Arriva Rail North DOO

[Dave1987]

If the RMTs position was sufficiently strong, alongside industrial action they’d by now also have attempted to present at least some of their evidence in court, reasonably confident of success in some areas. However relying almost entirely on public disruption through strikes suggest there’s almost no comparison whatsoever with the likes of Uber.

So how would prove that the former guard was a member of the RMT or actually took part in any strike action? You would be on a very slippery slope. It's very akin the likes of Uber. You would be discriminating against someone based on their lawful actions. That is pretty much saying that anyone who goes on strike is unemployable in future.

 

[Agent_Squash]

So how would prove that the former guard was a member of the RMT or actually took part in any strike action? You would be on a very slippery slope. It's very akin the likes of Uber. You would be discriminating against someone based on their lawful actions. That is pretty much saying that anyone who goes on strike is unemployable in future.

But when all other factors are equal, the fact that they were employed by a TOC in a role that was considerably disrupted by strike action won't help the employers perceptions of them. It is not unreasonable for an employer to minimise risk.

 

[furnessvale]

So how would prove that the former guard was a member of the RMT or actually took part in any strike action? You would be on a very slippery slope. It's very akin the likes of Uber. You would be discriminating against someone based on their lawful actions. That is pretty much saying that anyone who goes on strike is unemployable in future.

Of course it's discrimination, but I would be a pretty poor employer if I couldn't find another candidate better qualified on paper. As I said earlier, an employer doesn't have to take the risk.

 

[northwichcat]

In which case the SWR mainline has modern trains using 1970s operation. Not great.

But do SWR guards open half a double door, stick their head out and then open the other half and release the other sets of doors?

 

[Robertj21a]

So how would prove that the former guard was a member of the RMT or actually took part in any strike action? You would be on a very slippery slope. It's very akin the likes of Uber. You would be discriminating against someone based on their lawful actions. That is pretty much saying that anyone who goes on strike is unemployable in future.

Well, if they were employed as a guard on Northern they could probably get another rail job quite easily. Outside the industry I daresay that many employers would be particularly cautious, as they usually need to ensure a flexible and co-operative workforce.

 

[Meerkat]

But do SWR guards open half a double door, stick their head out and then open the other half and release the other sets of doors?

Not sure, but it feels like it takes an eternity!!

 

[6Gman]

I suggest that the definition of safety critical has been said on here to mean qualified to act as a guard on the particular service, however they are not actually required to be operationally involved in the movement of the train.

As a passenger I want the following safety critical elements from the second member of staff.

Sufficient safety training to ensure that in the event of an incident he/she can secure the safety of the train and passengers, notify those who "need to know" (be that signallers, Control or the emergency services) of what has happened and where it has happened and be able to manage the situation until necessary assistance arrives. He/she would normally do this in conjunction with the Driver, but if the latter is incapacitated he/she should have the competencies necessary to act alone.

 

[6Gman]

You speak highly of passengers!

I'm sure @Gems enjoys interacting with passengers much of the time, but late turn Saturdays can probably be a bit hairy and lairy.

 

[driver_m]

Good luck @Gems next week then dealing with whatever is threw at you. Most of our pro-dooers on here will be feeling rather deflated that a workforce might have actually been right all along. Hopefully the tide will turn now and see the folly of having one member of staff for hundreds and hundreds of people on one train for what it is. A cost-cutting, self defeating, unsafe way of working that benefits only a few, already substantially well off, group of people and their puppets in the Tory party.

 

[Robertj21a]

Good luck @Gems next week then dealing with whatever is threw at you. Most of our pro-dooers on here will be feeling rather deflated that a workforce might have actually been right all along. Hopefully the tide will turn now and see the folly of having one member of staff for hundreds and hundreds of people on one train for what it is. A cost-cutting, self defeating, unsafe way of working that benefits only a few, already substantially well off, group of people and their puppets in the Tory party.

Are you suggesting that Arriva has now agreed to all the RMT demands ?

 

[Starmill]

Good luck @Gems next week then dealing with whatever is threw at you.

So it's a forgone conclusion that the strike is called off?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Good luck

A cost-cutting, self defeating, unsafe way of working that benefits only a few, already substantially well off, group of people and their puppets in the Tory party.

But I thought Mr Cash said it was the Germans who were those who garnered all the benefits of what you say. Did he actually take up the matter with the German government?

 

[Ken H]

So it's a forgone conclusion that the strike is called off?

RMT twitter very active in the last hour - no mention of a deal
northern railways the same

 

[Ken H]

As a passenger I want the following safety critical elements from the second member of staff.

Sufficient safety training to ensure that in the event of an incident he/she can secure the safety of the train and passengers, notify those who "need to know" (be that signallers, Control or the emergency services) of what has happened and where it has happened and be able to manage the situation until necessary assistance arrives. He/she would normally do this in conjunction with the Driver, but if the latter is incapacitated he/she should have the competencies necessary to act alone.

Ask a season ticket holder if they want to pay another £100 (OK thats a made up number) a year to have a guard.
Ask a taxpayer non train user if he wants to fund guards or the NHS

 

[yorksrob]

Ask a season ticket holder if they want to pay another £100 (OK thats a made up number) a year to have a guard.
Ask a taxpayer non train user if he wants to fund guards or the NHS

As a season ticket holder/taxpayer, I'm already paying for guards on trains. What I want is to have the trains actually run so that I can get the benefit of what I've paid for.

 

[driver_m]

Ask a season ticket holder if they want to pay another £100 (OK thats a made up number) a year to have a guard.
Ask a taxpayer non train user if he wants to fund guards or the NHS

Everyone wants everything, but pay nothing. The world doesn't work like that. Of course they're going to say no. Where do you stop with this daft arguement. Not paying for schools because you have no kids, even though you need educated people to do things?

 

[Carlisle]

Good luck @Gems Most of our pro-dooers on here will be feeling rather deflated that a workforce might have actually been right all along. .

I don’t get the impression from staff I speak to that the RMT has conclusively won the debate, but clearly as most felt wealthy enough to sacrifice several Saturdays they’ve succeeded in creating enough disruption for it to have become politically unacceptable for those in charge not to act decisively in one way or another, That, (if northern didn’t concede almost immediately) was of course always the aim from the outset, passanger safety barely came into it .

 

[Ken H]

Everyone wants everything, but pay nothing. The world doesn't work like that. Of course they're going to say no. Where do you stop with this daft arguement. Not paying for schools because you have no kids, even though you need educated people to do things?

In economics there is the concept of opportunity cost. the idea that of you pay for X, you dont pay for Y. That is how public spending works unless you want to pile up debt for our kids and grand-kids to pay. So pay for guards or pay for nurses.
(You cant increase taxes much because of the laffer curve - Laffer showed that you can increase taxes and increase revenue up to a certain point, then behaviour changes and the revenue drops as rates increases)
Also rail travellers have a choice. if ticket prices are too high they will seek alternatives like road coaches or use their car. or even railhead to a cheaper station. or start to think if getting 2 tickets is cheaper than a through one. is Brighton-Croydon and an oyster cheaper than a Brighton-London season for example? Its called price elasticity. demand drops as price rises.

 

[Tomnick]

Why would season tickets have to go up by an increased margin just to cover the cost of something that they're already covering the cost of?

 

[Ken H]

Why would season tickets have to go up by an increased margin just to cover the cost of something that they're already covering the cost of?

OK. without guards there is a chance they could be lower. or the cost to the taxpayer would be less.

 

[Tomnick]

OK. without guards there is a chance they could be lower. or the cost to the taxpayer would be less.

Maybe. The pro-“DCO” crowd are always keen to point out that they won’t be getting rid of the guards though, just (they claim) taking responsibility for operating the doors off them. There’s not much to be saved there then.

 

[Ken H]

Maybe. The pro-“DCO” crowd are always keen to point out that they won’t be getting rid of the guards though, just (they claim) taking responsibility for operating the doors off them. There’s not much to be saved there then.

1. driver opening doors speeds up things. over time they would speed up services and get more revenue (BR knew about journey time elasticity)
2. If you make the 'guard' an non safety role, then you dont have to cancel a train cos there is no guard. Thats what they will be aiming at.

 

[Tomnick]

1. driver opening doors speeds up things. over time they would speed up services and get more revenue (BR knew about journey time elasticity)
2. If you make the 'guard' an non safety role, then you dont have to cancel a train cos there is no guard. Thats what they will be aiming at.

1. Yes, but I doubt the cost savings so achieved would pay for many nurses. I’m sure the RMT would agree to give up door release as part of negotiations in any case.
2. You’re right, you don’t. To achieve that small reduction in an already small number of cancellations, far more trains have been cancelled over the course of this dispute than would otherwise have been cancelled in probably hundreds of years.

 

[Robertj21a]

1. Yes, but I doubt the cost savings so achieved would pay for many nurses. I’m sure the RMT would agree to give up door release as part of negotiations in any case.
2. You’re right, you don’t. To achieve that small reduction in an already small number of cancellations, far more trains have been cancelled over the course of this dispute than would otherwise have been cancelled in probably hundreds of years.

Difficult to see why there's been so much about door release. What's the big deal ?. It works perfectly alright elsewhere, and on all DOO operations !
In any event, it's not just up to the RMT, doesn't ASLEF have to agree ??

 

[Tomnick]

Difficult to see why there's been so much about door release. What's the big deal ?. It works perfectly alright elsewhere, and on all DOO operations !
In any event, it's not just up to the RMT, doesn't ASLEF have to agree ??

Yes, ASLEF would have to agree too. It needn’t be a big deal. There is some risk involved though, both stopping short and wrong-side releasing.

 

[northwichcat]

Maybe. The pro-“DCO” crowd are always keen to point out that they won’t be getting rid of the guards though, just (they claim) taking responsibility for operating the doors off them. There’s not much to be saved there then.

Plus as the plan was for a booked second member of staff rather than guaranteed fewer fines for cancellations, fewer Delay Repay claims and to a lesser extent fewer last minute taxis and replacement buses when it's the last service without the second member of staff.

I notice the DOO/DCO is unsafe argument has resurfaced again. Yet we haven't had years of train crews arguing Pacers are unsafe despite very strong evidence that they are less crash worthy than Sprinters and a very serious incident with one that would have resulted in deaths had it not been an ECS movement.

 

[Ken H]

I dont work on the railway, never have. If i were a guard looking for lasting employment, I would think now was the time to start asking about cross training to be a driver. Yes i know not all guards can do that.

 

[LowLevel]

I dont work on the railway, never have. If i were a guard looking for lasting employment, I would think now was the time to start asking about cross training to be a driver. Yes i know not all guards can do that.

The roles are very different. Not all drivers make good guards and not all guards make good drivers.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Yes, ASLEF would have to agree too. It needn’t be a big deal. There is some risk involved though, both stopping short and wrong-side releasing.

As time goes by what is first seen as "over-the-top" safety equipment soon becomes accepted as a sensible standard fitting. Imagine not having AWS or TPWS on conventional lines. So the above mentioned risks could just about be eliminated by CSDE (Correct Side Door Enabling) and ASDO (Automatic Selective Door Operation) being fitted across the network and fleet. Adapted versions of both technologies are widely used already on LU but would be beneficial across the country regardless of who operates the doors. Despite the PTI risk being seen as the highest area of risk to passengers there is no push for these technologies; perhaps it's time the powers that be came clean on just where they think the limit on safety spending really lies. Or to put it another way: how much is the life of a rail passenger worth?

The roles are very different. Not all drivers make good guards and not all guards make good drivers.

Ain't that the truth?!!

 

[scrapy]

If the RMTs position was sufficiently strong, alongside industrial action they’d by now also have attempted to present at least some of their evidence in court, reasonably confident of success in some areas. However relying almost entirely on public disruption through strikes suggest there’s almost no comparison whatsoever with the likes of Uber.

On what grounds would RMT need or want to present evidence in court? what jurisdiction would a court have if RMT want to them? Northern will have taken advice on whether the RMTs action is lawful and have chosen not to take RMT to court so I would guess the legal advice Northern have been given is that the strike action is legal.