[Fritter]

From what ive been told is all the operating staff are on 90 trip/day probation once onxpress comes in... which means pretty much anyone could get fired for no reason

The only thing about letting operating staff go, is good luck finding a replacement in quick order. You can't hire some chump off the street and have them operate a train after a couple of online training courses.
Alstom already can't provide the staffing needs for the service Metrolinx wants to operate. From what I understand, there has been very few new operators in the industry in the last few years. There just has been a game of musical chairs wherein VIA will steal some operators from Metrolinx or CN/CPKC, and CN/CPKC will steal some from VIA or Metrolinx and so on.

 

[Bojaxs]

The only thing about letting operating staff go, is good luck finding a replacement in quick order. You can't hire some chump off the street and have them operate a train after a couple of online training courses.
Alstom already can't provide the staffing needs for the service Metrolinx wants to operate. From what I understand, there has been very few new operators in the industry in the last few years. There just has been a game of musical chairs wherein VIA will steal some operators from Metrolinx or CN/CPKC, and CN/CPKC will steal some from VIA or Metrolinx and so on.

The conductors and engineers will get transferred over. They're unionized.

The office staff who work for MX directly, their future is in question.

 

[Willybru21]

OnXpress will absolutely not be letting operators go, nobody knows what the future crewing requirements will be better than OnXpress, who designed the future service levels.

I've heard through the grapevine (so take it with a grain of salt) that the opposite of laying people off might happen, and former employees let go under Alstom will have an open invitation to return.

 

[Bojaxs]

OnXpress will absolutely not be letting operators go, nobody knows what the future crewing requirements will be better than OnXpress, who designed the future service levels.

I've heard through the grapevine (so take it with a grain of salt) that the opposite of laying people off might happen, and former employees let go under Alstom will have an open invitation to return.

How much can GO realistically increase service levels for their trains when Canadian regulations force them to operate every train with a 3 man crew?

If every station had level boarding, would GO still need a CSA in every train?

 

[crs1026]

How much can GO realistically increase service levels for their trains when Canadian regulations force them to operate every train with a 3 man crew?

If every station had level boarding, would GO still need a CSA in every train?

That would be a nice problem to have. Consider that it will take a decade or more to implement level boarding, if ever. That’s a third if the career span of existing operating staff. If that were ever to happen, the natural attrition of retirements of today’s operators would deal with most of any overage.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

OnXpress will absolutely not be letting operators go, nobody knows what the future crewing requirements will be better than OnXpress, who designed the future service levels.

I've heard through the grapevine (so take it with a grain of salt) that the opposite of laying people off might happen, and former employees let go under Alstom will have an open invitation to return.

I will not get in to the weeds here, I will say you are closer than some others.

 

[Willybru21]

I will say you are closer than some others.

I know some things here and there

 

[Northern Light]

I know some things here and there

You do indeed.

 

[SkylineHorizons]

Are they termination letters? I'd assume the letter would transfer employment with the new entity.

If they phrased it as a termination, they'd have to pay severance, and still need a new workforce. (Isn't there rules about terminating employees when the work continues, with the original employer still involved in the new entity?)

The entire crew base received termination letters from Alstom, as required by the ESA. They also went through a hiring process with OOI, including medical testing (where applicable) and background checks. The only step skipped was interviews. However, Alstom later filed a "successorship" claim, stating that OnExpress was a "successor business." Ostensibly, this move came only after they realized they would be liable for millions of dollars in severance and other payments to their terminated employees

This followed an initial period of hardball tactics during the transition, where Alstom was entirely uncooperative, denying OOI access to employee files and withholding a general overview of how operations were managed, citing "privacy concerns." This is particularly ironic, considering Alstom/Bombardier had historically taken a very favorable interpretation of labor laws—or outright violated them—whenever convenient. I.e. denying 60% of the workforce vacation this past year. The action was later "legalized" by an arbitrator, but only after stall tactics pushed the hearing well into the year at a point in which it would be impossible to accommodate vacation time. The claim was also made that they wouldn't have been able to maintain existing service levels and yet interestingly enough service levels were later increased.

OOI meanwhile is contesting the successorship claim, as they do not want the current collective agreement to carry forward. That agreement contains several stipulations that could complicate their ability to fulfill their obligations to MX under the new contract as well as significantly reducing their profit margins. The argument for successorship appears strong though, considering that the existing crew base is being transferred over and the work remains exactly the same. OOI is attempting to frame this as a "new workforce," which is particularly strange considering for instance that the existing seniority order is being respected(?). Just as unusual is that the TCRC(the union) is siding with OOI in this dispute. Typically, unions fight for successorship rights because it ensures the current collective agreement remains in effect. It’s unclear why the union is not doing so in this case, but it appears the union chair believes starting fresh would benefit the membership by fostering a positive relationship with the incoming company. However word is he has lost the support of a majority of the membership. It's not clear what will happen on January 1st - whether provisions of the current collective agreement will remain in force until a new one is signed with OOI or not. There is also the possibility of a "service disruption" as well.

The transition itself also seems far from smooth. OOI appears woefully unprepared to take over operations on Day 1, forcing MX to enter into some sort of contract with Alstom to assist with the takeover process. This development comes despite a deteriorating relationship between Alstom and MX.

For office staff? Unlikely.

Most of that staff has been hired by OOI.

 

[T3G]

How much can GO realistically increase service levels for their trains when Canadian regulations force them to operate every train with a 3 man crew?

If every station had level boarding, would GO still need a CSA in every train?

Yes, because requiring someone to monitor a full 12 car train from the front of it would pose a safety risk.

As well, how would the train crew, in a separate compartment from the passengers, be on hand to assist in an emergency?

 

[Fritter]

Responding to @SkylineHorizons, is there anyone who can run a railway competently?
Between Metrolinx, Bombardier/Alstom and OnExpress it seems like the best option would be to transfer GO Transit to GO Transit and let the professionals that operated the railway semi compently for 40+ years bring back some sanity to this whole process.
P3's, consortiums, and contracting out does not have a very good track record with Transit in the GTA.

 

[crs1026]

Responding to @SkylineHorizons, is there anyone who can run a railway competently?
Between Metrolinx, Bombardier/Alstom and OnExpress it seems like the best option would be to transfer GO Transit to GO Transit and let the professionals that operated the railway semi compently for 40+ years bring back some sanity to this whole process.
P3's, consortiums, and contracting out does not have a very good track record with Transit in the GTA.

ML is struggling from a politically imposed mandate to move as much work as possible to contracted companies because
a) the system is big enough that a fully in-house organization would be a monolith, and nobody likes huge government run organizations
b) the private sector lobbies to take on the work
c) it deflects accountability away from politicians and senior bureaucrats
d) ML doesn't have the requisite expertise in its internal talent pool

The problem with this approach is
a) there is not that much talent out there, and no one is developing and retaining it.... the market simply robs each other and the talent pool doesn't grow
b) constant shifting of contractors allows what talent there is to drift away or be attracted to better work elsewhere
c) underperformers who leave one contractor are grabbed up by another due to labour shortages so the dregs of the talent pool never really go away
d) the entire food chain does not create collaboration, consistency, communication, or accountability because there are so many firewalls and legalistic contract barriers

The solution ?
a) disband the ML board - they are not serving any useful purpose, do not set policy, and do not provide meaningful oversight
b) operate ML by written Shareholder Resolutions which are discoverable
c) implement meaningful FOI to provide transparency
d) develop and publish meaningful KPI's and an audited, pulished scorecard for every contractor

I hear enough about track maintenance and planned work windows where work is cancelled at last minute, doesn't get executed as planned, or experiences rules violations or mishaps.....actually quite scary as well as simply unproductive. All swept under the rug, it seems. The key imho is public transparency, and it just isn't there.


- Paul

 

[SkylineHorizons]

Yes, because requiring someone to monitor a full 12 car train from the front of it would pose a safety risk.

Hate to break it to you but they've already deprioritized safety in the name of on-time performance metrics. Trains no longer hold at a platform if someone presses the priority alarm, too many false alarms they say. So now they are to get going first and then only once they've left the station will the CSA go and check things out. Sorry, but your heart attack or assult can wait people need to get home but hey at least you can text 77777 for help now in case you forget to call 911

As well, how would the train crew, in a separate compartment from the passengers, be on hand to assist in an emergency?

By having the conductor in the body of the train. It would seem the plan is to have the engineer operate on his own at the front with the cndr in the body. This is actually how CP and CN did it at the end of their tenures. But GO wanted a more customer friendly approach when 'the Bomb' took over hence why they created the CSA position. OOI's contract proposal doesn't indicate that the CSA is a guaranteed position like Alstoms did, so the writing is on the wall. But it doesn't seem like they'll make the switch right away it seems that'll happen only after the next generation of equipment arrives, presumably equipped with in cab signaling.

 

[turbanplanner]

OnXpress will absolutely not be letting operators go, nobody knows what the future crewing requirements will be better than OnXpress, who designed the future service levels.

I've heard through the grapevine (so take it with a grain of salt) that the opposite of laying people off might happen, and former employees let go under Alstom will have an open invitation to return.

What ended up happening to the vacation time fiasco?

 

[Willybru21]

What ended up happening to the vacation time fiasco?

Not quite sure about that personally, there’s definitely others here that would be able to give a better answer than I would’ve been able to though