Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The agreement with Merseyrail to retain some form of on-board member of staff (probably OBS) is said to involve a fares increase which would not have otherwise been applied, so yes, I do.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Arriva Rail North DOO
- Thread starter Andrew32
- Start date
- Status
The agreement with Merseyrail to retain some form of on-board member of staff (probably OBS) is said to involve a fares increase which would not have otherwise been applied, so yes, I do.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Thank you for you detailed response, so it appeared northern at least attempted to begin relations with the RMT on a positive note, but as you almost confirm, unfortunately the union had decided long before then to ballot straight away if northern didn’t display a clear willingness to concede almost everything immediately, after having been legally prevented from organising a similar vote on the previous franchise.So the whole process was totally meaningless from day one and we are where we are, most on here probably foresaw that.
Last edited:
Dr Hoo
Established Member
Welcome to the forum. Thank you for your considered post.
I thought that the ‘slack’ already exists in that the Northern franchise only requires ‘half’ of services to run under DCO conditions. Many posters have noted that the foreseeable mix of rolling stock, let alone statements that current staff conditions will be protected means that anybody who wants to remain as a guard will be able to do so. Negotiations about issues such as platform despatch staff on Saturday evenings or other busy times are also entirely possible.
Meanwhile areas such as the Hope Valley continue to experience the fallout. A village like Bamford fights to retain its social viability with a community-run ‘last’ pub, cafe and Post Office that depend on weekend visitors. The station is supported by a Community Rail Partnership and a Friends Group. The local populace are the ones who are suffering on strike days (and also at risk by making car journeys instead) yet their line isn’t even one of the routes likely to see the guards go.
Last edited:
I was with you until that last paragraph ...
It needs to be "horses for courses". DOO is fine in tightly-controlled settings (such as LU) or where there's no need for passenger support (I actually worked on the very early DOO schemes for freight working).
BUT if I'm on a train rattling across all those level crossings between Wigan and Southport, out in the wilds of the Settle and Carlisle, or on an evening train in some of the less salubrious areas of South Manchester [other such areas are available] I want someone available to provide support/ advice etc thank you very much.
Firstly thank you for your response. I was one of the anti RMT people on this forum myself till I attended one of the public meetings they arranged. If you can get to one I would go. Yes it was very much a labour socialist meeting. The usual SWP lot arguing about revolution and selling socialist worker.
However the speech given by the RMT bloke was very measured and refreshingly honest. It is about job loses. I know that safety is raised as an issue but they are actually fearful of their jobs being lost. I just wished this was mentioned more as I prefer honesty than the public being used as a pawn with the phrases in the past that "We are not striking over jobs but over your safety". Its the half truths that I despise the most. Also what was also clear from the meeting was that this is affecting wages of staff. I suspected, wrongly, members could recoup lost wages on a Sunday. However its clear that's not the case.
Thirdly the elephant in the room Aslef was mentioned. It became very clear that although a few Aslef members are refusing to cross picket lines. The vast majority are not in favour of strike action. And the RMT cannot guarantee their support, despite whats been reported on here.
There was speeches from a labour councillor and MP but on the whole what was apparent was that the Labour party is not united behind this campaign. In fact certain leaders in Liverpool were against the strikes. However the RMT representative did say Corbyn was behind the strikes. I have to disagree with him here as I haven't heard a peep out of this guy on the issue. My opinion of Corbyn remains unchanged. Also despite the fact that I have become more sympathetic to the RMT position I do feel that strike action is not the correct strategy. Why? Well because I still don't think it will work. The Department for Transport will not back down. Northern will not back down. The Labour party are not united in keeping the guard or in campaigning as a group on this issue so there is no political will to campaign against the policy. Despite all the positivity in that meeting and my opinions being changed the facts still remain. I am unconvinced this strike action is working. Therefore the only option is to stop striking and start negotiation over the second role that Northern have promised to reduce potential job loses.
I appreciate RMT and its members will never do this as they would rather die than give up but that is the only solution in my opinion.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Corbyn tweeted a link to the RMT's video showing why they think it's important to keep guards on trains in March this year. The RMT took that as meaning he backed the strike action on both Merseyrail and Northern.
Well I would think more than one tweet is needed to support them. Guess he hasnt got the bottle to take sides on this issue.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
It is entirely logical to be their starting position, as it would be in most organisations. However, it's never going to work if you go in to discussions with that as a red line pre-condition (as evidenced by RMT's own statements to their members).
The sign of a good negotiator is one who can keep all the plates and sticks up in the air while also offering the odd carrot !. This is clearly something that the RMT have yet to understand.
Arriva must be cursing having ever agreed to NO redundancies - a massive commitment (that RMT continually ignore and demand more).
Killingworth
Established Member
I totally agree with this. I was working near Dore & Totley this morning and several people wandered over asking where was their train, wanting to go to Sheffield, Manchester, Marple and Bamford.* It's the Hope Valley route's busiest day when the 10.14 from Sheffield can leave passengers on the platform.
Had they not heard of the strike? Maybe, but two independently insisted Trainline and National Rail Enquiries respectively had told them the times of trains to take today. Now back home I can't find where it says that, but folks reading this are rail enthusiasts. Most passengers just want to get from A to B when they want.
The chap for Marple's alternative was bus into Sheffield, TPE or East Midlands to Stockport and bus from there. That takes a lot longer than the direct Northern hourly service, probably at least 3 times as long, but possible. Not all journeys are, or are worthwhile if the time taken is so much longer than normally expected.
* The Bamford traveller went home to get the car. The 2 intending Sheffield travellers got back in their car. The Marple chap was last seen heading for the bus stop. I think the Manchester bound traveller went home.
These claims appear to be a well established tactic for unions seeking to increase public sympathy during lengthy and inconvenient strikes such as this this one, so it may or may not be completely true , I’ve no idea .
North Manchester (tee hee)
You can see from this forum why they have tried to find an argument other than saving members' jobs. A lot of the British public do not care about other people losing their jobs, or somehow think this is a sign of progress
As I'd no option but to travel today, I checked National Rail Enquiries and the Northern strike site, and lo and behold, they coincided with each other and reality. Don't know whether I was just lucky
There are other ways to sort these things out eg government investing properly anywhere outside the south east
Not so, a more straightforward and honest campaign about job security, wages and customer care only reverting to strikes if there’s no progress in obtaining reasonable guarantees would I’m fairly certain be acceptable to most reasonable people
Driver error plays a part in most RTAs, but thinking that driverless cars will eliminate all of them is pure technohubris. Also, a lot of accidents are averted by driver skill and reactions
Read back through this thread and count the number of people for whom others' jobs are always a 'price worth paying'
Btw currently writing this while waiting at Newton-le-Willows for a TfW service delayed 19 minutes by signal failures. Perhaps we should be focusing more on decades of decay and mismanagement on the north's railways, rather than a few months of industrial action, when we ask ourselves why so few people up here who have the choice use rail
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
Perhaps we should. However, this thread is about DOO.
Other people are arguing that the RMT will single-handedly bring about the closure of most of the north's railways. I am pointing out that it would be fairer to accept that successive governments have probably done a lot more damage to them already. A debate without context rapidly becomes meaningless.
Also, as I've said this before, I find it interesting that a number of people on this thread are very keen to weep copious tears over how much the RMT's actions on Saturdays are harming passengers, yet never seem to crop up on the threads about how FUBARed the north's railways are every other day of the week. Makes me want to look carefully at their hands for traces of onion
Last edited:
Killingworth
Established Member
Absolutely true that we should be focusing on decades of cutting back, where land has been sold to make improvements difficult if not impossible, where trackside equipment gets in the way of later realignment, tracks have been singled, junctions over simplified, platforms removed and shortened, sidings and loops decommissioned,rolling stock outdated, not enough rolling stock, signalling and controls vulnerable to failures and weather. And some.
The ordinary passenger doesn't want to know about them in detail, or the massive schemes that are taking place that should reduce delays and improve reliability over time.
The present dispute is a festering and obvious self inflicted wound - and one that could be healed in days with the injection of goodwill from both sides.
Looking at the myriad threads on this forum there appear to be many thousands of postings about numerous failings of the rail industry. There's immense scope for improvement at all levels. However, members of the public wanting to use the trains that aren't running today can only see the reason as members of RMT not turning in due to strike action.
Indeed I think some people look at the ex mining communities and what became of them as a prime example of why they want to fight to keep their job. Now whilst guards dont generally all live in one geographic area because of the advent of popular ownership of motor vehicles etc . The principles of having a well paid job taken away with no consideration for retraining to be able to get an equally well paid job and what has become of modern unskilled labour (which many current guards would have no other option but to accept)I can understand why many of my colleagues are somewhat concerned about the job security .
I am fairly sure I have seen pictures of him tweeted on RMT picket lines during this dispute . And holding RMT placards at I think it was the last labour party conference .
Ive also Seen Dan Carden the MP for Walton speaking and he remarked that it was labour party policy that there would be no extension of DOO which correlates with the fact that it is in the manifesto .
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,700
This was in reply to me, of the NHS:
Sorry, secret meant the planning and scheming, obviously actual movement of staff was not secret, but it wasn't that public either. Large numbers of staff have moved from NHS to private employment. Almost all non clinical staff at all PFI hospitals are now employed by PFI partners not the public sector. A lot of services (dermatology, genitourinary and others) have passed lock, stock and barrel to the private sector, highest consultant down to the lowest paid non-clinical staff member. Many more have had their roles changed and often devalued by managers over time. It has affected recruitment and retention, but it happened non the less. All without huge publicity.
Sorry, secret meant the planning and scheming, obviously actual movement of staff was not secret, but it wasn't that public either. Large numbers of staff have moved from NHS to private employment. Almost all non clinical staff at all PFI hospitals are now employed by PFI partners not the public sector. A lot of services (dermatology, genitourinary and others) have passed lock, stock and barrel to the private sector, highest consultant down to the lowest paid non-clinical staff member. Many more have had their roles changed and often devalued by managers over time. It has affected recruitment and retention, but it happened non the less. All without huge publicity.
Can I just answer a few raised points on here that have been linked to my post this morning. Forgive me for not quoting people, I find doing that is a bit like 'calling them out' and that is certainly not my intention.
Firstly. This dispute was born when the Mcnulty report was published. That report was commissioned by the last Labour government. It was always inevitable that at some point it was going to blow up. As for the assumption that Arriva tried to reach out to the RMT and the staff, you could say that is true to a large extent, they did, but it is very hard to say how genuine they were, that is a question we perhaps will never know. But the "Proud to be Northern" days that were held with all Northern staff were not part of this process.
Somebody said it is about jobs. Absolutely it is, It is about safety and jobs, and I will come to safety in a moment. But you know, we should never be critical of protecting jobs, Jobs pay wages which pay tax, which in turn pay for the NHS and education and everything else. A well paid job lost on the alter of private profit that leaves the country, should never be celebrated. Especially in these far from certain times. And just remember this. Northern made a big issue of the "We will guarantee jobs until the end of the franchise" who is to say they might not throw the keys in next week if they don't get bailed out? It makes it all a bit hollow from a guards point of view.
So we come to safety. It is not about safety is the popular cry. So let me widen this topic, what is safety on the railway?. People imagine it to be a train leaving the tracks, doing a triple summersault, sliding for a mile and failing off a viaduct. And the chances of that happening is zero. So in a sense it is true that the number of guards who have to deal with what you might imagine is a serious safety issue is so small it is negligible,
But the disabled passenger in a wheelchair who travelled with me on a Friday night might disagree. She was terrified because the disabled bay was outside the toilet, and the toilet is where drunk after drunk headed. All she needed was me being there and chatting to her, it made her feel safe.
Then there was the guy who collapsed in the toilet after having a diabetic episode. If nobody had been on the train and went to see why the toilet had been locked for 10 minutes, how long would he have been there? Would he be alive? So he found safety also.
Then I have had a controlled evacuation in the middle of nowhere. A driver alone would have handled it had all the passengers been young whipper snappers, but they wasn't, they were mainly elderly and needed two people, they felt safe also.
So what I am saying is how does safety like this fit in with Northern's intention to run trains with nobody onboard. I'm not going to play devils advocate, of course there will always be times when it is safer to run a train with no guard in the event of a emergency, you wouldn't want to turf people off in the wilds of a winters night when the next train is over a hour behind, that is unsafe, and I cannot argue with the idea that sometimes running a train with no guard might be a better option, but putting a blanket figure on what they want to run is just plain foolish.
Finally the overtime argument. I cannot comment on the west side, I have no idea what they agreement is. But on the East it is this. We have booked Sundays, we can ask that they be covered, but if nobody is able to cover them, we have to do them. Sunday overtime is sometimes available because people on sick or holiday won't be taking their shift. But the idea that Sunday is available to make up for strike days is far from true. No way could available Sundays or any other day cover lost days through strikes.
Firstly. This dispute was born when the Mcnulty report was published. That report was commissioned by the last Labour government. It was always inevitable that at some point it was going to blow up. As for the assumption that Arriva tried to reach out to the RMT and the staff, you could say that is true to a large extent, they did, but it is very hard to say how genuine they were, that is a question we perhaps will never know. But the "Proud to be Northern" days that were held with all Northern staff were not part of this process.
Somebody said it is about jobs. Absolutely it is, It is about safety and jobs, and I will come to safety in a moment. But you know, we should never be critical of protecting jobs, Jobs pay wages which pay tax, which in turn pay for the NHS and education and everything else. A well paid job lost on the alter of private profit that leaves the country, should never be celebrated. Especially in these far from certain times. And just remember this. Northern made a big issue of the "We will guarantee jobs until the end of the franchise" who is to say they might not throw the keys in next week if they don't get bailed out? It makes it all a bit hollow from a guards point of view.
So we come to safety. It is not about safety is the popular cry. So let me widen this topic, what is safety on the railway?. People imagine it to be a train leaving the tracks, doing a triple summersault, sliding for a mile and failing off a viaduct. And the chances of that happening is zero. So in a sense it is true that the number of guards who have to deal with what you might imagine is a serious safety issue is so small it is negligible,
But the disabled passenger in a wheelchair who travelled with me on a Friday night might disagree. She was terrified because the disabled bay was outside the toilet, and the toilet is where drunk after drunk headed. All she needed was me being there and chatting to her, it made her feel safe.
Then there was the guy who collapsed in the toilet after having a diabetic episode. If nobody had been on the train and went to see why the toilet had been locked for 10 minutes, how long would he have been there? Would he be alive? So he found safety also.
Then I have had a controlled evacuation in the middle of nowhere. A driver alone would have handled it had all the passengers been young whipper snappers, but they wasn't, they were mainly elderly and needed two people, they felt safe also.
So what I am saying is how does safety like this fit in with Northern's intention to run trains with nobody onboard. I'm not going to play devils advocate, of course there will always be times when it is safer to run a train with no guard in the event of a emergency, you wouldn't want to turf people off in the wilds of a winters night when the next train is over a hour behind, that is unsafe, and I cannot argue with the idea that sometimes running a train with no guard might be a better option, but putting a blanket figure on what they want to run is just plain foolish.
Finally the overtime argument. I cannot comment on the west side, I have no idea what they agreement is. But on the East it is this. We have booked Sundays, we can ask that they be covered, but if nobody is able to cover them, we have to do them. Sunday overtime is sometimes available because people on sick or holiday won't be taking their shift. But the idea that Sunday is available to make up for strike days is far from true. No way could available Sundays or any other day cover lost days through strikes.
a_c_skinner
Established Member
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2013
- Messages
- 1,700
The franchise document is clear that they are perfectly at liberty to run with existing staff numbers on trains.
Yes the franchise document is clear. However they are saying they would like to run some trains with nobody on board. This is one of the sticking points that needs to be thrashed out. What is their intentions both in the near future and the long term? Let me highlight something people may not be aware of, that is staff turnover. It is phenomenal, would they replace these staff or just not bother. This is what will at some point have to be thrashed out.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
That's where the argument falls apart. By the RMT calling so many strikes they have resulted in some without cars having to reduce their hours or leave their jobs altogether. Some say the move to Saturday strikes has helped commuters but for those who work in retail Saturday is the busiest day - if you can't work Saturdays then you're not a useful retail employee. Also for those who are studying Mon-Fri and working Sat the strikes have meant they can no longer do any work.
Reading what Northern have said their guarantee is until the franchise end date (2025) but DfT have offered until 2026 regardless of whether the Northern franchise end date changes. However, there's a condition attached to that the offer until 2026 was on condition the RMT called off the strikes so it looks like the RMT's response to the DfT 2026 guarantee was to tell them where to stick it saying they'd rather strike than have a guarantee of jobs ending in 2026.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Northern have always been the budget franchise - lower quality rolling stock, poor provision of facilities at stations and lower than average pay for employees. Like in any other industry if you have the poor working environment - whether it's a clapped out train or a poorly heated office and below average pay you're going to look at moving to other employers and that's before you consider how good the management are.
Yes, it is very very regrettable if people have lost jobs through strikes. It doesn't sit well with me at all doesn't that. And let me tell you, I feel like a rat up a drainpipe looking for where the exit is for all f this. I do think though that the DFT and Northern's timetable shambles has hurt people more, would you not agree? I tend to read more comments on the twitter feed about that than I do about strikes.
- Status