RMT Extends Strike Action on Network Rail to Dec 24-27

[43066]

At what point can they do that?

I do very much wonder if the idea was to poison the deal with DOO (knowing full well that it wouldn't be agreed, and ASLEF probably wouldn't either) to stall it all while blaming the RMT to gain time to get their planned anti strike law through and then the RMT would be seriously weakened and perhaps have to capitulate to a much lower deal (I doubt 0+0, but maybe 2+2 or something).

The “anti strike” legislation isn’t really to do with this specific dispute, or dependent on its outcome.

My understanding (assuming it’s the route they want to go down) is that they could at any point, via the TOCs, start the process of fire and rehire, which would likely take a few months from start to finish, including a consultation period (90 days?).

Perhaps they’re hoping it won’t come to that, and that the RMT will acquiesce after Xmas, or perhaps the govt will still take the DOO off the table before Xmas and it’s all a negotiating ploy! I sort of doubt that, though.

Part of me hopes the RMT double down and cause as much chaos as possible just for the sheer hell of it, and to draw attention to what has happened, given how dirtily this has been handled.

 

[brad465]

If the public sector unions are hell bent on a 10% payrise the dispute will go on for years. As I have said in other posts the Russian conflict won't end until 2030 if it ever does. So god help the economy and the cost of living if things do drag on that long

State Pension and benefits are getting 10% and they're not even paying the taxes that contribute to those Government bills. Many workers on strike have settled or will settle for less than inflation-linked pay rises, and those that are demanding more (like nurses) have had hardship that is deeper and over a much longer period of time. As has been pointed out above, Russian reliance is being turned away from and alternative energy is being rolled out quickly and more affordably in comparison. A change of Government could well happen in that time as well, which would lead to the whole pay dispute being managed differently.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2022 ==

The “anti strike” legislation isn’t really to do with this specific dispute, or dependent on its outcome.

My understanding (assuming it’s the route they want to go down) is that they could at any point, via the TOCs, start the process of fire and rehire which would likely take a few months from start to finish, including a consultation period (90 days?).

Perhaps they’re hoping it won’t come to that, and that the RMT will acquiesce after Xmas, or perhaps the govt will still take the DOO off the table before Xmas and it’s all a negotiating ploy! I sort of doubt that though.

Part of me hopes the RMT double down and cause as much chaos as possible just for the sheer hell of it, and to draw attention to what has happened, given how dirtily this has been handled.

Yes the RMT were trying to make clear that that they don't appear to have beef with the RDG, it's the government and it's last-minute intervention in such a detrimental way that they're going after.

 

[JonathanH]

A change of Government could well happen in that time as well, which would lead to the whole pay dispute being managed differently.

If there is no money and other priorities, the scope to manage the pay dispute differently is quite limited.

 

[diffident]

State Pension and benefits are getting 10% and they're not even paying the taxes that contribute to those Government bills.

A point of order, Pensions are taxable including the state pension above the tax-free allowance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Part of me hopes the RMT double down and cause as much chaos as possible just for the sheer hell of it, and to draw attention to what has happened, given how dirtily this has been handled.

Despite the fact that I'm open to DOO done right, I totally agree - the attitude of the Government on this utterly stinks. It's like they want to poison and sabotage everything then call a general election and go to Labour "ha ha, now get out of that one without looking bad".

 

[JonathanH]

A point of order, Pensions are taxable including the state pension above the tax-free allowance.

Yes, but only to the extent that increases to the state pension push other income above the personal allowance.

 

[Llanigraham]

State Pension and benefits are getting 10% and they're not even paying the taxes that contribute to those Government bills.

Correction. I'm a pensioner AND I pay tax.

 

[Killingworth]

⁵⁵

A point of order, Pensions are taxable including the state pension above the tax-free allowance.

Many pensioners also get occupational pensions so can be paying quite a lot of tax depending on how much they put away for old age. My main scheme is index linked but limited to 5% maximum. Some private pension plans may have no inflation linking at all

 

[ComUtoR]

Despite the fact that I'm open to DOO done right

There is no DOO "done right" What you are attempting to support is DCO. DOO and DCO are two very different things and this constant misunderstanding is what is where this entire debate constantly goes awry.

I think that many staff would sign up for DCO but the second that little 'c' in the middle is changed then all hell breaks loose.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no DOO "done right" What you are attempting to support is DCO. DOO and DCO are two very different things and this constant misunderstanding is what is where this entire debate constantly goes awry.

I think that many staff would sign up for DCO but the second that little 'c' in the middle is changed then all hell breaks loose.

I was of the impression from posts here that DCO was just a way to "massage" the term DOO, and that DOO with an OBS, the Strathclyde Agreement (ticket examiner) or similar is still DOO, because the driver is wholly responsible for the operation and protection of the train and the second person is purely there for customer service or in some cases emergencies.

Is that wrong?

If DCO means "the driver doing the doors etc but there being another member of staff to deal with the passengers*", I'm all for that. It works well on the modern tram systems that have a second member of staff (Sheffield, Edinburgh and Blackpool). Done right (i.e. selling Anytime Day Singles only but not PFs) I think it could save Merseyrail a packet in dodged fares. Allow unit-hopping and it'd be the same for Northern.

* Provided there is some sort of quality management of what they actually do, e.g. scanning of e-tickets, and they don't just stand around looking scruffy and bored like some Southern OBSs do, which is both a waste of money and gives a bad impression about the service.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I was of the impression from posts here that DCO was just a way to "massage" the term DOO, and that DOO with an OBS or similar is still DOO, because the driver is wholly responsible for the operation and protection of the train and the second person is purely there for customer service or in some cases emergencies.

Is that wrong?

If DCO means "the driver doing the doors etc but there being another member of staff to deal with the passengers", I'm all for that.

Surely 755s are DOO trains, because all the on-board staff does in day to day practice is march up and down on ticket patrol? They don't in any way operate the train.

 

[D365]

Surely 755s are DOO trains, because all the on-board staff does in day to day practice is march up and down on ticket patrol? They don't in any way operate the train.

I think the distinction is that, on "Driver Only" services, the driver is the only member of staff to be rostered. Revenue protection and security/safety staff can join, but they aren't usually timetabled.

 

[ComUtoR]

I was of the impression from posts here that DCO was just a way to "massage" the term DOO, and that DOO with an OBS or similar is still DOO, because the driver is wholly responsible for the operation and protection of the train and the second person is purely there for customer service or in some cases emergencies.

Is that wrong?

Yes.

If DCO means "the driver doing the doors etc but there being another member of staff to deal with the passengers*", I'm all for that.

* Provided there is some sort of quality management of what they actually do, e.g. scanning of e-tickets, and they don't just stand around looking bored like some Southern OBSs do.

DCO guarantees that second person. DOO does not. It truly is that simple. DOO allows the services to run without that second member of staff. It allows for the flexibility of running with just the Driver. That why they want it so badly. However, staff understand that it also means that they are surplus to requirement. If you want staff on train then DCO.

 

[LowLevel]

Surely 755s are DOO trains, because all the on-board staff does in day to day practice is march up and down on ticket patrol? They don't in any way operate the train.

They make announcements, they're trained to operate the train in a way no different to any other guard operated traction, they can even do stuff like live monitor the CCTV systems inside and outside the train including the door cameras. They can tell the driver not to depart if they're doing something at a station. The only thing they don't do is open and close the doors, unless the driver operated system fails in which case they do that too.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I think the distinction is that, on "Driver Only" services, the driver is the only member of staff to be rostered. Revenue protection and security/safety staff can join, but they aren't usually timetabled.

I'm really struggling to understand the point of having OBS' that GTR have, or whatever it is GA 755s have, if you can just have revenue protection teams doing the ticket hooha. I won't have anyone telling me that the OBS provides valuable customer service, because in my experience from Southern since joining GTR (and having been on all 217 of their 377s across various routes, I've travelled a lot with them) they're never seen.

 

[Bletchleyite]

DCO guarantees that second person. DOO does not. It truly is that simple. DOO allows the services to run without that second member of staff. It allows for the flexibility of running with just the Driver. That why they want it so badly. However, staff understand that it also means that they are surplus to requirement. If you want staff on train then DCO.

So Southern OBSs are DOO because the train can operate without one even though they're normally there, but the 755s are DCO because a guard is mandatory?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==

I'm really struggling to understand the point of having OBS' that GTR have, or whatever it is GA 755s have, if you can just have revenue protection teams doing the ticket hooha. I won't have anyone telling me that the OBS provides valuable customer service, because in my experience from Southern since joining GTR (and having been on all 217 of their 377s across various routes, I've travelled a lot with them) they're never seen.

They're near enough always there but just tend to hang around in one vestibule sticking their head out to see if there are any wheelchair users wanting to board. This to me shows a lack of quality management, a bit like the south WCML guards who hide in the cab the whole time.

It'd make sense to at least have them scanning e-tickets to prevent people refunding them even if they don't sell any and don't do PFs.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The question I really want to know is, are RMT against DOO because of safety fears, and I mean genuine safety fears - not just them alleging that that's the reason, or because they fear it will cause redundancies? That's a genuine question I have.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The question I really want to know is, are RMT against DOO because of safety fears, and I mean genuine safety fears - not just them alleging that that's the reason, or because they fear it will cause redundancies? That's a genuine question I have.

I suspect the main reason is that they know anything which doesn't involve the guard being mandatory for the train to run removes all leverage with regard to strikes, as the trains will still run. Drivers still could, but ASLEF is known for being a bit more conciliatory than the RMT so easier to deal with.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

They're near enough always there but just tend to hang around in one vestibule sticking their head out to see if there are any wheelchair users wanting to board. This to me shows a lack of quality management, a bit like the south WCML guards who hide in the cab the whole time.

It'd make sense to at least have them scanning e-tickets to prevent people refunding them even if they don't sell any and don't do PFs.

Yes, I'm sorry how on earth can that be seen as anything other than pointless?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==

I suspect the main reason is that they know anything which doesn't involve the guard being mandatory for the train to run removes all leverage with regard to strikes, as the trains will still run. Drivers still could, but ASLEF is known for being a bit more conciliatory than the RMT so easier to deal with.

So, if your theory is correct - and I acknowledge the importance of recognising that it might not be - the decision to continue to strike is due to concern that they won't be able to strike in future.

 

[ComUtoR]

So Southern OBSs are DOO because the train can operate without one even though they're normally there

I'm not privy to their contract but yes, if the train can run without them then it's DOO. The OBS is there as a nicety, not as a requirement. Hence why staff believe that the grade is limited and can be whittled away into obscurity.

, but the 755s are DCO because a guard is mandatory?

I don't know what a 755 is or where they operate but again, if the Guard is REQUIRED then potentially it's DCO if they aren't doing door duties.

 

[LowLevel]

I'm really struggling to understand the point of having OBS' that GTR have, or whatever it is GA 755s have, if you can just have revenue protection teams doing the ticket hooha. I won't have anyone telling me that the OBS provides valuable customer service, because in my experience from Southern since joining GTR (and having been on all 217 of their 377s across various routes, I've travelled a lot with them) they're never seen.

The GA 755 guards do everything they ever did, apart from open and close the doors. There is quite a lot more to the job than being a door attendant particularly on the rural railway where other staff are thin on the ground.

I can't really speak for what happens on Southern but I've always gotten the idea the South Eastern area guards don't get nearly as involved as those of us further north do.

 

[yorkie]

There is no DOO "done right" What you are attempting to support is DCO. DOO and DCO are two very different things

It's the same thing, according to the ORR:

Driver Controlled Operation (DCO) | Office of Rail and Road

Driver controlled operation of passenger trains (DOO) is where the train driver is in control of the door operation of the train.

www.orr.gov.uk

Driver Controlled Operation of passenger trains (DCO), sometimes referred to as Driver Only Operation....

 

[ComUtoR]

I suspect the main reason is that they know anything which doesn't involve the guard being mandatory for the train to run removes all leverage with regard to strikes, as the trains will still run. Drivers still could, but ASLEF is known for being a bit more conciliatory than the RMT so easier to deal with.

It's not about 'leverage'. Would you throw your future away for a 4% pay rise ?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Dec 2022 ==

It's the same thing

It isn't, you are wrong, but lets agree to differ. You are entitled to have your own opinion on that.

 

[yorkie]

It isn't, you are wrong, but lets agree to differ. You are entitled to have your own opinion on that.

This is not my opinion; you are disagreeing with the ORR, not me.

I'm really struggling to understand the point of having OBS' that GTR have, or whatever it is GA 755s have, if you can just have revenue protection teams doing the ticket hooha. I won't have anyone telling me that the OBS provides valuable customer service, because in my experience from Southern since joining GTR (and having been on all 217 of their 377s across various routes, I've travelled a lot with them) they're never seen.

That's down to a management failing; Sotrail Strathclyde electrics surely offer the best model, but that's for another thread.

 

[43066]

DCO guarantees that second person. DOO does not.

Not true in the rule book sense DCO doesn’t exist independently of DOO. AIUI It’s a reference to how the train is operated rather than who is on board.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The question I really want to know is, are RMT against DOO because of safety fears, and I mean genuine safety fears - not just them alleging that that's the reason, or because they fear it will cause redundancies? That's a genuine question I have.

The reason I asked this was because a strike over potential redundancies is something I see as potentially detrimental to progression of the industry, like advances in technology, etc. Similarly to how self-service checkouts replaced a lot of manual ones in supermarkets, and ticket machines replaced many offices, trends and improvements in technology do make human jobs redundant, which is one way of the world that if prevented could hold us back.

 

[ComUtoR]

Not true in the rule book sense DCO doesn’t exist independently of DOO. AIUI It’s a reference to how the train is operated rather than who is on board.

Nope. Again, lets agree to differ as DOO can be a very emotive subject and is generally against forum discussion. I recommend further reading on the subject.

 

[Thirteen]

The question I really want to know is, are RMT against DOO because of safety fears, and I mean genuine safety fears - not just them alleging that that's the reason, or because they fear it will cause redundancies? That's a genuine question I have.

It's probably a bit of both.

 

[HSTEd]

If they have a second member of staff onboard the train to check tickets and railcards, whether that person is called a guard, conductor or revenue inspector it is not driver only operation and the TOC/Government still has the cost of the second member of staff on the train. It is driver controlled operation if the driver opens and closes the doors but it is not driver only operation and does not achieve the cost savings of driver only operation.

As I have noted, an optimal revenue protection strategy is almost certainly not going to put an inspector on every single train!

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's probably a bit of both.

My inclination is that the RMT would be more about job preservation and ASLEF would be more about safety because their drivers are the ones who will get in trouble if there's an incident.