Arriva Rail North DOO

[Killingworth]

It's that that needs simplifying. One crew, one unit, one route. It's less efficient, but it's hugely more reliable. Run fewer, longer trains if necessary, I'd rather have an hourly service I could set my watch by than a hotch-potch, unpunctual and unreliable half-hourly one. There would need to be a bit of shuffling to allow for breaks, but other than as required for that purpose keep it consistent and simple.

(WMT need to act in this way on the appallingly unpunctual and unreliable Liverpool-Brum service too, so Northern are not the only ones at it).

A new thread is probably needed to rehearse the reasons why longer trains can't be run as often as many suggest, and any cancellations would go down badly. Taking Leeds as an example (others know the layout better than I) they can use A, B and C platforms and still there isn't enough space at peak times to take many longer trains. Major engineering is needed to extend platforms.

It's the same across the nation. After Beeching many long platforms were shortened, or removed altogether. Putting them back will be another disruptive act on the way to a more flexible future.

Back on topic, David Brown visited picket lines at Wigan and Victoria on Saturday saying it wasn't meant to be this way. At least he can't be said to have hidden away. I suspect the point raised earlier is true. Stand in guards have had enough. They've taken the flak on Saturdays and that was OK for a week or two. It's not OK every Saturday.

Either the strikers start returning to work, or the stand ins decide they've had enough and reduce their commitment. It's back to normal running or very few Saturday services quite soon.

There is no blanket intention to remove all guards They couldn't be removed from the older half of the envisaged rolling stock fleet anyway. Many routes would be unsafe operated by a driver alone, the level of safety a matter to review. There's a high staff turnover of guards.

It doesn't take a degree in HR practice to see ways though this - if only they'd talk informally to each other first - talks about talks?

 

[Gems]

A new thread is probably needed to rehearse the reasons why longer trains can't be run as often as many suggest, and any cancellations would go down badly. Taking Leeds as an example (others know the layout better than I) they can use A, B and C platforms and still there isn't enough space at peak times to take many longer trains. Major engineering is needed to extend platforms.

It's the same across the nation. After Beeching many long platforms were shortened, or removed altogether. Putting them back will be another disruptive act on the way to a more flexible future.

Back on topic, David Brown visited picket lines at Wigan and Victoria on Saturday saying it wasn't meant to be this way. At least he can't be said to have hidden away. I suspect the point raised earlier is true. Stand in guards have had enough. They've taken the flak on Saturdays and that was OK for a week or two. It's not OK every Saturday.

Either the strikers start returning to work, or the stand ins decide they've had enough and reduce their commitment. It's back to normal running or very few Saturday services quite soon.

There is no blanket intention to remove all guards They couldn't be removed from the older half of the envisaged rolling stock fleet anyway. Many routes would be unsafe operated by a driver alone, the level of safety a matter to review. There's a high staff turnover of guards.

It doesn't take a degree in HR practice to see ways though this - if only they'd talk informally to each other first - talks about talks?

The problem with Leeds station isn't platform lengths, it is station bottlenecks on the approach. But your point about longer trains is correct. A classic example is Apperley Bridge. They built a platform just long enough for a 4 car 333 unit with a bridge blocking expansion at one end and a viaduct at the other, and this happened just a few years ago.
Now it is widely rumored they want 2 new three car EMU sets couple together to stop there. Sets you cant walk between, so now you have selective door opening looming and chaos around the corner.

As for David Brown. It is the first time he has ventured out of the bunker. He may say it wasn't meant to be this way, but he has done precious little to try and reach out to the staff. I'm not sure what David Brown hoped to achieve by appearing, It could be a interesting few weeks.

 

[Robertj21a]

A new thread is probably needed to rehearse the reasons why longer trains can't be run as often as many suggest, and any cancellations would go down badly. Taking Leeds as an example (others know the layout better than I) they can use A, B and C platforms and still there isn't enough space at peak times to take many longer trains. Major engineering is needed to extend platforms.

It's the same across the nation. After Beeching many long platforms were shortened, or removed altogether. Putting them back will be another disruptive act on the way to a more flexible future.

Back on topic, David Brown visited picket lines at Wigan and Victoria on Saturday saying it wasn't meant to be this way. At least he can't be said to have hidden away. I suspect the point raised earlier is true. Stand in guards have had enough. They've taken the flak on Saturdays and that was OK for a week or two. It's not OK every Saturday.

Either the strikers start returning to work, or the stand ins decide they've had enough and reduce their commitment. It's back to normal running or very few Saturday services quite soon.

There is no blanket intention to remove all guards They couldn't be removed from the older half of the envisaged rolling stock fleet anyway. Many routes would be unsafe operated by a driver alone, the level of safety a matter to review. There's a high staff turnover of guards.

It doesn't take a degree in HR practice to see ways though this - if only they'd talk informally to each other first - talks about talks?

The bit I don't really get is that a few of you have been saying that there's a high turnover of guards and a lot of the older stock will need guards for many years anyway. In addition, it seems to be generally agreed that the company is at present, and still wants in the future, to recruit more staff........

Against this, one of the most common complaints from the RMT members is that the No Redundancies commitment from Arriva is for *only* 5-6 years..... !!

How is this supposed to balance out ? - is the high turnover just in one area (the Eastern side ?) - and all the low turnover/more militant guards in a totally different area (the Western side ?).........or what ...

It simply doesn't add up.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because Arriva can't guarantee what will happen past the end of their franchise perhaps?

If the RMT want them to, they might as well pack up and go home now, because there is absolutely no way that can happen - it is not within their power nor will it be.

 

[Carlisle]

Just a vivid imagination at work here. Let's have some facts other than what you like to believe.

Northernrails 'Managing for attendance' procedures are the toughest in any workplace I have ever worked in.

Clearly not throughout the company as I can think of at least 2 ex norther employees that during ther 8 and 10 year careers both had in total at least 2 years off sick each

 

[87015]

Late running units are a reason, and a common reason. You'll see this through 'Not to stop orders' and terminating early. It has become more of an issue since May when they fell back on their new computer diagramming program. So units now have as little as 2 minute turn around's in places.
It is the same for crew diagram's which some have got ridiculous. It is no wonder crew can't make a service.

All of those allowances (ie 2 minute turnaround) in the diagrams will have been agreed with the unions and therefore brought by the crews of course...

 

[td97]

Either the strikers start returning to work, or the stand ins decide they've had enough and reduce their commitment. It's back to normal running or very few Saturday services quite soon.

Are there any guards not on strike?

 

[Gems]

Clearly not throughout the company as I can think of at least 2 ex norther employees that during ther 8 and 10 year careers both had in total at least 2 years off sick each

Do you think they might have been ill?

 

[Gems]

All of those allowances (ie 2 minute turnaround) in the diagrams will have been agreed with the unions and therefore brought by the crews of course...

The unions had no option to agree them, they were legal. Legal doesn't mean sensible though.

 

[Gems]

Are there any guards not on strike?

A few doted around.

 

[87015]

The unions had no option to agree them, they were legal. Legal doesn't mean sensible though.

But they can only be legal if the times have been signed off by the union. 2 minutes isn't standard so its been sold at some stage.

 

[142Pilot]

I don't know of any 2 minute turnarounds.

A PC takes 5 mins unless you are taking over from someone in the same direction, then it's one minute.

I think the minimum on routes I cover is 6 minutes, which involves a walk on a platform.

Although you are always lates so you have the choice of taking the 5 mins and departing late or getting a shuffle on to try to keep to departure time.


I wouldn't accept a docket with a 2 minute turnaround. It's simply not on.

 

[Gems]

But they can only be legal if the times have been signed off by the union. 2 minutes isn't standard so its been sold at some stage.

There is no such agreement. They can have a 30 second turn around if they want.

 

[Gems]

I don't know of any 2 minute turnarounds.

A PC takes 5 mins unless you are taking over from someone in the same direction, then it's one minute.

I think the minimum on routes I cover is 6 minutes, which involves a walk on a platform.

Although you are always lates so you have the choice of taking the 5 mins and departing late or getting a shuffle on to try to keep to departure time.


I wouldn't accept a docket with a 2 minute turnaround. It's simply not on.

Then you don't know everything do you. Here goes. Look it up. Crew changing ends at Lancaster = turn around.

LANCASTER 14.51
BARE LANE 1456
MORECAMBE 15.00

MORECAMBE 15.03
BARE LANE 15.07
LANCASTER arr 15.13

LANCASTER to LEEDS dep 15.15.

 

[87015]

There is no such agreement. They can have a 30 second turn around if they want.

Wait, what? They sold all turnaround times, how on earth did ASLEF get that accepted by drivers? That’s exceptionally stupid.

 

[Gems]

Wait, what? They sold all turnaround times, how on earth did ASLEF get that accepted by drivers? That’s exceptionally stupid.

It is indeed stupid. But we are talking stupid company with managers who know little of the issues train crew have.

 

[87015]

It is indeed stupid. But we are talking stupid company with managers who know little of the issues train crew have.

Must be some lovely TG tins go in for it?
ASLEF sold it. If the drivers are stupid enough to have accepted it they are equally to blame IMO, not that anything with that is a robust plan from any side - seems to sum it up.

 

[northwichcat]

Then you don't know everything do you. Here goes. Look it up. Crew changing ends at Lancaster = turn around.

LANCASTER 14.51
BARE LANE 1456
MORECAMBE 15.00

MORECAMBE 15.03
BARE LANE 15.07
LANCASTER arr 15.13

LANCASTER to LEEDS dep 15.15.

Morecambe to Leeds is a through service so do you mean the driver has 2 minutes to change ends mid-journey? The Piccadilly crews who work the 323s to Glossop seem to manage to change ends twice at two consecutive stations with 2-3 minutes at each station and that's been like that for years.

 

[Gems]

Must be some lovely TG tins go in for it?
ASLEF sold it. If the drivers are stupid enough to have accepted it they are equally to blame IMO, not that anything with that is a robust plan from any side - seems to sum it up.

You see what we have here is a part of the problem. Relationships are now so bad train crew just think, "Too stupid to work it out, let the delays and fines commence"
I'm not defending that attitude, but neither do the staff create this issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then you don't know everything do you. Here goes. Look it up. Crew changing ends at Lancaster = turn around.

LANCASTER 14.51
BARE LANE 1456
MORECAMBE 15.00

MORECAMBE 15.03
BARE LANE 15.07
LANCASTER arr 15.13

LANCASTER to LEEDS dep 15.15.

That is as someone else said a through service from Morecambe to Leeds (though really 5 minutes would be a more sensible time to allow changing ends with no layover). But the 3 minutes at Morecambe is rather silly; should be at least 10.

 

[142Pilot]

Then you don't know everything do you. Here goes. Look it up. Crew changing ends at Lancaster = turn around.

LANCASTER 14.51
BARE LANE 1456
MORECAMBE 15.00

MORECAMBE 15.03
BARE LANE 15.07
LANCASTER arr 15.13

LANCASTER to LEEDS dep 15.15.

I take it that's an eastern docket? I assume it is as the dark side have some bizzare dockets and rostering rules .

As that would be rejected at my gaff, even though it's a 10 minute journey. We don't have any short journeys like that. The shortest is 20 minutes, and even then you get 15 mins when you get there.

The tightest here is 6 minutes, and a few of 7minutes.

 

[northwichcat]

Coincidentally latest release from the RMT is that's it's a 'scandal' that journey times are getting longer, so obviously Mick Cash and the RMT fully support faster changeovers mid-journey. https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-on-new-research-today-from-the-tuc/

 

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW, if you want to make things *reliable*, bin off the through service and just run a single unit back and forth to Morecambe from Lancaster bays with a dedicated driver and guard, swapping round only when it's break time, and missing a Lancaster journey when it needs to do Heysham and back. One unit half hourly, and cancel a round trip from one end if it ends up late.

It's very much a local service used by people travelling from Lancaster to Morecambe or vice versa, so few would object. Run the Leeds service separately from the platform on the other side with a proper layover, so no crossing the whole formation either.

 

[Gems]

Morecambe to Leeds is a through service so do you mean the driver has 2 minutes to change ends mid-journey? The Piccadilly crews who work the 323s to Glossop seem to manage to change ends twice at two consecutive stations with 2-3 minutes at each station and that's been like that for years.

Yes but part of the problem here is the location. Leaving Lancaster on time is never easy, and the 14.51 departure clashes with the 14.50 arrival from Barrow. Add into the mix any late running Virgin trains, and the ball is rolling.
It used to be 10 mins allowance between Lancaster and Morecambe. But to squeeze this in, they reduced it to 9. Now even if they arrive on time, changing the destination blinds, checking the headlights and tail lights. 3 minutes is the limit, add to that any disabled passengers and the problems mount. Then you have to get back onto the WCML again. Then change ends at Lancaster, then get out again. It is not hard to see how squeezing every last drop creates delays.

 

[Gems]

FWIW, if you want to make things *reliable*, bin off the through service and just run a single unit back and forth to Morecambe from Lancaster bays with a dedicated driver and guard, swapping round only when it's break time, and missing a Lancaster journey when it needs to do Heysham and back. One unit half hourly, and cancel a round trip from one end if it ends up late.

It's very much a local service used by people travelling from Lancaster to Morecambe or vice versa, so few would object.

At Mays timetable change this train never went back to Lancaster, it went to Leeds via the Hest Bank north curve. But around June time some clever person under pressure from local rail user groups thought they could squeeze it in. Really.

 

[142Pilot]

In fact, I don't understand how that's been agreed. The LDC box would be overflowing with dockets here if that was applied.

That said, our LDC is very very good and despite some of the nasty jobs they have removed or altered a lot of what the magic computer spat out.

I'll check tomorrow but I understood the minimum was 5 minutes to change ends, change lights otdr, destination blind, adjust seat etc.

 

[Gems]

I take it that's an eastern docket? I assume it is as the dark side have some bizzare dockets and rostering rules .

As that would be rejected at my gaff, even though it's a 10 minute journey. We don't have any short journeys like that. The shortest is 20 minutes, and even then you get 15 mins when you get there.

The tightest here is 6 minutes, and a few of 7minutes.

Not sure what depot it is. I think Skipton. But I know it causes issues.

 

[87015]

You see what we have here is a part of the problem. Relationships are now so bad train crew just think, "Too stupid to work it out, ket the delays and fines commence"
I'm not defending that attitude, but neither do the staff create this issue.

So why did they sign up for no turnaround times? I’m amazed. Suppose it’s no skin off their back when delays accumulate, says even more.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So why did they sign up for no turnaround times? I’m amazed. Suppose it’s no skin off their back when delays accumulate, says even more.

Just a further sign of a complete breakdown in relations between employer and employee, I guess.

 

[87015]

Also what about mobilise / demob (or whatever local term is) - is that gone too? Surely can't have agreed a lower turnaround time than that. This would be laughable if it wasn't such an embarrassment to the industry!