ECML franchise to be broucht back under Public Ownership

[Talltim]

As I said in an earlier post , they do not conform to the normal concept of franchises which is a third party operating a business just like part of the main company.

e.g. In Keswick there is a "Costa" but it is not run by Costa but by a company called "Purple Bricks"(!) but everything about it is pure Costa apart from the till receipts which say "Purple Bricks T/A Costa" That is a what a Franchise is.

 

The TOCs are really concessions just the like beauty companies (and others) in department stores, selling their product in someone else's retail space.

 

Keith

I thought Purple Bricks was an online only estate agent?

[Zomboid]

I thought Purple Bricks was an online only estate agent?

They're not, GARETH...

[The Stationmaster]

And it will be improved with the Govt taking control?

 

Does 'the Govt' taking control mean they are going to take control away from DafT and Grayling will run it himself because with GTR I really can't see it mean ing much else?   DafT have exercised very direct control over a number of important aspects of GTR's 'control' of the franchise and some elements of DafT's involvement have led directly to the current mess.  So putting them in control of what they already virtually control would seem to be an excellent example of tortology, and tyical of the nonsense spouted by the rather useless Mr Grayling.

TUPE, TUPE, TUPE.... TUPE is all very well for directly employed staff but it provides no protection whatsoever for the large number of contract employees, most of whom (despite the constant propaganda about “preferring flexibility” from various sources) derive no benefit whatsoever from their status, are disadvantaged by it in a range of ways and would give it up tomorrow, given the chance.

 

Even under TUPE, constant change creates constant opportunities to restructure and eliminate or downgrade jobs

 

In reality TUPE isn't worth the paper it is written on as it only provides protection at the time of transfer.  It provides no future protection at all - all teh new management has to do is issue new contracts of employment, it really is as simple as that.

[jjb1970]

There really is no end to the genius of DafT and the government, now they can strip a company of a franchise they don't have! When oh when will we get journalists and MPs capable of asking the awkward questions and pointing out the real problems? I don't have much hope in the case of MPs as for different reasons I think the current set up suits both main parties in putting the government firmly in control but with no accountability.

[Hobby]

TUPE, TUPE, TUPE.... TUPE is all very well for directly employed staff but it provides no protection whatsoever for the large number of contract employees, most of whom (despite the constant propaganda about “preferring flexibility” from various sources) derive no benefit whatsoever from their status, are disadvantaged by it in a range of ways and would give it up tomorrow, given the chance.

 

Even under TUPE, constant change creates constant opportunities to restructure and eliminate or downgrade jobs

I've never said it couldn't be changed but for the rail staff who are not contractors the majority in most cases none of the things you mention change.

 

You are just scaremongering. Bear in mind I have gone through this process as rail staff. Have you?

[Coryton]

Erm no, most of the substantial increases in driver's pay have been a result of productivity restructurings, other increases have been generally in line with that of other staff.

 

In the case of EC (the subject here) this included;

Total single manning on high speed running (previously 2 drivers for above 110 and originally above 100 mph)

Elimination of all shift allowances and enhancements, and DOO payments

Sundays becoming part of the ordinary working week with no enhanced rate (was previously overtime)

Much greater flexibility in daily rostering changes

Changes to more flexible PNB (break) requirements

Remote book on / off (a phone in the S.O.P to York Control, instead of a T.C.S. being there)

 

Just the main points I can think of atm

This was within a couple of years of GNER taking over.

 

Regarding the post above re staff conditions being largely unaffected by franchise changes, in the short period under VTEC there's been very substantial changes in roles and staffing of on-board services, with Guards becoming 'Train Managers' and also responsible for managing catering on top of their train duties and ticketing, and changes and substantial cuts to the on-board crews

 

Interesting, and thanks for that.

 

The view I expressed above is something I've read in various places...which doesn't of course mean that it's true.

[frobisher]

In reality TUPE isn't worth the paper it is written on as it only provides protection at the time of transfer.  It provides no future protection at all - all teh new management has to do is issue new contracts of employment, it really is as simple as that.

TUPE is about the continuity of employment status and rights for the employees (i.e. years of service etc carry across). It is not about preserving the jobs themselves and never was. It is to prevent shady practices such as selling a company on who could then dismiss all the staff without having to make redundancy payments.

[Mike Storey]

Erm no, most of the substantial increases in driver's pay have been a result of productivity restructurings, other increases have been generally in line with that of other staff.

 

In the case of EC (the subject here) this included;

Total single manning on high speed running (previously 2 drivers for above 110 and originally above 100 mph)

Elimination of all shift allowances and enhancements, and DOO payments

Sundays becoming part of the ordinary working week with no enhanced rate (was previously overtime)

Much greater flexibility in daily rostering changes

Changes to more flexible PNB (break) requirements

Remote book on / off (a phone in the S.O.P to York Control, instead of a T.C.S. being there)

 

Just the main points I can think of atm

This was within a couple of years of GNER taking over.

 

Regarding the post above re staff conditions being largely unaffected by franchise changes, in the short period under VTEC there's been very substantial changes in roles and staffing of on-board services, with Guards becoming 'Train Managers' and also responsible for managing catering on top of their train duties and ticketing, and changes and substantial cuts to the on-board crews

 

Not completely accurate Ken, as you well know. I accept single manning and remote booking on/off were BR progressions of productivity enhancements to basic pay.

 

Eurostar kicked off the new driver deals with the Annualised Contract Hours arrangement, which nearly collapsed within a few years, because the hours were getting used up too quickly. But this was the pattern for some of the TOCs and FOCs to follow, to some degree, and it was widely accepted, in my time in GNER, that Virgin had upped the game by offering a far better package than us or others, because they were losing drivers hand over fist at first. The trade off between TOCs (and FOCs) by ASLE&F negotiators focusing on individual company deals was real (my brother was a drivers' rep and saw all this for himself) and drove their salaries, in many cases, to a pensionable level significantly in excess of what had been hoped for under progressive efficiency deals. And so it should be, given the enormous responsibilities they have. Privatisation, in the form it took, has benefited drivers more than any other group of staff.

 

On East Coast, "Guards" had become Senior Conductors in BR InterCity days, some years before privatisation. The concept of Train Manager was introduced by GNER, not VTEC, and Guards were encouraged to apply, but many of them chose not to. It was always the stated intention to eventually merge the two roles. That was not a Virgin invention.

[Ken.W]

Not completely accurate Ken, as you well know. I accept single manning and remote booking on/off were BR progressions of productivity enhancements to basic pay.

 

Eurostar kicked off the new driver deals with the Annualised Contract Hours arrangement, which nearly collapsed within a few years, because the hours were getting used up too quickly. But this was the pattern for some of the TOCs and FOCs to follow, to some degree, and it was widely accepted, in my time in GNER, that Virgin had upped the game by offering a far better package than us or others, because they were losing drivers hand over fist at first. The trade off between TOCs (and FOCs) by ASLE&F negotiators focusing on individual company deals was real (my brother was a drivers' rep and saw all this for himself) and drove their salaries, in many cases, to a pensionable level significantly in excess of what had been hoped for under progressive efficiency deals. And so it should be, given the enormous responsibilities they have. Privatisation, in the form it took, has benefited drivers more than any other group of staff.

 

On East Coast, "Guards" had become Senior Conductors in BR InterCity days, some years before privatisation. The concept of Train Manager was introduced by GNER, not VTEC, and Guards were encouraged to apply, but many of them chose not to. It was always the stated intention to eventually merge the two roles. That was not a Virgin invention.

 

Whilst some trading off between companies was involved, the main substantial increases were still largely a result of productivity restructuring agreements. These obviously difered significantly between companies as conditions varied, but the list I gave above was what was involved in the GNER deal - plus a significant one I missed off, elimination of 'Long Mileage Bonus' (on a company where most turns came under this) - and in this case the deal was entirely productivity financed (with a significant saving still going to the company too).

 

In the case of East Coast Guards, the change to 'Senior Conductor' was basically cosmetic, no role changes were involved.

While GNER did introduce a system of 'Customer Service Managers' (not Train Managers) quite a number of the CSMs were non-ops and still required to work with a 'guard' (under a disguised name), while some CSMs (generally former guards) were ops and did the guards role to as well as managing catering crew.

This system however soon collapsed, and things reverted to having a "Train Guard" which is how they were actually graded and announcements were made as such and who had no involement with catering, with a 'Crew Leader' in charge of the catering.

This continued until the present system of a single 'Train Manager' performing both guard and catering manager roles, together with a substantial reduction in other on-board crew, which was introduced by VTEC just a year ago. Substantial changes to the roles and staffing levels of on-board staff have taken place under VTEC

Edited July 2, 2018 by Ken.W

[The Stationmaster]

Interesting, and thanks for that.

 

The view I expressed above is something I've read in various places...which doesn't of course mean that it's true.

 

As far as GNER is concerned it is true - I had several chats with GNER Drivers and heard all of it, apart from remote booking-on, first hand from them.  Interestingly a lot of stuff on that list was proposed by BR to ASLE&F in the early 1990s but was rejected, mainly I think because it involved ending Mileage payments plus greater flexibility in 'flexible rostering'.  I was also well aware of the fact that the GNER changes meant that pay increases and related changes for Drivers were slef-financing, as has been the case with similar changes on some other operating companies although not universally so.  

 

Rather amusingly in view of MIke Storey's post hs brother was involved in trying to get Eurostar to back peddle on various things from their original contracted situation for Drivers so, for example while Eurostar Drivers' conditions did not originally include PNBs (Physical Needs Breaks) we ended up with a situation where we allowed ' break from the cab environment' (my words which were written into the changes) during a turn of duty,  interestingly no other railway in Western Europe has anything like a break equivalent to a PNB although SNCF have to provide a break at an appropriate location in very long turns (well over 9 hours).  SNCF continuous driving is also massively in excess of anything we've seen in the UK with a limit, again, in excess of 9 hours - when asked the obvious question an SNCF manager replied 'we put a bucket in the cab' (of a TGV) 

 

Remote booking-on is incidentally extremely difficult to properly explain or risk assess for Safey Critical staff in H&S and TWA (Transport & Works Act) terms but I know it happens and of course it was common on the SR in BR days.

[rockershovel]

Regarding TUPE, I’ve never experienced it as rail staff, never having held such a position but I DID hear a good deal about it from p/way workers who passed through the mass casualisation of the early privatisation period. It didn’t seem to provide THEM with much protection.

 

And, of course, it only applies in the very particular circumstances of a business being sold intact, as a going concern. I do know some engineers who passed through the O’Rourke/Laing takeover and few of the Lsing personnel, long survived - so even then, it doesn’t seem to have many teeth.

 

The only conclusion I can draw, is that it probably works well enough if you are a member of a strongly unionised workforce with safety-critical roles among its members.

[Clearwater]

Regarding TUPE, I’ve never experienced it as rail staff, never having held such a position but I DID hear a good deal about it from p/way workers who passed through the mass casualisation of the early privatisation period. It didn’t seem to provide THEM with much protection.

And, of course, it only applies in the very particular circumstances of a business being sold intact, as a going concern. I do know some engineers who passed through the O’Rourke/Laing takeover and few of the Lsing personnel, long survived - so even then, it doesn’t seem to have many teeth.

The only conclusion I can draw, is that it probably works well enough if you are a member of a strongly unionised workforce with safety-critical roles among its members.

Sorry - it emphatically does not apply when businesses are sold in tact. It's Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment). ie it applies when staff are transferred to one legal entity to another. When a business is sold to another business, the employees employment does not transfer. Ie if you're employed by A Ltd and its brought by B plc, employees remain (at first) employed by A Ltd. TUPE would only apply if those employments of contract were subsequently novated to B.

[Mike Storey]

Whilst some trading off between companies was involved, the main substantial increases were still largely a result of productivity restructuring agreements. These obviously difered significantly between companies as conditions varied, but the list I gave above was what was involved in the GNER deal - plus a significant one I missed off, elimination of 'Long Mileage Bonus' (on a company where most turns came under this) - and in this case the deal was entirely productivity financed (with a significant saving still going to the company too).

 

In the case of East Coast Guards, the change to 'Senior Conductor' was basically cosmetic, no role changes were involved.

While GNER did introduce a system of 'Customer Service Managers' (not Train Managers) quite a number of the CSMs were non-ops and still required to work with a 'guard' (under a disguised name), while some CSMs (generally former guards) were ops and did the guards role to as well as managing catering crew.

This system however soon collapsed, and things reverted to having a "Train Guard" which is how they were actually graded and announcements were made as such and who had no involement with catering, with a 'Crew Leader' in charge of the catering.

This continued until the present system of a single 'Train Manager' performing both guard and catering manager roles, together with a substantial reduction in other on-board crew, which was introduced by VTEC just a year ago. Substantial changes to the roles and staffing levels of on-board staff have taken place under VTEC

 

Yes, I am aware of the GNER deal, and the buy-out of the Top Link mileage benefits, given they were almost the only link by then. But VT drivers got an even better deal, despite all that, which was my point.

 

Thanks for the update on the demise of the GNER plan - I did not know it had reverted in later years. I guess that would have been during the National Express reign. The term "Train Manager" and the ultimate, planned role, was used throughout the "East Coast Experience" business plan, which I helped write (when under Brian Burdsall), and which Chris Garnett and his board, in particular Mike McKechnie, decided to largely implement. So I am puzzled by your reference to the CSM role as being the only change, as this was subsidiary to the TM concept. However, as I left GNER within a few years to a much better paid role, I bow to your knowledge of subsequent events.

[rodent279]

Regarding TUPE, the part of the business I worked in was transferred from a well known telecom network operator to a large multinational telecoms supplier. We had no change in t&c's, and when I was made redundant last year, some 8 years on, my service was continuous from when I started in 1999.

Edited July 3, 2018 by rodent279

[The Stationmaster]

TUPE is about the continuity of employment status and rights for the employees (i.e. years of service etc carry across). It is not about preserving the jobs themselves and never was. It is to prevent shady practices such as selling a company on who could then dismiss all the staff without having to make redundancy payments.

 

TUPE only protects 'rights' (i.e. conditions and terms of employment) at the time of transfer.  The new employer may, if they so wish, subsequently issue new contracts of employment which change the conditions and terms of employment and that is why in reality TUPE is hardly worth the paper it is written on.  According to TSSA advice (which I would in any case take with a pinch of salt having had past experience of their 'advice') somebody could claim unfair dismissal if a subsequent worsenment of their T&Cs by the new employer causes them to resign.

 

In reality just about the only thing which seems to be protected is length of service however that too needn't necessarily work as we found out at Eurostar when they put a cap on the number of years allowable for redundancy calculations and even applied that to anybody who opted for the final BR conditions for redundancy.

[frobisher]

TUPE only protects 'rights' (i.e. conditions and terms of employment) at the time of transfer.  The new employer may, if they so wish, subsequently issue new contracts of employment which change the conditions and terms of employment and that is why in reality TUPE is hardly worth the paper it is written on.  According to TSSA advice (which I would in any case take with a pinch of salt having had past experience of their 'advice') somebody could claim unfair dismissal if a subsequent worsenment of their T&Cs by the new employer causes them to resign.

Just the same as if you'd remained with the previous employer though. The important thing is that your continuity of employment passes across. You are under no obligation to take up any new contract of employment or accept new T&Cs offered, but your employment may terminate at that point under the previous regime.

 

In reality just about the only thing which seems to be protected is length of service however that too needn't necessarily work as we found out at Eurostar when they put a cap on the number of years allowable for redundancy calculations and even applied that to anybody who opted for the final BR conditions for redundancy.

Redundancy payments are capped at 12 years service, that's just UK employment law. Anything else is down to your contract and T&Cs...

[rodent279]

Just the same as if you'd remained with the previous employer though. The important thing is that your continuity of employment passes across. You are under no obligation to take up any new contract of employment or accept new T&Cs offered, but your employment may terminate at that point under the previous regime.

 

 

Redundancy payments are capped at 12 years service, that's just UK employment law. Anything else is down to your contract and T&Cs...

Really? I thought it was capped at £30K tax free? I'm sure mine was 18yrs.

[The Stationmaster]

Really? I thought it was capped at £30K tax free? I'm sure mine was 18yrs.

 

There are two separate things here -

 

1.  The number of years used to calculate a redundancy payment - that will normally be included somewhere in your Conditions of service/employment contract and has been varied from time to time, especially in parts of the state sector in order to encourage people to take redundancy on advantageous terms (often by crediting them with additional years, as happened in the case of teachers at one time).

 

2.  The Inland Revenue/HMRC rules relating to the amount of a redundancy payment which is not included in your current year's earnings for Income Tax purposes and is free of Income Tax - still presumably at £30,000 maximum.  Any redundancy payment which you receive directly in excess of the £30,000 is taxed as current year's income thus it is therefore best to receive a redundancy payment - from a taxation viewpoint - in early April and worst to receive it in March.  There are however legitimate ways to mitigate the tax loss (or there used to be) in that you can ask your employer not to give you the money but instead put it in your pension fund (although nowadays seems to be subject to some fairly daft limits on those so it might not necessarily be possible if you are up to or near those limits).

[frobisher]

Yup, there's quite a few components to a potential redundancy package.

 

There's your statutory redundancy pay... (I'm pleased to note that what I thought is a 12 year cap is now 20... Not having had employees for the last 4 years I'd not kept up with that, and it was never an issue with a young company...)

 

https://www.gov.uk/redundant-your-rights/redundancy-pay

 

Which is the minimum you're legally entitled to, and the employer may top that up. Any pay in lieu of notice/holidays is taxed normally and as Mike notes above, you've then got £30k of tax free to use up as a tax free lump sum between statutory and any negotiated redundancy package.

[cravensdmufan]

My first outing on LNER today - Peterborough to Leeds and return.

 

Perfect on time journey both ways - fortunately got back before the OHLE damage between Grantham and Newark this afternoon.

 

Great catering, and all staff very friendly. Noticed only a very few 91s DVTs HSTs have LNER logos thus far.  First class seating all still branded Virgin.

 

My only disappointment was that the Virgin Train dog's water bowl has been removed from the concourse at Peterborough.  Unfair - especially in this hot weather! (And I don't even own a dog!).

Edited July 5, 2018 by cravensdmufan

[Coach bogie]

My first outing on LNER today - Peterborough to Leeds and return.

 

Perfect on time journey both ways - fortunately got back before the OHLE damage between Grantham and Newark this afternoon.

 

Great catering, and all staff very friendly. Noticed only a very few 91s DVTs HSTs have LNER logos thus far.  First class seating all still branded Virgin.

 

My only disappointment was that the Virgin Train dog's water bowl has been removed from the concourse at Peterborough.  Unfair - especially in this hot weather! (And I don't even own a dog!).

 

Usual Thursday night run. £42.55 ticket now £60.05, no food ....again but it is only complimentary being the comment. Getting to the point of going by car as the return ticket is now £20 more than the diesel for the same return Journey, especially as I cannot buy advance tickets beyond what I already have.

 

I should be buying tickets for January 2019 now but since LNER took over the advance bookings has been stuck at .

 

Tickets are available for weekend travel up to and including Friday 21 September 2018

Tickets are also available up to and including Friday 07 December 2018

Mike Wiltshire

[cravensdmufan]

I notice some LNER services are calling additionally at St Neots today. eg 15.56 Newark - KX and 16.33 KX - Leeds.

 

Seems very unusual. Is that to ease GN/Thameslink cancellations? I wonder if LNER is being more flexible than it's predecessors?

Edited July 10, 2018 by cravensdmufan

[Wheatley]

Bring back to the good old days !! 

[

Whilst looking for something else I stumbled across this:

 

https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/25-june-1-july-2018/virgin-trains-east-coast-rebrands-as-london-and-north-eastern-railway/

 

Cooke says that the studio steered away from designing something with a “nostalgic, retro feel” that “railway aficionados may have loved” but would have been too similar to the First Great Western trainline rebrand to GWR completed in 2015 by Pentagram partner John Rushworth.

“We didn’t want the launch of LNER to be like sticking a plaster over the old brand

So it mustn't look like GWR's spikey charachters and it mustn't look like Virgin with stickers over the top. Failed twice there I think.

[Steadfast]

Turning the spiky N sideways to make a Z looks even worse than it sounds!

 

Jo

[31A]

I notice some LNER services are calling additionally at St Neots today. eg 15.56 Newark - KX and 16.33 KX - Leeds.

 

Seems very unusual. Is that to ease GN/Thameslink cancellations? I wonder if LNER is being more flexible than it's predecessors?

 

 

I noticed the other day 0903 King's Cross-York had a Huntingdon call and assumed the same, although it doesn't seem to have stopped there today!  In BR days (pre HSTs?) some long distance trains did call at Huntingdon, but it must be a very long time since any were booked to call at St. Neots!  In pre War days and maybe later, some of the (few) trains which served the stations between Hitchin and Peterborough had come from further afield than we might expect these days, such as Grantham or Leeds; not sure when that died out though.