Arriva Rail North DOO

[Gems]

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.

Some leave, some retire, some become drivers. But the turnover is vast, trust me on that. Just look at Northern's recruitment page, it tell's the tale.

 

[northwichcat]

I do think though that the DFT and Northern's timetable shambles has hurt people more, would you not agree?

I think the answer to that depends on the route. In the case of the Windermere branch or the Bolton corridor then yes, in the case of Manchester-Chester or Manchester-Crewe then no.

 

[northwichcat]

Some leave, some retire, some become drivers. But the turnover is vast, trust me on that. Just look at Northern's recruitment page, it tell's the tale.

Northern should be increasing staffing numbers ahead of the May 2019 timetable change. If they don't then they'll be many services not running due to 'a member of staff being unavailable.'

 

[Gems]

Northern should be increasing staffing numbers ahead of the May 2019 timetable change. If they don't then they'll be many services not running due to 'a member of staff being unavailable.'

You are absolutely correct, and they are, but the buggers already here keep leaving. It must be very frustrating for them.

 

[PR1Berske]

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.

I work at the Lancashire Teaching Hospital Trust, at which none of this has happened. Maybe it has at those PFI hospitals built during the Blair government.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Off topic, beyond how a trades union ought to respond to change of course, which is how we got to here. Nottingham and IIRC other East Mids dermatology is now outsourced, hotel services are private at PFI units, it is said to be where the profit lies for the PFI partners. Middlesbrough GUM went to Virgin (IIRC) while I was there and the medical and dental staff across the country (but less so Wales, more in Scotland) have had their jobs changed, for consultants beyond belief of the older ones. Nurses have gone from early, late and nights to 12 hour shifts; mental health staff have had retirement moved back five years in addition to the latest changes. A whole restructuring of non medical and dental grades called Agenda for Change has gone through largely unremarked. The point which started this is that this huge public sector enterprise has been able to rework its staffing with largely amicable settlements. If the RMT and their employers cannot manage this intelligently then it is a poor show.

 

[Robertj21a]

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.

I'm enjoying your input and can agree with much of what you say. Needless to say, pretty well all of the points you raise have been done to death on this thread in the course of the 6,600+ (!!) posts to date and you'll see that we have already managed a few points of general agreement (or at least a better understanding of where we may differ).

One point I would pick on would be your reference to job security. Naturally, it's highly important to the existing guards who may feel threatened by DOO/DCO but I fail to see why they have real concerns. The TOC has guaranteed no redundancies [I still bet they wish they hadn't done that !] for many years longer than anyone could possibly expect out in the 'real world' - and yet the RMT/members are still unhappy. What else can the TOC do but guarantee no redundancies ?.

I accept that, nowadays, there might be an increased likelihood of Arriva just despairing, and throwing in the towel, but that wasn't the case when the guarantee was made - and some of the damage caused since that time has been a direct result of action taken by the RMT [........ironic - but not enough for anyone to laugh about].

Specific jobs can't be guaranteed to never change at all (whether the RMT likes that or not) and there will be a need for guards on much of the older stock anyway. If, as you say, there is a high turnover of staff then it's even more difficult to see why it's necessary to have strikes all the time.

 

[Carlisle]

Read back through this thread and count the number of people for whom others' jobs are always a 'price worth paying'

I can’t find a post in this particular thread expressing zero care about others loosing their jobs. There are a number claiming to have been through restructuring or reapplication processes for their jobs without their union protesting so vigorously, if that’s what you meant .

 

[muz379]

One point I would pick on would be your reference to job security. Naturally, it's highly important to the existing guards who may feel threatened by DOO/DCO but I fail to see why they have real concerns. The TOC has guaranteed no redundancies [I still bet they wish they hadn't done that !] for many years longer than anyone could possibly expect out in the 'real world' - and yet the RMT/members are still unhappy. What else can the TOC do but guarantee no redundancies ?.

It could of course be the case that the staff concerned dont believe the guarantees to be genuine .I mean the statements issuing these guarantees have already said that they might not be able to be extended indefinitely . Its not as if there are any legal mechanisms that could be used to enforce these guarantees .

Then of course being guaranteed a job is not the same as being guaranteed a role . And I am sure many guards believe the role that they currently do still has value to the TOC and is still essential. I know for some the perception of the OBS role as a degradation in role would kill their motivation to work . As another poster (Lowlevel I believe) alluded to . Being on the train but not involved in its operation places you in a completely different situation , and would for many guards who take pride in their work just kill their morale .

 

[Carlisle]

It could of course be the case that the staff concerned dont believe the guarantees to be genuine ..

For someone who’s previously claimed to have worked in the extremely changeable world of retail, I’m extremely surprised you expect the rail industry to offer an almost indefinite guarantee of a particular role

 

[Robertj21a]

It could of course be the case that the staff concerned dont believe the guarantees to be genuine .I mean the statements issuing these guarantees have already said that they might not be able to be extended indefinitely . Its not as if there are any legal mechanisms that could be used to enforce these guarantees .

Then of course being guaranteed a job is not the same as being guaranteed a role . And I am sure many guards believe the role that they currently do still has value to the TOC and is still essential. I know for some the perception of the OBS role as a degradation in role would kill their motivation to work . As another poster (Lowlevel I believe) alluded to . Being on the train but not involved in its operation places you in a completely different situation , and would for many guards who take pride in their work just kill their morale .

I'm beginning to better understand how frustrated Arriva's negotiators must feel...........

 

[Meerkat]

Out of interest what is the RMTs position on all these resignalling schemes that are closing boxes and presumably costing a fair few jobs? Do they think we should be sticking to semaphore?

 

[muz379]

For someone who’s previously claimed to have worked in the extremely changeable world of retail, I’m extremely surprised you expect the rail industry to offer an almost indefinite guarantee of a particular role

I understand perfectly well that the company cannot extend any guarantees beyond its period of operating the franchise . But that is not to say that the guarantees of a job (not a role that is a separate matter) being offered should automatically be considered as genuine or worthwhile by all those in the grade concerned . Everyone here is keen to be critical of the RMT's approach towards this dispute , its conduct , supposed motives and its statements . I'm merely pointing the same spotlight towards the company .

Its just an indisputable fact that any guarantees offered are not cast iron or in anyway enforceable and many staff will be aware of that fact , the company could just renege on them with no comeback from the staff concerned . The fact is goodwill and relations between staff and company are about as low as they can get with the two being in a protracted dispute so staff treating statements by the company cynically should not be coming as that big of a surprise . Its not as if the company are being open with their plans on how they intend to achieve the franchise committent this whole dispute is centred around .

I was not even talking about my perception of the guarantees being made because anecdotal comment is wholly irrelevant to the wider debate and is not really something that I have any interest in discussing with posters on this forum , if I want to discuss by future career choices I will do so with people that actually know me personally and mean something to me . I was pointing out that many staff dont trust the guarantees , and have now expanded on some of the reasons why .Rather than discussing my personal situation which wont apply to all those in the grade lets discuss why as a group the RMT members in dispute should trust the grantees .

I'm beginning to better understand how frustrated Arriva's negotiators must feel...........

I can imagine it must be pretty frustrating getting sent to negotiate something which you actually have no authority to be able to make any agreements on owing to your relatively junior position .

 

[LowLevel]

Apparently David Brown turned up at a picket line today and declared that Arriva had never wanted it to be this way and were in negotiations with the DfT about their contract. What it means or how true it is who can say *shrug*

 

[yorksrob]

Apparently David Brown turned up at a picket line today and declared that Arriva had never wanted it to be this way and were in negotiations with the DfT about their contract. What it means or how true it is who can say *shrug*

If it throws the ball publicly into the DfT's court, and forces them to agree something, I'm for it.

 

[woodmally]

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

Yes going for the safety argument I agree with. The problem with the RMT campaign in the recent past, up until these public meetings, not only was it about safety but they keep repeating "Its not about jobs". Even though it is! Its the lies that make it worse. If they had said it is about jobs And public safety people would accept more.

 

[woodmally]

He'd be crucified by the media if he came out in open support of the strike

But he is doing nothing right now and so the argument continues. He has it within his gift to sort this dispute out. He speaks at Parliament. The RMT although they are not aligned with Labour are Corbyn supporters. The reason they are not currently aligned with labour I found out at the meeting was because Labour is not fully Momentum yet and they are not convinced Labour opposes DOO across the board. He could win massivly with people if he worked to end this dispute and show true leadership but sadly as for everything he does he doesn't like the tough decisions so cowers away.

 

[Carlisle]

IRather than discussing my personal situation which wont apply to all those in the grade lets discuss why as a group the RMT members in dispute should trust the grantees .
.

Given another northern guard posted here yesterday stating they’d absolutely no idea how genuine the company actually were when initially reaching out to the staff, plainly due to the union giving them zero time before starting a dispute, how can you seriously trust the RMT either?

 

[Carlisle]

He could win massivly with people if he worked to end this dispute and show true leadership

I’m not convinced the majority of the public would necessarily define the act of pandering to a rather extremist organisation like the RMT currently is, as true leadership, but I may be wrong .

 

[Tomnick]

Out of interest what is the RMTs position on all these resignalling schemes that are closing boxes and presumably costing a fair few jobs? Do they think we should be sticking to semaphore?

They’ve engaged constructively with Network Rail to try to make sure that everyone who wants a job has a job somewhere, that anyone who wants to go gets a decent offer and that the whole process is fair to all. I don’t recall so much as a hint of protest against the various resignalling schemes.

 

[Robertj21a]

Apparently David Brown turned up at a picket line today and declared that Arriva had never wanted it to be this way and were in negotiations with the DfT about their contract. What it means or how true it is who can say *shrug*

It will be interesting to see if Arriva can make some progress, but it may also simply bring to the fore with the DfT that there is a need for something fundamental to change. I can well imagine that others are going to start looking closely at the 'No redundancies' offer from Arriva - and wonder whether it shouldn't now be withdrawn.

 

[Gems]

Apparently David Brown turned up at a picket line today and declared that Arriva had never wanted it to be this way and were in negotiations with the DfT about their contract. What it means or how true it is who can say *shrug*

Wouldn't like to guess if this is true or not, the railway runs on some very tall stories.

You used to see Alex Hines around a lot when he was CEO. You would bump into him once a month on average. Sadly David Brown seems anonymous. Could this claim be true? It could be. There is no way Northernrail have the infastructure in place to come along and say, "Right, from Monday it is DCO operation" Half the time they have no idea what units are available. If you take the guard off that role and a 144 rolls up, you have a nightmare. You could end with with a situation that makes last May's timetable fiasco look attractive.

No, in truth this is something that has to be brought in gradually, and gradual would mean a better working relationship and buy time to sort a lot out of where we are all heading.

 

[Gems]

It will be interesting to see if Arriva can make some progress, but it may also simply bring to the fore with the DfT that there is a need for something fundamental to change. I can well imagine that others are going to start looking closely at the 'No redundancies' offer from Arriva - and wonder whether it shouldn't now be withdrawn.

There won't be redundancies. There is no room for such threats. They are recruiting, they struggle to hold staff, they have no idea from day to day which units they will have available.
This is not the time for them to start sabre rattling when a olive branch is needed, the mood on the ground is that it would just make people dig in deeper.

 

[Robertj21a]

There won't be redundancies. There is no room for such threats. They are recruiting, they struggle to hold staff, they have no idea from day to day which units they will have available.
This is not the time for them to start sabre rattling when a olive branch is needed, the mood on the ground is that it would just make people dig in deeper.

Yes, quite probably. However, the 'No redundancies' was, I assume, intended to be a sensible goodwill gesture with, no doubt, a hope that the RMT would see it as such.

The fact that the RMT still refuse to budge from their 'red line' of a safety critical guard on *every* train suggests that they don't appreciate any such good will gestures - in which case Arriva might as well withdraw it. From what you are saying, there's a high turnover of staff anyway (everywhere ?) so, I guess the offer is fairly meaningless.

I doubt that Arriva is in the mood to do any more than they have but, regardless, what sort of olive branch do you feel that Arriva could still offer ?

 

[Gems]

Yes, quite probably. However, the 'No redundancies' was, I assume, intended to be a sensible goodwill gesture with, no doubt, a hope that the RMT would see it as such.

The fact that the RMT still refuse to budge from their 'red line' of a safety critical guard on *every* train suggests that they don't appreciate any such good will gestures - in which case Arriva might as well withdraw it. From what you are saying, there's a high turnover of staff anyway (everywhere ?) so, I guess the offer is fairly meaningless.

I doubt that Arriva is in the mood to do any more than they have but, regardless, what sort of olive branch do you feel that Arriva could still offer ?

Yes, I would not disagree with what you are saying. It was a promise designed to smooth over fears, sadly it has just gone over the heads of everyone, a bit like Southerns offer of £2,000 did.
But you know, there are dangers in making offers like this. The biggest danger is that as the years pass by you start losing staff at a even faster rate, who in their right mind is going to sit in a job and not look elsewhere when the day you might be turfed out is looming. Also it becomes very hard to recruit in the same way. It really is not a sensible way of running a business from a staffing point of view.
The sensible way would have been to bring in changes, and phased in DCO. We are not opposed to drivers operating the doors at all, but we are strongly opposed to trains running with just the driver onboard, obviously there are exceptional circumstances to that, and these circumstances should be explored. But Arriva instead of acting sensible came along and took the wording of the franchise document to the letter. "It's says we could do this, so we will" sort of attitude, and it has backfired when there was never any need.

As for Arriva itself. The frontline staff have all but disenfranchised themselves from the company. The recent Arriva staff survey was basically binned by about 75% of the frontline workers. Relations are awful, and we need a smart man to come along and say, "This has to change, we have to step back a little and start to breathe again"

 

[Killingworth]

As for Arriva itself. The frontline staff have all but disenfranchised themselves from the company. The recent Arriva staff survey was basically binned by about 75% of the frontline workers. Relations are awful, and we need a smart man to come along and say, "This has to change, we have to step back a little and start to breathe again"

From what I hear the experiences of those standing in for regular guards may well have considerable influence on what may happen. It may not be entirely wasted time having that sharp end contact, although their regular jobs can't help but suffer from the lost time.

The sooner this is over the better. What do they say about making up after a quarrel? Maybe, let's hope so anyway, passengers, staff and Northern on all routes will come out stronger in 2019 after all the pain of 2018. Surely things can only get better!

 

[Meerkat]

They’ve engaged constructively with Network Rail to try to make sure that everyone who wants a job has a job somewhere, that anyone who wants to go gets a decent offer and that the whole process is fair to all. I don’t recall so much as a hint of protest against the various resignalling schemes.

So why aren’t the RMT doing the same for guards? Because there still will be signaller members, but they might lose most of those in OBS/station roles?

 

[Gems]

From what I hear the experiences of those standing in for regular guards may well have considerable influence on what may happen. It may not be entirely wasted time having that sharp end contact, although their regular jobs can't help but suffer from the lost time.

The sooner this is over the better. What do they say about making up after a quarrel? Maybe, let's hope so anyway, passengers, staff and Northern on all routes will come out stronger in 2019 after all the pain of 2018. Surely things can only get better!

It would be nice to think you are right. Are we all not guilty at times of assuming somebody's job is easy when we don't actually walk in their shoes.
I have heard stories of stand in guards. The most notable story being that one got so intimidated by groups of rowdy passengers boarding, he refused to go down the train and was nearly in tears. It can be very intimidating, especially on a Saturday.
Another reason why you should never deliberately run trains with no staff. It is just too much for those passengers who need a presence.

 

[Astradyne]

Yes going for the safety argument I agree with. The problem with the RMT campaign in the recent past, up until these public meetings, not only was it about safety but they keep repeating "Its not about jobs". Even though it is! Its the lies that make it worse. If they had said it is about jobs And public safety people would accept more.

How times have changed. When I dared to suggest the DOO disputes where about protectioism and job secuirty, I was largely shouted down as a lone descending voice on the Southern thread as told it was purely down to safety!

 

[Carlisle]

So why aren’t the RMT doing the same for guards? Because there still will be signaller members, but they might lose most of those in OBS/station roles?

Presumably it’s mostly down to the RMTs acceptance that with 2 or 3 unions representing signallers and associated grades, effective national stoppages are far more difficult to organise whereas almost all unionised guards will be members of the RMT giving considerable negotiating power they of course want to maintain.