Northern timetable plan for May 2018

[absolutelymilk]

Yes, that's what this thread: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-confirmed-scrapped-contagion-spreads.166907/ is about.

This thread is specifically about Northern though. So we should either change the title, create a new thread or discuss the changes only on the thread I linked.

 

[lincman]

As usual when any cock ups occur Lincoln loses out, we are still waiting for our 2 hourly service to London. I have had the misfortune to use the heralded new direct service to Leeds on a couple of occasions, 2hours 42 mins on a 142 was painful. The service was well used on both legs Lincoln- Sheffield and onwards to Leeds. Capacity is insufficient and the rolling stock struggles to keep time.

 

[Bantamzen]

I was under the impression that it is the previously planned December 2018 changes that had been cancelled, that's not to say that those changes cancelled for the May timetable won't still be introduced as well as other minor tweaks. It just won't be the whole scale changes that will be taking place.

 

[northwichcat]

I was under the impression that it is the previously planned December 2018 changes that had been cancelled, that's not to say that those changes cancelled for the May timetable won't still be introduced as well as other minor tweaks. It just won't be the whole scale changes that will be taking place.

There were no real changes planned to take place in December 2018. There were two Northern recasts planned - December 2017 and December 2019 but pretty much all the December 2017 changes were postponed to May 2018 and then some of them were postponed again just weeks before the planned timetable change date.

 

[Bantamzen]

There were no real changes planned to take place in December 2018. There were two Northern recasts planned - December 2017 and December 2019 but pretty much all the December 2017 changes were postponed to May 2018 and then some of them were postponed again just weeks before the planned timetable change date.

Ah, for some reason I thought there were new routes and further changes due to take place in December? Maybe I've got the years mixed up!

 

[northwichcat]

As usual when any cock ups occur Lincoln loses out, we are still waiting for our 2 hourly service to London. I have had the misfortune to use the heralded new direct service to Leeds on a couple of occasions, 2hours 42 mins on a 142 was painful. The service was well used on both legs Lincoln- Sheffield and onwards to Leeds. Capacity is insufficient and the rolling stock struggles to keep time.

Was Lincoln to London something DfT required franchise bidders to include or was an option which National Express chose to do on top of the minimum requirements? If it's the latter it's perhaps not surprising it didn't go ahead in the end - NX submitted a bid which looked good on paper but didn't work in practice.

Lincoln to Leeds via Sheffield has been promised brand new 195s and journey time improvements once those new trains are introduced but new trains don't appear overnight. Capacity is a problem on many services around the Northern network, as is the continued use of Pacer trains. Would things have been any better for you if you had caught one Pacer to Sheffield and then a second Pacer to Leeds?

 

[Harpers Tate]

All of the Lincoln <> Leeds services I have seen passing by since May have been 15x - mostly 158, a few "lesser" 15xs; no 14xs that I've seen recently.

 

[lincman]

I must be unlucky because each time I have used it a Pacer has been used, the last time was 2 weeks ago. I would be happy if it had been a 158. I now go via Doncaster, which is significantly quicker.

 

[northwichcat]

I noticed today:

17:18 Stockport to Chester - operating
Chester to Helsby ECS - scheduled
18:50 Helsby to Ellesmere Port- Cancelled due to a member of staff being unavailable
19:10 Ellesmere Port to Victoria - Starts at Helsby due to a member of staff being unavailable.

Do they arrange a different crew just to take the unit between Helsby and Ellesmere Port?

 

[Loop & Link]

It’s all the same crew, however the Chester-Helsby-Ellesmere Port-Man Vic job is still a Lime Street job but STP’d during the blockade, the crew are taxied to Chester first job of the evening for the crew.

The stock for 5F14 should come off 16:41 Manchester Piccadilly-Chester (2D53).

However today it’s coming off 17:18 ex-Stockport which means a late start to the subsequent ECS, and hence the cancellation. It has a VSTP path put in to run behind 18:50 Chester-Manchester Airport so it doesn’t knock it at Helsby shunting.

 

[frodshamfella]

I noticed today:

17:18 Stockport to Chester - operating
Chester to Helsby ECS - scheduled
18:50 Helsby to Ellesmere Port- Cancelled due to a member of staff being unavailable
19:10 Ellesmere Port to Victoria - Starts at Helsby due to a member of staff being unavailable.

Do they arrange a different crew just to take the unit between Helsby and Ellesmere Port?

I was wondering if anything had been operating from Helsby to Ellesmere Port right now while they are in such a mess, and the Chester to Runcorn Saturday parliamentary has that been running ?

 

[northwichcat]

It’s all the same crew, however the Chester-Helsby-Ellesmere Port-Man Vic job is still a Lime Street job but STP’d during the blockade, the crew are taxied to Chester first job of the evening for the crew.

The stock for 5F14 should come off 16:41 Manchester Piccadilly-Chester (2D53).

However today it’s coming off 17:18 ex-Stockport which means a late start to the subsequent ECS, and hence the cancellation. It has a VSTP path put in to run behind 18:50 Chester-Manchester Airport so it doesn’t knock it at Helsby shunting.

I should have said 16:41 Manchester to Chester not 17:18 Stockport to Chester. According to RTT the unit off the 17:18 Stockport to Chester went in to platform 7, while the unit off the 16:41 was in platform 6 with the unit in platform 6 forming the ECS to Helsby and not leaving until after the 19:01 Chester to Manchester departed from platform 7. I'm aware Victoria drivers sign both the Mid-Cheshire and Chester-Helsby-Victoria so could the Lime Street driver have been unavailable and the driver off the 17:18 Stockport to Chester have taken the Helsby to Victoria working but not the Ellesmere Port branch?

 

[northwichcat]

I was wondering if anything had been operating from Helsby to Ellesmere Port right now while they are in such a mess, and the Chester to Runcorn Saturday parliamentary has that been running ?

In the first couple of weeks of the new timetable Ellesmere Port workings were cancelled every day but now they seem to be running most days. For anyone who does have a season ticket for the Helsby-Ellesmere Port branch they can get enhanced compensation off Northern: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/northern-reveal-compensation-scheme.167026/

 

[northwichcat]

Reportedly mass cancellations can be expected on Northern services tomorrow due to hardly anyone volunteering to work a Sunday when England may have been playing a World Cup Final.

 

[nw-sparks]

Most of Sunday's Huyton <> Wigan trains have just been cancelled by VSTP.

Are they going to be ready for a full timetable in a couple of weeks? Doesn't look like it!

 

[Muenchener]

Reportedly mass cancellations can be expected on Northern services tomorrow Which will have zero due to hardly anyone volunteering to work a Sunday when England may have been playing a World Cup Final.

Which will have zero impact on the Man-Bolton-Preston corridor. Lol. I'll get my coat...

 

[underbank]

Northern have cancelled the first Barrow to Preston train tomorrow meaning no way to get to Preston to connect with Virgin services etc. Apparently, they can't be bothered to put on rail replacement services either. About time they lost the franchise and the drivers were sacked. I've had enough of their pathetic attempt at running a train service.

 

[Deerfold]

Northern have cancelled the first Barrow to Preston train tomorrow meaning no way to get to Preston to connect with Virgin services etc. Apparently, they can't be bothered to put on rail replacement services either. About time they lost the franchise and the drivers were sacked. I've had enough of their pathetic attempt at running a train service.

Why do you think the drivers should be sacked? How do you think a new franchisee could run better services with even fewer drivers?


I may have chosen a bad day tomorrow for my £10 Northern Rail Ranger.

 

[underbank]

Why do you think the drivers should be sacked?

Because too many have decided not to work and therefore not to provide the service. Yes, I know all about the sunday working volunteering etc., but the railways are a 7 day service, and if they can't manage it them it's P45 time. As for "who else", I'm starting to wonder why bother at all - their service is so poor, I think most people have given up relying on them and have found alternatives - most of their journeys are quicker/more comfortable by road.

 

[Deerfold]

Because too many have decided not to work and therefore not to provide the service. Yes, I know all about the sunday working volunteering etc., but the railways are a 7 day service, and if they can't manage it them it's P45 time. As for "who else", I'm starting to wonder why bother at all - their service is so poor, I think most people have given up relying on them and have found alternatives - most of their journeys are quicker/more comfortable by road.

They've decided not to volunteer for overtime. If it's that easy to bugger up the service, surely it's up to the employer to sort out a better system.

You're suggesting sacking people who have not broken the terms of their employment - time for lots of successful tribunal cases if they did that.

 

[lincman]

The idea of sacking drivers is not really the answer, but now must be the time to look at contracts for staff that put the service that is supposed to be provided first.

 

[Eccles1983]

Because too many have decided not to work and therefore not to provide the service. Yes, I know all about the sunday working volunteering etc., but the railways are a 7 day service, and if they can't manage it them it's P45 time. As for "who else", I'm starting to wonder why bother at all - their service is so poor, I think most people have given up relying on them and have found alternatives - most of their journeys are quicker/more comfortable by road.

So why the anger chap?

And how on earth are you justifying sacking people for simply sticking by their contract?

I mean I would love to see it attempted. The amount of money I would get at a tribunal would be eyewatering and I could get another job at another TOC.

You want sundays in the working week? Get your wallet ready for a hammering - it would cost a shedload to employ enough drivers to cope.

The adage "empty vessels make the most noise" seem to fit this.

 

[Chester1]

So why the anger chap?

And how on earth are you justifying sacking people for simply sticking by their contract?

I mean I would love to see it attempted. The amount of money I would get at a tribunal would be eyewatering and I could get another job at another TOC.

You want sundays in the working week? Get your wallet ready for a hammering - it would cost a shedload to employ enough drivers to cope.

The adage "empty vessels make the most noise" seem to fit this.

I would support putting new staff on 7 day contracts with an appropriate amount of extra pay. The situation of Sunday services run on OT looks pretty mad from a passenger perspective. Current staff could be offered a substantial lump sum to voluntarily sign up to a 7 day contract. Most would likely decline the offer. I agree about imposing contracts. I know how I would react!

 

[nedchester]

I would support putting new staff on 7 day contracts with an appropriate amount of extra pay. The situation of Sunday services run on OT looks pretty mad from a passenger perspective. Current staff could be offered a substantial lump sum to voluntarily sign up to a 7 day contract. Most would likely decline the offer. I agree about imposing contracts. I know how I would react!

You could make a start by employing all new staff on 24/7 contracts. Current staff can opt to move to a new contract if they wish. That's the way it works in other industries.

The railway does need to move into the 21st century on this matter.

 

[northwichcat]

I would support putting new staff on 7 day contracts with an appropriate amount of extra pay. The situation of Sunday services run on OT looks pretty mad from a passenger perspective. Current staff could be offered a substantial lump sum to voluntarily sign up to a 7 day contract. Most would likely decline the offer. I agree about imposing contracts. I know how I would react!

I've suggested numerous times new employees should be given a contract including Sunday and existing ones should be given the option of staying on their existing one or moving to the new ones. The response I've got each time is - the unions will never allow that.

 

[Chester1]

You could make a start by employing all new staff on 24/7 contracts. Current staff can opt to move to a new contract if they wish. That's the way it works in other industries.

The railway does need to move into the 21st century on this matter.

Yes thats how it works in the Civil Service too. The lump sum for agreeing to alter conditions is often considerable. There is the potential that I may be offered a contract change to include limited weekend working next year, it will be a choice for current staff but not new staff. Both current and new staff will be paid extra for weekend work. Drivers are already well paid but there are people in all walks of life who spend every penny they earn regardless of income and therefore are always want to earn more. Most drivers and probably guards too, would probably refuse so its important that all new rail staff are employed on 7 day contracts as soon as possible because it will take a long time for natural wastage to increase the number of staff contractually obliged to work Sundays. Its pitiful that the timetable is expected to be reliable when its entirely dependant on overtime.

I've suggested numerous times new employees should be given a contract including Sunday and existing ones should be given the option of staying on their existing one or moving to the new ones. The response I've got each time is - the unions will never allow that.

I don't buy that. Public opinion would be on the governments side and it would backfire very badly. They would be opposing offering existing staff the choice to accept or decline more money in return for working Sundays and make it mandatory for new staff, also on higher rates of pay. I think ToCs are the main opponents to 7 day working because they would have to employ and train more drivers.

 

[gavin]

More than 170 services cancelled today as drivers refused to work this Sunday after England won last Saturday

I would hope any new staff they take on now have Sunday working would implmented into the contract just like most shop workers do

 

[northwichcat]

More than 170 services cancelled today as drivers refused to work this Sunday after England won last Saturday

I would hope any new staff they take on now have Sunday working would implmented into the contract just like most shop workers do

Shop workers do have the right to opt out of Sunday working if they are regular church goers. However, 95% of the population don't go to church on Sundays so if ASLEF or the RMT started claiming 50% of their members want to opt out of Sunday working for that reason, it would be very suspicious.

 

[nedchester]

I've suggested numerous times new employees should be given a contract including Sunday and existing ones should be given the option of staying on their existing one or moving to the new ones. The response I've got each time is - the unions will never allow that.

It's got nothing to do the with the unions. New employees are not union members. If the unions with to protect current members terms and conditions then fine but legally the unions can do nothing with new employees (and I consider myself left of centre politically)

 

[northwichcat]

It's got nothing to do the with the unions. New employees are not union members. If the unions with to protect current members terms and conditions then fine but legally the unions can do nothing with new employees (and I consider myself left of centre politically)

The second sentence isn't automatically the case if the new employee has worked in another role for the TOC e.g. dispatcher becoming a guard or has worked in the same role for another TOC.