Ok obviously Im unaware of the finer minutiae of that particular dispute but as it’s merely one of several similar happenings at various TOCs over recent years, my point about the dubiousness of seemingly endless concessions to certain unions merely to keep a significantly taxpayer funded public service operational , still stands up to scrutiny.
What dispute ?
Very true which is why both the TOCs and the unions need to get together and sort issues like RDW and Sunday work. The TOCs need to accept that they will need to take on more staff which will cost them more and the unions need to accept that some of the practices like volunteering for Sunday's (which really belong in another era when driver's were very poorly paid and had to work Sunday's to make up a decent wage) need to change. Either that or TOCs need to bite the bullet and start employing new staff on new contracts as happens in many other industries.
I think there will probably be a need for a limited amount of volunteering for shifts on the railway and many staff are more than willing to take up the offer of some extra pay. However, relying a whole train service on volunteers is foolhardy in the extreme. Northern today started with an expansion of its Sunday services, how is this sustainable using a volunteer workforce?
I repeat once again perhaps because you missed the end of my post . The Unions in this case aspire for Sunday to be inside the week because it means more members .
As far as I am aware in this case Aslef reps had already put together a proposal for Sundays inside the working week as well as a harmonization deal . This was rejected flatly by the company as too costly . How the Union need to accept anything in this case is beyond me . They have actually attempted to facilitate bringing Sunday inside the week .
There are cost benefits to a TOC of keeping Sunday outside the week and relying on staff working it as overtime . There needs to be a cost benefit analysis between the financial benefits and the risk that occasionally there might be disruption because of the reliance on overtime to cover them . Ironically at the moment with RDW being unavailable It is more likely that there will be more Drivers willing to come in for a Sunday .
I'd propose this. All new staff to work Sunday every week for the foreseeable future unless for actual religious reasons (i.e. you *actually* attend Church) or unless booking annual leave (to accommodate family events, booking of single Sundays could be permitted). It'll then filter through.
If you know that's what you're getting when you apply, if you don't like it don't apply. Working for the railway is so popular they'll still get more than enough applicants.
Train crew could not work Sunday every week on the basis of the current rest day pattern . If you employed staff on a different rest day pattern & other T's &C'c then you would cause a massive row over who should be paid more , a different set of T's & C's would just introduce more complexity and take up more time collective bargaining . Employing train crew on different T's & C's at a TOC which already has 3 sets which need harmonization as a franchise requirement is frankly not a sensible proposal . And for reasons highlighted already is not going to happen .
Given the vast timescales for the 'new' T's & C's to become those the majority of crew are employed on a better solution is to engage the already established collective bargaining machinery and negotiate openly with the union to bring Sunday inside the working week and in this case look at a harmonization deal at the same time .
And RDW is not an entitlement so it (and overtime generally) should be phased out except in cases of disruption - i.e. overtime should never be used to cover a planned shift, only where disruption has occurred, be that delays in excess of expected, or be that sickness in excess of expected. If nothing else it's less safe than staff being expected to take their rest days - they will be more tired.
Overtime is routinely used to cover planned shifts , if there was a removal of the ability to use overtime to extend jobs and mark people spare to longer jobs the disruption would be untold .
RDW should only be used to cover training or off train briefing IMO , that should be the only reason that a more than reasonable number of drivers need to be released at once .
Overtime should only be used on an impromptu basis to cover short notice disruption whist working back to your depot or to complete report forms/be debriefed following an incident .
Unfortunately both of those would require proper staffing levels . As I have already said above there is a cost benefit to relying on overtime and RDW . And some of the fault for this lies at the door of the DFT for allowing franchises to be let on the basis of an inadequate complement .
Surely for an operator as large as Northern (and with as many depots as Northern) such an email would be needed for different shift managers to understand what they can cover for other depots? I would have thought that your description of the order of events is a bit out, and that this email is probably earlier in the process than you describe.
My description was not in as much detail as it should be . But the email is towards the end of the process given it was sent after 9 pm for services the following day . Shift managers already know through experience what other shift managers can provide cross cover and over which routes they can provide it so throughout the previous day when the following days train plan is being worked on shift managers who can provide cross cover for each other will already have been in dialogue .
