Arriva Rail North DOO

[Moonshot]

That's not a bad point. After all, two minutes had to be added to Ormskirk-Liverpool Merseyrail running times in the 1990s (which actually necessitated adding an extra unit and crew, if I recall correctly) when hustle alarms were added, thus adding just 10 seconds to the dispatch time. (Move on a few years and that unit is needed for Maghull North anyway, of course )

FWIW, while the timetable allows for it so it doesn't cause actual delay, the running on Bedford-Bletchley is rather sluggish, and I've observed on many occasions that delayed door release while waiting for a transaction to be completed is a common cause. I reckon you'd probably get a couple of minutes off that as well - no great issue as it's self-contained at both ends, but might give a better impression to passengers. Added to the likely gain of a couple of minutes from the higher acceleration of Class 230s as compared to 153s, that's starting to get noticeable. 46 minutes down to 41 or even 40 is potentially something to shout about, even if it's poor compared with driving.

The other thing to bear in mind is that a wheelchair passenger may well be located at the opposite end of a train from the guards cab. Having a guard right next to the wheelchair on approach to a station ( without having to worry about opening doors ) is a time saving as well. I ve lost count of the number of times I have had to make that journey.

 

[CN75]

The RMT are claiming it is a delaying tactic/incompetence/unprofessionalism etc. Presumably the management said why they arrived late or why they had to leave early, so why aren't the RMT telling us the excuse they were given?

Any delay or suspension on strikes is useful for the RMT too, because it gives more time for their members to recoup money lost from striking. Some may be coping but others will be looking at their costs and becoming concerned.

However it is obviously a delaying tactic for Arriva management to drag out talks for as long as possible. In the GTR situation, it looked as though GTR and ASLEF both saw the benefits in dragging out talks for months as the services improved and the OBS operation continued to prove acceptable to the drivers who eventually would vote on the conclusion, much to the RMT’s outrage. It isn’t the last time that tactic will be seen from ASLEF.

How does that allow more time to be spent on revenue duties or prevent services being cancelled if the second member of staff takes ill? It wouldn't deliver benefits for Northern and would still require negotiation with ASLEF. All it would do would mean making RMT member's jobs slightly easier - so win win for the RMT and no win for anyone else.

This is the outcome of the Scotrail negotiation, which followed about ten days of strikes. It was not RMT who managed to achieve the result so much as ASLEF making it clear they would strike on the issue of DOO extension too. At the time, the media focus on the GTR dispute was explosive. The Scottish National Party government decided it wanted none of it and relented from it’s own franchise specification. Scotrail walked away claiming they had made some operational reform, when in reality they had achieved next to nothing.

Guards and Drivers in England do not presently have the political support to influence the DfT in the same way. As has been pointed out in the threads, the cost of financing these disputes has been budgeted for and continues to be bankrolled by the government. There is no way to achieve any operational reform on the railways that could risk industrial action unless the government will compensate the operators for it, as the previous thirty years have largely shown.

 

[Carlisle]

So far these disputes have cost a rather large fortune of public money. Do you think that’s a sensible use of taxpayers’ funds?

I think it’s high time the unions either embrace the challenge of actually trying for a national DOO ban on safety grounds (they’ll have access to considerable funds, legal and technical expertise far superior to almost any of us on here, who are sympathetic to that aim), or accept the RSSB view that its safe under certain conditions, negotiatie a decent comprise, and move on .

 

[Moonshot]

I think it’s high time the unions either embrace the challenge of actually trying for a national DOO ban on safety grounds (they’ll have access to considerable funds, legal and technical expertise far superior to almost any of us on here, who are sympathetic to that aim), or accept the RSSB view that its safe under certain conditions, negotiatie a decent comprise, and move on .

I was just looking at the ASLEF website, I cant actually see anything on it that relates to a campaign against DOO.

 

[AndyHA]

Yes , but both ASLEF and RMT agreed to DOO working back in the early 1980s . First on the St Pancras to Bedford Line , then others on a line by line basis .

“Safety” was never mentioned or discussed in those days . To the best of my knowledge after retirement from the Railway after 45 years , there has never been an accident where DOO has compromised passengers safety etc .

So why has it become an issue now . Would we be having this discussion if a Labour Government was in power , or we had a more reasonable person in Grayling’s shoes ?

 

[OxtedSignaller]

I think it’s high time the unions either embrace the challenge of actually trying for a national DOO ban on safety grounds (they’ll have access to considerable funds, legal and technical expertise far superior to almost any of us on here, who are sympathetic to that aim), or accept the RSSB view that its safe under certain conditions, negotiatie a decent comprise, and move on .

Never going to happen the RSSB bankrolled by the DfT and rail companies has stated that DOO is as safe if not safer than Driver Guard Operation. Nobody has been killed by becoming trapped in the doors of a DOO train. Until a serious incident happens where DOO is responsible I cannot see it being stopped.

 

[northwichcat]

Never going to happen the RSSB bankrolled by the DfT and rail companies has stated that DOO is as safe if not safer than Driver Guard Operation. Nobody has been killed by becoming trapped in the doors of a DOO train. Until a serious incident happens where DOO is responsible I cannot see it being stopped.

So if the RMT won't listen to the RSSB because they are government funded, who will they listen to? You can't have a rail safety board who aren't funded by someone.

 

[LowLevel]

The other thing to bear in mind is that a wheelchair passenger may well be located at the opposite end of a train from the guards cab. Having a guard right next to the wheelchair on approach to a station ( without having to worry about opening doors ) is a time saving as well. I ve lost count of the number of times I have had to make that journey.

Only because your daft TOC keeps you on a long leash to the back of the train and is too tight to fit intermediate door controls. All of our wheelchair spaces have door controls near them and we are even allowed to use them at our discretion!

 

[Moonshot]

Only because your daft TOC keeps you on a long leash to the back of the train and is too tight to fit intermediate door controls. All of our wheelchair spaces have door controls near them and we are even allowed to use them at our discretion!

We can open doors wherever we want to provided there are door controls at the location. Class 319s spring to mind. But in any event, it doesnt matter at all if the driver opens doors. This would probably be a much simpler retrofit to older units than each individual door.

 

[lammergeier]

Yes , but both ASLEF and RMT agreed to DOO working back in the early 1980s . First on the St Pancras to Bedford Line , then others on a line by line basis .

“Safety” was never mentioned or discussed in those days . To the best of my knowledge after retirement from the Railway after 45 years , there has never been an accident where DOO has compromised passengers safety etc .

So why has it become an issue now . Would we be having this discussion if a Labour Government was in power , or we had a more reasonable person in Grayling’s shoes ?

James St changed everything and focussed minds on what the consequences can be if you have a pti interface incident. Without wanting to go over old ground, a large number of rail staff thought the prosecution of the guard was wrong and the subsequent 5 year sentence was excessive. Then there was the bizarre prosecution of Mr Zee on Merseyrail which just cemented opinions amongst staff, particularly drivers. So it's nothing to do with the government of the day, more to do with the responsibilities and pressures of dealing with the pti.

 

[bahnause]

Never going to happen the RSSB bankrolled by the DfT and rail companies has stated that DOO is as safe if not safer than Driver Guard Operation. Nobody has been killed by becoming trapped in the doors of a DOO train. Until a serious incident happens where DOO is responsible I cannot see it being stopped.

DOO comes with other problems. The RSSB acknowledges that:
Arriva Rail North DOO

 

[driver_m]

There's more of us POL at your Daily Mail style posts I'm afraid.

Keep it up, I know who's going to win.

I pity them TBH. We will win this .

 

[driver_m]

James St changed everything and focussed minds on what the consequences can be if you have a pti interface incident. Without wanting to go over old ground, a large number of rail staff thought the prosecution of the guard was wrong and the subsequent 5 year sentence was excessive. Then there was the bizarre prosecution of Mr Zee on Merseyrail which just cemented opinions amongst staff, particularly drivers. So it's nothing to do with the government of the day, more to do with the responsibilities and pressures of dealing with the pti.

A lot of the pro-dooers can't seem to reply to this point satisfactorily .I've said this exact thing ages ago. Times change and now we're on decent money we dont need to sell our colleagues down the river. Not that they should have anyway.

 

[Carlisle]

A lot of the pro-dooers can't seem to reply to this point satisfactorily .

That’ll mainly be due the PTI debate being almost completely exhausted in the Southern threads, and not much else .

 

[woodmally]

So if the RMT won't listen to the RSSB because they are government funded, who will they listen to? You can't have a rail safety board who aren't funded by someone.

The answer is they will listen to whoever will give them the answer they want. Its never been about passenger safety. This whole we are all striking out of the goodness of our hearts and wage packets for your safety is bunkum. Its simply that, I will praise RMT here a bit, that they have the foresight to know that the conductors role will be reduced. This is their membership base and as it does will give more power to Aslef. Therefore they are trying to prevent this from happening.

If anyone out there disagrees and argues it is about safety then I will make this point. If all your concerned about is passenger safety and after two years and goodness knows how much lost earnings and strike days (not just Northern but other networks too) and you are still in the same place now then the best decision would be to stop striking. When an accident happens that you predicted you can then say I told you so we tried to stop it and Grayling has blood on his hands etc. Its clear the argument isn't going to be won by strike action. If they thought there was a case to be had then they would work with disabled groups and other pressure groups to mount a case to reverse this decision.

Now it has been mentioned on here wait till Aslef get involved. Well if like people have suggested Aslef are against DOO or will be, then surely why not wait till Aslef are wound up by it and both go on strike over the same thing together united? Earlier I did say that I think these Saturday strikes will be a turning point and in that I made a small error. I forgot to take into account that they would recoup money lost on Sunday. Thereby not cost them any wages.

Lastly, and I dont expect an aswer to this question, why dont the RMT call a second ballot. I know the answer is because they will probably lose it. But if anyone disagrees with me I will say this. If I am wrong then it will reinforce your position by calling one. Though I suspect they wont.

 

[Bromley boy]

The RMT are claiming it is a delaying tactic/incompetence/unprofessionalism etc. Presumably the management said why they arrived late or why they had to leave early, so why aren't the RMT telling us the excuse they were given?

I don’t suppose any of us know. But I notice a lack of inside knowledge hasn’t stopped you making excuses for Northern management above!

Can you not even acknowledge that there are two sides to every dispute and northern haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory here?

 

[woodmally]

I don’t suppose any of us know. But I notice a lack of inside knowledge hasn’t stopped you making excuses for Northern management above!

Can you not even acknowledge that there are two sides to every dispute and northern haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory here?

I'm ardent critic of the RMT but I accept that RMT are right on this one. I never understood why Northern agreed to talks in the first place as they could never back down over the guard. As its part of the contract agreement with DFT.

 

[northwichcat]

I don’t suppose any of us know. But I notice a lack of inside knowledge hasn’t stopped you making excuses for Northern management above!

Can you not even acknowledge that there are two sides to every dispute and northern haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory here?

I gave a general view on how management work. If things go wrong that they need to get involved in then they need to revise their schedules at no notice. Surely the managers who arrived late or left early said something - why has the fact they arrived late and left early be plastered all over this forum but the excuses they gave haven't been? I'm sure if the manager arrived late and blamed his alarm clock not going off, the RMT would have put that in their press release as an illustrative example of why they think Northern have made a mockery of the talks. The fact that they haven't suggests there's a better excuse - maybe a driver was involved in a SPAD and the manager left early to avoid keeping the driver waiting?

I'm accepting there's two sides and the RMT information has holes in it. Other posters accept the RMT information as the gospel truth and are unable to see the holes in it. People like you just don't want a balanced argument.

 

[Andyh82]

The RMT are strike happy and strike at the first resort. The fact they started industrial action at the very start of the franchise years and years before DOO was ever likely to start proves this. We are still some time off DOO starting even now.

In fact didn’t they try and strike even before this franchise has started?

Didn’t they also start a plan of industrial action from the very start of the franchise elsewhere such as at South Western Railway?

Just think, they could have started action against DOO now, as would still not have been introduced, and saved their members losing all those wages over the past few years.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, I've written to my MP about this. I've asked her to bring what pressure she can to bear on the Government to get both sides to reach agreement.

I'm ardent critic of the RMT but I accept that RMT are right on this one. I never understood why Northern agreed to talks in the first place as they could never back down over the guard. As its part of the contract agreement with DFT.

If they can't back down, what's the point of having industrial action in the first place ?

If ASLEF throwing their hat in the ring is likely to result in a quicker resolution, I wish they'd get on with it.

 

[northwichcat]

The RMT are strike happy and strike at the first resort. The fact they started industrial action at the very start of the franchise years and years before DOO was ever likely to start proves this. We are still some time off DOO starting even now.

In fact didn’t they try and strike even before this franchise has started?

Yes they did and old Northern got legal advice which confirmed that any strike against a future employer was illegal and the RMT were putting their member's jobs on the line by instructing them to go on an illegal strike. (Northern could have sacked them for not turning up for work as it wouldn't have been a strike against their current employer.)

I'm pretty sure they also balloted SWR members within the first week of the franchise.

 

[northwichcat]

Well, I've written to my MP about this as I'm sick and tired of it. I've asked her to bring what pressure to bear

Out of interest who is your MP?

Note the RMT ignored a request from Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram to call off the strikes but decided to misquote a bit from their letter where they said about supporting regional services having guards and used it in a press release claiming Burnham and Rotheram support them.

 

[yorksrob]

Out of interest who is your MP?

Note the RMT ignored a request from Andy Burnham and Steve Rotheram to call off the strikes but decided to
misquote a bit from their letter where they said about supporting regional services having guards and used it in a press release claiming Burnham and Rotheram support them.

Yvette Cooper - so I could imagine the pressure would more likely be on the Government.

 

[woodmally]

Yvette Cooper - so I could imagine the pressure would more likely be on the Government.

To be honest I wrote to Corbyn for same reason. I just want a resolution. Thinking that Corbyn who wants to be a future leader and a supporter of the RMT might take it as an issue. I just got some generic mumbo jumbo from one of his lackys about lack of investment in the railways. Clearly he didnt read my email.

 

[woodmally]

Well, I've written to my MP about this. I've asked her to bring what pressure she can to bear on the Government to get both sides to reach agreement.



If they can't back down, what's the point of having industrial action in the first place ?

If ASLEF throwing their hat in the ring is likely to result in a quicker resolution, I wish they'd get on with it.

I agree but I suspect the reason they didnt wait for Aslef, im sure people will disagree with me here, is they think that Aslef wont support them. And you know what I'm inclined to believe them. But if anyone wants to argue against me then answer this question why not wait for Aslef and go against DOO jointly?

 

[Bromley boy]

I gave a general view on how management work. If things go wrong that they need to get involved in then they need to revise their schedules at no notice. Surely the managers who arrived late or left early said something - why has the fact they arrived late and left early be plastered all over this forum but the excuses they gave haven't been? I'm sure if the manager arrived late and blamed his alarm clock not going off, the RMT would have put that in their press release as an illustrative example of why they think Northern have made a mockery of the talks. The fact that they haven't suggests there's a better excuse - maybe a driver was involved in a SPAD and the manager left early to avoid keeping the driver waiting?

I'm accepting there's two sides and the RMT information has holes in it. Other posters accept the RMT information as the gospel truth and are unable to see the holes in it. People like you just don't want a balanced argument.

So the answer to my question is “no, I won’t acknowledge it”. (when management didn’t turn up I’m sure they made up some excuse - it was clearly a delaying tactic).

As always, you are blinded by bias and completely incapable of being objective. You’ll criticise the RMT at every turn but won’t acknowledge what are obviously shoddy tactics from management even when they are staring you in the face.

How ironic that you then say I’m the one not wanting a balanced argument - utterly laughable (and who are “people like me” exactly?).

There’s little insight to be gained from someone who will twist every fact to suit their pre ordained world view.

I'm ardent critic of the RMT but I accept that RMT are right on this one. I never understood why Northern agreed to talks in the first place as they could never back down over the guard. As its part of the contract agreement with DFT.

And your posts are all the more credible for that objectivity. Similarly, I am anti DOO extension (but not anti reform - driver open guard close would be a good compromise in my view), but I have criticised the RMT many times in the past.

We all have different opinions, of course, but it makes for a more interesting discussion when the participants are mature enough to distinguish between shades of grey rather than viewing everything in simplistic, black and white terms.

 

[Bromley boy]

I agree but I suspect the reason they didnt wait for Aslef, im sure people will disagree with me here, is they think that Aslef wont support them. And you know what I'm inclined to believe them. But if anyone wants to argue against me then answer this question why not wait for Aslef and go against DOO jointly?

I think you have answered your own question there - ASLEF support cannot be guaranteed.

That said, I suspect ASLEF will prove a much tougher nut to crack oop north than it was down south where there is much greater cultural acceptance of DOO (most GTR (Southern) drivers will drive/have driven DOO services at some point).

 

[northwichcat]

So the answer to my question is “no, I won’t acknowledge it”. (when management didn’t turn up I’m sure they made up some excuse - it was clearly a delaying tactic).

As always, you are blinded by bias and completely incapable of being objective. You’ll criticise the RMT at every turn but won’t acknowledge what are obviously shoddy tactics from management even when they are staring you in the face.

How ironic that you then say I’m the one not wanting a balanced argument - utterly laughable (and who are “people like me” exactly?).

There’s little insight to be gained from someone who will twist every fact to suit their pre ordained world view.

You're making presumptions about the management (to make them correspond with the RMT's view that they want to use a delaying tactic), despite not knowing the managers and not being there. I'm throwing ideas in to the mix that the RMT wouldn't want to suggest, which could be plausible reasons for managers being late for any meeting in any business. I may have not worked for Northern but I have worked for busy responsive businesses where workload or demands can change from 1 minute to the next - all it takes is for one phone call or email to drop in for everything to change and I'm sure the railways are no exception (someone reported on here services were cancelled on a strike day because a manager standing in as a guard had to respond to an incident with another service so couldn't continue to stand in as a guard.) It's obvious from the RMT's press releases past and present that they don't know or care how management works, all they care about is management giving them what they want when they want it.

 

[yorksrob]

To be honest I wrote to Corbyn for same reason. I just want a resolution. Thinking that Corbyn who wants to be a future leader and a supporter of the RMT might take it as an issue. I just got some generic mumbo jumbo from one of his lackys about lack of investment in the railways. Clearly he didnt read my email.

I agree but I suspect the reason they didnt wait for Aslef, im sure people will disagree with me here, is they think that Aslef wont support them. And you know what I'm inclined to believe them. But if anyone wants to argue against me then answer this question why not wait for Aslef and go against DOO jointly?

Well, to be honest I haven't noticed Ms Cooper make many statements on the railway before now, so hopefully it will help to push the whole thing up the political agenda.

I don't claim to have a great knowledge of the pro's and con's of DOO. As far as I'm concerned, If agreements have been reached in other TOC's (which they have) I want them reached here now, not after another year of disruption with Northern passengers getting the mucky end of the stick.

 

[Bromley boy]

I'm throwing ideas in to the mix that the RMT wouldn't want to suggest, which could be plausible reasons for managers being late for any meeting in any business. I may have not worked for Northern but I have worked for busy responsive businesses where workload or demands can change from 1 minute to the next - all it takes is for one phone call or email to drop in for everything to change and I'm sure the railways are no exception (someone reported on here services were cancelled on a strike day because a manager standing in as a guard had to respond to an incident with another service so couldn't continue to stand in as a guard.)

If meetings were deemed sufficiently important managers of the level who would be handling these negotiations would be quite capable of clearing their diaries. It’s hardly likely that they would be called away for operational reasons such as a SPAD, as you suggest above.

I rather suspect the RMT (for all their faults) have a pretty shrewd idea of how TOC management work after 100 years or so in the business and failure to attend meetings on multiple occasions, sending representatives without authority to negotiate etc. smacks either of extreme incompetence or (more likely) delaying tactics.

Of course you will not accept this because everything is automatically the RMT’s fault.