Hull Trains Strike over dismissal

[TheManBehind]

It will be up to ASLEF to make a call on whether to continue the action; considering the rumour that even some aye-voting drivers are returning to work as well, it wouldn't make sense to me at least sense to continue it on. I suspect it's becoming tiresome for many of the drivers to keep losing the money!

 

[Moonshot]

Did the guy who got fired not use a tribunal?

 

[Obrian76]

Ive

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2025 ==

I’ve been on the railway since I left school in the early 90s. I’ve always stood by ASLEF but on this occasion they’ve got it wrong and have gone too far.

I work for an operator who frequents Hull regularly. First, why didn’t this go to tribunal some have asked. This is because ASELF know that they would not win with the evidence stacked against them. The driver did not say anything in a safety brief, but instead sought out a member of the management team with the ASLEF H&S rep present and declared they’d fallen asleep 3 days that week driving the train at 125mph, plus multiple times in the past. That’s against a backdrop of the driver having done the same 12 months previously and receiving full support to get them back to work. ASLEF say there’s no evidence. If only that were true! A driver at the company says there’s a full written statement signed by the driver and the ASLEF rep where the declaration was recorded. Hence why they won’t take it to ET!!!!!

They’ve asked member to strike even though they know all this. The driver has been offered redeployment and significant financial offers yet ASLEF have turned this down, but they tell the media there’s been no movement. Another lie.

I now hear that 12 drivers have left ASLEF and gone back to work due to the behaviour of the union. I’ve always been supportive of trade unions but only then they fairly and truthfully represent their members. On this occasion they have misrepresented Hull Trains members and members of the wider community.

This seems more about ASLEF having a crack at taking down an open access operator rather than the issue they’re hiding behind.

 

[whoosh]

Ive

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2025 ==

I’ve been on the railway since I left school in the early 90s. I’ve always stood by ASLEF but on this occasion they’ve got it wrong and have gone too far.

I work for an operator who frequents Hull regularly. First, why didn’t this go to tribunal some have asked. This is because ASELF know that they would not win with the evidence stacked against them. The driver did not say anything in a safety brief, but instead sought out a member of the management team with the ASLEF H&S rep present and declared they’d fallen asleep 3 days that week driving the train at 125mph, plus multiple times in the past. That’s against a backdrop of the driver having done the same 12 months previously and receiving full support to get them back to work. ASLEF say there’s no evidence. If only that were true! A driver at the company says there’s a full written statement signed by the driver and the ASLEF rep where the declaration was recorded. Hence why they won’t take it to ET!!!!!

They’ve asked member to strike even though they know all this. The driver has been offered redeployment and significant financial offers yet ASLEF have turned this down, but they tell the media there’s been no movement. Another lie.

I now hear that 12 drivers have left ASLEF and gone back

But that would be his driving role terminated under medical grounds though, wouldn't it...? If he's allegedly falling asleep then either it's something like sleep apnea (which there is treatment for), or be something they (including Occupational Health) can't diagnose?
I'm struggling to understand how it has it gone from what could be a 'medical redeployment', which it could be argued is reasonable, to 'the sack', which seems less so.

I don't think the full story is being told on both sides.

 

[800001]

Ive

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2025 ==

I’ve been on the railway since I left school in the early 90s. I’ve always stood by ASLEF but on this occasion they’ve got it wrong and have gone too far.

I work for an operator who frequents Hull regularly. First, why didn’t this go to tribunal some have asked. This is because ASELF know that they would not win with the evidence stacked against them. The driver did not say anything in a safety brief, but instead sought out a member of the management team with the ASLEF H&S rep present and declared they’d fallen asleep 3 days that week driving the train at 125mph, plus multiple times in the past. That’s against a backdrop of the driver having done the same 12 months previously and receiving full support to get them back to work. ASLEF say there’s no evidence. If only that were true! A driver at the company says there’s a full written statement signed by the driver and the ASLEF rep where the declaration was recorded. Hence why they won’t take it to ET!!!!!

They’ve asked member to strike even though they know all this. The driver has been offered redeployment and significant financial offers yet ASLEF have turned this down, but they tell the media there’s been no movement. Another lie.

I now hear that 12 drivers have left ASLEF and gone back to work due to the behaviour of the union. I’ve always been supportive of trade unions but only then they fairly and truthfully represent their members. On this occasion they have misrepresented Hull Trains members and members of the wider community.

This seems more about ASLEF having a crack at taking down an open access operator rather than the issue they’re hiding behind.

From sources within HT they can't believe Aslef would even bring strike action with the evidence against the driver.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2025 ==

But that would be his driving role terminated under medical grounds though, wouldn't it...? If he's allegedly falling asleep then either it's something like sleep apnea (which there is treatment for), or be something they (including Occupational Health) can't diagnose?
How has it gone from a 'medical redeployment' to 'the sack'?

I don't think the full story is being told on both sides.

This is one where no one will tell the full story on either side.

 

[whoosh]

This is one where no one will tell the full story on either side.

Well, I can understand that. There is the possibility, as I alluded to, that someone's medical records (NHS or Occupational) are a possible factor.

 

[John R]

I don't think the full story is being told on both sides.

Unless and until it comes out in an Employment Tribunal an employer is always going to be limited as to what it can say regarding the dismissal of an employee, and as noted above the fact that medical details are involved makes it even less likely that it can put forward its case.

 

[43096]

But that would be his driving role terminated under medical grounds though, wouldn't it...? If he's allegedly falling asleep then either it's something like sleep apnea (which there is treatment for), or be something they (including Occupational Health) can't diagnose?
I'm struggling to understand how it has it gone from what could be a 'medical redeployment', which it could be argued is reasonable, to 'the sack', which seems less so.

From what has been sad above, the driver/ASLEF has turned down redeployment. As they’re clearly not going to go back to driving with that medical record, it’s a SOSR (some other substantive reason) case - they’ve effectively sacked themselves by turning down redeployment!

 

[Moonshot]

Just seems very odd drivers taking strike action in support of a colleague who has been offered re deployment. Occasionally it does happen that safety critical staff have to withdraw from their roles due to medical issues....but this industry does offer other employment without the need for a medical

 

[Dieseldriver]

Ive

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Aug 2025 ==

I’ve been on the railway since I left school in the early 90s. I’ve always stood by ASLEF but on this occasion they’ve got it wrong and have gone too far.

I work for an operator who frequents Hull regularly. First, why didn’t this go to tribunal some have asked. This is because ASELF know that they would not win with the evidence stacked against them. The driver did not say anything in a safety brief, but instead sought out a member of the management team with the ASLEF H&S rep present and declared they’d fallen asleep 3 days that week driving the train at 125mph, plus multiple times in the past. That’s against a backdrop of the driver having done the same 12 months previously and receiving full support to get them back to work. ASLEF say there’s no evidence. If only that were true! A driver at the company says there’s a full written statement signed by the driver and the ASLEF rep where the declaration was recorded. Hence why they won’t take it to ET!!!!!

They’ve asked member to strike even though they know all this. The driver has been offered redeployment and significant financial offers yet ASLEF have turned this down, but they tell the media there’s been no movement. Another lie.

I now hear that 12 drivers have left ASLEF and gone back to work due to the behaviour of the union. I’ve always been supportive of trade unions but only then they fairly and truthfully represent their members. On this occasion they have misrepresented Hull Trains members and members of the wider community.

This seems more about ASLEF having a crack at taking down an open access operator rather than the issue they’re hiding behind.

Why would ASLEF be attempting to ‘take down’ an open access operator?

 

[43096]

Why would ASLEF be attempting to ‘take down’ an open access operator?

The usual union "class warfare" nonsense? State controlled = good, private sector = bad in union world.

 

[whoosh]

I think rather than any beef with open access, this is a case of a company confident that's it's decision to stop someone driving is correct, and a union confident of it's position that a driver should be able to freely bring up a fatigue issue without fear.

Both seem entrenched in their respective positions, and it seems there are more details that both sides won't go into publically.

Tricky...

 

[ainsworth74]

And think that this might be the moment to bring this one to a halt again having had the opportunity for any updates that might be pertinent at the moment but seemingly not being dramatically further forward.

Any thing else that crops in the future, please do feel free to report this post and the Forum Staff can look at re-opening the thread.

 

[Mag_seven]

A further update:

Hull Trains driver accuses Aslef union of 'misleading people' - BBC News

A dispute between Hull Trains and Aslef over a driver's sacking started in February.

www.bbc.com

A Hull Trains driver has called for strikes to end, claiming the union behind it is "misleading people".

Walkouts have been taking place since February after the drivers union Aslef claimed a member had been unfairly dismissed for raising a safety concern.

The driver, who wants to remain anonymous, and a second source who contacted the BBC, disagreed with the union's claim that its member had a "perfect safety of the line record" and agreed with the train operator, which was "100% doing the right thing".

Aslef called the accusations "false and inaccurate", while Hull Trains said it had put forward a number of proposals to the union in a bid to resolve the matter.

 

[Mag_seven]

Further update (thanks to @styles)

Hull Trains drivers vote to continue strike action

Drivers with the Aslef union have voted 95% in favour of continuing industrial action.

www.bbc.co.uk

Drivers have voted to continue their strikes at Hull Trains for a further six months.

Walkouts have been taking place since March 2025 after the union Aslef claimed a driver had been unfairly sacked for raising a safety concern.

A spokesperson for Hull Trains said the move was "disappointing" and the company had tabled "a number of proposals for a resolution of this matter".

The union said 90% of its members entitled to vote took part in the ballot, with 95% of those voting in favour of industrial action.

Hull Trains has consistently denied the union's claims and said it had put forward solutions to end the dispute.

 

[Mag_seven]

Dispute now settled:

Hull train driver strikes end after deal is struck with Aslef

Drivers at Hull Trains have been striking since March 2025 over the sacking of a colleague.

www.bbc.co.uk

Strike action by drivers at Hull Trains over the sacking of a colleague has ended.

Walkouts have been taking place since March 2025 after union Aslef claimed a driver had been unfairly sacked for raising a safety concern.

Both Hull Trains and ASLEF confirmed to the BBC that an agreement had been reached to bring the strike action to an end.

A spokesperson for the train company said: "We are pleased that our customers can continue to travel with confidence when booking with Hull Trains, following the positive outcome of our talks with Aslef."

 

[alistairlees]

Dispute now settled:

Hull train driver strikes end after deal is struck with Aslef

Drivers at Hull Trains have been striking since March 2025 over the sacking of a colleague.

www.bbc.co.uk

Thank goodness for that (as a frequent user).

 

[GordonT]

A Hull Trains drivers' walkout presumably could be accomplished in about 15 seconds.

 

[greatkingrat]

Thank goodness for that (as a frequent user).

I though they had been running a normal service despite the strike action?

 

[Killingworth]

I though they had been running a normal service despite the strike action?

Almost, see Rail magazine; https://www.railmagazine.com/news/hull-trains-and-aslef-end-13-month-dispute-over-sacked-driver

Hull Trains and ASLEF end 13-month dispute over sacked driver​

• By David Stubbings
• |
• 13 February 2026
• News

The long-running dispute between Hull Trains and ASLEF has been resolved.
The open access operator has been in dispute with the drivers’ union since January 2025 over the sacking of a driver.
ASLEF members were first balloted 13 months ago after a driver shared information about their workload and a previous incident during a company briefing on fatigue. Hull Trains management dismissed them, saying the information provided about the incident breached health and safety protocol.
RAIL understands that as part of the resolution, the driver at the centre of the dispute is not being reinstated and is not returning to Hull Trains.
A Hull Trains spokesperson said: “We are pleased that our customers can continue to travel with confidence when booking with Hull Trains, following the positive outcome of our talks with ASLEF.
“The safety of our customers and colleagues has and always will continue to be our number one priority.”
Early in the dispute, strikes caused Hull Trains to cancel or amend numerous services between East Yorkshire and London.
However, the company had said that during recent strikes it had been able to operate a full timetable. RAIL understands this was by using non-union drivers and driver managers.

 

[Russel]

Almost, see Rail magazine; https://www.railmagazine.com/news/hull-trains-and-aslef-end-13-month-dispute-over-sacked-driver

For those of us not in the know, if the driver isn't being reinstated and HT were able to run almost a full service while the strike was in action, what exactly has this strike achieved?

 

[dk1]

Well done ASLEF

 

[skyhigh]

For those of us not in the know, if the driver isn't being reinstated and HT were able to run almost a full service while the strike was in action, what exactly has this strike achieved?

I presume (though I have no inside information) the driver in question has not returned to work because the relationship between the two parties has irrevocably broken down, but instead been given a payout that they originally weren't going to get.

 

[Russel]

I presume (though I have no inside information) the driver in question has not returned to work because the relationship between the two parties has irrevocably broken down, but instead been given a payout that they originally weren't going to get.

That would make sense.

 

[185]

....what exactly has this strike achieved?

It's not the first time FirstGroup have sacked someone who raised concerns about safety. At a business-critical time for FirstGroup, with the future of Open Access in question, it was particularly stupid to take on the union and stick FG's dirty washing on the line for all to see.

Reminds me of the case some years ago where FirstGroup sacked a driver, a troublesome ASLEF Health & Safety rep for making a false report - namely that his train's horn didn't work and could have killed track workers. The train was cancelled, brought into a depot, and the horn worked fine*

*oh, after the ice blocking it defrosted in the nice warm depot.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Just stop the FG hate stuff. It isn’t relevant here.

The driver concerned was on managements radar well before the concerns were raised by him in that manner. Once he opened his mouth, then the usual processes would kick in. You just don’t, ever, put yourself out on a limb like that.

As a former rep, if I found out someone was likely to be in trouble or was having difficulties, I would advise them and usually tell them to go to their supervisor/manager to discuss it one-to-one, telling them to tell that supervisor/manager that I had advised him/her to go to them. That usually stopped any funny business before it started. On the odd occasion, I would be asked to accompany them.

But if anyone found out they were in trouble and tried to head it off at a safety meeting, they were either incredibly stupid or very poorly advised. If someone had attention issues and I had no problem with the roster or there weren’t any family or other issues worrying him/her, I would have pushed management to go down the medical route to discover whether there was an underlying condition causing the problem.

If management took the view that the individual, on safety grounds, could not carry on in that role, that is their prerogative. It can obviously be appealed but they carry the safety responsibility, not me as a rep. In the case of someone not coming back, I would be pushing for redeployment or a medical settlement, not a dismissal.

In the case of Hull Trains, it cost ASLEF some members as those drivers thought the union were pushing things too far. It has been a bruising experience for all concerned.

 

[whoosh]

In the case of Hull Trains, it cost ASLEF some members as those drivers thought the union were pushing things too far. It has been a bruising experience for all concerned.

Quite a few members it seems. When I saw that the most recent ballot was 90% or so for strike action, I was quite surprised, as the previous ballot was only just for strike action.

Has there been a change of mind toward the company, I thought?

The first ballot, I can't remember what the results were, but it was a clear majority voting yes.
After six months, another ballot was issued.
This was the one that was only just a yes vote.
When I looked into it, the second ballot was 17 yes, 15 no, for strike action. So pretty close.

This time (third ballot, after another six months - with 90% yes vote), it turns out only 19 ballot papers were issued. 1 abstention, 17 yes, 1 no.

So a considerable amount have left the union. I have seen a roster from a few years ago, and there were 30 lines. If it's increased, there's likely only a few more than this now - low 30s in total.
So this has sadly caused a division.
At least 11 are now not in ASLEF.

 

[Mattplans]

I think it is incredibly misleading to refer to this as a "health & safety issue". While that is what it is on the surface, it can lead a layman - or any reasonable person - to assume it was an infrastructure issue, or that the driver concerned was a whistleblower etc, or perhaps there was a wet floor somewhere with no sign. I myself was surprised to find out that the driver fell asleep at the controls of a 125mph train on multiple occassions.


If the content of post #184 is true, then what a severe waste of everyone's time this ordeal has been

That too. I hope the drivers come back/the management keep it up for a few weeks at least as I’m off to London for a tour of Charing Cross jubilee line soon and want the trip to go smoothly…

I imagine it didn't go too smoothly?

 

[yorkie]

A pleasing outcome (albeit not for ASLEF, losing so many members! Hopefully they've learnt from this)

I imagine it didn't go too smoothly?

It probably did, given the strikes had relatively little effect.

 

[father_jack]

Just stop the FG hate stuff. It isn’t relevant here.

The driver concerned was on managements radar well before the concerns were raised by him in that manner. Once he opened his mouth, then the usual processes would kick in. You just don’t, ever, put yourself out on a limb like that.

As a former rep, if I found out someone was likely to be in trouble or was having difficulties, I would advise them and usually tell them to go to their supervisor/manager to discuss it one-to-one, telling them to tell that supervisor/manager that I had advised him/her to go to them. That usually stopped any funny business before it started. On the odd occasion, I would be asked to accompany them.

But if anyone found out they were in trouble and tried to head it off at a safety meeting, they were either incredibly stupid or very poorly advised. If someone had attention issues and I had no problem with the roster or there weren’t any family or other issues worrying him/her, I would have pushed management to go down the medical route to discover whether there was an underlying condition causing the problem.

If management took the view that the individual, on safety grounds, could not carry on in that role, that is their prerogative. It can obviously be appealed but they carry the safety responsibility, not me as a rep. In the case of someone not coming back, I would be pushing for redeployment or a medical settlement, not a dismissal.

In the case of Hull Trains, it cost ASLEF some members as those drivers thought the union were pushing things too far. It has been a bruising experience for all concerned.

A sage reflection as always from CY. I highlight one part- a lot of driver managers have spent a long time driving trains during the action. I'm not FG bashing but that can't be a good situation to be in for so long with the day to day job neglected. Might even be causing other matters not to be handled correctly.