Arriva Rail North DOO

[northwichcat]

Second time in a week I'm agreeing with the RMT on this. Better not make a habit of it. But if he didn't agree with the strike then he should resign and go to work.

You're actually agreeing with the opinion of a train driver, who is probably a member of a different union.

 

[Jonfun]

Which is a role the passengers want as proved by the research. There is absolutely no reason in this day and age why conductors should be responsible for opening and closing doors.

A conductor can hold off releasing the doors if the driver has stopped short, or on driver release, send 2-2 on the bell to stop him.
A conductor has a clear view of all of the platform-train interface, not just the three feet surrounding the door, so can anticipate and react to issues such as rushing passengers.
A conductor is in the train so (in the majority of cases) he won't close the doors whilst there's wheelchair passengers waiting to come off etc.
A conductor doesn't have to secure the cab and walk down the platform and back again when a door starts playing silly buggers, he can just walk down, close and isolate/lock it out of use and dispatch from the next one along.
A conductor provides a second pair of eyes on the platform signal - the chance of two pairs of eyes missing a red signal is less than one.

I concede, some of these could be achieved with the driver working the doors and a safety trained second person in the train. But that isn't being proposed - a second person, of unspecified training, might be in the train or might not.

 

[Bromley boy]

You're actually agreeing with the opinion of a train driver, who is probably a member of a different union.

That post says it all about you, frankly!

What the does the job I personally do, or the union I belong to, have to with what is being discussed here, or affect the validity of my opinions?!

Play the ball not the man.

 

[northwichcat]

A conductor has a clear view of all of the platform-train interface, not just the three feet surrounding the door, so can anticipate and react to issues such as rushing passengers.

Yet when a trap and drag incident occurred at Newcastle with a 3 car 185 the RAIB found fault with the conductor, yet some rail staff claimed the conductor should have the assistance of a dispatcher.

 

[northwichcat]

That post says it all about you, frankly!

What the does the job I personally do, or the union I belong to, have to with what is being discussed here?!

Are you a representative of the RMT union? If not why do you think @woodmally shouldn't be told that he's mistaken if he thinks you are? If someone posted that they thought I was Northern management, I would be grateful to any poster who pointed out that I'm not.

Remember you posted questions on here demanding to know what job I did and how much I was paid for it because I dared to comment on train crew salaries. You're the one who wants to discuss employment aspects of the train crews on a forum open to all but take it personally if non-rail staff disagree with rail staff.

 

[Robertj21a]

I would make only 2 comments:-

1. We are only hearing what the RMT view is of the meeting. The employers may have a totally different view, but don't see the need to shout about it.

2. The employers have made it perfectly clear, on a number of occasions, that they will not agree to a second, safety critical, member of staff on every train.

The RMT are unwilling to drop or amend their demand - so the strikes will just go on and on.

 

[furnessvale]

The RMT are unwilling to drop or amend their demand - so the strikes will just go on and on.

Or until such time as the Government decide that the 5% market share that rail have in the passenger market is not worth the hassle and cash involved and pull the plug.

 

[CN75]

I think the thing you need to remember is that whilst you are happy to be moved to work in a solely customer service role, that isn't what many of your colleagues joined the railway to do. They didn't join the railway to just sell tickets, they joined the railway to work in an operational capacity in a job which had safety responsibility and a high level of training. Many will have no desire to work in an "unskilled" role with no responsibility. Fares still go up, the deskilling means customer service goes down, as do safety levels, and in time staffing levels will drop. It isn't just a slight change in a job description, it's completely changing the role.

Unfortunately, the ‘operations’ side of many railway companies has spent years telling staff that customer service was a lower priority to safety. This entrenched the view customer service is some vague add-on when there’s nothing safety related to do, if you can be bothered. Looking after customers properly is actually more challenging than knowing rules and reading signals. It would probably be much more useful for customers in reality if all guards had intense training and annual examinations on travel connections, station facilities, tickets, upcoming engineering works, rather than track route knowledge and obsolete rules. Maybe both would be ideal. Doubtless this would be strongly resisted by the RMT and many guards.

A conductor can hold off releasing the doors if the driver has stopped short, or on driver release, send 2-2 on the bell to stop him.
A conductor has a clear view of all of the platform-train interface, not just the three feet surrounding the door, so can anticipate and react to issues such as rushing passengers.
A conductor is in the train so (in the majority of cases) he won't close the doors whilst there's wheelchair passengers waiting to come off etc.
A conductor doesn't have to secure the cab and walk down the platform and back again when a door starts playing silly buggers, he can just walk down, close and isolate/lock it out of use and dispatch from the next one along.
A conductor provides a second pair of eyes on the platform signal - the chance of two pairs of eyes missing a red signal is less than one.

I concede, some of these could be achieved with the driver working the doors and a safety trained second person in the train. But that isn't being proposed - a second person, of unspecified training, might be in the train or might not.

The problem with this list is that for the past 30 years much longer trains than on Northern have run all around the South East with just a driver. Operationally, it is nice to have a guard - but where some basic changes have been made, it isn’t necessary. DOO dispatch equipment was once primitive even though it worked, but like everything, the technology has advanced. If BR had fitted the CSR radio system around more of the country in the 1980s then it would not have just been the South East and Scotrail having DOO conversion.

Surprisingly, a second or third pair of eyes on the signal was found by the RSSB’s research to be less safe than just the driver’s involvement. The logic was that the driver might not check for themself and instead rely on the guard or platform staff, or that either of them could also give a tip to the driver on a red signal, or in some other way miscommunicate and create a hazard.

 

[Tom Quinne]

It is when you consider there are no job losses or salaries reduction planned, and let's not forget that 50% of northern services will still have a traditional guard as part of the franchise agreement. And with the total number of services going up anyway, I don't see what the worry is. When this dispute is finally resolved, a lot of people are going to look back and wonder why all the fuss?

Your a Northern Guard ?
I assume you’ll be one of the “alright jack” crew the way your going on, just wait until the company wants to do away with the 2nd person onboard and you’ve no power to make a stand, or are you one of these “ill just go driving” lot ?

We had a few of those at GWR, screw the rest I’ll be okay.

 

[northwichcat]

I seem to recall @Moonshot saying once before he changes career regularly so he possibly sees a guard role as a stepping stone to something better, whereas others want to be a train guard for life even if the need for train services ceases to exist.

 

[Killingworth]

I think the thing you need to remember is that whilst you are happy to be moved to work in a solely customer service role, that isn't what many of your colleagues joined the railway to do. They didn't join the railway to just sell tickets, they joined the railway to work in an operational capacity in a job which had safety responsibility and a high level of training. Many will have no desire to work in an "unskilled" role with no responsibility. Fares still go up, the deskilling means customer service goes down, as do safety levels, and in time staffing levels will drop. It isn't just a slight change in a job description, it's completely changing the role.

A very great number of us of more mature years started one job which evolved into something totally different, and that's if we were smart enough to avoid many bullets to keep a job at all. In my case that involved several relocations across the north.

I'd agree that in many cases service goes down. Watching Dad's Army I remember being taken to see Captain Mainwaring's equivalent to open an account, the bank branch just like his and staff much the same. We knew all the staff by name and they knew us. Now I can't even send them an email and it's a battle to speak to anyone, all the branches closing one by one. The likes of Mainwaring received a high level of training but their responsibilities were gradually scythed away as everything was computerised. Some staff accepted roles with lower levels of responsibility, many left with a pay off or took early retirement.

Anyone who is able to hold on to a job with exactly the same duties over a career of 40+ years must be very rare in the world of today. In my lifetime I think of miners, fishermen, steel workers, bus conductors, porters, station masters, librarians, local postmasters and lamp lighters (chap came round with a ladder once a week to wind up the 8 day clocks on gas lamps) to name but a few - nearly all gone or going.

The rail accident statistics don't seem to tally with the statement that safety levels are going down, rather the reverse. Old compartment coach trains had guards but many had no corridors, and even when they did anything could happen in there unseen.

We need the best of modern worlds. My line has 3 long tunnels. I'd certainly be unhappy if trains had only one member of staff aboard. There was a derailment in 3.5 mile long Totley Tunnel about 1961 and nobody got seriously hurt, more by good luck that nothing was going the other way. I assume train crews going through there get some extra training on what to do in such a circumstance.

However, all the Northern stopping trains would pick up vital seconds if the conductor didn't have to open the doors. They might also collect more revenue. Far too often fares don't get collected when stations are fairly close together. Having a safety trained conductor surely doesn't require opening those doors as well? With Pacers it possibly does, but is that a good reason to be having this dispute? When they've gone the RMT case gets weaker.

 

[Eccles1983]

I love the way all non train crew think that having no conductor means quicker dispatch.

As a driver I can almost with absolute certainty say the opposite. If its my head on the block I will absolutely make sure it is safe, and with the useless methods of doo I have seen there is no way it will be quicker for me to get out, check every door and then get back in, reinput otdr details, check signal and go than a guard doing it.

I'll await the armchair experts telling me I'm wrong.....

 

[scrapy]

Clearly you are not in a better position than me to know what is going on, because I am a guard right in the thick of this.

It needs a second ballot, and one of the reasons behind that is there has been a significant increase in guard numbers over the last 18 months who have not had a vote.

There are significant numbers of my colleagues who can see right through this dispute , and are losing money for no good reason. Nobody is being made redundant, but the role needs to evolve into a far more customer savvy one.

It's also worth pointing out that so far , each conductor has recieved 2 cheques of £200 each from the RMT. Some of you may consider that a bribe.

You claim to be a guard right at ths thick of it yet are so out of touch? Have you attended any of your local branch meeetings where you may find out more? Have you made your opinions clear there? If you or your colleagues all think the same way presumably there is the opportunity for you or one of your same thinking colleagues to put yourself forward for election to a post within the RMT as procedures are there to secure a vote of no confidence in those representing you. If there are a significant number of your colleagues all believing the same then you should try and change things from within and you will presumably have no problem getting elected with so much support.

 

[scrapy]

A very great number of us of more mature years started one job which evolved into something totally different, and that's if we were smart enough to avoid many bullets to keep a job at all. In my case that involved several relocations across the north.

I'd agree that in many cases service goes down. Watching Dad's Army I remember being taken to see Captain Mainwaring's equivalent to open an account, the bank branch just like his and staff much the same. We knew all the staff by name and they knew us. Now I can't even send them an email and it's a battle to speak to anyone, all the branches closing one by one. The likes of Mainwaring received a high level of training but their responsibilities were gradually scythed away as everything was computerised. Some staff accepted roles with lower levels of responsibility, many left with a pay off or took early retirement.

Anyone who is able to hold on to a job with exactly the same duties over a career of 40+ years must be very rare in the world of today. In my lifetime I think of miners, fishermen, steel workers, bus conductors, porters, station masters, librarians, local postmasters and lamp lighters (chap came round with a ladder once a week to wind up the 8 day clocks on gas lamps) to name but a few - nearly all gone or going.

The rail accident statistics don't seem to tally with the statement that safety levels are going down, rather the reverse. Old compartment coach trains had guards but many had no corridors, and even when they did anything could happen in there unseen.

We need the best of modern worlds. My line has 3 long tunnels. I'd certainly be unhappy if trains had only one member of staff aboard. There was a derailment in 3.5 mile long Totley Tunnel about 1961 and nobody got seriously hurt, more by good luck that nothing was going the other way. I assume train crews going through there get some extra training on what to do in such a circumstance.

However, all the Northern stopping trains would pick up vital seconds if the conductor didn't have to open the doors. They might also collect more revenue. Far too often fares don't get collected when stations are fairly close together. Having a safety trained conductor surely doesn't require opening those doors as well? With Pacers it possibly does, but is that a good reason to be having this dispute? When they've gone the RMT case gets weaker.

I agree with you. The RMT have agreed similar to what you suggest on Greater Anglia although speaking to drivers on Northern they'd rather not have responsibility for the doors and there are some coming up to retirement or still working past that age who say when DCO comes in it is time for them to go, which may make driver shortages even worse over the short term.

 

[Moonshot]

You claim to be a guard right at ths thick of it yet are so out of touch? Have you attended any of your local branch meeetings where you may find out more? Have you made your opinions clear there? If you or your colleagues all think the same way presumably there is the opportunity for you or one of your same thinking colleagues to put yourself forward for election to a post within the RMT as procedures are there to secure a vote of no confidence in those representing you. If there are a significant number of your colleagues all believing the same then you should try and change things from within and you will presumably have no problem getting elected with so much support.

Let me put you absolutely 100% straight so as their is absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever. What I have posted is absolutely 100% correct. A second ballot would imo return a vote dismissing strike action. There are far too many guards losing money they can't afford. So please don't come on this thread claiming you know this and that based on the hearsay evidence of guards you supposedly know.

I can also safely tell you that a good number of guards ( myself included ) are of the opinion that the drivers will eventually sign a deal which gives them control of the doors. I personally have no problem with that because it takes the likes of me out of the firing line.

 

[B&I]

Certain people on these threads have made fairly clear thatbtheu don't like the RMT. That is entirely understandable. However, when you start siding with Northern, an organisation whose arrogant contempt for its passengers is exceeded only by its bottomless incompetence, it really does start to call your credibility into question

 

[LOL The Irony]

00.01 hours and 23.59 hours on Saturday 25th August 2018

Not impressed...

 

[Moonshot]

Certain people on these threads have made fairly clear thatbtheu don't like the RMT. That is entirely understandable. However, when you start siding with Northern, an organisation whose arrogant contempt for its passengers is exceeded only by its bottomless incompetence, it really does start to call your credibility into question

Just as well that your opinion has absolutely no effect whatsoever in the real world of railway operations.

 

[scrapy]

Let me put you absolutely 100% straight so as their is absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever. What I have posted is absolutely 100% correct. A second ballot would imo return a vote dismissing strike action. There are far too many guards losing money they can't afford. So please don't come on this thread claiming you know this and that based on the hearsay evidence of guards you supposedly know.

I can also safely tell you that a good number of guards ( myself included ) are of the opinion that the drivers will eventually sign a deal which gives them control of the doors. I personally have no problem with that because it takes the likes of me out of the firing line.

If you don't want a safety role, why not become a fare collector? You are making wild assumption about a second ballot that i do not agree with but you've not answered my question about why you don't stand for election yourself if you feel your views are representative of the majority.

 

[Jonfun]

Surprisingly, a second or third pair of eyes on the signal was found by the RSSB’s research to be less safe than just the driver’s involvement. The logic was that the driver might not check for themself and instead rely on the guard or platform staff, or that either of them could also give a tip to the driver on a red signal, or in some other way miscommunicate and create a hazard.

Yes, there is a risk of the driver taking an erroneous tip on a red from their guard. But if one person in the process misses the signal at red if there is more than one person in the process the other(s) may identify it. If there is only one person in the process then there is nobody else to identify it. It can't be *less* safe, because one person has still had to miss the signal anyway for the incident to happen. It could equally be the driver or the guard.

 

[Moonshot]

Yes, there is a risk of the driver taking an erroneous tip on a red from their guard. But if one person in the process misses the signal at red if there is more than one person in the process the other(s) may identify it. If there is only one person in the process then there is nobody else to identify it. It can't be *less* safe, because one person has still had to miss the signal anyway for the incident to happen. It could equally be the driver or the guard.

Humans make mistakes, that is a fact.

Guards giving 2 against a red is rare, however when it has happened, invariably there was a distraction involved. There are safety systems in place to mitigate human error.

 

[woodmally]

Let me put you absolutely 100% straight so as their is absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever. What I have posted is absolutely 100% correct. A second ballot would imo return a vote dismissing strike action. There are far too many guards losing money they can't afford. So please don't come on this thread claiming you know this and that based on the hearsay evidence of guards you supposedly know.

I can also safely tell you that a good number of guards ( myself included ) are of the opinion that the drivers will eventually sign a deal which gives them control of the doors. I personally have no problem with that because it takes the likes of me out of the firing line.

You don't need to confirm it 100% RMT have proven this calling the first ballot quickly before the rules changed and refuse to call a second ballot. Even though if they were right it would actually reinforce their position and make it stronger. But they won't because they will know they will lose.

 

[PR1Berske]

You don't need to confirm it 100% RMT have proven this calling the first ballot quickly before the rules changed and refuse to call a second ballot. Even though if they were right it would actually reinforce their position and make it stronger. But they won't because they will know they will lose.

Not the only organisation resolutely against the notion of asking people the same question twice

 

[northwichcat]

Interesting when the RMT balloted on DOO in 2015 (on what was contained in the ITT) 908 voted and 726 were in favour of strike action but they found out that strike action at that stage would be illegal (due to only being allowed to strike against your current employer.) When they reballoted based on Arriva Rail North's plans 837 voted with 696 in favour of strike action, despite an increase in the number of guards employed by the franchise.

 

[Moonshot]

You don't need to confirm it 100% RMT have proven this calling the first ballot quickly before the rules changed and refuse to call a second ballot. Even though if they were right it would actually reinforce their position and make it stronger. But they won't because they will know they will lose.

Agreed.

It really should happen now. But in any event, as always, the dispute should get settled eventually.

 

[northernchris]

the dispute should get settled eventually.

Hopefully in the next few weeks if Northern take the talks seriously

 

[Tomnick]

Humans make mistakes, that is a fact.

Guards giving 2 against a red is rare, however when it has happened, invariably there was a distraction involved. There are safety systems in place to mitigate human error.

The “safety systems” are unlikely to stop you before you pass the signal though, and might not even stop you reaching the point of potential conflict. Either way, it’s already done a lot of damage to the driver’s career by then, and I don’t understand why drivers would willingly agree to take on extra responsibility and workload to put themselves at much more risk of making that sort of error.

 

[Robertj21a]

Hopefully in the next few weeks if Northern take the talks seriously

Hopefully in the next few weeks if the RMT adjust their position very slightly.....

 

[Moonshot]

The “safety systems” are unlikely to stop you before you pass the signal though, and might not even stop you reaching the point of potential conflict. Either way, it’s already done a lot of damage to the driver’s career by then, and I don’t understand why drivers would willingly agree to take on extra responsibility and workload to put themselves at much more risk of making that sort of error.

You might want to ask that question to drivers who already drive DOO. Worth pointing out that a SPAD does not end a drivers career. They are rare events in their own right. Driving standards are very high in the UK. And so are guards

 

[woodmally]

Agreed.

It really should happen now. But in any event, as always, the dispute should get settled eventually.

I still dont know how it can be resolved. Yes the action will eventually stop when DOO gets implemented but the strike action will be a failure. For this very simple reason. The public have no power. The government wont back down over DOO and Northern can't otherwise it would breach contract. Therefore there is nothing to negotiate. Either RMT accept DOO and move on or keep striking till it gets implemented. Or have I missed something.