Arriva Rail North DOO

[B&I]

Because it's the Arriva and DOO industrial action that is causing the cancelled Saturday Northern trains is it not?

As you can see, certain posters are really concerned about the effects of the strikes on individual passengers, and not at all using this as a cheap point to attempt to score against the unions

 

[B&I]

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

It's been a major PR mistake of the RMT's to go for the monkey in their propaganda (Northern) and not the organ grinder (the DfT and the government).

 

[Meerkat]

I wasn’t sure if safety critical just meant that you couldn’t move without them rules-wise, or specific training.
I guess I am asking what a revenue bod would need to learn to become safety critical, assuming DCO.

 

[Gems]

It's been a major PR mistake of the RMT's to go for the monkey in their propaganda (Northern) and not the organ grinder (the DfT and the government).

To be fair, I think the RMT have, but perhaps to a lesser degree. A lot of people seem to think governments that they support can do no wrong, and that makes it very difficult to dig out the truth. You can detect this when you work lines that are predominantly Conservative areas compared to Labour supporting ones, but not exclusively I might add.

 

[B&I]

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.

What can he do, really, but offer moral support ? A minority Tory government behaves as if it has a commanding electoral mandate, thanks to bribes to the Protestant Bigotry Party to shore it up. They're not going to be swayed on removing guards in the same way they're impervious to pressure on everything else, particularly because no parliamentary vote is required on the issue

 

[B&I]

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.

Don't let the actual reality of running a railway get in the way of a good bit of give-the-unions-a-handbagging rhetoric. There are people on here who would rather see the entire system grind to a halt than see their favourite right-wing politicians and their civil service enablers having to back down

 

[Meerkat]

I would love to know how blasé these people would be if suddenly their job no longer existed, and the next mortgage / rent payment was looking harder to come by

I am in the process of being made redundant. It’s just the way of the world.
Keeping roles just for the sake of keeping people employed is hopelessly inefficient, particularly if those roles are relatively expensive and funded by taxpayers (most of whom don’t even use trains)
I really hope Merseyrail whack up their fares to cover the cost of the RMT belligerence

 

[Gems]

I wasn’t sure if safety critical just meant that you couldn’t move without them rules-wise, or specific training.
I guess I am asking what a revenue bod would need to learn to become safety critical, assuming DCO.

PTS, and be in possession of a SQUID card in the technical sense.

I am in the process of being made redundant. It’s just the way of the world.
Keeping roles just for the sake of keeping people employed is hopelessly inefficient, particularly if those roles are relatively expensive and funded by taxpayers (most of whom don’t even use trains)
I really hope Merseyrail whack up their fares to cover the cost of the RMT belligerence

Woah. That is one very tragic comment I have to say. I don't use the education system, why am I funding expensive teachers wages? But I would never think like that because those teachers are paying tax on their earnings which in turn pays for things like the NHS I might need.

I never came on here to fall out, but that is one very short sighted and blaise comment. It lacks a lot of understanding of how the world works.

 

[Meerkat]

What is PTS and SQUID please?
Not sure what relevance teachers have - no one is saying they aren’t needed.
The railways are very expensive, it isn’t good PR to be demanding taxpayers cash but not operating efficiently.

 

[Gems]

What is PTS and SQUID please?
Not sure what relevance teachers have - no one is saying they aren’t needed.
The railways are very expensive, it isn’t good PR to be demanding taxpayers cash but not operating efficiently.

But where does the fault for the inefficiency lay? Why do you always assume it lays with those who are there to help passengers, the disabled, and anyone else who wants to travel. Why is the DFT not inefficient with it's franchise agreements, why are drivers not inefficient being paid over £60K in some cases. Why are all these top managers not inefficient with their million pound salaries.
You really need to stop beating up on those at the bottom end of the trough. You are just coming across as rather silly when I'm sure you aren't

 

[CN75]

No they are not demanding that at all. They are wanting onboard staff, and for them to remain safety critical. If this can be agreed, everything is up for negotiation.
When any negotiation takes place both sides are always poles apart, but remove the obstacles that prevent talks, and you usually meet in the middle and come up with a serious working proposal. We need to stop bashing the RMT, agreements have been made with Scotrail, Anglia, Merseyrail, (Although that one even baffles me)
Let me tell you now as a guard, we are not married to the RMT. Serious proposals will bring this to an end.

Sorry for directly asking Gems, but would you accept an agreement to keep a guard like you are currently qualified on every train, with the proviso that in exceptional circumstances the train could run with passengers without a guard?

 

[Gems]

Sorry for directly asking Gems, but would you accept an agreement to keep a guard like you are currently qualified on every train, with the proviso that in exceptional circumstances the train could run with passengers without a guard?

Absolutely, Yes.

I fully recognise there are exceptional circumstances where it is far safer to get people to their destinations than to de-train. Depths of winter on a bitter snowy night the Yorkshire dales as a example. But there are others. This is not a RMT demand I fully support.

 

[Robertj21a]

It is very hard for any of us who are not sat in the meetings to know what is going on or being discussed. It is all speculation and you can believe any side you like.
I personally would be very disappointed if the RMT wasn't under any circumstances prepared to shift position. But I have heard that Northern have not behaved in a perfect manner either. It must be incredibly frustrating if you were trying to reach some form of compromise and in the background you had the DFT zipping close the mouths of those doing the talking. Arriva are having to run back for more money, that suggests that the whole franchise bid was horribly wrong.
Honestly, you have to work for them to see the mismanagement and complete foolery of some of these people. It leaves me exasperated. I never thought I would say this, but I almost crave the days of 'Northern spirit' and they were bad.

It's not a question of what may be said in the meetings themselves, all the output from the RMT repeats that they want a safety-critical guard on every train. No room to negotiate when someone refuses to even consider any alternatives. I'm surprised that the ordinary members aren't (apparently) questioning whether this remains a sensible approach.

 

[Gems]

It's not a question of what may be said in the meetings themselves, all the output from the RMT repeats that they want a safety-critical guard on every train. No room to negotiate when someone refuses to even consider any alternatives. I'm surprised that the ordinary members aren't (apparently) questioning whether this remains a sensible approach.

Again. I fully see where you are coming from. But lets see this from a starting position of negotiation rather than a position that cannot be dropped. As in my last post, there are times when only a blithering idiot would fail to see there are occasions when it is safer to get people on the move guard or not.
But as I have said before. If only the DFT would butt out and allow all options to be considered. We are not fools, and a totally rigid RMT stance if progress could be made, would implode on them.

 

[Meerkat]

All the inefficiencies need tackling.
The DfT situation is farcical, and why I can’t understand why anyone would think nationalisation is the answer.
The drivers is another case of industrial blackmail (from an outside view it is the drivers who should be at risk, as computers can do that job but not the OBS job.......)
But the guards is the current dispute and if the RMT win then the inefficiency is locked in for years

Ps I would actually have an OBS on all mainline trains (inc current DOO ones), particularly in 3rd Rail areas. But they wouldn’t be guards, just revenue with a phone and basic training.

 

[Dave1987]

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.

One thing I think you fail to appreciate is there is a growing conception of destaffing on the railways. Staffless stations and staffless trains seem to be the DFT’s vision of the future. I know of station staff who believe they are next for the chop once the DFT have finished attacking the guards. I would not say the railways are a good career choice for anyone unless you are a driver or signaller and that is a very sad state of affairs!

 

[Gems]

All the inefficiencies need tackling.

Ps I would actually have an OBS on all mainline trains (inc current DOO ones), particularly in 3rd Rail areas. But they wouldn’t be guards, just revenue with a phone and basic training.

That makes them guards then.

 

[Dave1987]

All the inefficiencies need tackling.
The DfT situation is farcical, and why I can’t understand why anyone would think nationalisation is the answer.
The drivers is another case of industrial blackmail (from an outside view it is the drivers who should be at risk, as computers can do that job but not the OBS job.......)
But the guards is the current dispute and if the RMT win then the inefficiency is locked in for years

Ps I would actually have an OBS on all mainline trains (inc current DOO ones), particularly in 3rd Rail areas. But they wouldn’t be guards, just revenue with a phone and basic training.

And when you have a massive accident but your person with their smart phone doesn’t have a clue what to do then what do you do? Drivers aren’t being replaced by computers any time soon. We still have 100 year old signalling on many many lines

 

[Gems]

And when you have a massive accident but your person with their smart phone doesn’t have a clue what to do then what do you do? Drivers aren’t being replaced by computers any time soon. We still have 100 year old signalling on many many lines

Your argument is sound Dave, problem is massive accidents are so rare that like travelling on 'Easyjet' people come to view guards like hostesses selling scratch cards and booze, it's not until they need someone to open the emergency exit they sit up and take notice.

 

[Robertj21a]

Again. I fully see where you are coming from. But lets see this from a starting position of negotiation rather than a position that cannot be dropped. As in my last post, there are times when only a blithering idiot would fail to see there are occasions when it is safer to get people on the move guard or not.
But as I have said before. If only the DFT would butt out and allow all options to be considered. We are not fools, and a totally rigid RMT stance if progress could be made, would implode on them.

This 'blithering idiot' appears to dominate the RMT leadership......The ordinary members need to get their voice heard but it always appears that few attend meetings and even fewer ever speak up.
Given that you appear to be far more pragmatic than most other RMT members on here perhaps you could infiltrate Mick Cash's top team.........

 

[Jonfun]

PTS, and be in possession of a SQUID card in the technical sense.

That's not actually correct. You can have PTS and not be safety critical. And not all Safety Critical staff hold SCWID (Safety Critical Work ID Cards) - some TOCs have summary details of staff competence on their company ID cards which are issued to all staff.
A staff member is Safety Critical if they perform a Safety Critical duty, which in the case of a Guard is train dispatch and co-ordinating an evacuation. An OBS who is trained to dispatch, for instance, would be Safety Critical.

 

[Gems]

I know that despite what some people say, onboard well trained staff are needed. How do I know? Because in my experience as soon as the smallest thing goes wrong, people come looking for you.

It is that simple.

 

[Gems]

That's not actually correct. You can have PTS and not be safety critical. And not all Safety Critical staff hold SCWID (Safety Critical Work ID Cards) - some TOCs have summary details of staff competence on their company ID cards which are issued to all staff.
A staff member is Safety Critical if they perform a Safety Critical duty, which in the case of a Guard is train dispatch and co-ordinating an evacuation. An OBS who is trained to dispatch, for instance, would be Safety Critical.

Quite right. I actually posted this when I had just started the reply without realising I had quoted it. Quoting is not my strong point.

 

[Gems]

This 'blithering idiot' appears to dominate the RMT leadership......The ordinary members need to get their voice heard but it always appears that few attend meetings and even fewer ever speak up.
Given that you appear to be far more pragmatic than most other RMT members on here perhaps you could infiltrate Mick Cash's top team.........

I can't disagree. Although Mick's generals to me seem to be the bigger problem.

 

[Dave1987]

Your argument is sound Dave, problem is massive accidents are so rare that like travelling on 'Easyjet' people come to view guards like hostesses selling scratch cards and booze, it's not until they need someone to open the emergency exit they sit up and take notice.

Yes well unfortunately we live in a world where lots live in the perfect world of a computer. Not in the real world where things aren’t so perfect. It’s only when there is a massive accident that people admit they got things wrong. There was a very recent near accident with an Airbus aircraft where the sensors were sending faulty data to the flight computers. Yet the computer technicians and investigators could not explain how it could possibly happen. The real world slapped them in the face and only the skills of a human being prevented disaster. Automation will and should assist humans not replace them.

 

[Jonfun]

I know that despite what some people say, onboard well trained staff are needed. How do I know? Because in my experience as soon as the smallest thing goes wrong, people come looking for you.

It is that simple.

Yes, this. One advantage of Guards is that you have a reasonably standard training programme across the industry, so you can be reasonably sure the Guard will have a good knowledge of things, as opposed to situations like where some TOCs give their Catering Crews more training than other TOCs give their revenue inspectors, and some contracted staff wearing the same uniform get a tiny fraction of the training provided to either of the above.

My view is whatever happens we should move towards a more robust standard training programme for all railway staff so everyone doing a given duty (eg working onboard a train) has to have a certain level of training.

 

[Dave1987]

I know that despite what some people say, onboard well trained staff are needed. How do I know? Because in my experience as soon as the smallest thing goes wrong, people come looking for you.

It is that simple.

Every time I’ve had a problem on my train I’ve been very thankful there has been a fully competent guard onboard to assist.

 

[Confused52]

That's not actually correct. You can have PTS and not be safety critical. And not all Safety Critical staff hold SCWID (Safety Critical Work ID Cards) - some TOCs have summary details of staff competence on their company ID cards which are issued to all staff.
A staff member is Safety Critical if they perform a Safety Critical duty, which in the case of a Guard is train dispatch and co-ordinating an evacuation. An OBS who is trained to dispatch, for instance, would be Safety Critical.

This is a significant point and answers a question I asked some time ago. Put simply a Safety Critical second member of staff on every does not mean that person controls the despatch at every stop or indeed at any stop, only that the person could do so and in addition help the driver as needed. That means there is wiggle room if the RMT drop the apparent need for that person to be on every train without fail.

If David Brown did say what was reported at the Picket line I would be very concerned that he expects to be rebuffed by the DfT and is getting his defence in early. If he thought there was a chance of renegotiation with the DfT I would have expected him to keep his mouth shut for fear of prejudicing the discussions.

 

[Bookd]

This whole argument has similarities to the Brexit negotiations (why not? - they come in to everything else!).
I don't mean the outcome of Brexit which is a different discussion, but the same problem arises there - the various participants laid down red lines at the outset from which they won't move so it is difficult to see how any resolution can be achieved unless someone moves.

 

[Meerkat]

That makes them guards then.

Not really.you listen to vox pops of passengers supporting the second staff member and what they want is somone to answer questions and act as policeman/bouncer, not someone who has to concentrate on despatch or someone hidden in the back cab or office (SWR experience - the few hiding are more memorable than the ones quietly getting on with revenue work)
They don’t need much safety training, the main advantage is having someone with an official link to control who can speak to the passengers