TPE franchise to move to OLR

[Horizon22]

Would the ex ex MD of TPE not have been persuaded by anyone below them at the time that these out of the box crew arrangements were sound? To change something so fundamentally is a collective decision surely? , not by someone on their own?

Oh I'm sure controllers and planners could have seen this coming from a MILE off. But it depends if that went up the chain adequately in their departments and whether anyone at a senior level had an eye on this detail. Other TOCs look at the way diagrams and route knowledge have been slashed with 2+ changes on route as madness and a good case study in how not to do it despite how attractive it might initially appear.

 

[43066]

To be fair they are customers, as are we all. And some of us rely on the railways to get to work to earn money, so if it suddenly becomes very difficult to do so it kind of does become the business of passengers.

On the basis that you’ve said you work for the government, and on the basis that I’m a taxpayer, I’m therefore one of your customers.

Should your precise employment Ts and Cs therefore be my business?!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jun 2023 ==

It is incredibly sad. It seems like nobody can really be bothered to work together to sort out the service that runs the route of the world’s first ever intercity line and goes right past the world’s first ever passenger railway. It should be one of our crown jewels, not the absolute basket case it has been allowed to become, my multiple actors in the show. Almost all railways in the world operate better than TP - just think about how crazy that is for a moment.

It leaves the whole region looking like a shell of a place economically and leaves customers in a shocking position, especially those who really rely on trains. I don’t doubt it also leaves staff members who want desperately to turn up to work and run a great service incredibly frustrated as well.

I have no idea what the solutions are beyond what has already been said but it sounds like all concerned on decision making need a mix of therapy and basic railway logistics and IR training.

Difficult to disagree with any of this.

 

[bramling]

Well yeah they don't exist because a lot of the problems on TPE aren't fundamentally due to industrial relations. They certainly aren't being helped by the current IR issues to be sure. Not working overtime/rest days and otherwise working to rule and not going above and beyond is clearly having an impact. But those are unlikely to be fixed until the main dispute is settled nationally.

But even if all the staff at TPE were happy as a pig in the proverbial and morale was sky high TPE would still be struggling for the many reasons enumerated above. Lack of traction knowledge, lack of route knowledge, fragile diagrams and a general shortage of bodies all adding up to make the operation vulnerable to collapse. Happy staff would make that easier to manage but it certainly wouldn't fix the issue.

The fix is going to be to rebuild the resilience of ensuring that a guard that works out of Newcastle signs both 802s and 185s and that they sign all relevant diversionary routes and at least as far as Huddersfield. That a diagram for a Liverpool to Hull service doesn't have potentially two or three changes of crew on route meaning that if one person out of the six required is unavailable and can't be covered that potentially that entire out and back service ends up cancelled. Etc etc.

It isn't as easy as just saying "oh the staff are intransigent, don't want to work and should just shut up and get on with it". That still wouldn't deliver the schedule reliably when the operation has been structured by management and, increasingly, the DfT to be so fragile to begin with.

I’d say there will also need to be some kind of post-mortem to find out how these issues arose, and in particular where accountability lies for the decisions to pigeon-hole everything up in this way. It has been suggested that some of GTR‘s issues are due similar structuring of the crewing.

I have a nasty suspicion there’s a strong element of someone designing something which looks okay on paper, and any dissent quashed from those with the experience to be able to see that problems would be likely to arise.

 

[mike57]

Would the ex ex MD of TPE not have been persuaded by anyone below them at the time that these out of the box crew arrangements were sound?

I have a nasty suspicion there’s a strong element of someone designing something which looks okay on paper, and any dissent quashed from those with the experience to be able to see that problems would be likely to arise.

I dont know about the rail industry, but in other industries if someone at the top wants to do something there will be enough people below them who are only interested in advancing their own careers and will go along with even totally ridiculous plans, and those who speak out are branded as dinosaurs and bullied into shutting up. I've worked in engineering for 50 years and seen it a few times. Personally I deal with it by exiting as fast as possible, as it usually ends badly.

Because of the structure of the railways having a fast exit strategy is probably less of an option.

Oh I'm sure controllers and planners could have seen this coming from a MILE off.

In the case of the 2018 timetable there were 'schoolboy errors' that were obvious even to non railway empolyees, e.g. 2 trains arriving from opposite directions at the single platform at Malton within 3 minutes of each other. Again it is reasonable to assume that those tasked with implimenting it would spot it, and were probably told to 'Shut up and get back in your box, what do you know about running a business' to quote what I heard on one occasion in a meeting to discuss a project.

I’d say there will also need to be some kind of post-mortem to find out how these issues arose, and in particular where accountability lies for the decisions to pigeon-hole everything up in this way.

In this situation those who 'broke' something usually ride off into the sunset to work their magic somewhere else. Its a shame that those responsible cannot be held accountable, but the reality is that would be very hard to do unless the threshold for a criminal investigation were to be reached, which is not going to happen.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

No idea, but a senior manager of planning who covered diagramming when challenged about the effectiveness of the short hop multiple crewing answered with the comment "i have been doing it this way for 20 odd years, and Im not changing it now"

Would the ex ex MD of TPE not have been persuaded by anyone below them at the time that these out of the box crew arrangements were sound? To change something so fundamentally is a collective decision surely? , not by someone on their own?

 

[Bantamzen]

It does, but our beef should be with how the railway is being run. In other words if the local coffee shop staff go on strike, question the quality and intent of the management not the staff.

Normally I'd agree, however it seems that there is a particularly toxic environment at TPE that seems to run beyond just the current dispute. I've worked in a toxic environment myself, and it was way more complex than just management vs staff.

On the basis that you’ve said you work for the government, and on the basis that I’m a taxpayer, I’m therefore one of your customers.

Should your precise employment Ts and Cs therefore be my business?!

I'm sure you would expect T&Cs that ensured my department delivered the service you would want. Just as you would expect binmen's T&Cs ensure your bins were removed when promised, or schoolteachers to be available when kids were in school to learn.

So in a way yeah, customers should expect that the railway T&Cs ensured that the railways ran 7 days a week, from early morning to late evening / night. If you want the travelling great unwashed to stay out of the discussion on T&Cs, lobby the private sector to come back to the railways instead of handing over the keys to the government. But as long as the railways lean on public funding, the public are going to have their say.

 

[fabs]

Would the ex ex MD of TPE not have been persuaded by anyone below them at the time that these out of the box crew arrangements were sound? To change something so fundamentally is a collective decision surely? , not by someone on their own?

That is the question! It depends on how you lead. Create an echo chamber around yourself and there’s no chance of that happening.
Creating a culture of fear amongst your head of departments, equally no chance.

Personally, a major part of the problem was importing those seniors that were arguably heavily responsible for the Scotrail franchise loss from
FG.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Having worked with that ex-MD, he didn’t take a contrary view very kindly and on the subject of optimised diagramming, he didn’t appreciate my input at the bid stage. I have a very poor view of that diagramming policy.

You don’t need a post-mortem to know what happened, the reasons have been on here and other blogs for ages! Optimised diagramming has become fashionable in the industry and is strongly supported by the DfT. They see it as a major way of controlling both staff numbers and training costs. Every bid, the DfT go through your diagrams and try to squeeze more out. The more diversionary routes you have, the worse it gets.

The fact that MG, the man who negotiated a huge increase in GWR driver numbers with the DfT, wasn’t able to reverse what had happened before with that previous MD wasn’t just down to a few awkward senior managers - he was fighting against that DfT view of the train crew world.

As an aside, FG didn’t put their usual A team into the Scotrail bid - they had sniffed the political wind. They thought whoever got it wasn’t going to keep it for very long.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Personally, a major part of the problem was importing those seniors that were arguably heavily responsible for the Scotrail franchise loss from
FG.

Fully agree with you there. Words echoed by a few on pay grades above me...

 

[ainsworth74]

Optimised diagramming has become fashionable in the industry and is strongly supported by the DfT.

I wonder if this sort of thing is going to be the UK equivalent of the Precision Scheduled Railroading idea which has taken hold in the US and in reality isn't really precise, nor scheduled and barely qualifies as railroading...

 

[43066]

Normally I'd agree, however it seems that there is a particularly toxic environment at TPE that seems to run beyond just the current dispute. I've worked in a toxic environment myself, and it was way more complex than just management vs staff.

It just looks like you’re angling for a way to blame the environment on ASLEF/the staff. Why is it so hard just to accept that the TOC has been badly run in a way that has destroyed goodwill? Neither of the TOCs I’ve worked at are anything like as bad as TPE, despite staff belonging to the same unions.

I'm sure you would expect T&Cs that ensured my department delivered the service you would want. Just as you would expect binmen's T&Cs ensure your bins were removed when promised, or schoolteachers to be available when kids were in school to learn.

Except that in this case the issue preventing the service isn’t the Ts and Cs it’s the lack of staff with sufficient route training. Yet you seem to be suggesting this is somehow the fault of the staff.

So in a way yeah, customers should expect that the railway T&Cs ensured that the railways ran 7 days a week, from early morning to late evening / night. If you want the travelling great unwashed to stay out of the discussion on T&Cs, lobby the private sector to come back to the railways instead of handing over the keys to the government. But as long as the railways lean on public funding, the public are going to have their say.

Yet the railway has historically relied heavily on overtime. That is not the fault of the staff, so why are you suggesting it is?

The last sentence is just factually incorrect. My local GP surgery is publicly funded, yet I don’t get a say over when they’re open. That applies to all public sector organisations.

The issue the railway has at the moment is that the employers are being prevented by the government from negotiating with their employees for political reasons - hence why TPE is unusable for many people. Yet you seem determined to blame that on the employees!

 

[Krokodil]

To be fair they are customers, as are we all. And some of us rely on the railways to get to work to earn money, so if it suddenly becomes very difficult to do so it kind of does become the business of passengers.

As a customer your beef is with the employer. The detail of the traincrew's conditions is not your concern. In any case, it isn't the conditions that got TPE into this mess.

Would the ex ex MD of TPE not have been persuaded by anyone below them at the time that these out of the box crew arrangements were sound? To change something so fundamentally is a collective decision surely? , not by someone on their own?

Golton was probably caught between the DfT and middle management to a large extent. TPE's Ops Standards department seem to have implemented some rules that look unnecessarily restrictive to those of us in other TOCs.

 

[Bantamzen]

It just looks like you’re angling for a way to blame the environment on ASLEF/the staff. Why is it so hard just to accept that the TOC has been badly run in a way that has destroyed goodwill? Neither of the TOCs I’ve worked at are anything like as bad as TPE, despite staff belonging to the same unions.

Why is it hard to accept? Because I have seen how these toxic working environments can occur with my own eyes, and its not always just management that cause them. I have no idea if that is the case at TPE, but it certainly seems to run a lot deeper than just the current dispute with the TOC & DfT.

Except that in this case the issue preventing the service isn’t the Ts and Cs it’s the lack of staff with sufficient route training. Yet you seem to be suggesting this is somehow the fault of the staff.

Did I say this particular issue was the fault of the staff? No. Remind me who's angling here...

Yet the railway has historically relied heavily on overtime. That is not the fault of the staff, so why are you suggesting it is?

But the unions don't want it but have let it slide, is that correct? So I mean if staff keep taking the overtime, and if management think its cheaper......

This is why I don't quite see it as binary as some.

The last sentence is just factually incorrect. My local GP surgery is publicly funded, yet I don’t get a say over when they’re open. That applies to all public sector organisations.

Erm, it is factually correct actually. My department went from very traditional 9-5 public opening to 8-8 plus Saturdays to satisfy.... Survey says.... Public demand!!

The issue the railway has at the moment is that the employers are being prevented by the government from negotiating with their employees for political reasons - hence why TPE is unusable for many people. Yet you seem determined to blame that on the employees!

The current dispute may well be political in nature, however the toxic environment being suggested at TPE may run a lot deeper than that.

Anyway I really don't give a crap about who is to blame any more. All that ever seems to happen is everyone points the finger at someone else, with lots of shouting and not much movement. All sides need to stop with the p***** contest and start getting some serious negotiations on. Otherwise DfT might as well ditch TRU and just shove extra lanes on the M62, because passengers will vote with their cars...

 

[43066]

Why is it hard to accept? Because I have seen how these toxic working environments can occur with my own eyes, and its not always just management that cause them. I have no idea if that is the case at TPE, but it certainly seems to run a lot deeper than just the current dispute with the TOC & DfT.

I get the sneaking suspicion that you won’t accept anything other than the union being at fault. As I say, the same union represents staff at other TOCs that are nowhere near as toxic, which suggests it is not the union that is the issue here.

But the unions don't want it but have let it slide, is that correct? So I mean if staff keep taking the overtime, and if management think its cheaper......

This is why I don't quite see it as binary as some.

So really the union can do no right can it? If they work overtime they’re greedy and enabling the company, if they withdraw it as part of an industrial dispute you’ll attack them for having worked it in the first place!

Not a word of condemnation for management choosing to run the company like this in the first place..

Erm, it is factually correct actually. My department went from very traditional 9-5 public opening to 8-8 plus Saturdays to satisfy.... Survey says.... Public demand!!

Maybe things are different in Yorkshire, but that certainly isn’t how most publicly funded organisations work in my experience. The Ts and Cs of their staff are none of my business, either, and are certainly not determined by public opinion.

Anyway I really don't give a crap about who is to blame any more.

So what exactly is the point of discussing it, then?

All sides need to stop with the p***** contest and start getting some serious negotiations on. Otherwise DfT might as well ditch TRU and just shove extra lanes on the M62, because passengers will vote with their cars...

All sides are not equal in this dispute. I doubt staff who are losing thousands of pounds consider that they’re in a p****** contest - they’re simply trying to prevent their work life balance being made even worse than it already is.

The government is acting as the blocker here, and is preventing individual TOCs from negotiating with ASLEF. Are you denying that?

 

[josh-j]

Ultimately the government is responsible for public transport provision. Simple as that. If they can't manage to think of a way to run trains that doesn't result in workers feeling they have to strike then they aren't doing their job.

The fact they then go on to blame the workers just shows the pigheaded way they apparently think about service provision, in which they care less about things actually working than they do about winning the fight they themselves started.

 

[Bantamzen]

I get the sneaking suspicion that you won’t accept anything other than the union being at fault. As I say, the same union represents staff at other TOCs that are nowhere near as toxic, which suggests it is not the union that is the issue here.

You can have all the sneaking suspicions you want, doesn't make them right like..

So really the union can do no right can it? If they work overtime they’re greedy and enabling the company, if they withdraw it as part of an industrial dispute you’ll attack them for having worked it in the first place!

Let's be honest here, under private funding this was the ultimate having cake and eating it. Unions could huff and puff about how overtime shouldn't be relied on, but turned a blind eye when staff took it. I don't blame staff for that by the way, but maybe it was helping the TOCs cheap out in the long run. And now that OLRs are taking over failed franchise after failed franchise, the books have been opened and the bean counters aren't happy. That's kind of how it works in the public sector, everything goes under the microscope.

Not a word of condemnation for management choosing to run the company like this in the first place..

I've had plenty through the various threads, but I was focusing on the situation at TPE.

Maybe things are different in Yorkshire, but that certainly isn’t how most publicly funded organisations work in my experience. The Ts and Cs of their staff are none of my business, either, and are certainly not determined by public opinion.

Erm, my department is nationwide and the extended opening is national. So I've really no idea what points you were hoping to score here, but it's an own goal I'm afraid...

So what exactly is the point of discussing it, then?

Very little it seems. Its just how I feel as a former passenger of TPE. I used to use them all the time, but have been on exactly 3 in the last two years as the whole job lot melted. I know passengers shouldn't have an opinion and just shut up & accept whatever they are given, but I'm a bolshy old git. As I'm sure you know, which is why you keeping dangling the bait....

All sides are not equal in this dispute. I doubt staff who are losing thousands of pounds consider they they’re in a p****** contest - they’re simply trying to prevent their work life balance being made even worse than it already is.

I don't doubt that. But equally it doesn't mean some sides are innocent either. There are too many trenches dug on all sides now, and if someone doesn't make a move soon TPE will just be something talked about around campfires...

The government is acting as the blocker here, and is preventing individual TOCs from negotiating with ASLEF. Are you denying that?

No, but has it stopped ASLEF from negotiating with the government? Admittedly its going to be much harder, and they might even have to make concessions if they want to make progress. But then the railways got themselves into this situation in the first place. There's no getting away from the fact that franchises have fallen like dominoes, which has led to this level of intervention from Whitehall. And that's it, whatever the reasons private industry is rapidly giving up on the railways, it has led to this. Its probably a good job Thatcher isn't around, she would have had no problem shutting the job lot down!

 

[Phillipimo]

Railway Gazette article

‘A victory for union hard-liners’ as TransPennine Express transfer risks causing more disruption​

Rail Business UK can reveal that the short-notice decision by Transport Secretary Mark Harper to bring TransPennine Express into the government’s Operator of Last Resort has stoked serious concerns about unintended consequences within the industry.

UK: Fears are growing about more disruption to rail services caused by industrial action in the wake of the decision by Transport Secretary Mark Harper to transfer the TransPennine Express business from FirstGroup to the government’s Operator of Last Resort. This was formally completed shortly before 02.00 on May 28.

The decision announced on May 11 was ostensibly taken because of the protracted period of disruption to TPE services across northern England in the weeks and months beforehand. In January and February, up to a quarter of TPE trains were cancelled, which was the highest rate of any British train operator.

But an improvement plan agreed with the Department for Transport was starting to show signs of improvements, with one in six services cancelled in March.

Rail Business UK understands that since the start of the recovery programme TPE had consistently achieved targets set by officials at DfT, which closely manages operators through their operating contracts.

FirstGroup had been expecting a short extension its National Rail Contract of around six months, with a number of conditions applied regarding further improvements in service delivery.

‘A victory for union hard-liners’ as TransPennine Express transfer risks causing more disruption

Rail Business UK can reveal that the short-notice decision by Transport Secretary Mark Harper to bring TransPennine Express into the government's Operator of Last Resort has stoked serious concerns about unintended consequences within the industry.

www.railwaygazette.com

You might need to login (free) to view.

 

[fabs]

Not a great deal has changed in terms of management/union relationships.
Especially as one rep helpfully reminded everyone on social media this week that ‘they don’t have to allow route learners in their cab’.

Whilst true, why would you want to delay the training of someone who’s ultimately going to become qualified and stop you picking up what should be their o’dark o’clock shift off spare.

 

[43066]

You can have all the sneaking suspicions you want, doesn't make them right like..

From your posts you do tend to take an anti union stance on these matters. This one is no exception.

Let's be honest here, under private funding this was the ultimate having cake and eating it. Unions could huff and puff about how overtime shouldn't be relied on, but turned a blind eye when staff took it. I don't blame staff for that by the way, but maybe it was helping the TOCs cheap out in the long run. And now that OLRs are taking over failed franchise after failed franchise, the books have been opened and the bean counters aren't happy. That's kind of how it works in the public sector, everything goes under the microscope.

The management of the company decide on the staffing levels needed to run the service, not the union. Of course having the ability to work overtime suits some, but is not guaranteed either way, so if the management don’t have enough staff the blame is squarely on them.

The railway is still being funded in largely same way as it always was - a combination of subsidy and ticket revenue. The bean counters have also offered the same overtime rate to the staff, so clearly they are happy! The offer on the table is also enough to settle the dispute nationally, the figures are not the issue.

As a tax payer I’d like to know why the government is actively blocking negotiations and wasting public money bankrolling an entirely unnecessary industrial dispute.

Erm, my department is nationwide and the extended opening is national. So I've really no idea what points you were hoping to score here, but it's an own goal I'm afraid...

I’m simply pointing out that your original suggestion is generally incorrect. I only have to look as far as my local GP surgery to disprove it.

Very little it seems. Its just how I feel as a former passenger of TPE. I used to use them all the time, but have been on exactly 3 in the last two years as the whole job lot melted. I know passengers shouldn't have an opinion and just shut up & accept whatever they are given, but I'm a bolshy old git. As I'm sure you know, which is why you keeping dangling the bait....

I’m not dangling any bait - just pointing out that the government and poor management decisions rather than the unions are the reason for the service on TPE being rubbish at the moment.

No, but has it stopped ASLEF from negotiating with the government? Admittedly its going to be much harder, and they might even have to make concessions if they want to make progress. But then the railways got themselves into this situation in the first place. There's no getting away from the fact that franchises have fallen like dominoes, which has led to this level of intervention from Whitehall. And that's it, whatever the reasons private industry is rapidly giving up on the railways, it has led to this. Its probably a good job Thatcher isn't around, she would have had no problem shutting the job lot down!

The franchises that failed were based on inaccurate financial forecasts. Again - not the fault of the staff or unions.

You seem to have forgotten that the government spent months denying that the dispute was anything to do with them. ASLEF has been trying to negotiate on a local level. Negotiation with the government makes absolutely no sense when Ts and Cs are so different. The fact the government still aren’t allowing that is why no progress has been made over the last eighteen months or so.

Its probably a good job Thatcher isn't around, she would have had no problem shutting the job lot down!

If this government thought they could do that, they would.

I also happen to disagree with you there. Margaret Thatcher was fundamentally pragmatic and would have allowed the dispute to be settled, or more likely not provoked it in the first place.

As an ASLEF member I know I speak for many of my colleagues when I say I’d rather see the railway shut down completely than roll over and accept the changes that are being proposed - and all for a real terms pay cut! Unfortunately the dispute will therefore continue until the government moderates its approach.

Whilst true, why would you want to delay the training of someone who’s ultimately going to become qualified and stop you picking up what should be their o’dark o’clock shift off spare.

In what context was that said? I make it 100% right. Drivers shouldn’t ever feel under pressure to allow people in - it’s entirely an individual decision.

 

[bramling]

Ultimately the government is responsible for public transport provision. Simple as that. If they can't manage to think of a way to run trains that doesn't result in workers feeling they have to strike then they aren't doing their job.

The fact they then go on to blame the workers just shows the pigheaded way they apparently think about service provision, in which they care less about things actually working than they do about winning the fight they themselves started.

This is how I see it. Most of this country’s problems at the moment seem to trace back to the current incompetent government. One of the least competent of my lifetime. And, having been in power for 13 years, it’s hard to blame anyone else.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I’d rather see the railway shut down completely than roll over and accept the changes that are being proposed

But were that the case, what would you have to gain??

 

[43066]

But were that the case, what would you have to gain??

Permanent rest days?

In all seriousness - it won’t happen of course - but people shouldn’t underestimate the strength of feeling.

Its’s frustrating to see this dragging on when all that needs to happen is for the negotiations to be allowed to proceed and for the goodwill to start to be repaired. That does ultimately have to come from the government.

 

[Bantamzen]

From your posts you do tend to take an anti union stance on these matters. This one is no exception.

I've explained this before, I am not anti-union. I am against strikes in the current economic climate. The issue is not binary, stop trying to make it so.

The management of the company decide on the staffing levels needed to run the service, not the union. Of course having the ability to work overtime suits some, but is not guaranteed either way, so if the management don’t have enough staff the blame is squarely on them.

The railway is still being funded in largely same way as it always was - a combination of subsidy and ticket revenue. The bean counters have also offered the same overtime rate to the staff, so clearly they are happy! The offer on the table is also enough to settle the dispute nationally, the figures are not the issue.

As a tax payer I’d like to know why the government is actively blocking negotiations and wasting public money bankrolling an entirely unnecessary industrial dispute.

I can probably answer that quiet easily. Because it's not prepared to settle on the pay rates without something back. Its not the first time, nor will it be the last.

I’m simply pointing out that your original suggestion is generally incorrect. I only have to look as far as my local GP surgery to disprove it.

I disagree, your GP practice does not prove the general point. Much of the public sector has swung towards more availability to suit public demand.

The franchises that failed were based on inaccurate financial forecasts. Again - not the fault of the staff or unions.

Were all because of failed forecasts, that's not how I recall it?

You seem to have forgotten that the government spent months denying that the dispute was anything to do with them. ASLEF has been trying to negotiate on a local level. Negotiation with the government makes absolutely no sense when Ts and Cs are so different. The fact the government still aren’t allowing that is why no progress has been made over the last eighteen months or so.

Well even though I agree it doesn't make sense, right now that's were ASLEF and the other unions are. A consequence of the private sector starting to wash it's hands of the industry I'm afraid.

If this government thought they could do that, they would.

I also happen to disagree with you there. Margaret Thatcher was fundamentally pragmatic and would have allowed the dispute to be settled, or more likely not provoked it in the first place.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on that. Unions were not something she seemed to tolerate much. I think she'd be after blood right now, especially with a general election on the horizon.

As an ASLEF member I know I speak for many of my colleagues when I say I’d rather see the railway shut down completely than roll over and accept the changes that are being proposed - and all for a real terms pay cut! Unfortunately the dispute will therefore continue until the government moderates its approach.

Well then either all parties move to find some common ground, or staff on the ground are going to keep on losing money. And whilst many of your colleagues might think that way, I'm going to guess that there will be as many again starting to look nervously at their bank balances and credit card statements. And it may be them that ultimately determine which direction this all goes.

 

[Krokodil]

I wonder if this sort of thing is going to be the UK equivalent of the Precision Scheduled Railroading idea which has taken hold in the US and in reality isn't really precise, nor scheduled and barely qualifies as railroading...

Is there more somewhere I can read up on that? I wasn't aware that this madness has infected the US.

 

[ainsworth74]

Is there more somewhere I can read up on that? I wasn't aware that this madness has infected the US.

Wikipedia is a good starting point (and links to articles that might be worth reading):

Precision railroading - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's not the same issue as on TPE but there are shades of it in terms of the way that it tries to sweat assets and staff by ways which make the spreadsheets do the right thing but may not actually deliver a good service nor viable one long term.

 

[eldomtom2]

Is there more somewhere I can read up on that? I wasn't aware that this madness has infected the US.

Of course, what has to be remembered is that working conditions on American railroads are a lot worse than they are in the UK. TPE would probably be having less issues if it could expect its employees to be on call at a moment's notice...

 

[43066]

I've explained this before, I am not anti-union. I am against strikes in the current economic climate. The issue is not binary, stop trying to make it so.

Saying you’re against strikes in the current economic climate is very much a binary statement.

People aren’t striking because they want to, it’s because they feel they have no choice - precisely because of the economic situation.

I can probably answer that quiet easily. Because it's not prepared to settle on the pay rates without something back. Its not the first time, nor will it be the last.

Taxpayers money is being wasted on ideological point scoring by the government. Any normal industry free from government interference would have been able to settled the dispute by now.

The unions are quite happy to give something back but what that something is needs to be discussed locally and needs a negotiation to be allowed to take place. This is why the disputes in Scotland and Wales have been settled. The government is currently preventing that and you should be concerned by this as a passenger and a taxpayer. Yet you seem always to be going into bat for the government.

I disagree, your GP practice does not prove the general point. Much of the public sector has swung towards more availability to suit public demand.

Your original point was that Ts and Cs of employees of publicly funded businesses are somehow the business of customers. I’ve pointed out that that isn’t the case.

If the service isn’t being delivered then, as someone else has pointed out, your beef is with the management of the organisation responsible for providing that service, not with the union representing the staff.

Well even though I agree it doesn't make sense, right now that's were ASLEF and the other unions are. A consequence of the private sector starting to wash it's hands of the industry I'm afraid.

If you can agree it doesn’t make sense you should be able to see why there’s no way forward in the current situation.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on that. Unions were not something she seemed to tolerate much. I think she'd be after blood right now, especially with a general election on the horizon.

This is a rather simplistic and revisionist way of looking at things. Beyond the miners (and ultimately that was a dying industry anyway) that wasn’t necessarily the case at all.

Well then either all parties move to find some common ground, or staff on the ground are going to keep on losing money. And whilst many of your colleagues might think that way, I'm going to guess that there will be as many again starting to look nervously at their bank balances and credit card statements. And it may be them that ultimately determine which direction this all goes.

How do you expect parties find common ground when they’re being prevented from negotiating? That’s the point you seem to keep missing.

Of course, what has to be remembered is that working conditions on American railroads are a lot worse than they are in the UK. TPE would probably be having less issues if it could expect its employees to be on call at a moment's notice...

Where does they reasoning end? If slavery was brought back labour costs would certainly go down.

 

[Cowley]

We need a bit of a breather from the political/union stuff that just seems to endlessly go round and round in circles in these threads.

That moment is now.