Arriva Rail North DOO

[Starmill]

I'm on the payroll.

I KNOW MORE THAN YOU SO DONT QUESTION ME.

----------

*was told by a high up chap in the union covering the talks.

More than whom!? Also, who cares what payroll you are or aren't on? And what were you told by someoe in the Union?

 

[142blue]

Why have ATW been doing extra calls at Sandbach, Alderley Edge etc. Can this be enforced and drivers / guards told they must call there and why do these additional calls only get confirmed last minute

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Why have ATW been doing extra calls at Sandbach, Alderley Edge etc. Can this be enforced and drivers / guards told they must call there and why do these additional calls only get confirmed last minute

They can be enforced. TPE have been stopping at South Milford on Saturdays recently and have also been known to run some ECS moves as passenger services at times.

 

[scrapy]

More than whom!? Also, who cares what payroll you are or aren't on? And what were you told by someoe in the Union?

I think Eccles1983s' post was a bit tongue in cheek taking the mickey out of some of the other posts on here.

Northern have told the RMT that on consultation with Network Rail it is feasable to implement DOO on every line during the franchise except Middlesbrough to Whitby and possibly the Cumbrian coast. I do not know exactly why these lines are different, I have never travelled on them. What is feasable, what the minimum set out in the franchise agreement and what their intentions are may be different and I do think that it is part of bargaining in the negotiations.

In other news talks at ACAS begin later this week and further talks scheduled for next 2 weeks. Strikes remain on at present.

 

[Eccles1983]

More than whom!? Also, who cares what payroll you are or aren't on? And what were you told by someoe in the Union?

You've missed the joke.

Doesn't matter.

I was told just that, apart from a line in Middlesbrough all lines and routes are up for grabs with doo. 50% is a minimum. The reality is much more.

 

[pt_mad]

We have to be careful, it's not like a football match where either side may win, but it could be a draw. It seems we have to have a winner and a loser. Really? Do we?

Starting position for TOC, all trains DOO. Starting position for union, no trains DOO - or any fudge on definitions. Some form of DOO will happen on some routes, eventually, for a variety of reasons. In private that must be accepted by both sides, but where do the lines get drawn? How can faces be saved, and both sides can claim victory? How can both avoid defeat?

In the meantime passengers and all grades of Northern's staff are put through varying degrees of hell to achieve very little real change for the next 5-10 years. It's a ritual that's gone on a very long time in industrial relations. Been there, got the t-shirts. In 10-20 years the world will have moved on - it always does.

But I'd repeat what I said in a previous post, it's a canny move by RMT to go for Saturday strikes when those who don't normally man trains would normally be at leisure. If they give up their Saturdays they'll be wanting time off in lieu, and some will leave. Which means that if anyone wants to contact them they won't get a quick reply. Other areas of the business may suffer long term damage that can't be quantified. Saturday services will be hard to man unless RMT regular train crew members break ranks.

But I know nothing, and admit it.

I'm only a passenger with a life long interest in rail travel who can't always get to places on Northern routes when I want to without using the car - or another TOC's services. And I'm reminded that I have a nice car, which can get me door almost to door, at a minute's notice!

Why does DOO have to be inevitable though? When we think about a long distance coach trip, there could be 50 passengers on the coach, and there will often be a stuard type person onboard providing customer service. A local bus is different because the stops are so frequent, the travel often local and the driver can see and hear what's going on in the bus and does revenue as well. But a train with potentially hundreds of people on where the driver cannot see what's going on inside, it seems ludicrous anyone would desire this tbh. Especially in a country which is so obsessed with health and safety, except where it doesn't suit it seems.

You wouldn't have an aircraft with no staff in the passenger accomodation. So why any long distance train should run without one on duty I don't know. Who operates the doors is perhaps a secondary part of the debate. Senior air stewards have safety accreditations. So why can't all parties agree that a guard must be onboard for the train to run, and it will still be called a guard with the same grade and they will have safety competence, but perhaps they won't do full door operation, although they will be capable of it in case it's needed?

Or is this more about cost saving due to not having to have two on some of the trains, and also so that if no guard is available the toc performance isn't affected as they dont have to cancel the service if it's DOO? And perhaps they'd rather have a new grade of OBS rather than employ new recruits on guard terms which the toc may regard as too favourable?

 

[Clip]

Why does DOO have to be inevitable though? When we think about a long distance coach trip, there could be 50 passengers on the coach, and there will often be a stuard type person onboard providing customer service.

Ive not known National Express to have any sort of steward on board when ive had to use one of their godforsaken coaches - do other operators of long distance coaches have stewards on them?

 

[Killingworth]

Why does DOO have to be inevitable though? When we think about a long distance coach trip, there could be 50 passengers on the coach, and there will often be a stuard type person onboard providing customer service. A local bus is different because the stops are so frequent, the travel often local and the driver can see and hear what's going on in the bus and does revenue as well. But a train with potentially hundreds of people on where the driver cannot see what's going on inside, it seems ludicrous anyone would desire this tbh. Especially in a country which is so obsessed with health and safety, except where it doesn't suit it seems.

You wouldn't have an aircraft with no staff in the passenger accomodation. So why any long distance train should run without one on duty I don't know. Who operates the doors is perhaps a secondary part of the debate. Senior air stewards have safety accreditations. So why can't all parties agree that a guard must be onboard for the train to run, and it will still be called a guard with the same grade and they will have safety competence, but perhaps they won't do full door operation, although they will be capable of it in case it's needed?

Or is this more about cost saving due to not having to have two on some of the trains, and also so that if no guard is available the toc performance isn't affected as they dont have to cancel the service if it's DOO? And perhaps they'd rather have a new grade of OBS rather than employ new recruits on guard terms which the toc may regard as too favourable?

I said "Some form of DOO will happen on some routes, eventually, for a variety of reasons." I used those words with care.

DOO may have different definitions for different people on different routes with different rolling stock. Some people's definition might mean 3 or 4 safety trained staff on a 12 coach train, but none would be what we used to define as a guard. To me that wouldn't be DOO, but might be acceptable in some places. I've travelled on 12 coach trains in the south east that seem to have no onboard staff and that must be true DOO - and it's accepted, there, with manned stations. Class 153's of one carriage seem to carry a driver and guard no matter where they go, but usually in rural areas between unstaffed stations. I can't see how revenue can be protected without someone, somewhere to confirm payment is being made, but that's where it's getting more difficult, making one set of rules fit all.

This is where co-operative discussions need to take place, and ACAS is a good place to start. Nothing ruled out, and nothing ruled in. "This is the way it's always been done, so that's the way it always will be done" might have left us with Stephenson and his Rocket, or horses on wagonways.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Neither National Express nor Megabus (other than possibly on the Scottish Gold routes) have stewards of any kind. There may in some cases be a second driver, but they are a driver, not a steward.

As for DOO, the term means driver only operation, which means the driver deals with all the operational aspects of the train and service. It doesn't mean there can't be another member of staff present either optionally or contractually, for instance to check/sell tickets or provide passenger care and service, nor does it state that those members of staff may not be safety trained - just that the driver is solely and fully responsible for all operational matters on board including door operation and dispatch.

 

[NORTHERNSOUL]

I said "Some form of DOO will happen on some routes, eventually, for a variety of reasons." I used those words with care.

DOO may have different definitions for different people on different routes with different rolling stock. Some people's definition might mean 3 or 4 safety trained staff on a 12 coach train, but none would be what we used to define as a guard. To me that wouldn't be DOO, but might be acceptable in some places. I've travelled on 12 coach trains in the south east that seem to have no onboard staff and that must be true DOO - and it's accepted, there, with manned stations. Class 153's of one carriage seem to carry a driver and guard no matter where they go, but usually in rural areas between unstaffed stations. I can't see how revenue can be protected without someone, somewhere to confirm payment is being made, but that's where it's getting more difficult, making one set of rules fit all.

This is where co-operative discussions need to take place, and ACAS is a good place to start. Nothing ruled out, and nothing ruled in. "This is the way it's always been done, so that's the way it always will be done" might have left us with Stephenson and his Rocket, or horses on wagonways.

Well if nothing is ruled out maybe the RMT should ask how much the franchise subsidy would have been cut by had they not agreed to do the DfT.s dirty work on the removal of guards issue.

Along with why the routes on which they plan to introduce it was such a secret that in the franchise agreement that information was redacted.

 

[ComUtoR]

As for DOO, the term means driver only operation, which means the driver deals with all the operational aspects of the train and service. It doesn't mean there can't be another member of staff present either optionally or contractually, for instance to check/sell tickets or provide passenger care and service

This has been continually debated.

DOO - Only the Driver is on the train
DCO - Driver + Second member of staff

My TOC works both

 

[Bletchleyite]

This has been continually debated.

DOO - Only the Driver is on the train
DCO - Driver + Second member of staff

My TOC works both

I think these make more sense, but I don't believe they are the formal definition and that formally DCO=DOO. Could be wrong though.

 

[ComUtoR]

I think these make more sense, but I don't believe they are the formal definition and that formally DCO=DOO. Could be wrong though.

Reading the Northern franchise agreement, where it refers to DCO it, as you rightly state, to the need to plan for the second member of staff. (non operational duties)

DCO is a new term that has been introduced and, cynically, appears to be the new norm and some say its DOO by the back door. I am DOO and I am the only person on the train. I think there was a link in another thread about DOO/DCO as defined.

From a Drivers perspective it makes a huge difference when we have full operational duties so I fully understand why they see DCO as DOO by another name. More and more I feel like DCO is the best method of operation for all services. Because I do the doors I see it as a step up in safety and much more passenger orientated. Operationally it also makes more sense but ONLY if that person is safety trained, excluding door duties.

Reading through the franchise agreement it doesn't state that the service can be worked forward or not if the planned second member of staff it not present, only that they are planned and the unit run in DCO mode. For the franchise to specifically state DCO and not DOO really does imply that there is a specific difference between the two.

As I say. My TOC runs DOO/DCO and Guards so I see the specific differences every day.

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

Driver-and-conductor operated
The conductor – or guard – is responsible for closing the doors and determining that it is safe to start the train. The conductor is normally responsible for releasing the doors as well.

Driver controlled operation (DCO)
The train driver is responsible for door operation and determining that it is safe to start the train, although other auxiliary members of staff may be provided on the train.

Driver only operation (DOO)
The train driver is responsible for door operation and determining that it is safe to start the train, and is the only member of staff on the train.

As you can see. DOO specifically states that the Driver is the ONLY member of staff on the train.

What they want is DCO as the default and if the second member of staff is not there then it can be worked forward as DOO. Ergo why there was a specific set of conditions for when it can be worked without an OBS. Again, hence why its DOO by the back door.

The RSSB have been very clever in their use of DCO and 'auxillary' and 'may' Both Unions are desperately trying to get these grey areas locked down with specifics.

 

[Bromley boy]

This has been continually debated.

DOO - Only the Driver is on the train
DCO - Driver + Second member of staff

My TOC works both

Clearly I don’t know who you are or where you work, but I’m aware of one TOC which works three methods:

- true guarded: driver open guard close, ding ding and away, no guard = service cancelled;

- true DCO: second person aboard who has no safety critical duties but train will still be cancelled in their absence;

- true DOO: the only staff encountered by passengers are roving cleaners and the occasional REO, who may or may not be an ex driver with one too many SPADs under his belt (two in four weeks tends to have that effect, especially when colleagues and managers alike thought he was a bit of a bell-end in the first place).

 

[OxtedSignaller]

I do think they should create a national list of competencies and responsibilities for an auxiliary person on a DCO train especially as they increasingly expand the role. It differs within different companies and even different depots of the same company. If they are being given safety training and responsibilities it should be laid out in the rulebook etc so there is no disputing what they can and cannot do.

 

[northwichcat]

The RSSB have been very clever in their use of DCO and 'auxillary' and 'may' Both Unions are desperately trying to get these grey areas locked down with specifics.

Sensible way forward would be:

Driver and conductor - minimum 2 members of staff guaranteed
DCO - minimum 2 members of staff booked
DOO - driver only booked member of staff for entire journey even if roaming ticket inspectors or security staff may join the service at some point.

 

[ComUtoR]

Driver and conductor - minimum 2 members of staff guaranteed
DCO - minimum 2 members of staff booked
DOO - driver only booked member of staff for entire journey even if roaming ticket inspectors or security staff may join the service at some point.

Which is exactly what we currently have.

The sensible way forward is DCO, but the second member is safety trained.

 

[Bromley boy]

Sensible way forward would be:

Driver and conductor - minimum 2 members of staff guaranteed

You and I are finally in agreement .

 

[pt_mad]

Which is exactly what we currently have.

The sensible way forward is DCO, but the second member is safety trained.

And the second member of staff is guaranteed?

I suspect this MAY be the way forward. Would the second member of staff be able to still be known as a conductor in grade and terms or would anyone else who didn't operate doors have to an OBS on new terms? New recruits I mean.

 

[Clip]

Sensible way forward would be:

Driver and conductor - minimum 2 members of staff guaranteed
DCO - minimum 2 members of staff booked
DOO - driver only booked member of staff for entire journey even if roaming ticket inspectors or security staff may join the service at some point.

The TOCs still want the flexibility to run services when that 2nd person is not available for one reason or the other so that they dont have to cancel trains (thanks northern this morning - taxi company's love you) but others dont want that so is that a fourth version no one has added?

 

[evoluzione]

This Saturday could be interesting, some managers are now refusing to work anymore strike days.

RMT’s decision to strike every Saturday might be working.

 

[northwichcat]

This Saturday could be interesting, some managers are now refusing to work anymore strike days.

RMT’s decision to strike every Saturday might be working.

Yet the RMT have been offered ACAS mediated talks but are persisting with strike action instead saying talks would just be a 'delaying tactic' by 'pigheaded' management.

 

[Grumpy]

You wouldn't have an aircraft with no staff in the passenger accomodation.

Apologies if appearing nit picky, but this is quite common on smaller commercial aircraft. I cant remember what the borderline is for someone in the cabin. I have made many uk domestic flights with the only staff in the cockpit. Usually 19 seaters. I recall one flight from Glasgow to Inverness on a Loganair Twin Otter where the Captain's passenger briefing was simple "strap up and if anything happens follow us through the door!"

 

[Mollman]

Northern have told the RMT that on consultation with Network Rail it is feasable to implement DOO on every line during the franchise except Middlesbrough to Whitby and possibly the Cumbrian coast. I do not know exactly why these lines are different, I have never travelled on them. What is feasable, what the minimum set out in the franchise agreement and what their intentions are may be different and I do think that it is part of bargaining in the negotiations.

In other news talks at ACAS begin later this week and further talks scheduled for next 2 weeks. Strikes remain on at present.

Not sure about Cumbrian Coast but I think Whitby must be to do with operating the points at Battersby. There again that should see Lancaster - Heysham on the list too.

 

[pt_mad]

Apologies if appearing nit picky, but this is quite common on smaller commercial aircraft. I cant remember what the borderline is for someone in the cabin. I have made many uk domestic flights with the only staff in the cockpit. Usually 19 seaters. I recall one flight from Glasgow to Inverness on a Loganair Twin Otter where the Captain's passenger briefing was simple "strap up and if anything happens follow us through the door!"

Presumably there's going to be more passengers on the train than 19? And presumably there was more than one member of staff in the cockpit?

 

[northwichcat]

Presumably there's going to be more passengers on the train than 19? And presumably there was more than one member of staff in the cockpit?

On a train how long does it take the guard to prepare the train for a station stop (scheduled or unscheduled)? Do they have to walk through and ensure every passenger is wearing a seatbelt, all tables are up, luggage is properly stowed, the toilets are locked out-of-use? Do they also have to go through and get all passengers to return to their seats and fasten seat belts at a seconds notice if the driver experiences turbulence, possibly having to first abandon serving refreshments? When the train stops do they have to wait for someone to put steps or a walkway the other side of the doors before they can open them?

International law states the minimum number of staff needed on an aircraft based on passenger capacity. If train safety is even remotely comparable what international laws are there to prevent DOO or even driver-less metro trains with no staff on board at all?

 

[pt_mad]

On a train how long does it take the guard to prepare the train for a station stop (scheduled or unscheduled)? Do they have to walk through and ensure every passenger is wearing a seatbelt, all tables are up, luggage is properly stowed, the toilets are locked out-of-use? Do they also have to go through and get all passengers to return to their seats and fasten seat belts at a seconds notice if the driver experiences turbulence, possibly having to first abandon serving refreshments? When the train stops do they have to wait for someone to put steps or a walkway the other side of the doors before they can open them?

Ok it seems you may not think a guard is needed?

 

[northwichcat]

Ok it seems you may not think a guard is needed?

I'm saying it's stupid to compare staffing levels on planes to trains. Common sense dictates that planes need considerably staff than trains. As what's obvious to most isn't obvious to you I'm just pointing out the obvious.

 

[pt_mad]

I'm saying it's stupid to compare staffing levels on planes to trains. Common sense dictates that planes need considerably staff than trains. As what's obvious to most isn't obvious to you I'm just pointing out the obvious.

But logically in proportion, if a plane needs 4 cabin crew a train would need one? Rather than none? An emergency could just as easy happen on a train as a plane, it's just that typically people don't feel as vulenrable on a train because they're on the ground. I would argue that a fight is more likely inside a train than a plane. To have no staff there to be able to be alerted is worrying.

 

[Killingworth]

Northern have told the RMT that on consultation with Network Rail it is feasable to implement DOO on every line during the franchise except Middlesbrough to Whitby and possibly the Cumbrian coast. I do not know exactly why these lines are different, I have never travelled on them. What is feasable, what the minimum set out in the franchise agreement and what their intentions are may be different and I do think that it is part of bargaining in the negotiations.

Having seen a feasibility study for a totally different area of rail operations I suspect many of the things said to be feasible would only be achievable after a lot of costly adjustments out of all proportion to any benefits to be gained. Feasible if...... and when ............. can be guaranteed first. The one I saw was apparently feasible. That meant the consultant's time, effort and bill could be said to have been justified. Nevertheless, it went straight onto an electronic shelf to gather dust where it will remain until it gets forgotten about or until it's accidentally deleted. I'd have said the costs were understated and the assumptions of outcomes were far too optimistic.

There's talk of managers not wishing to work Saturday trains. There are a lot of staff who are not called managers helping to keep the trains running. Many are not used to working Saturdays and they aren't died in the wool railway people from the north. If they're normal workers they'll be looking at jobs elsewhere and, especially if they're good, will go and get them. Why hang around with all this hassle?

When they do try keeping the wheels turning the day job has to suffer. That can have all sorts of consequences when tasks get behind. Once or twice a month is different from every Saturday. Some dedicated staff will be taking more work home, or trying to do it on lap tops between trips. These factors will bring their toll as fatigue starts to set in. A lot of things that should have been done won't have been, or not done as well as they should. People expecting actions may find they're delayed, or just don't happen. Projects within Northern may suffer, and collateral disruption is unpredictable.

The damage caused by the dispute is greater than the missing trains. That's what happens during periods of industrial action, anywhere.