You.really don't know how things work do you? Say me and my colleagues went on strike tomorrow and we all got sacked. Where do you get replacement drivers to cover us?, Where do you get drivers who have the correct route knowledge, where do you get drivers from who sign the traction? And how do you ensure you get them all signed off ready to do our work? Existing drivers, even if they were prepared to come in and take our jobs, would still need a few months to be fully trained. Brand new drivers would take well over a year. Plus you'd also need instructors and mentors who youve also just sacked. And those few driver managers who you need to do all that paperwork will be tied up trying to cover the skeleton service being ran. I'm not trying to make you look daft, but you have to ultimately co-operate, with your workforce, and imposing stuff on one side is just not going to work. Michael O'Leary thought he could do the same with his pilots and learnt the hard way that you can't. As jcollins has also said, you're mixing up your issues with that driver who refused to work the 12 car set and ASLEF getting took to court .That didn't happen in that incident .The key to all this co-operation. The unions and management know this, unfortunately the puppet master DfT doesn't have a clue as it currently reflects the clueless useless government that we have, and is behaving in the same way as O'Leary. It won't work .
-
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!
Arriva Rail North DOO
- Thread starter Andrew32
- Start date
- Status
You.really don't know how things work do you? Say me and my colleagues went on strike tomorrow and we all got sacked. Where do you get replacement drivers to cover us?, Where do you get drivers who have the correct route knowledge, where do you get drivers from who sign the traction? And how do you ensure you get them all signed off ready to do our work? Existing drivers, even if they were prepared to come in and take our jobs, would still need a few months to be fully trained. Brand new drivers would take well over a year. Plus you'd also need instructors and mentors who youve also just sacked. And those few driver managers who you need to do all that paperwork will be tied up trying to cover the skeleton service being ran. I'm not trying to make you look daft, but you have to ultimately co-operate, with your workforce, and imposing stuff on one side is just not going to work. Michael O'Leary thought he could do the same with his pilots and learnt the hard way that you can't. As jcollins has also said, you're mixing up your issues with that driver who refused to work the 12 car set and ASLEF getting took to court .That didn't happen in that incident .The key to all this co-operation. The unions and management know this, unfortunately the puppet master DfT doesn't have a clue as it currently reflects the clueless useless government that we have, and is behaving in the same way as O'Leary. It won't work .
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I don’t think the argument was really whether ASLEF can or can’t declare an official strike, more whether or not a driver can rightfully refuse DOO related training on the new stock without the possibility of any displinary action by their employer,
Last edited:
Eccles1983
On Moderation
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 841
Of course they can.
Its in my contract that I will only work doo (np)
If the company attempted to force a different contract on new drivers then there would be an instant dispute.
Then the drivers who signed up to a different method of working would be unable to be trained. Simply for the reason that all the instructors would be on the old contract, and unable to instruct a different method of work. And before the "they will get new instructors" shout comes in - you need to have been passed out for at least 3 years before your allowednto instruct. So a 3 year stalemate.
If the company instructed me to train for doo without union backing I would refuse. Point blank. I dont know anyone who would carry out such a request.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
Is there nobody who doesn't belong to the union ?
Yes but not enough to run a service I'd imagine
For things to pan out the way you suggest, it’d require almost every driver and instructor concerned to opt to resign from an extremely well paid career on principle rather than accept a relatively minor change to their T&Cs., how likley is it that any more than a few would ultimately consider that to be their best option?
Last edited:
Overspeed110
Member
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 117
Hardly any.
I've even known some loud and proud Tory voting drivers that are union members. And seeing that the Tories hate the working classes and especially unionised ones, it makes me sick when you know that a driver votes Tory and is in a union.
And you know what?
The way it's going and the attitudes of some of the new entrants who are becoming "drivers" now, the ASLEF will be affiliated to the Tory party within the next few years.
Thankfully my time is nearly done, it's not the job it used to be. Bring on next summer.
Drivers? Many depots will have a full complement of union members or one at most who isn't.
DOO isn't a minor change as you put it @Carlisle . You really need to speak to quite a few of us to understand the strength and depth of feeling on this matter. Forget Southern. They half had it anyway and took numerous attempts to be ground down, a company that hasn't ever had DOO for passenger work is a different kettle of fish altogether
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
So, as others have suggested before, there is simply NO way that DOO will be accepted ?
It's not just a question of more money ?
What do people think of this development? Do you think it will change the situation on Northern Rail? I am surprised this has happened to be honest. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...ter-firm-agrees-to-crunch-talks-a3829391.html
Sorry to say I think it’s just the latsst tactic by RMT to drag their national DOO dispute on for as long as possible with almost no intention in the near future of offering anything meaningful that might actually enable the TOCs to reach a settlement without completely backing down, I hope I’m wrong
Last edited:
Can't speak for anyone else other than myself, but no, I will never accept DOO Not for a kings ransom. I have enough to do with what's in front of me, without worrying about what's behind me. I'm not motivated by money. Only by my own moral code, and I will never sell a workmate down the road to help me or the company worked for, to profit from that.
bramling
Veteran Member
Personally I wouldn't rely on everyone taking the same stand. Given in many workplaces it's hardly uncommon for adults to squabble over a few pounds worth of overtime, I think it's fair to say a lot of people will agree to things in return for a suitable sum. It's surprising what some, or even many, people will do for pretty small sums of extra cash.
Shaw S Hunter
Established Member
While I agree with your general point I suspect that in this particular case the "price" will amount to something rather more substantial than your "pretty small sum". ASLEF members at GTR were bought off with a thumping pay rise which must, to a degree at least, have been sanctioned by the DfT and that was at a franchise where DOO had already existed for many years. OTOH Northern requires a fairly large subsidy to survive so I very much doubt the DfT will accept a similarly generous settlement but with no DOO currently in the franchise why wouldn't ASLEF demand a hefty rise? While I do not possess an accurate crystal ball I can see this dispute getting seriously ugly once ASLEF inevitably become involved.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
This *should* actually come down to the key safety issues rather than what may, or may not, be in employment contracts. If there are genuine safety issues then (as with Southern) it shouldn't be a money issue anyway. Of course, that isn't what eventually happened at Southern !
Arriva could potentially take a similar approach to that which TfL/London Underground eventually took to introduce NightTube, which started later than originally planned but was then implemented without impacting existing Underground drivers (or further strikes) unlike the original plans. For example;:
(1) introduce a new "DOO driver" grade, with higher pay, for drivers who operate DOO services
(2) existing drivers.would retain their existing terms and conditions, with no requirement to work DOO services or switch to the new grade
(3) the new grade would be open to new recruits and to any existing drivers who wished to switch to the DOO role in return for higher pay.
(1) introduce a new "DOO driver" grade, with higher pay, for drivers who operate DOO services
(2) existing drivers.would retain their existing terms and conditions, with no requirement to work DOO services or switch to the new grade
(3) the new grade would be open to new recruits and to any existing drivers who wished to switch to the DOO role in return for higher pay.
Train drivers might not have much choice about driving DOO. Arriva (or any company) can give drivers any training it wants to, including courses on how to use the in-train cameras for DOO. Drivers can refuse that training, but could only do so with ASLEF backing if it was part of official action supported by a ballot. In a court that action would be challenged and Arriva would probably win as an employer can give it’s employees any training it wants within justifiable reason. Throughout the delay, the training would be taking place. ASLEF would be left with large court costs and have to tell it’s members they had to attend the training. If this was to happen, it isn’t a good strategy for ASLEF. Drivers on a personal basis could refuse to attend the training but not only is that individually risky, a pattern could be found to be unofficial industrial action which would give ASLEF a serious headache.
If ASLEF will not amend the working agreements and contracts that don’t allow DOO with consent, an option for Arriva is to formally advise all the affected drivers that their terms and conditions will change in 12 weeks. After that, if they have had the training, nothing will theoretically stop the drivers driving DOO, for no pay increase. These are high stakes, but that is the legal way to force the change through if all else fails.
ASLEF are highly unlikely to ever let it get to that stage. It makes much more sense for a long negotiating period to happen, and secure the best outcomes for the drivers. The key thing ASLEF can not afford is drivers splitting away from ASLEF. The strikes at GTR were called off because it became obvious the government would back GTR seeing them out and ASLEF would not get what they wanted. If the strikes had continued in the face of that, potentially ASLEF members would have broken ranks rather than lose thousands of pounds more for that fight. As the train network is less critical outside London and the Conservative government will probably stay for four more years, they will ride out a long Northern strike by drivers too - and there is plenty of other matters that will quickly fill the national media.
At SWR, it looks rather obvious that the RMT have called off the five days of strike action after never having intended to ever carry it through. The most recent ballot results showed about 50% of the guards supported more strikes. To be called out for five days in two weeks could have been the final straw for some guards and the action would have collapsed. RMT got the media headlines, but the suspension for the ACAS talks is just what would have happened anyway.
Is it actually written in your contract that you can only driver passenger trains with a guard ? I find that quite doubtful. Unless it does say that then one day you will be asked to drive trains and open and close the doors. You will then have the choice to either A do it or B not do it. If you choose option B you will have to move to a new company that doesn't do DOO, retire or find a different job. You will not have an option C to refuse and then carry on as now.
You are a driver. Driving and opening and closing the doors is not considered a change of contract so yes your company can force you to do it.
If opening and closing the doors/being responsible for the dispatch process, as well as being the sole person in charge of the safety of the train isn't in the contract already, then it is a contract change. I don't know why you are arguing about what is in someones contract with a Northern driver, I think he'll know what he is/isn't required to do.
No its not a contract change. Their contract will say they drive trains. Opening and closing doors is part of driving trains so not a change of contract.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Employment contracts are never as straight forward as that. Does the contract mention the presence of other staff on passenger trains or say they can work DOO for ECS workings but not DOO-P?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Isn't the guard in charge of the train on a guarded train? If so, then that is a massive change in responsibility even if the practical difference is on a day to day basis fairly small.
Opening and closing doors isn't part of driving trains. Driving a train involves the throttle and the brake (on a very basic level, obviously there are more controls involved than just that). Door operations aren't a default part of driving a train, up until now in that neck of the woods it has always been the responsibility of the guard, and so making the driver responsible for them will mean a change in responsibilities and so new contractual terms.
Isnt the guard responsible primarily for the passenger saloon, but trained to assist the driver on other matters if requested or required
Last edited:
You might think that but you would be wrong. Drivers on Southern, Southeastern, Scotrail, Great Western, Great Northern, Thameslink, C2C, Anglia and Overground all do it.
Eccles1983
On Moderation
- Joined
- 4 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 841
It clearly states drive doo trains non passenger.
So I will have ample reasons to say no. But thanks, always needed a railway contract specialist to rely on in here.
If you want to pretend you haven't read what myself or eccles1983 have said then you carry on in your Dreamland. You clearly haven't got a clue about how things work. We all know those companies have it, but have you noticed that those companies all had it from BR days? It's a very different thing in privatisation and in companies that have never had it, it's much harder to use the same arguments that its on 40% of trains .It's safe, etc etc. BR didn't get it in on all the routes it wanted to in the days of low wages and small offers to drivers, so why are people under the impression that it's inevitable?
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Only if it's in their contract. Otherwise they can refuse to carry out the task.
Employers can sometimes force a change of contract on people, but ultimately only through fire-and-rehire. I cannot imagine that any attempt to strong-arm the drivers in that way would be successful.
That is because driving DOO in passenger service was in the driver's contract. ASLEF thought they had a gentleman's agreement that 12-car wouldn't be used, but they found out in Court that gentleman's agreements are worth diddly squat.
Those drivers have DOO-P in their contract. Their contracts were changed back in the 80s and 90s to include DOO-P, and their pay went up as a result.
Drivers without DOO-P do not contractually have to drive DOO-P. Fire-and-rehire will force a contract change on them, but won't do much for industrial relations. Otherwise a contract change can be reached through negotiation, but that negotiation is likely to involve £s and lots of them. At Southern- where most drivers did have DOO-P in their contract- it involved a 28% pay rise.
- Status