Arriva Rail North DOO

[Jonfun]

Somepeople want the government to legislate: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/233298

Then you'd just have a massive work-to-rule, which is often more damaging than a strike one day a week!

 

[CN75]

A) the drivers won't go DOO (at all in my mind) for free. Taking the South, it took an £18k bung, and if you believe that a second member will still e on board, where's the saving ? By your reckoning the second member must be on less than £8k a year.
B) common knowledge.
C) talk to guards. I accept that TVMs have hit hard, but money has gone into buying the machines, servicing them, and refilling them; so that's another layer of staff required, when the idea was to cut staff numbers.

Another poster eloquently explained that having to crew trains with two inflexible staff members causes greater performance risk, particularly in disruption. If the second member of staff is more flexible, the problem reduces but the train retains two staff members. The savings - time, which is money to Arriva and the DfT - are largely there.

Pay trains are the most basic form of ticket collection. The revenue guards collect does not all go to Northern because of the way the industry distributes the money collected. Guards would also need to be collecting around £45k per person per annum in ticket sales - sales which would otherwise be lost and not collected any other way - to cover the obvious costs such as salary, pension and combined overheads - and that’s before the service performance impact is taken into account. However, the more revenue protection capable and focused the second person is, the better the purely economic argument for retaining them stacks up. Hence the plan to make suburban stations driver-only with staff at stations is theoretically sensible.

The revenue and customer service benefits are by far the strongest grounds for Northern to retain second members of staff, but this evolution is a leap too far for the RMT and a large number of the present guards. It’s a shame, since at the moment the RMT could still negotiate a strong deal with virtually all the employment safeguards that the guards presumably want. The government wants the strike to end. However, as they will not negotiate the offer, the guards will presumably get the terms and the system imposed in due course.

 

[yorksrob]

Another poster eloquently explained that having to crew trains with two inflexible staff members causes greater performance risk, particularly in disruption. If the second member of staff is more flexible, the problem reduces but the train retains two staff members. The savings - time, which is money to Arriva and the DfT - are largely there.

Pay trains are the most basic form of ticket collection. The revenue guards collect does not all go to Northern because of the way the industry distributes the money collected. Guards would also need to be collecting around £45k per person per annum in ticket sales - sales which would otherwise be lost and not collected any other way - to cover the obvious costs such as salary, pension and combined overheads - and that’s before the service performance impact is taken into account. However, the more revenue protection capable and focused the second person is, the better the purely economic argument for retaining them stacks up. Hence the plan to make suburban stations driver-only with staff at stations is theoretically sensible.

The revenue and customer service benefits are by far the strongest grounds for Northern to retain second members of staff, but this evolution is a leap too far for the RMT and a large number of the present guards. It’s a shame, since at the moment the RMT could still negotiate a strong deal with virtually all the employment safeguards that the guards presumably want. The government wants the strike to end. However, as they will not negotiate the offer, the guards will presumably get the terms and the system imposed in due course.

I've not seen any evidence to suggest that the Government is particularly concerned for the strike to end.

 

[Robertj21a]

I've not seen any evidence to suggest that the Government is particularly concerned for the strike to end.

No, I agree. I've always assumed that the strikes are likely to go on for many months, as no parties wish to give any ground.

 

[Halifaxlad]

I've not seen any evidence to suggest that the Government is particularly concerned for the strike to end.

I keep thinking what will happen when these new trains arrive?

If they do start running them with the drivers operating the doors, then the RMT won't be able to strike without risking public safety (in their opinion).

I think this might be the reason why the government doesn't seem that bothered.

 

[yorksrob]

I keep thinking what will happen when these new trains arrive?

If they do start running them with the drivers operating the doors, then the RMT won't be able to strike without risking public safety (in their opinion).

I think this might be the reason why the government doesn't seem that bothered.

Indeed.

But its all a long time until these trains arrive.

 

[Carlisle]

No, I agree. I've always assumed that the strikes are likely to go on for many months, as no parties wish to give any ground.

northern did concede some ground recently, but it appears to have been interpreted by the RMT as a mere stepping stone towards almost total capitulation, so the deadlock continues

 

[woodmally]

northern did concede some ground recently, but it appears to have been interpreted by the RMT as a mere stepping stone towards almost total capitulation, so the deadlock continues

Meanwhile RMT give no ground as its a zero sum game for them. As for these new trains coming in the government can absorb weekend strikes till they arrive. Its Labour that need to be questioned. Aside from the odd tweet and appearance on the picket line once a blue moon there has been nothing concrete from them in terms of a campaign on this issue. You would think they would be all over it.

 

[Muttley]

I keep thinking what will happen when these new trains arrive?

They'll quietly oxidize in a siding somewhere until the guards dispute is settled.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Meanwhile RMT give no ground as its a zero sum game for them. As for these new trains coming in the government can absorb weekend strikes till they arrive. Its Labour that need to be questioned. Aside from the odd tweet and appearance on the picket line once a blue moon there has been nothing concrete from them in terms of a campaign on this issue. You would think they would be all over it.

They won't run on every route, though, or anywhere near it. So unlike Southern the option of "right, DOO tomorrow, you're all redundant, here's some OBS jobs to apply for" won't work.

 

[Jonfun]

They won't run on every route, though, or anywhere near it. So unlike Southern the option of "right, DOO tomorrow, you're all redundant, here's some OBS jobs to apply for" won't work.

Of course a fair business would offer a suitable voluntary redundancy package to those who wanted to take it, and offer suitable alternative work (which would basically amount to giving the redundant guards first dibs on other roles within the business as and when they come up) to any who wished to move into a different position instead. But nothing seems to have been discussed about all of this - instead it just seems to be assumed that the guards will not object to the main part of their job being taken away.

 

[Robertj21a]

Of course a fair business would offer a suitable voluntary redundancy package to those who wanted to take it, and offer suitable alternative work (which would basically amount to giving the redundant guards first dibs on other roles within the business as and when they come up) to any who wished to move into a different position instead. But nothing seems to have been discussed about all of this - instead it just seems to be assumed that the guards will not object to the main part of their job being taken away.

I'm not sure how any of this could be discussed all the time that the RMT set pre-conditions for any talks. Not much point in Arriva coming forward with any proposals until the union is willing to talk properly.

 

[CN75]

They won't run on every route, though, or anywhere near it. So unlike Southern the option of "right, DOO tomorrow, you're all redundant, here's some OBS jobs to apply for" won't work.

Southern have traditional conductors on a number of routes and still managed to achieve the conversion of part of the former conductor routes to new operation with their On Board Supervisors, so it has been shown to be possible.

 

[CN75]

Of course a fair business would offer a suitable voluntary redundancy package to those who wanted to take it, and offer suitable alternative work (which would basically amount to giving the redundant guards first dibs on other roles within the business as and when they come up) to any who wished to move into a different position instead. But nothing seems to have been discussed about all of this - instead it just seems to be assumed that the guards will not object to the main part of their job being taken away.

Arriva have not said they do not need (want) to lose any of their guards. If individuals chose to leave because their job changed, they would need to be replaced at cost to the employer. Arriva’s proposed stated staff model is (now) a second person - which is realistically the guard’s current job. Therefore, why offer any redundancy package?

 

[HH]

Then you'd just have a massive work-to-rule, which is often more damaging than a strike one day a week!

Surely if they can't strike then you just change the rules...

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Are Northern guards due an annual pay rise soon? Perhaps one way for Northern to force the RMT's hand would be to withhold any pay rise until the strikes are called off. Or even threaten Northern guards with a 20% pay cut seeing as they're only working a 4 day week now?

 

[trickyvegas]

Are Northern guards due an annual pay rise soon? Perhaps one way for Northern to force the RMT's hand would be to withhold any pay rise until the strikes are called off. Or even threaten Northern guards with a 20% pay cut seeing as they're only working a 4 day week now?

As far as I'm aware, you don't get paid whilst on strike so the pay will have effectively been cut as a result of being on strike.

 

[Starmill]

Are Northern guards due an annual pay rise soon?

I thought they'd just been awarded a back dated one? Or was that only staff who weren't guards?

 

[Carlisle]

Its Labour that need to be questioned. Aside from the odd tweet and appearance on the picket line once a blue moon there has been nothing concrete from them in terms of a campaign on this.

In other words as clear as their position is on Brexit .

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course a fair business would offer a suitable voluntary redundancy package to those who wanted to take it, and offer suitable alternative work (which would basically amount to giving the redundant guards first dibs on other roles within the business as and when they come up) to any who wished to move into a different position instead. But nothing seems to have been discussed about all of this - instead it just seems to be assumed that the guards will not object to the main part of their job being taken away.

Except that it seems to be the case that there will be enough guard's roles for those wanting them for as long as they want them (due to 15x not being DOO suitable) so there's no need for anyone to be made redundant.

 

[gazzaa2]

Meanwhile RMT give no ground as its a zero sum game for them. As for these new trains coming in the government can absorb weekend strikes till they arrive. Its Labour that need to be questioned. Aside from the odd tweet and appearance on the picket line once a blue moon there has been nothing concrete from them in terms of a campaign on this issue. You would think they would be all over it.

It's effectively a cold war. Government can deal with Saturday strikes and guards happy to have their Saturdays off.

This has led to an impasse so neither side getting anywhere but government buying themselves more time for new trains.

If RMT are serious why not call more strikes during the week? Just striking Saturdays isn't getting them anywhere rather than their weekends off. Either it carries it on as it is for years or things come to a head.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

As far as I'm aware, you don't get paid whilst on strike so the pay will have effectively been cut as a result of being on strike.

Surely the more moderate guards must be feeling the pinch by now and are thinking of asking their union to reduce the number of strikes? Most people with a family and a mortgage can't afford to take an indefinite 20% pay cut.

Maybe I'm being naive but striking say every other Saturday would enable RMT to keep up the pressure without their members suffering as great a financial loss?

 

[Carlisle]

Surely the more moderate guards must be feeling the pinch by now and are thinking of asking their union to reduce the number of strikes? ?

Going by what’s been posted recently, that would require a clear majority of striking members to express a will to change tactics otherwise it sounds extremely difficult for a minority’ to actively change direction from within, most probably, those wishing to return to work would end up leaveing the union altogether alongside perhaps switching allegiance to an alternative, however lack of established alternatives in what is a very highly unionised environment probably make all this a considerably harder decision for any individual concerned than it might be in most other industries

 

[Robertj21a]

It's effectively a cold war. Government can deal with Saturday strikes and guards happy to have their Saturdays off.

This has led to an impasse so neither side getting anywhere but government buying themselves more time for new trains.

If RMT are serious why not call more strikes during the week? Just striking Saturdays isn't getting them anywhere rather than their weekends off. Either it carries it on as it is for years or things come to a head.

What do you believe the 40+ strikes to date have actually achieved ? Why do you feel that even more strikes would change the situation ?

 

[a_c_skinner]

What do you believe the 40+ strikes to date have actually achieved ? Why do you feel that even more strikes would change the situation ?

Exactly. We are stuck in the 1970s style of IR here. The RMT has failed its most basic duty which is to improve its members income, actually doing the opposite. The employer has failed too, it needs a good relationship with its staff so they want to work and work well for the customers. This is how British Leyland used to be.

 

[yorksrob]

This is how British Leyland used to be.

And to rub it in, we still have their trains !

 

[gazzaa2]

What do you believe the 40+ strikes to date have actually achieved ? Why do you feel that even more strikes would change the situation ?

I mean that simply striking every Saturday is utterly pointless for everyone. The Government/Northern aren't going to budge, the guards get their Saturdays off but lose a day's pay indefinitely and the passengers either use alternative methods of travel or just stay in the house/local area on a Saturday. For all the background noise this pathetic cold war of Saturday strikes could go on all next year with nobody budging an inch.

I'm not saying more strikes will achieve anything but if strikes are their way of trying to win (which is the intention) then why not strike through the week as well? Either that or knock the strikes on the head.They're getting nowhere as they are.

 

[Robertj21a]

I mean that simply striking every Saturday is utterly pointless for everyone. The Government/Northern aren't going to budge, the guards get their Saturdays off but lose a day's pay indefinitely and the passengers either use alternative methods of travel or just stay in the house/local area on a Saturday. For all the background noise this pathetic cold war of Saturday strikes could go on all next year with nobody budging an inch.

I'm not saying more strikes will achieve anything but if strikes are their way of trying to win (which is the intention) then why not strike through the week as well? Either that or knock the strikes on the head.They're getting nowhere as they are.

My point is that 40 strike days have achieved nothing, so 50, 80 or 100 are also very unlikely to change anything.

 

[Starmill]

My point is that 40 strike days have achieved nothing, so 50, 80 or 100 are also very unlikely to change anything.

This point has been made by so many of us, time after time. I don't think there's an answer that follows any logic.

 

[northernchris]

My point is that 40 strike days have achieved nothing, so 50, 80 or 100 are also very unlikely to change anything.

When the strikes first started though, they were relatively infrequent and on differing days so didn't cause too much inconvenience. Now, some lines haven't seen a service on a Saturday since August 18th which becomes more inconvenient. I do wonder if the strikes had started out at every Saturday back in March 2017 whether we would have had a conclusion by now