Merseyrail Class 777 introduction updates

[Parjon]

Tbh when a fleet is years old before it comes into service, it doesn't reflect well on the railway industry as a whole. What could local politicians and officers done differently in the circumstances that would have got them into service this year?

Pandemic related issues give a large break, but protracted negotiations that seem to take an inordinate amount of time just to happen, let alone reach agreement, are entirely how the industry operates.

There is a collective responsibility for the trains being withheld from passengers that lies with everyone involved, including the workers. Poor job everyone.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect the only answer to that is "fitted proper guard panels and disabled the DOO cameras".

 

[Parjon]

Which would still require alterations and still require the same negotiations.

 

[Ribbleman]

I agree but the reality we are never going to find out the true story even if questions were asked. There is / was intention to keep 10 Class 507's for the Southport line while the work gets completed for the operation of Class 777 eight car operation. Now with the delayed Class 777 introduction, has that changed too?

It was actually 14 x 507s that were to be kept. The specific unit numbers were reported but with the passage of time it is unlikely that those particular sets would still be those favoured. What the requirement, if any, will be once the 777s are finally in use will depend upon Network Rail’s progress on moving signals and lengthening the platforms at Southport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which would still require alterations and still require the same negotiations.

If the trains had been designed for conventional guard operation from day one then there would have been little or no resistance. I'm not saying this would necessarily have been the right approach, but it is pretty clear that it's true based on all manner of precedent.

 

[TheSel]

Announced today by Merseytravel that the training runs (with class 777s) between Liverpool Central and Kirkby will resume from Monday 9 January 2023.

Link here

Copy of [relevant] text:

Kirkby line temporary timetable change from Monday 9 January.​

As part of the continued preparation for the new fleet of trains, driver training will take place on the Kirkby line from Monday 9 January. Between approximately 09:00 – 16:30, Monday – Friday, there will be 3 trains per hour instead of 4 trains per hour on the Kirkby line.

The list of trains that will be temporarily removed from the timetable can be found below. We are working to resolve an error in the journey planner which currently shows that these trains will run.

 

[markymark2000]

Could well be the Echo may be giving him less of an easy ride soon.

The echo is owned by Reach PLC who are quite a left leaning media outlet. Exactly the same as the MEN, they won't push things against the Labour party that much. I mean, there was corruption within Labour ran Liverpool City Council and they brushed over it like it was nothing.

The councillors are the ones that need up the ante. Watch the webcasts they are all soft even the opposition no challenge at all.

No one will say anything because it's all Labour. 62% of councillors within Merseyside are Labour. All of the councils are Labour ran and Labour runs the City Region. Why would anyone sit and fight against their own party. Especially if they want any kind of political career going forward. The other 38% of councillors are split between one or two green, one or two

I've read a few comments in other places saying the same, no one seems to be asking any serious questions about it. I've not watched any of the webcasts but have read the transport committee meetings minutes from earlier meetings and little has been asked about it.

Do you mean the same transport committee who things it's a good use of taxpayers money to keep retendering a Christmas Day network, which hasn't changed in god knows how many years, despite some routes carrying only 1 person over a 7 hour day (who are enthusiasts joining their driver mates for a journey, they just get logged on the machine because it's so much of a laugh).

Again though, like above. It's mostly Labour on the committee and the chair of the committee, Liam Robinson, is one of the biggest backside lickers there is. No matter what gets said or done by Merseytravel and Steve Rotherham, he will back it.



This is the issue in places like Liverpool where it's such a political stronghold, no one asks serious questions about things because it would mean going against their own party. They're all just mini cheerleaders for dictator Steve.

 

[DJH1971]

Announced today by Merseytravel that the training runs (with class 777s) between Liverpool Central and Kirkby will resume from Monday 9 January 2023.

Link here

Copy of [relevant] text:

Kirkby line temporary timetable change from Monday 9 January.​

As part of the continued preparation for the new fleet of trains, driver training will take place on the Kirkby line from Monday 9 January. Between approximately 09:00 – 16:30, Monday – Friday, there will be 3 trains per hour instead of 4 trains per hour on the Kirkby line.

The list of trains that will be temporarily removed from the timetable can be found below. We are working to resolve an error in the journey planner which currently shows that these trains will run.

Seems rather confusing as thought this was still going through the unions before driver training could commence?

 

[ashkeba]

Why would anyone sit and fight against their own party. Especially if they want any kind of political career going forward.

Factionalism and infighting, usually. Few regimes last forever, even in one party boroughs.

 

[Skie]

Seems rather confusing as thought this was still going through the unions before driver training could commence?

Not really that confusing, the ballot result was expected in early Jan.

 

[OL-3944]

The RMT negotiated a method of dispatch with Merseytravel without input from ASLEF. Ironically ASLEF refused to open negotiations regarding operation of the 777s until the RMT dispute was settled. Now ASLEF aren’t happy with the method of dispatch agreed by the RMT. Hard to believe but it’s the truth…..

 

[jamesst]

The RMT negotiated a method of dispatch with Merseytravel without input from ASLEF. Ironically ASLEF refused to open negotiations regarding operation of the 777s until the RMT dispute was settled. Now ASLEF aren’t happy with the method of dispatch agreed by the RMT. Hard to believe but it’s the truth…..

Try again. Aslef are perfectly happy, the drivers however weren't so much...

 

[OL-3944]

Deleted

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2023 ==

Try again. Aslef are perfectly happy, the drivers however weren't so much...

How do you know. Do you work there?

 

[jamesst]

Deleted

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2023 ==


How do you know. Do you work there?

Yep

 

[Vespa]

If the ASLEF Union continue to cause trouble holding up the introduction of the 777, eventually there won't be any 507/8 trains capable of running a satisfactory service level what's to stop the operating company throwing in the towel and hand back the franchise making everybody redundant, the new franchise may well decide to impose DOO as part of the the new employment contract.

Won't be the first time a company folds and the new firm taking on old staff under a new contract.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

If the ASLEF Union continue to cause trouble holding up the introduction of the 777, eventually there won't be any 507/8 trains capable of running a satisfactory service level what's to stop the operating company throwing in the towel and hand back the franchise making everybody redundant, the new franchise may well decide to impose DOO as part of the the new employment contract.

Won't be the first time a company folds and the new firm taking on old staff under a new contract.

Aint going to happen LCA haven't got the bottle

 

[Vespa]

Aint going to happen LCA haven't got the bottle

You never know, everybody has a limit.

 

[samrammstein]

Does anyone have any details about the new 'agreed' method of dispatch and how it differs from the current 507/508 system?
What exactly might ASLEF be unhappy with regarding the new methods? Many thanks.

 

[L401CJF]

Does anyone have any details about the new 'agreed' method of dispatch and how it differs from the current 507/508 system?
What exactly might ASLEF be unhappy with regarding the new methods? Many thanks.

As I understand it under the agreed method, the driver releases the doors, the guard will step out onto the platform and observe signal, boarding / alighting etc. The guard will signal to the driver to close the doors using a fob of some sort at the door. I may have not got it quite right but this is how I read it in the agreement!

Currently the guard opens/closes all doors and takes responsibility for it. Under the new arrangement that responsibility will now go to the driver.

 

[Parjon]

As I understand it under the agreed method, the driver releases the doors, the guard will step out onto the platform and observe signal, boarding / alighting etc. The guard will signal to the driver to close the doors using a fob of some sort at the door. I may have not got it quite right but this is how I read it in the agreement!

Currently the guard opens/closes all doors and takes responsibility for it. Under the new arrangement that responsibility will now go to the driver.

So they have the responsibility, but have to accept that on the say so of the "guard" instead of being able to use their own eyes and a suite of cameras?...

"This is about safety..." said the union.

 

[Wezz]

Not really that confusing, the ballot result was expected in early Jan.

Result is expected by Jan 17th

 

[L401CJF]

So they have the responsibility, but have to accept that on the say so of the "guard" instead of being able to use their own eyes and a suite of cameras?...

"This is about safety..." said the union.

I assume the driver will still use eyes and cameras whilst the guard just does a quick visual. Kind of like a station duties complete tip at a manned dispatch station in a sense.

 

[py_megapixel]

What advantage does the fob thing have over "10-bell" (as seen on Voyagers)? Presumably just that the actual communication takes less time?

 

[507020]

So they have the responsibility, but have to accept that on the say so of the "guard" instead of being able to use their own eyes and a suite of cameras?...

"This is about safety..." said the union.

At present, the driver cannot see the platform behind at all and must take power only on the say so of the guard, (although if the driver is aware of something that the guard isn’t it is still possible not to) but the responsibility for safe closing of the doors remains with the guard.

The additional responsibility of the drivers pressing the door close button appears to be the last remaining issue here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What advantage does the fob thing have over "10-bell" (as seen on Voyagers)? Presumably just that the actual communication takes less time?

Ten bell would be disastrous for Merseyrail, it would slow down station stops by about 10 seconds. Definitely not a workable option. If they were going for proper guard dispatch, they'd just have to fit full guard panels.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jan 2023 ==

I assume the driver will still use eyes and cameras whilst the guard just does a quick visual. Kind of like a station duties complete tip at a manned dispatch station in a sense.

Yep, that's it. In my view it is quite possibly the safest dispatch method I've heard of that doesn't involve platform staff. Two sets of eyes have to be better than one. In essence the guard gives first tip by tapping a fob on a reader by the door and the driver does the rest. The only thing I could think of that would be safer bar dispatchers would be full guard control and the driver looks in the monitors before pulling off.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Tbh when a fleet is years old before it comes into service, it doesn't reflect well on the railway industry as a whole.

Wasn't it the 458s that were so late into service that RVAR requirements for new stock had changed in some minor way (font size on the information displays I think) and, not having grandfather rights for the previous standard, had to be further modified.

 

[The_Train]

As I understand it under the agreed method, the driver releases the doors, the guard will step out onto the platform and observe signal, boarding / alighting etc. The guard will signal to the driver to close the doors using a fob of some sort at the door. I may have not got it quite right but this is how I read it in the agreement!

Currently the guard opens/closes all doors and takes responsibility for it. Under the new arrangement that responsibility will now go to the driver.

This is pretty much how I understand it as well. Then after 6-12 months of this process, the DfT will claim that there is no need for the guards and will go down the mandatory redundancy route for all guards. This is why the drivers are refusing to accept the terms and want the guards to have full control of the doors because a) it's safer and b) scousers will always look out for their own and there is no way drivers will want to accept terms that ultimately leads to their colleagues losing their jobs

 

[AlexNL]

DfT have little to say over Merseyrail, that's devolved to Merseytravel.

 

[Parjon]

Yes exactly. And the LCR isn't going to rock the boat. They'll want to just leave it like that forever.

A bit like the underground station gatelines that have never been set to read tickets properly.

 

[The_Train]

DfT have little to say over Merseyrail, that's devolved to Merseytravel.

Well whoever it is will have the same idea - doesn't matter which organisation it is, everyone is seeking to follow the lead of the scummers running this country, reduce overheads and create a worse (and potentially dangerous) rail system.

With the current proposals, there is literally no need for the guards - the drivers know this, hence their pushback against it and hence the delays to the introduction of this fleet. During my last visit to the area, I spoke to a driver who said precisely this so it's from the horses mouth - all of Merseyrail's staff see the proposals as a threat to some people's livelihoods and most of them (possibly all of them but there's always some who don't care for other people as long as they're alright) don't like that idea