Deal proposed for Northern Conductors in the North West regarding Sunday working

[dk1]

Committed Sundays not pensionable and only a small uplift leads to no one ever wanting to work late turn Sundays which leads to the staff committed never being able to get them off without a wrap around of a rest day one side and or annual leave to guarantee that Sunday off, how many life events are missed through this? In the 21st century that shouldn't be the case, new entrants have to sign up to being available to work, and from this progression will be made, for me it should be within the working week and obviously therefore pensionable.

Our duty traincrew managers regularly offer other conductors booked off with pay on the Saturday or Monday either side as an incentive to cover and ensure anyone who wants their committed Sunday off gets it.

 

[david737]

Was wondering if this offer has gone out to a vote yet as there is nothing on the RMT website about it not even in the members section.

 

[175001]

It'll be a no

 

[jonnyfan]

Was wondering if this offer has gone out to a vote yet as there is nothing on the RMT website about it not even in the members section.

Yes the referendum is currently live and was emailed out to the affected conductors, I think it closes on Thursday lunchtime. I imagine the result will be released shortly after.

 

[185]

Our duty traincrew managers regularly offer other conductors booked off with pay on the Saturday or Monday either side as an incentive to cover and ensure anyone who wants their committed Sunday off gets it.

Few get offered that, not all. I get the impression there's quite a poor relationship between the traincrew, and both TCSs & guards managers from what I hear. I've seen how long they keep those sat spare until their day is up - other companies staff would have been let go hours earlier.. a great deal of iniquity in how staff are treated at Northern.

 

[scrapy]

Few get offered that, not all. I get the impression there's quite a poor relationship between the traincrew, and both TCSs & guards managers from what I hear. I've seen how long they keep those sat spare until their day is up - other companies staff would have been let go hours earlier.. a great deal of iniquity in how staff are treated at Northern.

The reason Northern staff are kept spare longer is that they generally could still be available for a shorter trip that can be completed in under an hour eg Man Vic to Rochdale and back. Whereas other some companies or locations a member of train crew with 3 hours left on their shift cannot do anything productive so may be allowed to go home. (Eg TPE staff at Cleethorpes).

 

[185]

The reason Northern staff are kept spare longer is that they generally could still be available for a shorter trip that can be completed in under an hour eg Man Vic to Rochdale and back.

I get that. But when there's seven spares sat there all waiting to work that one Rochdale... yeah, keep the last man standing... but not all of them.

 

[LowLevel]

I get that. But when there's seven spares sat there all waiting to work that one Rochdale... yeah, keep the last man standing... but not all of them.

Being paid to sit on your backside is a good number when you can get it. Things like going home off spare tend to reflect good industrial relations, and it sounds like that's missing at Northern.

On the other hand I've always been slightly tickled at the indignant fury simply having to attend for your rostered hours can generate.

 

[dk1]

Few get offered that, not all. I get the impression there's quite a poor relationship between the traincrew, and both TCSs & guards managers from what I hear. I've seen how long they keep those sat spare until their day is up - other companies staff would have been let go hours earlier.. a great deal of iniquity in how staff are treated at Northern.

You aren’t going to get the best out of everybody by treating them like that. No wonder they are in the predicament they are. Totally unnecessary.

 

[Krokodil]

Being paid to sit on your backside is a good number when you can get it. Things like going home off spare tend to reflect good industrial relations, and it sounds like that's missing at Northern.

On the other hand I've always been slightly tickled at the indignant fury simply having to attend for your rostered hours can generate.

It works both ways, if the TCS needs a favour (movement outside of T&Cs etc.) then they're more likely to get it if they are prepared to authorise scoops in return.

 

[LowLevel]

It works both ways, if the TCS needs a favour (movement outside of T&Cs etc.) then they're more likely to get it if they are prepared to authorise scoops in return.

Of course - but on Northern that seems to have broken down totally and it seems unlikely the train crew supervisors are going to blink first.

 

[mandub]

As expected the vote is a NO.
86% No.

 

[ainsworth74]

Disappointing for everyone really but not surprising from what's been related on this thread. Industrial relations have been so poor on the West side of Northern for so long now (going back way before any present unpleasantness) that I really do question if its even possible to right the ship (rerail the train?) now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Disappointing for everyone really but not surprising from what's been related on this thread. Industrial relations have been so poor on the West side of Northern for so long now (going back way before any present unpleasantness) that I really do question if its even possible to right the ship (rerail the train?) now.

If it isn't possible, then what can be done? Simply upstaffing (including new staff who work every single Sunday plus a roster on other days, a bit like the way London Underground recruited specific staff for Night Tube) so everyone simply works their contracted hours and not a second more? Just totally withdraw Northern Sunday service on all routes?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2024 ==

Being paid to sit on your backside is a good number when you can get it. Things like going home off spare tend to reflect good industrial relations, and it sounds like that's missing at Northern.

On the other hand I've always been slightly tickled at the indignant fury simply having to attend for your rostered hours can generate.

And presumably out of pure practicality you want standby staff to be there until it's got so late in their shift that there is no practical way they can work any train within it, which is going to be pretty late in the shift in most cases. If they can go home at e.g. half shift, then they clearly didn't need to be rostered at all. Unless they were to move to "on call" instead of standby, but that would mean more cancellations and would presumably result in lower payments than being in attendance on full pay - at least it does in most industries!

 

[Killingworth]

If it isn't possible, then what can be done? Simply upstaffing (including new staff who work every single Sunday plus a roster on other days, a bit like the way London Underground recruited specific staff for Night Tube) so everyone simply works their contracted hours and not a second more? Just totally withdraw Northern Sunday service on all routes?

Many employers have staff specifically recruited to cover shifts like these. It takes organising and goodwill but can work very well. Strangely there are many people who are quite happy to work weekends and nights. Everything comes down to organising, goodwill - and price!

 

[PupCuff]

It'd be interesting to know the extent of use of contingent managers to cover some of these gaps. Not from a "well, the managers should come in and work the trains instead" perspective, but just to gauge the actual scale of the problem.

To some extent, conductor resourcing issues are masked at some TOCs by (over)use of contingents, but if Northern are utilising conductor competent managers and still also having such dire resource availability that should raise serious alarm bells, in that the situation could very easily be even worse. On the flip side, if they're not utilising contingents at all, does this show Northern to be in a position where the management are equally hacked off and thus declining overtime?

 

[Krokodil]

And presumably out of pure practicality you want standby staff to be there until it's got so late in their shift that there is no practical way they can work any train within it, which is going to be pretty late in the shift in most cases. If they can go home at e.g. half shift, then they clearly didn't need to be rostered at all. Unless they were to move to "on call" instead of standby, but that would mean more cancellations and would presumably result in lower payments than being in attendance on full pay - at least it does in most industries!

Where I am spare staff are generally let go six hours into a nine hour shift, at the discretion of the supervisor. Bearing in mind that most things they might be asked to cover would involve a two-hour round trip this doesn't seem unreasonable to me, the odds of them being able to cover any as-yet unknown disruption at this point is pretty remote, and if there are signs of disruption (or even if there aren't) the supervisor can hold onto them until time.

Standby staff exist at key interchanges. There's usually only one at a time, but unlike spare staff (who could all be marked to turns in advance) they are guaranteed to be available. They aren't let go until the last possible train they could work has departed. They are only deployed as a last resort to keep things moving (spares are used first). The idea being that if a train pulls into a busy station and there's no onward driver to be seen, the standby will be sent out to stop places like Manchester Oxford Road being clogged up.

 

[AMD]

It'd be interesting to know the extent of use of contingent managers to cover some of these gaps.

There are some managers who are in regularly working trains, and have been for months.

 

[Sheridan]

It'd be interesting to know the extent of use of contingent managers to cover some of these gaps. Not from a "well, the managers should come in and work the trains instead" perspective, but just to gauge the actual scale of the problem.

To some extent, conductor resourcing issues are masked at some TOCs by (over)use of contingents, but if Northern are utilising conductor competent managers and still also having such dire resource availability that should raise serious alarm bells, in that the situation could very easily be even worse. On the flip side, if they're not utilising contingents at all, does this show Northern to be in a position where the management are equally hacked off and thus declining overtime?

I’m only looking at this from the outside, but presumably one of the perks of being management is not having to work Sundays* - and while doing the occasional contingency shift might appeal, regularly working normal Sundays probably doesn’t?

*Of course it’s also one of the perks of being a conductor in this case, hence the problems Northern are having!

 

[185]

As I mentioned, remove the strings or this won't pass. If they need to drop the cash offer amount to compensate (the management side), then do it, but as I said - the strings are a red line.

Time & ¾, minimum nine hours, or a higher cash minimum with no strings. See if that has any takers.

 

[td97]

Just totally withdraw Northern Sunday service on all routes?

There seems to be 3 choices:

• Offer guards an amenable deal
• Remove the requirement for guards i.e. DOO for 331/195 routes
• Remove services from timetable

All of the above seem to be in the 'too difficult' basket for Northern.

 

[dk1]

There seems to be 3 choices:

• Offer guards an amenable deal
• Remove the requirement for guards i.e. DOO for 331/195 routes
• Remove services from timetable

All of the above seem to be in the 'too difficult' basket for Northern.

ASLEF would never agree to the middle option thankfully.

 

[AMD]

It would also take everyone straight back to 2017/18 when there were 40 odd days of strike action, which was pretty damaging across the north, not just the north west.

 

[Red Rover]

It would also take everyone straight back to 2017/18 when there were 40 odd days of strike action, which was pretty damaging across the north, not just the north west.

The thing is it’s worse than that, not being able to rely on a service is worse than a strike, for instance short notice cancellations is something of a northern forte, in fact I’d go so far to say they’ve mastered it, for what purposes I couldn’t say, they’ve just cancelled the 1955 Liv wac at 1958.

 

[Llandudno]

Might be best to withdraw Sunday services on most (all?) of Northern’s routes until an overtime agreement/sufficient staff are recruited. It may also help the reliability of midweek and Saturday services.

Such a drastic measure and the associated bad press may get the politicians/DfT/Northern Management/Unions to thrash out a deal..?

It would if it was in London….!

 

[Red Rover]

Work to rule would be best for all parties, be transparent about it, at least then with the staff you have you’d should get a minimum level of service over 6 days.

 

[skyhigh]

Might be best to withdraw Sunday services on most (all?) of Northern’s routes

In which case you'd have a load of East staff sitting around at work being paid to nothing.

 

[Red Rover]

In which case you'd have a load of East staff sitting around at work being paid to nothing.

If it’s part of their working week and not overtime and if a train can run it should.

 

[Confused52]

Northern have announced an emergency timetable from Sunday 22nd December on Sundays in the North West. Everything they are not certain to be able to run is either to be cancelled or substituted by a bus according to the press release. Burnham wanted certainty and he will get it; It suspect it won't make him happy.

 

[Starmill]

Realistically I'd say the timetable changes should just be made permanent. Run them from May as a last-minute change and maybe by this time next year or this time in two years we'll be in better shape.

Lots of stations will have to go to no service on Sundays. Or replacement bus as WTT. For the routes that are left, unit diagrams can then be rearranged to offset the lost capacity. For the most part emergency timetables don't achieve that - and realistically they probably never can.

The money that would have paid the supplements for Sundays under this deal can instead be spent on hiring buses every Sunday.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Nov 2024 ==

There seems to be 3 choices:

• Offer guards an amenable deal
• Remove the requirement for guards i.e. DOO for 331/195 routes
• Remove services from timetable

All of the above seem to be in the 'too difficult' basket for Northern.

It does seem like someone influential always thinks at least one of those is a nuclear option doesn't it.