Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The RMT Union and conductor colleagues have escalated their dispute over the Memorandum of Understanding, Rest Day and Sunday Working arrangements at Transpennine Express
Despite the significant work undertaken through constructive dialogue, the negotiations have failed as the company has suspended all further productivity negotiations with the Conductors Company Council until a resolution is reached in relation to the unrelated local matter at Manchester Piccadilly.
The NEC considers it unacceptable that the employer has “paused” productivity talks because of an unrelated local matter, where the employer has attempted imposition in breach of the collective bargaining machinery and caused a breakdown in industrial relations. TransPennine Express has made a series of threats in an attempt at industrial blackmail, and collective punishment in the form of stopping talks cannot be tolerated."
The RMT Union and conductor colleagues have escalated their dispute over the Memorandum of Understanding, Rest Day and Sunday Working arrangements at Transpennine Express
As such, Industrial action will take place by Transpennine Express conductor colleagues for all shifts starting between the hours of:
0001 Hours and 2359 Hours on Sunday 4th October 2026
0001 Hours and 2359 Hours on Sunday 11th October 2026
0001 Hours and 2359 Hours on Sunday 18th October 2026
0001 Hours and 2359 Hours on Sunday 25th October 2026
The union has called this action due to a stall in productivity talks that have been going on for the last two years.
The "Piccadilly problem" is a separate, unrelated issue which that is being used as a tool to delay productivity talks, which is why the action has been called.
The "Piccadilly problem" is a separate, unrelated issue which that is being used as a tool to delay productivity talks, which is why the action has been called.
I don't have all the details but it's related closure of the Transpennine Express OTAP (On Train Accounting Point) due to the transfer of dispatchers and station team leaders to Northern
I don't have all the details but it's related closure of the Transpennine Express OTAP (On Train Accounting Point) due to the transfer of dispatchers and station team leaders to Northern
It would appear that Northern have also admitted defeat on the conductor restructuring this week as well. Though there doesn't seem to be any link, so it's likely just a coincidence.
If I were travelling, I would be expecting quite a limited service on both operators on these days.
It would appear that Northern have also admitted defeat on the conductor restructuring this week as well. Though there doesn't seem to be any link, so it's likely just a coincidence.
If I were travelling, I would be expecting quite a limited service on both operators on these days.
Apologies - what I meant was accepted that the process to bring Sunday working in has been exhausted i.e. the restructuring plan voted upon earlier this year has been abandoned.
Apologies - what I meant was accepted that the process to bring Sunday working in has been exhausted i.e. the restructuring plan voted upon earlier this year has been abandoned.
Apologies - what I meant was accepted that the process to bring Sunday working in has been exhausted i.e. the restructuring plan voted upon earlier this year has been abandoned.
I don't have all the details but it's related closure of the Transpennine Express OTAP (On Train Accounting Point) due to the transfer of dispatchers and station team leaders to Northern
The Northern OTAPs themselves are not a in a very good position right now either. I dont know the process at TPE but I am assuming that TPE guards are now doing everything themselves regards to machines and money?
The ballot on the new deal wasn't accepted, but, as it had been split into a two-part question, and one of the two was accepted, there was an unknown over whether there could be a revised deal, yes. However there is no revised deal.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The current Sunday schedules are likely to continue for the foreseeable, if this is what you mean, yes. If you mean will the ability to resource the reduced schedules, yes this is likely to decrease on TPE strike days and Christmas shopping weekends, as they're even more unattractive to work than a normal one. There's a possibility of improved reliability (against the reduced service) in January.
Apologies - what I meant was accepted that the process to bring Sunday working in has been exhausted i.e. the restructuring plan voted upon earlier this year has been abandoned.
The ballot on the new deal wasn't accepted, but, as it had been split into a two-part question, and one of the two was accepted, there was an unknown over whether there could be a revised deal, yes. However there is no revised deal.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The current Sunday schedules are likely to continue for the foreseeable, if this is what you mean, yes. If you mean will the ability to resource the reduced schedules, yes this is likely to decrease on TPE strike days and Christmas shopping weekends, as they're even more unattractive to work than a normal one. There's a possibility of improved reliability (against the reduced service) in January.
Without wishing to veer of topic, my understanding of the Northern Sunday working / Productivity is that it has NOT been abandoned.
Northern says it made it abundantly clear that the whole package was one offer, including the "who opens the doors" question. The RMT insisted on balloting it as two questions, making people believe that you could have one without the other, which was allegedly never the case.
Members voted to accept Sundays inside, the extra pay, extra rest days and one off lump sum payment, but voted against Driver Open Conductor Close door operation.
The letter Northern has written says, quite correctly, that the "Role of the Guard" dispute was seeking to get a guarantee that there would always be a Guard on the train. Northern says they have guaranteed this and quoted the relevant clause in the offer / revised conditions. Therefore they have given the Union what they want. It seems the RMT has moved the goalposts saying they also want to insist the Guard opens doors, and not the driver. This is despite the RMT saying in letters that "DOCC" is an approved and accepted method of operation.
What Northern is now saying is that they have given the RMT what they originally wanted to settle the dispute, that Northern never offered the two things as separate deals and hence having two ballots was pointless, that there will be no further negotiations on the matter and they await the RMT acceptance of the offer.
They say that if they do not hear from the RMT then they will infer that the process is exhausted. If that is the case then they can look, one way or the other, to impose it as the process is exhausted. It doesn't mean they have abondoned the idea, just looking at other ways of implementing it!
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
