RMT dispute on Merseyrail

[the sniper]

and? If it can be done, why not?

And why should the RMT and ASLEF buy into that...?

Obviously it can be done. But why would the unions wish to be complicit in facilitating it?

 

[HH]

Especially when Jezza will be nationalising the railways in 6 months and you'll find yourselves in a land of milk and honey

 

[northwichcat]

Especially when Jezza will be nationalising the railways in 6 months and you'll find yourselves in a land of milk and honey

Maybe he'll want Merseytravel to run Merseyrail and then people will discover the plans don't change when a public company takes over the franchise, except maybe any plans to give staff above inflation pay rises.

 

[HH]

Maybe he'll want Merseytravel to run Merseyrail and then people will discover the plans don't change when a public company takes over the franchise, except maybe any plans to give staff above inflation pay rises.

And then the money runs out...

But don't let a little thing like that worry you peeps; we can print plenty more where that came from!

 

[driver_m]

It seems that yet again one or two people on here think that DOO is inevitable on Merseyrail. You have to get the drivers to agree to it first. Good luck with that one. Steve Rotheram the new LCR mayor may have a very different opinion to the Merseytravel Management as well.

 

[HH]

It seems that yet again one or two people on here think that DOO is inevitable on Merseyrail. You have to get the drivers to agree to it first. Good luck with that one. Steve Rotheram the new LCR mayor may have a very different opinion to the Merseytravel Management as well.

Nothing is inevitable except death and taxes.

But perhaps it's a good thing that Liverpool has experience of deficit budgets.

 

[craigybagel]

I would imagine now Merseyrail guards know the long term future of Merseyrail is expected to be DOO, that if they want to remain in a guard's role they will apply for vacancies advertised by other operators .

They already are doing - several have come over to ATW at Chester in the last few years. There aren't all that many vacancies for them though, especially when you consider the easiest option to move is to Northern and prospects aren't much better there.

 

[danbarnstall]

It seems that yet again one or two people on here think that DOO is inevitable on Merseyrail. You have to get the drivers to agree to it first. Good luck with that one. Steve Rotheram the new LCR mayor may have a very different opinion to the Merseytravel Management as well.

He's appointed the councillor who is the Merseytravel chair to his team so I doubt it.

 

[Carlisle]

There is also a large trust & credibility issue in these circumstances. Many people simply do not trust what they are told. I am very suspicious of any "promises" made by managers. Having being screwed once before you tend to get cynical. You may not have been in that position before. I have...

Ive had some very unscrupulous bosses too so totally understand employment law probably needs strengthening in certain areas to prevent exploitation, but I also appreciate this isnt a viable reason alone to resist virtually all change in the manor the rail unions appear to be doing right now .

 

[313103]

Ive had some very unscrupulous bosses too so totally understand employment law probably needs strengthening in certain areas to prevent exploitation, but I also appreciate this isnt a viable reason alone to resist virtually all change in the manor the rail unions appear to be doing right now .

I think it is a bit incredulous to think that change has not occurred even in the last couple of years. I think you will find not many are adverse to change, however if that change means less security, easier ways of getting rid of you, being moved from one location to another then will find that staff will resist that change.

If change was going benefit me (the Employee), you the (passenger/customer) and those in charge then i am all for that. However all this change is for change sake. To say that if these changes (really job loses) dont take place threatens the ability of the company to get new rolling stock, shows how bad things of got in this industry.

It seems that some on here think its a laugh and make snide innuendos about the purpose of a Guard or any other grade with the exception of driver and judging by the amount of questions asked in the employment section of this forum you would the railways only have one grade.

As an aside but relevant to the change issue, A certain company will be bringing in new trains from the winter timetable, yet not them or the employers of the dispatch staff employed by another company have so far mentioned what change is going to made, and if change is needed what it will be, will the dispatchers still have a job to go to once the new trains are completely rolled out? These are questions that will need to answered very soon, nothing worse then being given a statutory 90 day notice.

 

[northwichcat]

They already are doing - several have come over to ATW at Chester in the last few years. There aren't all that many vacancies for them though, especially when you consider the easiest option to move is to Northern and prospects aren't much better there.

Northern have recruited extra for the pre-DCO enhancements and TPE will be running additional Liverpool services.

 

[Dave1987]

So 300 decent wage packets lost to the Merseyside economy, 300 people potentially on the dole from an already deprived area. Instead the money is all going to Switzerland to pay their workforce :roll:

 

[Camden]

Sounds like a mixture of a lot of bad assumptions and a cliche thrown in there to boot.

The trains will be locally owned, so the savings go towards a more efficient network paid for locally.

The trains have already been ordered and paid for with all the kit required to enable DCO. There's fat chance of that kit being left idle when the local taxpayer and farepayers are picking up the bill for the modernisation.

Has it even been ascertained whether the new trains are capable of being guard operated? What if on the new trains it is only technologically possible for the driver to physically and/or safely do door duties?...

Crying over spilt milk, comes to mind.

 

[313103]

Sounds like a mixture of a lot of bad assumptions and a cliche thrown in there to boot.

The trains will be locally owned, so the savings go towards a more efficient network paid for locally.

The trains have already been ordered and paid for with all the kit required to enable DCO. There's fat chance of that kit being left idle when the local taxpayer and farepayers are picking up the bill for the modernisation.

Has it even been ascertained whether the new trains are capable of being guard operated? What if on the new trains it is only technologically possible for the driver to physically and/or safely do door duties?...

Crying over spilt milk, comes to mind.

Not a bad assumption from me, i can only go by what has happened through the annuls of history, so i speak from experience of going through process this once under British Rail once under Privitisation. Certainly no cliches either.

They may say the trains are going to be owned locally, that is what they are saying now. Transport for London said the same thing about the class 378s before they arrived and do they own them now? in fact they have never owned them. So that could still change. Shame they are not being built in the UK could of saved even more money and benefited the wider UK economy at the same time

So if the trains have been paid for already, why in the future does this affect staff numbers? Surely if they have been paid for then reducing the numbers of staff need not happen.

The so called kit you talk about is not DCO it is DOO makes no difference to me as i see it being one and the same thing but never mind some things are designed to be dressed up and sounded like something they are not. You said earlier that the taxpayers (which incidentally includes those that will lose there jobs!) have paid for these new trains, again if they have been paid for why the need to reduce the staff headcount? Unless of course they actually haven't been paid for.

Merseyrail have said those trains need to be run in DOO in order for the new trains to be worthwhile having, a euphemism meaning we have to reduce the amount of staff.

I am a grown man and yes whilst you may think the saying crying over spilt milk is believe it or not a cliche in itself. When one loses there job, a job they enjoyed doing and to the best of there ability to be told your no longer needed because we have to make savings, it wasnt milk being spilt but tears, tears of sadness that it had come to such a pass, tears of anger that a decision had been made to say we don't appreciate you anymore, to be told the decision has not been made by us but by some government quango.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Some of us recognise the realities of business and that the "truth" is usually somewhere between both "sides".

The truth is Merseytravel say they need to save money to afford the new trains. Keeping the same headcount on the same wage saves nothing. So where are the savings coming from?

Oh yeah, headcount and wage reductions.

Maybe that's the right call, maybe it isn't. But I'm sick of having my intelligence insulted on this matter. If the TOC wants/needs to cut staff to cut costs, they should be honest about it, rather than pretending they'll magically save money just by giving someone a new job description.

 

[Wombat]

When one loses there job, a job they enjoyed doing and to the best of there ability to be told your no longer needed because we have to make savings, it wasnt milk being spilt but tears, tears of sadness that it had come to such a pass, tears of anger that a decision had been made to say we don't appreciate you anymore, to be told the decision has not been made by us but by some government quango.

Losing your job is unpleasant (I've got significant personal experience of that). But, and sorry to be blunt, we all know that the railway isn't a job-perpetuation scheme. If guards are now surplus to requirements and the railway can operate safely and fairly without them, the fact that guards enjoy their jobs isn't a sufficient reason to keep them.

As it happens, I don't think that guards are surplus to requirements, and won't be until someone comes up with a sensible way of providing assistance to disabled passengers. And I don't think that "book in advance and hope for the best" can reasonably be described as sensible. I do think, still, that the RMT has misdirected its focus - as a passenger, the assistance angle is far more compelling than the safety angle (and I'm afraid that the job loss and union diminution angles are not compelling at all).

 

[Bletchleyite]

There will be full level boarding. That handles the assistance requirement differently - no ramp, no gap.

 

[Chester1]

Losing your job is unpleasant (I've got significant personal experience of that). But, and sorry to be blunt, we all know that the railway isn't a job-perpetuation scheme. If guards are now surplus to requirements and the railway can operate safely and fairly without them, the fact that guards enjoy their jobs isn't a sufficient reason to keep them.

As it happens, I don't think that guards are surplus to requirements, and won't be until someone comes up with a sensible way of providing assistance to disabled passengers. And I don't think that "book in advance and hope for the best" can reasonably be described as sensible. I do think, still, that the RMT has misdirected its focus - as a passenger, the assistance angle is far more compelling than the safety angle (and I'm afraid that the job loss and union diminution angles are not compelling at all).

Merseyrail is solving disabled access by making all stations fully disabled accessable and altering platform heights so they are all the same height as the floor of the new trains. However disabled access is a strong argument against DOO for Northern. I understand people fighting for their jobs but the left seems to be pushing maximium staffing levels not just fighting compulsory redundancies. Its a basic economic fact of the last 200+ years that automation does make indivduals unemployed but in the long term other jobs are created because by reducing costs prices are reduced which increases spending and results in jobs being created in another parts of the economy. I don't think people complaining about machines and robots replacing humans will be more accurate than the luddites.

 

[BML247]

The truth is Merseytravel say they need to save money to afford the new trains. Keeping the same headcount on the same wage saves nothing. So where are the savings coming from?

Oh yeah, headcount and wage reductions.

Maybe that's the right call, maybe it isn't. But I'm sick of having my intelligence insulted on this matter. If the TOC wants/needs to cut staff to cut costs, they should be honest about it, rather than pretending they'll magically save money just by giving someone a new job description.

Maybe theyll reduce costs and headcount through natural wastage - you have to admit that people leaving through retirement and other jobs and those roles then not being refilled is an alternative to just sacking people.

 

[Robertj21a]

Not a bad assumption from me, i can only go by what has happened through the annuls of history, so i speak from experience of going through process this once under British Rail once under Privitisation. Certainly no cliches either.

They may say the trains are going to be owned locally, that is what they are saying now. Transport for London said the same thing about the class 378s before they arrived and do they own them now? in fact they have never owned them. So that could still change. Shame they are not being built in the UK could of saved even more money and benefited the wider UK economy at the same time

So if the trains have been paid for already, why in the future does this affect staff numbers? Surely if they have been paid for then reducing the numbers of staff need not happen.

The so called kit you talk about is not DCO it is DOO makes no difference to me as i see it being one and the same thing but never mind some things are designed to be dressed up and sounded like something they are not. You said earlier that the taxpayers (which incidentally includes those that will lose there jobs!) have paid for these new trains, again if they have been paid for why the need to reduce the staff headcount? Unless of course they actually haven't been paid for.

Merseyrail have said those trains need to be run in DOO in order for the new trains to be worthwhile having, a euphemism meaning we have to reduce the amount of staff.

I am a grown man and yes whilst you may think the saying crying over spilt milk is believe it or not a cliche in itself. When one loses there job, a job they enjoyed doing and to the best of there ability to be told your no longer needed because we have to make savings, it wasnt milk being spilt but tears, tears of sadness that it had come to such a pass, tears of anger that a decision had been made to say we don't appreciate you anymore, to be told the decision has not been made by us but by some government quango.

Sorry to see anyone lose their job (if indeed they do) but I also have to say that it's a very common feature of life all over the big outside world. One key reason for rail staff getting so upset about changes to their jobs is that they've been protected from such things for much longer than most other employees. Realistically, I think most people recognise that some changes are necessary and the new trains are the obvious time to do it.

 

[Dave1987]

Sorry to see anyone lose their job (if indeed they do) but I also have to say that it's a very common feature of life all over the big outside world. One key reason for rail staff getting so upset about changes to their jobs is that they've been protected from such things for much longer than most other employees. Realistically, I think most people recognise that some changes are necessary and the new trains are the obvious time to do it.

Where is Mrs May's Governments plan to retrain these guards then that may have been a guard all their working life? Or do they just get chucked on the scrap heap and then punished for not accepting exploitation like zero hours contracts? That's your modern economy!

 

[Chester1]

Where is Mrs May's Governments plan to retrain these guards then that may have been a guard all their working life? Or do they just get chucked on the scrap heap and then punished for not accepting exploitation like zero hours contracts? That's your modern economy!

There is no evidence that Merseyrail will fire permanent employees due to DOO. The only people who are virtually guaranteed to lose their jobs are the guards employed on 3 year fixed term contracts who know what they are signing up to and who will be well placed to find employment with other opperators that are not switching to DOO. They are essentially on 3 year well paid training roles and will still prosper from starting work for Merseyrail. Natural wastage is a very reasonable way to reduce staffing levels and there are plenty of Merseyrail staff due to retire over the next 5 years and the rest can fill customer service roles at their guard pay rate until they retire.

 

[Robertj21a]

Where is Mrs May's Governments plan to retrain these guards then that may have been a guard all their working life? Or do they just get chucked on the scrap heap and then punished for not accepting exploitation like zero hours contracts? That's your modern economy!

You've lost me. Since when did any government retrain guards ?

 

[northwichcat]

Where is Mrs May's Governments plan to retrain these guards then that may have been a guard all their working life? Or do they just get chucked on the scrap heap and then punished for not accepting exploitation like zero hours contracts? That's your modern economy!

People who haven't got degrees can join government funded programs to retrain for another career. If you've got a degree then you're stuffed, especially if you still have a student loan from learning for your previous career. An exception applies if you want to go in to teaching - which was why so many sacked bankers tried to become teachers in 2008.

 

[driver_m]

Yet again, DOO is ok with some of you because no existing staff will get sacked etc etc.

Answer this. The driving is the most mentally demanding it has ever been. Thanks to the pressure to get every decision right 100% of the time at whatever time of the day be it 3am 3pm or 9hrs 59m into a shift. Drivers have got enough to do looking forward without the need to be looking backward as well. There's no way every station is going to be fitted with dispatchers and RA equipment. The threat of prosecution for even passing signals at danger now is real, never mind platform incidents. No driver will willingly take this additional and risky task on in addition to the things already needing doing. Thats before I even get to the sacking of colleagues who we work with. None of you can give a convincing answer as to why you assume DOO is inevitable. Give me reason to change my mind.

 

[Chester1]

I think a distinction needs to be made between limiting the damage to indivduals of change and trying to stop it. We are going through a technology revolution that will profoundly change society and the economy. One career for life and very few changes to working practices is a totally unrealistic expectation. There is a huge difference between zero hours contracts, uber style "self employment", compulsory redundancy and agency work vs greater use of fixed term contracts* and major changes to job roles and reduction in staffing levels implemented through natural wastage. Merseyrail is ultimately controlled by 5 Labour run councils who have vested interests in carefully managing the transition to DOO and also have the financial and political incentives to make it happen. I am concerned about Northern running DOO services but Merseyrail is virtually a metro system, it will have tailored rolling stock and a sensible plan to manage the transition.

*A tangent - I got sick of the number of people who told me people can't get mortgages on fixed term contracts and thats why their family or friends children etc was living at home etc. A quick google search proved that mutiple banks and building societies offer mortgages to people on fixed term contracts and I got one to buy my home. I think it was a fairly typical of (mainly) public sector workers who picked up the view that the private sector was an awful place during the crash and its aftermath and haven't changed their view as the job situation has improved since. Obviously there are big issues at the lower end of the job market and house prices are too high but people do seem to love making blanket negative statements about the economy and change.

 

[LowLevel]

I don't want to hop around through multiple jobs to suit other people with my own needs being at the bottom of the list, though. I do what I understand to be a valued job, really very well (I feel quite entitled to blow my own trumpet) and I don't wish to fit into this new gig economy.

I'm a simple creature who wants to work hard, have a bit of fun in my leisure time, enjoy the company of my family and friends and die at a half decent age if at all possible in a not too horrible way.

I don't for want of a better phrase have 'ambitions' for my career and resent the fact that it suits a subsection of society to sacrifice my job security and indeed happiness to make life more efficient for them. They'll be just as dead as me at the end of it.

 

[Chester1]

I don't want to hop around through multiple jobs to suit other people with my own needs being at the bottom of the list, though. I do what I understand to be a valued job, really very well (I feel quite entitled to blow my own trumpet) and I don't wish to fit into this new gig economy.

I'm a simple creature who wants to work hard, have a bit of fun in my leisure time, enjoy the company of my family and friends and die at a half decent age if at all possible in a not too horrible way.

I don't for want of a better phrase have 'ambitions' for my career and resent the fact that it suits a subsection of society to sacrifice my job security and indeed happiness to make life more efficient for them. They'll be just as dead as me at the end of it.

To be honest the answer to your and driver_m's post is unfortunately: tough, your probably not going to have a choice unless your retiring in the next few years. Going all out to oppose change rarely works and wastes the oppertunity to obtain conncessions. Job security is relative, your mention of the gig economy highlights one of my points in my post above. There is a perception amongst people with what they thought was a job for life, that employment is either like theirs or is terrible and insecure. There is a huge middle ground and hopefully it extend downwards through political action, as well as upwards due to technology. Change is a fact of life that people seem to make a pass time of complaining about instead of making the most of the benefits.

DOO will enable Merseytravel to pay for its own rolling stock and have lower opperating costs. There are clear benefits of this for passengers and if drivers start quiting there are plenty of people who will apply for trainee driver vacancies and consider themselves very fortunate if they become a driver.

 

[LowLevel]

I would like to think I'm a good enough employee that all being well I won't need to leave the railway (I have fairly extensive customer service, management and operational experience both in and out of the industry and I believe I'm held in pretty good regard) but I really don't need the stress.

 

[Robertj21a]

I don't want to hop around through multiple jobs to suit other people with my own needs being at the bottom of the list, though. I do what I understand to be a valued job, really very well (I feel quite entitled to blow my own trumpet) and I don't wish to fit into this new gig economy.

I'm a simple creature who wants to work hard, have a bit of fun in my leisure time, enjoy the company of my family and friends and die at a half decent age if at all possible in a not too horrible way.

I don't for want of a better phrase have 'ambitions' for my career and resent the fact that it suits a subsection of society to sacrifice my job security and indeed happiness to make life more efficient for them. They'll be just as dead as me at the end of it.

You've just summed up what a good many people feel about their jobs, lives etc. Unfortunately, change happens whether it suits us or not. As I've said before, rail staff have been fairly protected from the 'real world', so may now have genuine concerns about how they will cope with a changing future.