Arriva Rail North DOO

[Carlisle]

Do you think they might have been ill?

For a relatively small proportion of that time , yes

 

[Gems]

Also what about mobilise / demob (or whatever local term is) - is that gone too? Surely can't have agreed a lower turnaround time than that. This would be laughable if it wasn't such an embarrassment to the industry!

But this is what we are all up against. The timetable is being drawn up by idiots who have never worked a train. But timetabling is a complex thing, and this is why the chaos last May commenced.

 

[Gems]

For a relatively small proportion of that time , yes

Were you his GP at the time?

Come on, your whole argument is rather silly. The idea that someone can be off work for two years and nobody wants to know why. It does not happen in the real world.

 

[ComUtoR]

Then you don't know everything do you. Here goes. Look it up. Crew changing ends at Lancaster = turn around.

LANCASTER 14.51
BARE LANE 1456
MORECAMBE 15.00

MORECAMBE 15.03
BARE LANE 15.07
LANCASTER arr 15.13

LANCASTER to LEEDS dep 15.15.

Is this taken from an actual crew diagram or just pulled from a timetable ?

 

[Tom Quinne]

Short turn rounds aren’t only a Northern issue.

Bristol Temple Meads to Avonmouth and Severn Beach 2/3 minute turn rounds.

If one of the services got delayed enroute the only way get the branch services out of mounting delays was to turn back short at Clifton Down or cut out a service all together.

Another cracker was Bristol Temple Meads to Weymouth with a 8 minute turn round (if right time), in that time the crew (who had brought it down from Bristol) had to use the toilet (through two security doors and a 200 yard walk), change ends, and set the cabs up.

PNBs of 25 minutes with 4 minute either side of walking time on a 1 minute margin of delay turnaround on a service from Portsmouth to Cardiff! Again when you beat your crew with large sticks don’t be surprised when they insist on taking their legally entitled breaks, and again your timetable falls to bits - it’s legal though.

The response from diagram unit was it’s “legal” as in within parameters. When you take the diagram planning away from Human beings with years of experience and replace them with inputted “legal” parameters into a computer program don’t be surprised when your timetable falls to bits.

All in the name of efficiency yesterday costing a fortune today, repeat this across every TOC and the costs are eye watering, but the only way to reduce costs is to get rid of guards....

 

[87015]

Short turn rounds aren’t only a Northern issue.

Bristol Temple Meads to Avonmouth and Severn Beach 2/3 minute turn rounds.

If one of the services got delayed enroute the only way get the branch services out of mounting delays was to turn back short at Clifton Down or cut out a service all together.

Another cracker was Bristol Temple Meads to Weymouth with a 8 minute turn round, in that time the crew (who has brought it down from Bristol) had use the toilet (through two security dorks and a 200 yard walk), change ends, and set the cabs up.

The response from diagram unit was it’s “legal” as in within parameters. When you take the diagram planning away from Hunan beings with years of experience and replace them with inputted “legal” parameters into a computer program don’t be surprised when your timetable falls to bits.

All in the name of efficiency, yesterday costing a fortune tosay, repeat this across every TOC and the costs are eye watering, but the only way to reduce costs is to get rid of guards....

So why are staff side selling turnaround times so much? The Weymouth example presumably wanted a longer break than turnaround time - but must have been inside whatever continuous driving time had been sold by the union which would be between toilet (natural) breaks or whatever the local term is? Crews are an incredibly expensive resource of course.

 

[Meerkat]

The computers aren’t the problem, I assume the problem is that they didn’t use the correct humans to input the parameters? Unless the parameters are far too restrictive.

 

[87015]

The computers aren’t the problem, I assume the problem is that they didn’t use the correct humans to input the parameters? Unless the parameters are far too restrictive.

No, the (minimum) parameters are what the unions have agreed... if they are nonsensical then all sides are at fault for agreeing them and using them.

 

[Tom Quinne]

So why are staff side selling turnaround times so much? The Weymouth example presumably wanted a longer break than turnaround time - but must have been inside whatever continuous driving time had been sold by the union which would be between toilet (natural) breaks or whatever the local term is? Crews are an incredibly expensive resource of course.

Staff, as in traincrew don’t get a say. That’s the officials who work these things out - we never got a way, nor were we asked.

Walking time parameters are often decades old, based on sometimes single vehicle trains.
To get a walking time reevaluating is pretty much impossible, as a slight increase could end up costing millions as the ripple effect across multiple diagrams could be huge.

The company have worked out it’s cheaper to pay the delays and screw the passengers than alert the diagrams which will cost more money in wages to new lengthened diagrams.

 

[Tom Quinne]

The computers aren’t the problem, I assume the problem is that they didn’t use the correct humans to input the parameters? Unless the parameters are far too restrictive.

Indeed, with respect the timetable planners and diagram teams are considered entry level jobs with entry level pay. People join, get trained up then move - repeat the cycle.

You never get a good depth of knowledge as people move on quickly, it didn’t help with Network Rail moving their teams to Milton Keynes killing off 100s of year of experience in one move.

 

[87015]

Staff, as in traincrew don’t get a say. That’s the officials who work these things out - we never got a way, nor were we asked.

Walking time parameters are often decades old, based on sometimes single vehicle trains.
To get a walking time reevaluating is pretty much impossible, as a slight increase could end up costing millions as the ripple effect across multiple diagrams could be huge.

The company have worked out it’s cheaper to pay the delays and screw the passengers than alert the diagrams which will cost more money in wages to new lengthened diagrams.

So have staff side offered to sell it back for longer turnarounds balancing company vs crew requirements? They are elected by to represent traincrew...

 

[scrapy]

LANCASTER 14.51
BARE LANE 1456
MORECAMBE 15.00

MORECAMBE 15.03
BARE LANE 15.07
LANCASTER arr 15.13

LANCASTER to LEEDS dep 15.15.

In the working timetable (different from public one) it arrives at 15.12.30 and departs at 15.15.30 so has a 3 minute turnaround which is the minimum allowed by the unions.

 

[Meerkat]

Sounds like the staff need to get their unions to insist on a review of the parameters.
A chance to be the reasonable ones trying to create a better service for the passengers in the face of incompetent management (if they do the PR correctly)

 

[Meerkat]

Ps for the outsider....what is meant by “the staff side selling turnaround times” please?

 

[Tom Quinne]

No, the (minimum) parameters are what the unions have agreed... if they are nonsensical then all sides are at fault for agreeing them and using them.

We (GWR) wanted to reevaluate the walking time at the end of our turns (10 minutes) to cash up and book off.

So we arrive at Bristol Temple Meads platform 1 off a service from Severn Beach (100% pay train). You have to exit the train, walk from platform one to platform 7 then log off your machine, cash up, pay in and check your diagram for the next turn all in 10 minutes!

You’d be lucky to get to logging off, let alone cashing up in 10 minutes.

This allowance was decades old, the company and union actually sat down and worked out the actual required time and how much extra it would cost over just one depot.

I don’t know the exact numbers but it worked out about 4 or 5 extra guards to get a 20 minute book off allowance - so say £150,000 in basic salary alone at one depot.

That was dropped like a hot rock, the company now rely on staff simply not bothering to book off and claim the extra pay.

 

[87015]

Ps for the outsider....what is meant by “the staff side selling turnaround times” please?

They’ll be reduced in pay talks. Pay me more, I’ll agree lower turnaround. Or reduced walking time. “Productivity” Etc.

 

[Tom Quinne]

Ps for the outsider....what is meant by “the staff side selling turnaround times” please?

Coal face staff get no say in turn round times, many years ago turn rounds times were worked out by actually doing the walk physically. But this is a best case, no distractions, no passenger questions, right turn arrival etc - real world a lot of turn rounds don’t work.

 

[Tom Quinne]

They’ll be reduced in pay talks. Pay me more, I’ll agree lower turnaround. Or reduced walking time. Etc.

It doesn’t work like that.
Each turn round point has a agree time allowance, like I say often worked out years and years ago - left as was due to cost, as in the company not wanting to alter them to increase cost.

 

[Kite159]

Coincidentally latest release from the RMT is that's it's a 'scandal' that journey times are getting longer, so obviously Mick Cash and the RMT fully support faster changeovers mid-journey. https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-on-new-research-today-from-the-tuc/

And for the benefit of those unwilling to click on the link (and in case it changes)

RMT Press Office:

Rail union RMT on new research today from the TUC showing that the daily commute is taking longer

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said;

"Britain's commuters, robbed blind by greedy private train companies, are being forced to travel greater distances as they are priced out of our towns and cities. They are a captive market being exploited for shareholder gain. It's a national scandal and the only solution is public ownership.

"The pressure of longer commuting times also piles stress onto infra structure, capacity and staff. We need investment in services that reflects those demands and that will only come through a publicly owned railway freed from the profit motive."

Ends

Sometimes I do wonder what planet is Mr Cash on...

 

[Tom Quinne]

Me to ! - as a paying member of the RMT.

 

[87015]

It doesn’t work like that.
Each turn round point has a agree time allowance, like I say often worked out years and years ago - left as was due to cost, as in the company not wanting to alter them to increase cost.

Yes, but have the staff side attempted to buy them back or just wanted them extended without a trade-off? It should be in notes somewhere what they were “worth” when sold.

 

[Meerkat]

So Mick Cash believes “We need investment in services that reflects those demands and that will only come through a publicly owned railway freed from the profit motive."
Which way has NR investment gone since it became officially fully public?

 

[6Gman]

(WMT need to act in this way on the appallingly unpunctual and unreliable Liverpool-Brum service too, so Northern are not the only ones at it).

I use that service quite a lot. Don't recognise your description of it.

 

[Andyh82]

Is there any rail news story that doesn’t come complete with an over the top Mick Cash quote slamming the railways. Even a story about new trains or a new line he would find a negative angle.

 

[Meerkat]

That would be interesting polling
“Why don’t you use the railway?”
“If your answer is that they are a rip off why do you think this?”
Not sure if Daily Mail or Cash&Corbyn would win!

 

[northernchris]

A few doted around.

I've noticed at least 3-4 Skipton based conductors out on Saturdays over the past few weeks.

Yes but part of the problem here is the location. Leaving Lancaster on time is never easy, and the 14.51 departure clashes with the 14.50 arrival from Barrow. Add into the mix any late running Virgin trains, and the ball is rolling.
It used to be 10 mins allowance between Lancaster and Morecambe. But to squeeze this in, they reduced it to 9. Now even if they arrive on time, changing the destination blinds, checking the headlights and tail lights. 3 minutes is the limit, add to that any disabled passengers and the problems mount. Then you have to get back onto the WCML again. Then change ends at Lancaster, then get out again. It is not hard to see how squeezing every last drop creates delays.

Don't Network Rail also have to agree to the schedules? So the clash with the 1450 arrival / 1451 departure should have been identified and amended before timetables were confirmed. At least that confirms why the 1451 often arrives Leeds late though!

 

[Dr Hoo]

I've noticed at least 3-4 Skipton based conductors out on Saturdays over the past few weeks.



Don't Network Rail also have to agree to the schedules? So the clash with the 1450 arrival / 1451 departure should have been identified and amended before timetables were confirmed. At least that confirms why the 1451 often arrives Leeds late though!

Is a departure (in the opposite direction) one minute after an arrival (I.e. a ‘re-occupation’ rather than a ‘headway’ issue) actually very unusual? I think that they used to be quite common at Leicester around xx25 a couple of years ago, for example.

 

[Carlisle]

The idea that someone can be off work for two years and nobody wants to know why. It does not happen in the real world.

I appreciate many are completely genuine with some sadly having to ultimately retire early due to ill health, however both examples I gave had at least 3 periods of around 6-9 months off over a 4 or 5 year period, eventually agreeing to resign, and (the last I heard) were still well enough to be carrying out almost identical work elsewhere, however probably a debate for another thread by HR experts

 

[Halifaxlad]

bit random but does anybody have a problem trying to keep up with this thread?

 

[muz379]

All of those allowances (ie 2 minute turnaround) in the diagrams will have been agreed with the unions and therefore brought by the crews of course...

Sounds like the staff need to get their unions to insist on a review of the parameters.
A chance to be the reasonable ones trying to create a better service for the passengers in the face of incompetent management (if they do the PR correctly)

And when the reps sit down with the company and ask for the turnaround time back and the company say no . Then what , avoidance of dispute , company still says no . Do you go into dispute over it ? When in all honesty its the companies timetable and delay bill which you are trying to mitigate ? The members can always claim their overtime for any time worked beyond their day .

I can just see the tabloid headlines now "Greedy train drivers on 75k pa going on strike for steam era "fire break" rest stops "


I know of occasions when diagrams have been rejected on the grounds of too tight turnarounds by local reps during the "consultation" before the timetable change . The companies response are that they are legal . The diagrams have gone into traffic and caused performance issues . Only for the company to come back and ask staff for help identifying the performance issues . I can see how local reps can become quite jaded to the process of checking diagrams during the "consultation" . Yes a diagram might be legal , but surely the staff are best placed to indicate what will and wont work in the real world as well