Arriva Rail North DOO

[woodmally]

Oh, you should have asked me earlier. The answer is ACAS. My late father was involved in an iron industry dispute, which was small but intractable. They decided on ACAS. ACAS was so hopeless that both sides discovered new common ground - namely agreeing that ACAS had been hopeless. Armed with this new mutual understanding they solved their remaining differences.

Daft anecdote aside yes, the problem is at least in part saving face.

ACAS wont work for the very simple reason there is no common ground. RMT want no DOO. Northern have a franchise agreement that agrees to DOO. The government support DOO and are anti trade union and the DFT is run by a Tory government. Any other ideas would be greatfully received.

 

[northwichcat]

So anyone who fights for their jobs and livelihoods are blacklisted by the corporate elite? How fantastic this modern capitalism is eh.

As we're going through a technological revolution employers will want employees who are willing to accept changes to their role if they want the role long term, nothing capitalist about that.

 

[scrapy]

It was pointless surveying passengers as unless there is one cabin crew member for every 50 passenger seats the plane is not legally allowed to take off. Referring to aircraft cabin crew as people who serve food and drink, is as bad as calling a guard on a train not equipped for DOO a ticket inspector, their primary job is safety and they can and do suspend serving food and drink if they have safety duties to undertake. A guard is only 'safety critical' if the train is not equipped for DOO so once the 195s and 331s are introduced the guard becomes optional whether you like it or not.

The analogy is quite similar as some people don't realise the safety training cabin crew have and even fewer people realise the safety training guards have and I very much doubt the wording of the questions informed them of this. Given Northerns poor record on non strike days the passengers being surveyed are probably at the end of their tether with Northern and probably dont fully understand the reason for their disruption. Theyd probably say they'd have driverless trains as long as they ran.

 

[northwichcat]

The analogy is quite similar as some people don't realise the safety training cabin crew have and even fewer people realise the safety training guards have and I very much doubt the wording of the questions informed them of this.

You do see more obvious safety duties being undertaken by cabin crew, like ensuring the aircraft doors are shut, locking toilets out-of-use for take-off/landing, ensuring all passengers are wearing seat belts, ensuring all luggage is safely stowed, ensuring all overhead luggage racks are properly shut, as well as doing a pre-flight safety demonstration and that's presuming there's no emergency and passengers aren't having to put on life jackets, oxygen masks or leaving the plane via the emergency exits on to the wing of the plane.

 

[Dave1987]

As we're going through a technological revolution employers will want employees who are willing to accept changes to their role if they want the role long term, nothing capitalist about that.

You mean employees that are willing to accept vague promises from an untrustworthy Government that reportedly has plans to get rid of them as soon as it can do so without bad PR about lost jobs? BTW I’m part of a union that has been on strike before so I guess I’m blacklisted. Hope you enjoy paying your taxes to pay for dole money for all those you wouldn’t touch by the way. What an utterly sickening place to live this country is becoming.

 

[B&I]

As we're going through a technological revolution employers will want employees who are willing to accept changes to their role if they want the role long term, nothing capitalist about that.

Except, as the guards' case demonstrates, in low wage, low productivity, low skill Britain, what we are actually doing is deskilling work and pushing people into casual, purposeless jobs to keep the unemployment figures down

 

[Dave1987]

You do see more obvious safety duties being undertaken by cabin crew, like ensuring the aircraft doors are shut, locking toilets out-of-use for take-off/landing, ensuring all passengers are wearing seat belts, ensuring all luggage is safely stowed, ensuring all overhead luggage racks are properly shut, as well as doing a pre-flight safety demonstration and that's presuming there's no emergency and passengers aren't having to put on life jackets, oxygen masks or leaving the plane via the emergency exits on to the wing of the plane.

Haha the only reason there are cabin crew on flights is because the FAA and EASA mandate them. They would quickly be gotten rid of if they weren’t mandatory.

 

[B&I]

Many people, like yourself, are posting speculation about what happens if Northern start to move to DCO/DOO and pretending they are facts - at present there is no Northern guard who's job or role is under threat for the foreseeable future but you like to believe the misinformation being circulated by the RMT, which isn't even specific to Northern. I also notice both you and scrapy are of the opinion that as a passenger survey is having the opposite effect of what you want there must be something wrong with the survey, it's not I'm that pro-DOO, it's that people like you are so anti-DOO that you post so much misinformation that anyone posting more balanced posts is seen as pro-DOO.

I notice you completely missed the point of the analogy I did using support for Esther McVey as Tatton MP, say you don't want to discuss it further and then bring up your own political analogy. :roll:

Here's the irony. In my head I'm not anti-DOO, as on balance I don't think the safety benefits having guards brings are made necessary by the costs, and because I would rather staff were focused on customer-facing roles. In my heart, I have considerable sympathy for yet another pile of people about to be thrown on the great British scraphead (6 years to me is not the unforeseeable future).

Why is this ironic ? It's ironic because, if there is anything which would sway me from my initial view on DOO, it is the arguments put forward on this thread in favour of DOO, and the way they are put forward. It's not balance. It's verging on fanaticism. These are people's livelihoods which are being treated with such casual disdain by people on here.

I didn't miss the point of your analogy btw. I just didn't find it interesting or worthwhile enough to comment on.

 

[B&I]

When I say proper analysis I mean things need to be looked at like how results vary between staffed and unstaffed stations, how results vary between lines with a frequent service and lines with an infrequent service, how results vary between places where rail is the only public transport to those which have a bus/Metrolink alternative. The figures are changing quite rapidly against the RMT's favour. The first survey was in September had 173 responses and had 43 favouring no train to an understaffed train (24.8%), the most recent had 312 responses was done in the last week and had only 15 favouring no train to an understaffed train (4.8%.) This raises the question are the original results now invalid as passengers are more pro-DOO now the strikes have been going on for a while, or was it just the passengers surveyed most recently are more pro-DOO?



It was pointless surveying passengers as unless there is one cabin crew member for every 50 passenger seats the plane is not legally allowed to take off. Referring to aircraft cabin crew as people who serve food and drink, is as bad as calling a guard on a train not equipped for DOO a ticket inspector, their primary job is safety and they can and do suspend serving food and drink if they have safety duties to undertake. A guard is only 'safety critical' if the train is not equipped for DOO so once the 195s and 331s are introduced the guard becomes optional whether you like it or not.

Wait a minute. The choice offered in this survey was between having a train with a guard, and having no train at all ? How the hell did you think people were going to answer ?

I honestly can't believe you're trying to argue that this survey is a reason for getting rid of guards

 

[northwichcat]

You mean employees that are willing to accept vague promises from an untrustworthy Government that reportedly has plans to get rid of them as soon as it can do so without bad PR about lost jobs? BTW I’m part of a union that has been on strike before so I guess I’m blacklisted. Hope you enjoy paying your taxes to pay for dole money for all those you wouldn’t touch by the way. What an utterly sickening place to live this country is becoming.

Look on any modern job description and flexibility is pretty much guaranteed to be on there. If they have reason to believe you are inflexible and unwilling to accept a change to your job role, why would they hire you?

 

[scrapy]

You do see more obvious safety duties being undertaken by cabin crew, like ensuring the aircraft doors are shut, locking toilets out-of-use for take-off/landing, ensuring all passengers are wearing seat belts, ensuring all luggage is safely stowed, ensuring all overhead luggage racks are properly shut, as well as doing a pre-flight safety demonstration and that's presuming there's no emergency and passengers aren't having to put on life jackets, oxygen masks or leaving the plane via the emergency exits on to the wing of the plane.

In the same way that you see a guard check that a train is fully accommodated on a platform, check it is safe to depart, check the doors are shut etc, but many people still think that they just check tickets.

 

[Gems]

Beware of surveys with loaded questions. They're as bad as people who think they know a job role but don't.

 

[Gems]

Look on any modern job description and flexibility is pretty much guaranteed to be on there. If they have reason to believe you are inflexible and unwilling to accept a change to your job role, why would they hire you?

Funny. Northernrail hire a lot of guards as drivers.

Just a desperate argument isn't it.

 

[northwichcat]

Wait a minute. The choice offered in this survey was between havinf a train with a guard, and having no train at all ? How the hell did you think people were going to answer ?

No the choice was would they feel safer left on the platform until the following service arrives or safer on a train with just a driver on board. However, of course the safety of passengers is only important when they are on the train in the view of the RMT.

I honestly can't believe you're trying to argue that this survey is a reason for getting rid of guards

As stated already the survey was to discover whether passengers wanted a second member of staff with no ifs and no buts as the RMT are proposing and are saying passengers want.

 

[northwichcat]

In the same way that you see a guard check that a train is fully accommodated on a platform, check it is safe to depart, check the doors are shut etc, but many people still think that they just check tickets.

Do they? I've been on trains when the guard has been slow to release the doors, the driver has opened their window and looked back to see what's only on, only for a passenger to ask the driver why they haven't released the doors yet.

On the rear coach of a Pacer it's obvious it's the guard who releases and closes the doors, on other types of trains it's not so obvious, especially when there's also a dispatcher who gives a signal to indicate the train can depart.

 

[northwichcat]

Funny. Northernrail hire a lot of guards as drivers.

Just a desperate argument isn't it.

You're missing the point. It's flexibility within your role, not the flexibility to decide of your own accord you will apply for a different higher paid role.

 

[Robertj21a]

Presumably then it was only reasons of space which prevented you mentioning the part the government / DfT had played im creating the situation, as every one of your posts was full already of bile about the RMT.

This has become a depressingly common debating tactic, also seen for example re Brexit. 'But just because every comment I make about the EU is negative doesn't mean that there aren't good things about the EU'

I'm sure you don't read....... [sigh]

Anyway, if it helps you better understand what I've already written, I'm more than happy to confirm that the whole episode could have been better handled by the DfT and government (and TOC).

That doesn't alter the fact that I was only referring to the RMT on that particular occasion.

 

[Gems]

Do they? I've been on trains when the guard has been slow to release the doors, the driver has opened their window and looked back to see what's only on, only for a passenger to ask the driver why they haven't released the doors yet.

On the rear coach of a Pacer it's obvious it's the guard who releases and closes the doors, on other types of trains it's not so obvious, especially when there's also a dispatcher who gives a signal to indicate the train can depart.

"Do they" Yes they do, because giving full door release when not platformed could result in dismissal. If someone opened a un-platformed door and fell out it could result in court. Of course if drivers were perfect like many on here seem to think, it would be on the platform every time, except their not are they.
What about that poor woman who saw her dog dragged to it's death at Borehamwood the other month. That would not have happened if the train had a guard.

 

[B&I]

I'm sure you don't read....... [sigh]

Anyway, if it helps you better understand what I've already written, I'm more than happy to confirm that the whole episode could have been better handled by the DfT and government (and TOC).

That doesn't alter the fact that I was only referring to the RMT on that particular occasion.

Thank you for your characteristically condescending clarification

 

[Robertj21a]

Sad to say, if I were an employer, I would think long and hard before taking on an ex guard having seen how long and bitter this dispute has become.

Why would anyone want to employ an ex-member of the RMT ?. Employers want motivated, co-operative, pragmatic and 'modern' staff, not those who want to remain in the 1980s.

 

[Robertj21a]

Thank you for your characteristically condescending clarification

No, thank you for bothering to read it properly.

 

[B&I]

No the choice was would they feel safer left on the platform until the following service arrives or safer on a train with just a driver on board. However, of course the safety of passengers is only important when they are on the train in the view of the RMT.

That wasn't what you said.

Still, it now seems that respondents were being offered the choice between a train, albeit with no guard, and waiting an hour (presumably, if it was usual Northern service frequency) for the next train. Again, are you hugely surprised that they picked getting a train ?

As stated already the survey was to discover whether passengers wanted a second member of staff with no ifs and no buts as the RMT are proposing and are saying passengers want.

I'd suggest that, if you want to rely on this survey to support your case, actually posting some evidence about it.

 

[B&I]

No, thank you for bothering to read it properly.

As i was saying....

 

[Gems]

Why would anyone want to employ an ex-member of the RMT ?. Employers want motivated, co-operative, pragmatic and 'modern' staff, not those who want to remain in the 1980s.

Northernrail employ members of the RMT when they take them on as drivers...LNER are more than happy to take on Northern trained guards also, could it be because they know they're a high standard?

 

[Dave1987]

Look on any modern job description and flexibility is pretty much guaranteed to be on there. If they have reason to believe you are inflexible and unwilling to accept a change to your job role, why would they hire you?

By flexibility you mean employers being able to change job descriptions, hours, pay, terms & conditions of employees at will. So your average joe working man or woman has no certainty from one year to the next about their employment. That’s where unions come in to stop employees being exploited. That is until hard right Tories legislate to nullify unions in the name of free markets. The more this carries on the more likely you are to get a Corbyn Government.

 

[Robertj21a]

The more people your Government ignores for valid reasons about their job security and livelihoods the more likely it is that Corbyn’s Labour will win the next election. I honestly believe if good old ‘Failing Grayling’ actually engaged with the conductors directly rather than cowering in the corner blaming everyone else for his own ineptitude then things might actually begin to get better. But no he is more interested in taking unions to court and going to war with staff.

It's not my government, it's everyone's government, including you.

I don't accept the continual bleating about 'job security' because, quite simply, there will be plenty of jobs for everyone who wants one. Just because the RMT like to call strikes doesn't mean to say that there's any real risks - it's to scare the likes of those who realise that they might not cope very well out in the real world.

 

[Dave1987]

Why would anyone want to employ an ex-member of the RMT ?. Employers want motivated, co-operative, pragmatic and 'modern' staff, not those who want to remain in the 1980s.

I know some people who are part of a cooperative union who accept anything management proposes. Needless to say they have been continually screwed over by management and have an extremely high turnover of staff!

 

[Gems]

By flexibility you mean employers being able to change job descriptions, hours, pay, terms & conditions of employees at will. So your average joe working man or woman has no certainty from one year to the next about their employment. That’s where unions come in to stop employees being exploited. That is until hard right Tories legislate to nullify unions in the name of free markets. The more this carries on the more likely you are to get a Corbyn Government.

Dave. In the race to the bottom some people think it is good to be in the lead.

 

[Gems]

It's not my government, it's everyone's government, including you.

I don't accept the continual bleating about 'job security' because, quite simply, there will be plenty of jobs for everyone who wants one. Just because the RMT like to call strikes doesn't mean to say that there's any real risks - it's to scare the likes of those who realise that they might not cope very well out in the real world.

It's not my government. I didn't vote for the mess they are creating all around them.

Have to admit I did laugh at this. "To scare those who realise they might not cope in the real world" So all the guards who used to be in the services, ex police, etc couldn't cope in the real world. Would you cope in their world? Would you cope on a late train on a Saturday night full of fighting drunks.

Personally I think a bit of respect is needed on this forum.

 

[Dave1987]

It's not my government, it's everyone's government, including you.

I don't accept the continual bleating about 'job security' because, quite simply, there will be plenty of jobs for everyone who wants one. Just because the RMT like to call strikes doesn't mean to say that there's any real risks - it's to scare the likes of those who realise that they might not cope very well out in the real world.

Definitely not my Government. I didn’t vote for them and they do not respresent me.

You are aware that most jobs that have been created are low paid, low skill, insecure jobs. The ‘gig’ economy has exploded under this Government. There is not plenty of quality jobs out there at all. You like your Government are clearly in denial of what is actually happening in the economy.