Arriva Rail North DOO

[Carlisle]

it is now much easier to mobilise support for industrial action at a single TOC than it was for national action under BR.

In the interests of the future prosperity of railways worldwide, I sincerely hope any countries contemplating adopting the British franchising model, give the above point careful consideration first.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

In the interests of the future prosperity of railways worldwide, I sincerely hope any countries contemplating adopting the British franchising model, give the above point careful consideration first.

Alternatively ensure a framework exists that either promotes good industrial relations or makes them completely irrelevant, depending on your political preference!

 

[Carlisle]

Alternatively ensure a framework exists that either promotes good industrial relations or makes them completely irrelevant, depending on your political preference!

True, but so far, nothing other than further strike laws would have actually prevented the current deadlock.

DFT wanted the Mc Nulty report implemented and the unions were determined to carry out their plans to oppose it in the way that they have,, even before Willko’s daft rant took place.

Almost nothing’s changed.

 

[Confused52]

Alternatively ensure a framework exists that either promotes good industrial relations or makes them completely irrelevant, depending on your political preference!

Do I take that as on the one hand a reference to the Objects of the RMT (found at https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/rmt-rule-book/rule-1/) and in particular (4b) "... to work for the supersession of the capitalist system by a socialistic order of society;"

The heavy handed idealism does appear to be evenly spread then? The General Public aren't being told about that either.

 

[Andrew32]

Is this confirmed as I was led to believe that nothing has been discussed regarding operation of doors by either ASLEF or RMT?

I'm not sure how the fight has been lost for the RMT?

I thought at this point last year the Merseyrail fight could have been lost but they seem close to a deal.

So far:-

No DOO passenger trains have run on Northern

No drivers have been trained on DOO procedures.

ASLEF have not agreed to work trains DOO
.
It is not in drivers contracts to work trains DOO.

A training package has been agreed for the class 195 and 331 for both drivers and guards. Drivers are not being trained on door procedures or selective door operation (selective door operation refused by ASLEF). Guards are being trained on door procedures and selective door operation.

RMT have agreed deals with other TOCs

There is growing public and political pressure for Arriva to loose the Northern franchise. This may see the quiet removal of the DOO clause, especially if there is a change of government. It's in the RMTs interests to drag this out.

 

[scrapy]

Is this confirmed as I was led to believe that nothing has been discussed regarding operation of doors by either ASLEF or RMT?

There has been some discussion with the RMT. The only partial discussion which has taken place with ASLEF is a request for drivers to set up SDO on new trains. ASLEF have said it's not part of a their role. Guards will now be trained on it, drivers wont.

 

[DaveB10780]

To me it seems like a few people are messing up the lives of thousands of people on a false premise. Have pretty much voted Labour all my life, however I find the current action unwarranted and totally uncaring of the impact to many people. It seems all about union politics and refusal to accept a changing world. We, the general public, don't believe there are safety issues but are happy there should be a second person on the train. This should be relatively trivial to agree and move on so JFDI.

 

[Carlisle]

It's in the RMTs interests to drag this out.

If correct ,its almost certainly the main reason they’ve opted to backtrack on any previous offer to give up door duties to drivers,.

 

[Andrew32]

There has been some discussion with the RMT. The only partial discussion which has taken place with ASLEF is a request for drivers to set up SDO on new trains. ASLEF have said it's not part of a their role. Guards will now be trained on it, drivers wont.

Thankyou

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Do I take that as on the one hand a reference to the Objects of the RMT (found at https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/rmt-rule-book/rule-1/) and in particular (4b) "... to work for the supersession of the capitalist system by a socialistic order of society;"

The heavy handed idealism does appear to be evenly spread then? The General Public aren't being told about that either.

My comment was in response to another comment about a wider international view and I was alluding to the fact that many countries have different approaches to industrial relations to ours, from more liberal to authoritarian.

As for the quoted RMT aspiration I would suggest that most unions have something similar but none suggest that change should be achieved by illegal means. The laws governing trade union activity in this country do mean that we don't see the sort of industrial strife that was common during the 1970s, indeed the "balance of power" has swung very much in the opposite direction. My issue with the public not being fully aware of the reality in this dispute is that elected politicians should be accountable to the electorate but generally in this country such accountability seems only to be considered important during election campaigns. OTOH trade unions almost invariably have branch meetings on a regular, typically monthly, basis allowing their "electorate" an opportunity not only to question elected local officials but to debate motions from members which can, and do, cause changes in the way their union behaves. Clearly it is not practical for Parliament to be subjected to the same pattern of scrutiny but nevertheless I believe politicians, especially those in government, should be more transparent about their motivations for policy enactments and degree of adherence to manifesto commitments.

 

[superkev]

Do I take that as on the one hand a reference to the Objects of the RMT (found at https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/rmt-rule-book/rule-1/) and in particular (4b) "... to work for the supersession of the capitalist system by a socialistic order of society;"

The heavy handed idealism does appear to be evenly spread then? The General Public aren't being told about that either.

I suppose the question is are the strikes for political rather than the much quoted safety mantra.
K

 

[Darren Measor]

What's the benefit of striking for political reasons. Unless it's a general strike.

 

[Carlisle]

I suppose the question is are the strikes for political rather than the much quoted safety mantra.
K

For the unions hierarchy and activists definitely, however for a sizeable proportion of the members it’s probably more centred around a desire to preserve a culture of work with a well proven track record of delivering good wages and conditions. (during the llast quarter century anyway)

 

[PR1Berske]

Is the strike still valid if it morphs from being specifically about DOO into a broader anti-Tory one?

 

[Robertj21a]

Is the strike still valid if it morphs from being specifically about DOO into a broader anti-Tory one?

I doubt if that many people really know, or care, what the strikes are all about !. The general public, most of whom never use the trains, won't have a clue.

 

[mde]

Is the strike still valid if it morphs from being specifically about DOO into a broader anti-Tory one?

Is it a ‘broader anti-Tory one’ though?

The DOO issue would have likely resulted in a strike regardless of who was in power at Number 10… end of the day it could be argued that the same contentious issue would have appeared as it’s clear that the civil servants in the DfT have a chosen path, and, even with, say, a more rail savvy Minister being at the helm, it’s doubtful the oath would change.

Merseyrail is an example of that - their push to DOO-P was originating from a PTE which is controlled by Labour…

 

[Tomnick]

We, the general public, don't believe there are safety issues but are happy there should be a second person on the train.

The general public, for the most part, have a very poor understanding of the risks involved though. A guarantee of a second member of staff on every train is a world away from the DfT's requirement to simply have each train covered at the diagramming stage.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If the three October "Saturday" strike days on 6th, 13th and 20th of the month are intended to convey the stated RMT worries about safety, why has the 27th October not been added to these?

 

[Adam0984]

They seem to announce them in blocks of 3 so in regards to the Saturday ones it was the last one in August and first 2 in September. Then they announced the other 3 in September (with it been a 5 Saturday month). Then now it’s the first 3 in October and the next ones might be the 27th plus the first 2 in November

 

[Robertj21a]

The general public, for the most part, have a very poor understanding of the risks involved though. A guarantee of a second member of staff on every train is a world away from the DfT's requirement to simply have each train covered at the diagramming stage.

Perhaps, but I'm not sure that it's much different to that which seems to be working well now on Southern ?

 

[Tomnick]

Perhaps, but I'm not sure that it's much different to that which seems to be working well now on Southern ?

Maybe not. Southern, at least, seem committed to the OBS grade. Time will tell how that plays out in the longer term, but it's certainly at odds with McNulty's desire to have trains operated by the driver alone by default. Given Northern's current understaffing, I'd have no confidence whatsoever in any vague commitments that they might provide.

 

[northwichcat]

Note to editors:

RMT will be lobbying for the guard guarantee at the launch of the new ARN Class 195 and 331 units from 08:30 on Thursday October 2018 at the Edge Hill Train Care Centre, Picton Road, Liverpool L15 4JH.

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-says-new-northern-trains-long-overdue/

Note to RMT: There's more than one Thursday in the month of October.

 

[coppercapped]

The general public, for the most part, have a very poor understanding of the risks involved though. A guarantee of a second member of staff on every train is a world away from the DfT's requirement to simply have each train covered at the diagramming stage.

I think they have a very good understanding. Nearly half of all rail passenger journeys are made on the London Underground network - 1.37 billion per year - which really is operated with only one person on each train.

 

[scrapy]

Perhaps, but I'm not sure that it's much different to that which seems to be working well now on Southern ?

Northern have said they plan to have services running without a second person. That's different to running services without a second person because they are unavailable at short notice.

 

[Tomnick]

I think they have a very good understanding. Nearly half of all rail passenger journeys are made on the London Underground network - 1.37 billion per year - which really is operated with only one person on each train.

Anyone with a good understanding of the risks involved would appreciate the difference between the well-staffed, accessible London Underground network and the often deeply rural Northern network.

 

[Robertj21a]

Northern have said they plan to have services running without a second person. That's different to running services without a second person because they are unavailable at short notice.

With new trains, and infrastructure set up for DOO, it seems entirely logical to run certain services as DOO. I can't see that the RMT need to keep to their 'All or nothing' blanket approach.

 

[northwichcat]

Until a list of DCO routes is published with the expected staffing provision both on board and at stations, as well as expected formation lengths it's pointless making any comparisons. However, it's very unlikely Northern will be running 8/10/12 car DOO services like in the South. Also the unstaffed station reasoning is really a red herring as guards only assist passengers get between the train and the platform - they don't go off to check if there's any passengers who may have difficulty getting between the road/car park and the station platform.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I think they have a very good understanding. Nearly half of all rail passenger journeys are made on the London Underground network - 1.37 billion per year - which really is operated with only one person on each train.

Anyone with a good understanding of the risks involved would appreciate the difference between the well-staffed, accessible London Underground network and the often deeply rural Northern network.

Absolutely no comparison. The LU network exists in a totally different environment compared to the national rail network. Stations much closer together, no level crossings, much more secure perimeter fences/walls and no maintenance staff on the tracks while trains are operating. And even LU relies on platform "dispatchers" at many of its busier stations.

With new trains, and infrastructure set up for DOO, it seems entirely logical to run certain services as DOO. I can't see that the RMT need to keep to their 'All or nothing' blanket approach.

What infrastructure would that be? A handful of stations has had lighting upgrades and that's about it. Do we have any idea whether the cab-mounted display screens are actually any good? There's an awful lot of sub-standard screens out on the network already, we don't want any more.

 

[XDM]

Anyone with a good understanding of the risks involved would appreciate the difference between the well-staffed, accessible London Underground network and the often deeply rural Northern network.

What is different between the deeply rural Northern network(where incidentally?) & the empty level crossing riddled DOO routes from Wickford to Southminster & Cambridge to Kings Lynn?

ANYONE WITH an understanding of risks will answer nothing.

As DOO has worked perfectly safely on these rural routes for DECADES it will work perfectly safely on the routes Northern is choosing to DOO.

 

[Robertj21a]

Absolutely no comparison. The LU network exists in a totally different environment compared to the national rail network. Stations much closer together, no level crossings, much more secure perimeter fences/walls and no maintenance staff on the tracks while trains are operating. And even LU relies on platform "dispatchers" at many of its busier stations.



What infrastructure would that be? A handful of stations has had lighting upgrades and that's about it. Do we have any idea whether the cab-mounted display screens are actually any good? There's an awful lot of sub-standard screens out on the network already, we don't want any more.

To me, it's whatever infrastructure is felt necessary to ensure safe operation. It would probably need an independent review as I doubt if everybody would accept anything done by a TOC/NR - or any Union.