense. Of course it would be less "efficient," but there might well be a net gain in "UK efficiency" as the customers' working days and leisure time become more productive.
It's not the only factor needing fixing of course.

If you look at my previous posts I also say that the timetable is too tight if it is not allowing for any service recovery.

In terms of commercial benefit...what is the point of paying an extra £500pm to drivers every month for little extra benefit in delivering services? I am pointing out that this is not the answer to the current problem.

There are enough drivers they just don’t have route knowledge on required routes, this is a training problem.

I am not excluding any externalities, I am actually pointing out that the answer is not to focus on the minutiae of drivers hours being 35 or 40 hours per week but that there are clearly many more issues to address.

-poorly implemented timetable which appears too tight operational causing secondary delay and cancellation

-shortfall in driver training over routes required

- no RDW agreement to allow release for route learning or training

-not enough units to allow running of service increase and still allow for maintenance without short forming services

- too many through services requiring relieving Crew

- 3 sets of terms and conditions for drivers within ARN

- dictats from Dft around mandatory services with little account for deliverabity

How many more externalities are there more important than a 35/40 hour week?!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Northern MD David Brown has just been on BBC Breakfast explaining the interim timetable amidst the inevitable calls for Northern to be stripped of the franchise................I'm surprised nobody has suggested those knights in shining armour from TfL take it over!!

With the announcement from Wales this morning of what is genuinely going to be transformational, I think the people of the North have even more of a right to be aggrieved. Very much the poor man of the railway.

 

[mpthomson]

Was there ever a such thing as a 9-5 office based job with an hour unpaid lunch to create 7 hours a day, 5 days a week? While there are a few 35 hour a week office based jobs, they are few and far between with most people doing something like 08:30-5 or 9-5:30 with an hour's unpaid lunch break or 9-5 with 30 minutes unpaid lunch break. Then those jobs which are 35 hours a week aren't generally well paid even on a per hour basis, which suggests most of those doing 35 hour weeks are because their employer can't afford to pay people to work 37.5 hours.

There are even some who work more than 35 hours who don't even work 5 days a week. For example, nurses can end up working 4 x 9 hour days per week, especially if they're doing the overnight shifts.

The large majority of nurses now work 12hr or similar length shifts, normally with an hour break (if they get it) in the pattern 44 one week and 33 the next.

In the mid 2000s I used to work for a crisis team and we did 3 14hrs shifts a week (with a 90 min break).

 

[RickSanchez]

The large majority of nurses now work 12hr or similar length shifts, normally with an hour break (if they get it) in the pattern 44 one week and 33 the next.

In the mid 2000s I used to work for a crisis team and we did 3 14hrs shifts a week (with a 90 min break).

In the Hidden review it was highlighted that the hours worked on the railway in safety critical roles should not exceed 12 hours and should contain no driving after the 11th hour

12 hours between shifts

No more than 72 hours in a week

13 days worked in 14

Although superseded since privatisation by HSAW Act, the principles are still adhered to

 

[northwichcat]

With the announcement from Wales this morning of what is genuinely going to be transformational, I think the people of the North have even more of a right to be aggrieved. Very much the poor man of the railway.

Indeed. At the time it was announced the Northern franchise rolling stock improvements were pretty much on a par with what Scotland had been promised - some brand new, some modernish and some refurbished old. However, with the West Midlands replacing 323s and 170s with brand new and with Anglia replacing 156s with brand new it later seemed Northern had got a short straw and now the Welsh announcement has added to that. Although it should be remembered Wales & Borders will serve Cheshire, Merseyside and Greater Manchester.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed. At the time it was announced the Northern franchise rolling stock improvements were pretty much on a par with what Scotland had been promised - some brand new, some modernish and some refurbished old. However, with the West Midlands replacing 323s and 170s with brand new and with Anglia replacing 156s with brand new it later seemed Northern had got a short straw and now the Welsh announcement has added to that. Although it should be remembered Wales & Borders will serve Cheshire, Merseyside and Greater Manchester.

This is indeed true, and there's also TPE.

 

[RickSanchez]

Absolutely, holding out hope the new units on test at Vellim materialise but the rest of the fleet will still be refurbed nearly 30 year old units, even the 333’s are coming up 20 years old

 

[Bovverboy]

There is actually an early Leeds-Wigan service booked to call at Batley.

Interesting. I was not on that one though!

And which one were you on, may we ask? Did the train doors open, and passengers board or alight?

 

[Bertie the bus]

There are enough drivers they just don’t have route knowledge on required routes, this is a training problem.

That means there aren't enough drivers.

Many on here understand drivers require traction and route knowledge but you can't expect the average passenger to understand or care that drivers need to learn the Blackpool route because a signal has moved 3 feet and the fast lines at Kirkham & Wesham have been removed. Especially when Digital Doris has just told them their train has been cancelled due to a shortage of drivers.

 

[RickSanchez]

That means there aren't enough drivers.

Many on here understand drivers require traction and route knowledge but you can't expect the average passenger to understand or care that drivers need to learn the Blackpool route because a signal has moved 3 feet and the fast lines at Kirkham & Wesham have been removed. Especially when Digital Doris has just told them their train has been cancelled due to a shortage of drivers.

No it doesn’t

It means there is a training issue that needs addressing

A shortage means not enough in the headcount which would be remedied by recruitment

This is not the case as highlighted by northern drivers stating depots are already over complement and northern themselves stating they have enough drivers

This idea of not enough drivers muddies the water when the real issue is the route training

 

[Bertie the bus]

If Northern have said it it must be true, because they've been entirely honest throughout haven't they?

You are completely missing the point. Trains are cancelled because there are no drivers to drive them, ergo in normal people's eyes that mean not enough. The PIS tells them there are not enough.

To give an analogy. If your car runs out of petrol but you have several gallons at home in a tank in your garage do you have enough petrol? No you don't.

 

[Moonshot]

No it doesn’t

It means there is a training issue that needs addressing

A shortage means not enough in the headcount which would be remedied by recruitment

This is not the case as highlighted by northern drivers stating depots are already over complement and northern themselves stating they have enough drivers

This idea of not enough drivers muddies the water when the real issue is the route training

Maybe the phrase should be that there is a shortage of drivers who are fully route competent according to the needs of their own link. What happens with a new driver is that they tend to pass out with just 3 routes to their name. They then have to drive 60 turns over those routes before they can go route learning others.

 

[RickSanchez]

If Northern have said it it must be true, because they've been entirely honest throughout haven't they?

You are completely missing the point. Trains are cancelled because there are no drivers to drive them, ergo in normal people's eyes that mean not enough. The PIS tells them there are not enough.

To give an analogy. If your car runs out of petrol but you have several gallons at home in a tank in your garage do you have enough petrol? No you don't.

It is not just what northern have said, northern drivers have said the same...depots are over compliment but drivers don’t have route training.

Your analogy doesn’t work in this context, the fuel analogy would be more correct if northern didn’t run services due to a lack of fuel.

Headcount at a depot is worked out by rostered work and driver numbers, there are mathematically enough drivers, unfortunately they have not been trained to drive the route required.

Root cause of the issue is a lack of training not a lack of recruitment

 

[RickSanchez]

Maybe the phrase should be that there is a shortage of drivers who are fully route competent according to the needs of their own link. What happens with a new driver is that they tend to pass out with just 3 routes to their name. They then have to drive 60 turns over those routes before they can go route learning others.

Exactly this, the issue is that the drivers are there but the work is uncovered as the drivers aren’t trained on the route.

Mathematically the work is covered

In practice a lack of route training is the issue.

The issues should be separated rather than being lumped together

 

[AndrewE]

a little bit more ‘padding’ in the diagrams without much more, if any productive driving.

If you look at my previous posts I also say that the timetable is too tight if it is not allowing for any service recovery.

the first quote is about "efficiency" in the use of drivers, which is what I was replying to. Even if the timetable works it's no good if drivers are diagrammed so tightly that one late arrival means a lost PNB leading to a snowballing set of delays, cancellations or crews in the wrong place.

In terms of commercial benefit...what is the point of paying an extra £500pm to drivers every month for little extra benefit in delivering services? I am pointing out that this is not the answer to the current problem.
I am not excluding any externalities, I am actually pointing out that the answer is not to focus on the minutiae of drivers hours being 35 or 40 hours per week but that there are clearly many more issues to address.
...
How many more externalities are there more important than a 35/40 hour week?!

The 35/40 hr week is not an externality, it's part of the internal working of the business, and therefore part of the problem.
Externalities are things like passengers' lives being disrupted, increased congestion and pollution from people abandoning rail, more ill-health from the pollution, deaths in ambulances stuck in the congestion, people missing paid-for holidays because of not getting to the airport in time... etc.

 

[Llama]

In the not so distant past (maybe 10 years ago) those drivers would have remained in a ''training link" where 100% of their rostered work was the routes they had passed out on (these training links bore no resemblance to the recent training links where only 40-60% of the work was the trainees' actual core routes). New drivers were therefore fully productive from day one of them being signed off to work trains after passing out. They served their time in the training link (usually 12 months or so) then applied for vacancies in the business links. This meant they got experience of driving full diagrams every day, and also meant that the old hand drivers weren't having to cover work the newbies didn't sign because there was none, newbies had their own self-contained starter links (of which there were usually several, each containing a different selection of routes). This setup also meant that trainee drivers were guaranteed to amass the minimum numbers of trips over their core routes as required in training before their passout, and their passouts more often than not fell in the week that they should have done as projected through the course syllabus.

Nowadays rhings are different - trainees are often taking between one and two years to be passed out due to the inefficiencies in the way their practical handling is organised, and then when they do pass out they are only 10% productive, and spend most of their first two years sat spare in the messroom being fed scraps of work - this is because they now end up immediately in a bigger link containing all roads and traction and for standards reasons they are simply not allowed to learn more routes for long periods of time.

 

[Moonshot]

Exactly this, the issue is that the drivers are there but the work is uncovered as the drivers aren’t trained on the route.

Mathematically the work is covered

In practice a lack of route training is the issue.

The issues should be separated rather than being lumped together

Absolutely....and the lack of RDW has led to a surge in outstanding training days, no doubt about that. New drivers are getting very frustrated with this as they are very keen to push on and get themselves fully productive. Let's not forget that Northern have took on a significant number of drivers in the last 18 months...and guards as well

 

[RickSanchez]

the first quote is about "efficiency" in the use of drivers, which is what I was replying to. Even if the timetable works it's no good if drivers are diagrammed so tightly that one late arrival means a lost PNB leading to a snowballing set of delays, cancellations or crews in the wrong place.

The 35/40 hr week is not an externality, it's part of the internal working of the business, and therefore part of the problem.
Externalities are things like passengers' lives being disrupted, increased congestion and pollution from people abandoning rail, more ill-health from the pollution, deaths in ambulances stuck in the congestion, people missing paid-for holidays because of not getting to the airport in time... etc.

I have already highlighted secondary delays and cancellations due to timetables being too tight

35/40 hour week is external to this argument as it is not the root cause of the issue.

More flexibility is retained on a 35 hour week with 4hr committed overtime per week as the ability to work rest days than a flat 40hr working week.

Deaths in ambulances is really an appeal to emotion in this context there is no evidence base for it

The real issue is the disruption to passengers lives which needs addressing with the utmost urgency

 

[RickSanchez]

Absolutely....and the lack of RDW has led to a surge in outstanding training days, no doubt about that. New drivers are getting very frustrated with this as they are very keen to push on and get themselves fully productive. Let's not forget that Northern have took on a significant number of drivers in the last 18 months...and guards as well

Which is why a RDW agreement is needed to initially remedy the situation

It will not however resolve all the underlying issues in the long term as if it is implemented to solve this issue and then withdrawn again when the December timetable comes around we will be back to square one.

The more drivers that can sign routes with the ability to retain competence over them within the roster the more resilience the plan will have

The less tight the timetable is the more resilience there will be in terms of staffing and unit allocation

They need weighing up and balancing properly to provide a robust and resilient service

A full utilisation of al available paths in a timetable with full efficiency is no good without operational resilience

 

[Bertie the bus]

It is not just what northern have said, northern drivers have said the same...depots are over compliment but drivers don’t have route training.
...
Headcount at a depot is worked out by rostered work and driver numbers, there are mathematically enough drivers, unfortunately they have not been trained to drive the route required.

OK, perhaps you would like to answer these questions:

There is a thread on here about the Cumbrian Coast service. There have been many services cancelled on that route due to the driver shortage. What routes or traction do they need to learn?

If it is simply not enough trained drivers then why were there fewer services at Blackpool North on the second Sunday of the new timetable than the first?

Also regarding Blackpool, when there has there been a temporary timetable in force for a couple of months taking into account the fact drivers don’t have route knowledge, why have there been so many cancellations?

 

[RickSanchez]

OK, perhaps you would like to answer these questions:

There is a thread on here about the Cumbrian Coast service. There have been many services cancelled on that route due to the driver shortage. What routes or traction do they need to learn?

If it is simply not enough trained drivers then why were there fewer services at Blackpool North on the second Sunday of the new timetable than the first?

Also regarding Blackpool, when there has there been a temporary timetable in force for a couple of months taking into account the fact drivers don’t have route knowledge, why have there been so many cancellations?

I don’t sign those routes so can’t comment with authority!

As regards the cancellations on the second Sunday maybe there were more drivers working the first Sunday who signed the route than on the second Sunday

Driver training has been discussed previously on the Blackpool line, more drivers needed to relearn the route due to recertify on it than was originally envisaged.

All if the above points ultimately come down to training issues not driver numbers

Although I get the feeling you personally believe there are not numerically enough drivers and so another huge recruitment drive should take place, get all the drivers signed in and then have redundancies when it becomes apparent that there is not enough work for all the new drivers?

 

[Bertie the bus]

All if the above points ultimately come down to training issues not driver numbers

Of course they don't come down to a training issue. You don't answer any of the questions and then just come to a convenient conclusion.

You appear to be a Northern driver. I would say your talents are wasted and you should apply for a job at your press office.

 

[RickSanchez]

Of course they don't come down to a training issue. You don't answer any of the questions and then just come to a convenient conclusion.

You appear to be a Northern driver. I would say your talents are wasted and you should apply for a job at your media department.

How are they not training issues?

There are enough drivers they don’t sign the route!

What do you think is the main reason for the cancellations then?

Also your ad hominem attack on me undermines your argument.

 

[Moonshot]

Which is why a RDW agreement is needed to initially remedy the situation

It will not however resolve all the underlying issues in the long term as if it is implemented to solve this issue and then withdrawn again when the December timetable comes around we will be back to square one.

The more drivers that can sign routes with the ability to retain competence over them within the roster the more resilience the plan will have

The less tight the timetable is the more resilience there will be in terms of staffing and unit allocation

They need weighing up and balancing properly to provide a robust and resilient service

A full utilisation of al available paths in a timetable with full efficiency is no good without operational resilience

All true, but one thing I would take issue with is the need for a RDW agreement in the first place. IMO, it should not exist at all, and drivers should be free to choose whether they want to earn extra money or not.

 

[RickSanchez]

All true, but one thing I would take issue with is the need for a RDW agreement in the first place. IMO, it should not exist at all, and drivers should be free to choose whether they want to earn extra money or not.

Fully agree

However it seems a necessity at the current moment in the short term but I agree it shouldn’t have come to this

 

[Llama]

Absolutely....and the lack of RDW has led to a surge in outstanding training days, no doubt about that. New drivers are getting very frustrated with this as they are very keen to push on and get themselves fully productive. Let's not forget that Northern have took on a significant number of drivers in the last 18 months...and guards as well

The number of training days had actually increased steadily despite there having been a RDW agreement for the last two or three years which stopped in February. There hasn't been a ''surge" since RDW stopped, some depots have actually had some reductions in training requirements (eg Man Vic losing 155s, some Airport, some Huddersfield work) and some have had increases (eg Man Picc learning the Chat Moss, or Lime Street learning Airport to Crewe and 323s).

 

[Moonshot]

The number of training days had actually increased steadily despite there having been a RDW agreement for the last two or three years which stopped in February. There hasn't been a ''surge" since RDW stopped, some depots have actually had some reductions in training requirements (eg Man Vic losing 155s, some Airport, some Huddersfield work) and some have had increases (eg Man Picc learning the Chat Moss, or Lime Street learning Airport to Crewe and 323s).

I can guarentee you it has, because the figures are posted on noticeboards. Which includes new drivers requirements.

 

[Moonshot]

Fully agree

However it seems a necessity at the current moment in the short term but I agree it shouldn’t have come to this

In effect its unofficial industrial action with no ballot. I suspect had there been a ballot, it wouldnt have got through. But in any event, thats hypothetical just now.....we are where we are right now.

 

[Llama]

I can guarentee you it has, because the figures are posted on noticeboards. Which includes new drivers requirements.

I can guarantee you it hasn't, because I also see the same noticeboards, and have seen then for a lot longer than you have.