LNER unreliability caused by staff shortages

[LowLevel]

but which organisation is applying the thumbscrews in removing rest day working?

Strangely I do agree with you. The ASLEF approach of "thou shalt not work your rest day unless we say you can" would wind me up. The RMT's approach of you can do as you like unless there's an action short ballot been passed by the members suits me far better - it's my choice to sell my time to the company or not.

 

[12LDA28C]

Strangely I do agree with you. The ASLEF approach of "thou shalt not work your rest day unless we say you can" would wind me up. The RMT's approach of you can do as you like unless there's an action short ballot been passed by the members suits me far better - it's my choice to sell my time to the company or not.

Easy enough to understand ASLEF's approach though. They usually only grant Rest Day Working to TOCs for a specific reason such as due to driver training. ASLEF is against RDW in principle as it means TOCs can get by with not enough drivers employed. If they are forced to employ more drivers (as of course they should, to ensure they can resource trains without relying on RDW) then that means more members in the Union with the associated increase in subscription revenue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Easy enough to understand ASLEF's approach though. They usually only grant Rest Day Working to TOCs for a specific reason such as due to driver training. ASLEF is against RDW in principle as it means TOCs can get by with not enough drivers employed. If they are forced to employ more drivers (as of course they should, to ensure they can resource trains without relying on RDW) then that means more members in the Union with the associated increase in subscription revenue.

Does it also work because drivers are paid a lot more than guards and so have less need for overtime? One of the problems with going to "full staffing" is that some (RMT) staff would be genuinely upset that they couldn't have overtime any more when things got tight (which it increasingly will at the moment).

 

[12LDA28C]

Does it also work because drivers are paid a lot more than guards and so have less need for overtime? One of the problems with going to "full staffing" is that some (RMT) staff would be genuinely upset that they couldn't have overtime any more.

Possibly. It all depends on individuals' personal situation and preferences. I would say that over the last 20 years the average driver's salary has increased to the point where it is now not so necessary to work much O/T to earn a good wage, consequently some drivers do no overtime at all, some do a little and a small minority work all the hours they can.

 

[Surreytraveller]

It’s how everyone else in just about every other line of work does it. I don’t know any other industry where someone contracted to work 34.5 hours a week would be allowed to work just 22 of them on the basis that the next week they worked 51 hours. One also has to question how tired someone will be at the end of a 51 hour working week and whether they should really be driving a train after that much time at work rather than resting. I know I wouldn’t be comfortable driving a car for 51 hours in a week as I’d be exhausted by the end of it.

The only possibility I can think of where such an arrangement might apply is aircraft crew.


It really is cost cutting. How it should be done is a 35 hour week, diagram an amount under that, say approx 33 hours, and then the rest of the time to take them up to their contracted hours should be flexible for exactly the sort of situation I mentioned above.

The only way that would work, is if you had a railway where the driver books on and preps a train, takes 90 minutes to drive the train in one direction, half hour turn round, 90 minutes to drive back. Hour break, and another return trip. 8h45. That's not how the railway works

 

[43066]

Does it also work because drivers are paid a lot more than guards and so have less need for overtime? One of the problems with going to "full staffing" is that some (RMT) staff would be genuinely upset that they couldn't have overtime any more when things got tight (which it increasingly will at the moment).

Not necessarily, earning more just means people have more expensive lifestyles and of course everyone’s circumstances are different. It’s fair to say that anyone who is reliant on non contractual, non guaranteed overtime is pretty foolish.

but which organisation is applying the thumbscrews in removing rest day working?

Would that be the same rest day working TOCs can unilaterally withdraw any time it suits them, with absolutely no notice and no compensation?

 

[LAX54]

From friends it isn't just the railway that work like this. I have two friends that work in local government where their contract states they will work a certain number of hours a month, since they are both "on call", so they could work 1 hours in three weeks, but then can be "not available" after working 20 hours in week four. Anything over 140 hours is paid as overtime if they wish to work it.



Agreed, and I did it once due to my relief being snowbound, and it needed both my LOM and the District Manager to sign it off.
(The line still shut though!)
And signallers on a 12 week, 12 hour roster get a extra day off every 12 weeks so their average works out at 35 hours a week,

Back in 87, I signed on at Cantley (Norfolk) was snowing hard when I arrived.........didnlt leave the box for 3 days ! the local pub kept me fed !
surprisingly (BR days) I was actually paid for those 3 days without a break ! (they asked me on first day, if they could get a plough through at anytime in the following hours would I deal with it ? )

 

[greyman42]

Strangely I do agree with you. The ASLEF approach of "thou shalt not work your rest day unless we say you can" would wind me up. The RMT's approach of you can do as you like unless there's an action short ballot been passed by the members suits me far better - it's my choice to sell my time to the company or not.

Does ASLEFs approach happen in any other industry? In my industry, if the union tried to dictate to its members what they can and cannot do, the members would stick two fingers up at them, and rightly so.

 

[43066]

Does ASLEFs approach happen in any other industry? In my industry, if the union tried to dictate to its members what they can and cannot do, the members would stick two fingers up at them, and rightly so.

And how do your industry’s Ts and Cs compare to ASLEF members’?

Also missing the point (as usual) that the union isn’t some abstract body that dictates what its members can or can’t do. ..

 

[greyman42]

And how do your industry’s Ts and Cs compare to ASLEF members’?

They seem to be fine. We don't have strikes and we are well paid.

 

[43066]

They seem to be fine. We don't have strikes and we are well paid.

How nice for you. Since you brought it up, which industry do you work in?

If you’re happy with your own Ts and Cs, it seems a little odd that you complain so bitterly about others defending theirs.

I’ve been on strike one day in seven years…

 

[greyman42]

How nice for you. Since you brought it up, which industry do you work in?

Food production industry.

 

[Trainbike46]

Also missing the point (as usual) that the union isn’t some abstract body that dictates what its members can or can’t do. ..

Surprisingly many people keep saying that the unions are some dictatorship controlling their members, which is weird given how obviously wrong it is; members elect the union's leadership, can vote in strike ballots, so have influence on the decisions made higher up in the union, and if they don't like the outcome, they are free to leave. Where do people keep getting this idea that the unions, specifically railway unions, are some dictatorial force controlling their members?

 

[Bald Rick]

Would that be the same rest day working TOCs can unilaterally withdraw any time it suits them, with absolutely no notice and no compensation?

Of course they can - overtime / RDW isn’t going to be offered if none is needed. Hence its voluntary on the part of those who participate.

Surprisingly many people keep saying that the unions are some dictatorship controlling their members, which is weird given how obviously wrong it is; members elect the union's leadership, can vote in strike ballots, so have influence on the decisions made higher up in the union, and if they don't like the outcome, they are free to leave. Where do people keep getting this idea that the unions, specifically railway unions, are some dictatorial force controlling their members?

I’m afraid I have heard of far too many people being pressured to vote a certain way, or do (or not do) certain things, at all levels of some rail unions’ hierarchy, for me to believe that their democratic credentials Are questionable at best. Including in this dispute.

 

[Dave91131]

Back on the subject of LNER unreliability.

For tomorrow:

0540 ex Edinburgh cancelled south of Newcastle
0526 and 0630 Newcastle to London cancelled throughout

0930 and 1030 ex London starting north from Newcastle

Fantastic.

 

[dk1]

Back on the subject of LNER unreliability.

For tomorrow:

0540 ex Edinburgh cancelled south of Newcastle
0526 and 0630 Newcastle to London cancelled throughout

0930 and 1030 ex London starting north from Newcastle

Fantastic.

Am I right in thinking the LNER FDW agreement with ASLEF ends next week?

 

[Watershed]

Back on the subject of LNER unreliability.

For tomorrow:

0540 ex Edinburgh cancelled south of Newcastle
0526 and 0630 Newcastle to London cancelled throughout

0930 and 1030 ex London starting north from Newcastle

Fantastic.

Not great, but a lot better than Avanti - who are currently showing 6 cancellations for the rest of the day, on their severely reduced timetable.

 

[johncrossley]

Are people standing on trains because of cancellations?

 

[800001]

Are people standing on trains because of cancellations?

Yes

 

[Dave91131]

Are people standing on trains because of cancellations?

I'm not in a position today to see the trains on which passengers from the cancelled ones are being advised to travel, but based on loadings I've seen in recent weeks of the services in question, my answer would be almost certainly yes there will be standees.

That is assuming of course that, irrespective of any other factors today which may affect loadings, people haven't already given up and headed to an airport.

 

[Bald Rick]

Am I right in thinking the LNER FDW agreement with ASLEF ends next week?

Most LNER Drivers haven’t been working them for a couple of months, so it’s a moot point.

 

[800001]

Wednesday 23rd Nov
8 cancellations
3 services terminating short of destination

 

[dk1]

Most LNER Drivers haven’t been working them for a couple of months, so it’s a moot point.

Okay thanks. Next weeks rosters will be of particular interest then.

 

[Dave91131]

Today is the worst I've known it so far in terms of cancellations.

Multiple Edinburgh's and Leeds' cancelled throughout and numerous part cancellations too.

Many more days like today and LNER will be well and truly welcomed to the Avanti and TPE club.

 

[DanNCL]

Cancelling both the 16:45 and 17:15 departures from Leeds isn’t a good look. I don’t want to imagine how cosy the Mark 4 set on the 17:45 will be!

The last southbound from Edinburgh to London is cancelled too - published travel advice tells people to get the 18:30, with no mention of any arrangements for those who are unable to travel an hour earlier.

Also from the published list of cancellations something isn’t quite adding up to me. The 15:06 Kings Cross - York is cancelled but not the 18:02 return, and likewise the 16:03 York - Kings Cross is cancelled but not the outbound from Kings Cross at 13:06. So is the set from the 13:06 ex Kings Cross going to occupy P6 at York for two and a half hours to work the 18:02? Can’t see Network Rail or Northern being terribly happy with that!

Many more days like today and LNER will be well and truly welcomed to the Avanti and TPE club.

Indeed. It’s worrying. The sooner the DFT stop sitting on their hands and start sorting things out the better, whether that be by sorting it out themselves or allowing the TOCs to do what’s required to sort things out.

 

[KGX]

They are really going downhill. Timetable cuts seem inevitable now. Although there probably are quite a few services that could be consolidated on weekdays.

 

[800001]

Cancelling both the 16:45 and 17:15 departures from Leeds isn’t a good look. I don’t want to imagine how cosy the Mark 4 set on the 17:45 will be!

The last southbound from Edinburgh to London is cancelled too - published travel advice tells people to get the 18:30, with no mention of any arrangements for those who are unable to travel an hour earlier.

Also from the published list of cancellations something isn’t quite adding up to me. The 15:06 Kings Cross - York is cancelled but not the 18:02 return, and likewise the 16:03 York - Kings Cross is cancelled but not the outbound from Kings Cross at 13:06. So is the set from the 13:06 ex Kings Cross going to occupy P6 at York for two and a half hours to work the 18:02? Can’t see Network Rail or Northern being terribly happy with that!


Indeed. It’s worrying. The sooner the DFT stop sitting on their hands and start sorting things out the better, whether that be by sorting it out themselves or allowing the TOCs to do what’s required to sort things out.

The 2 York services will most likely be TM shortage so will most likely run empty.

Edit: just looked and the set that arrives at York at 1530 is down to work the 1802.

 

[johncrossley]

Cancelling both the 16:45 and 17:15 departures from Leeds isn’t a good look. I don’t want to imagine how cosy the Mark 4 set on the 17:45 will be!

Presumably you would divert through Sheffield or Manchester. As you say, the 17:45 is effectively cancelled.

 

[Silver Cobra]

The 17:15 has now been reinstated to run as far as Doncaster, but there's still no service from Leeds to Grantham and beyond until the 17:45. So that will still be a very busy service, but at least some pressure will have been lifted from it.

 

[Kite159]

At least the 17;45 isn't a 5 coach Azuma.