(10 Jan 2025, 3:16 pm)Adrian wrote I noticed they're advertising for a whole host engineering positions at the moment:

• Vehicle Electrician - £26.42p/h
  
• Chargehand Technicians - £27.67p/h
  
• Coachbuilders - £26.42p/h
  
• Master Technicians - £28.29p/h
  
• PCV/HGV Technicians - £26.42p/h
  

Looking at the salaries posted, and based on what you've written, it seems very odd! They're listing salary of 'up to' £26.42 for their Coachbuilder and PCV/HGV Technician roles, for example, which would equate to a £55k salary based on a 40 hour week (they say shifts will be 5 days over 7).

If that is anywhere near being accurate, then they're paying £13k-£20k more than Stagecoach? https://www.stagecoachbus.com/careers/jo...ng-3-24135
Arriva have a similar role at £18.95p/h: https://www.arrivabusjobs.co.uk/job-desc...d=JR028518

So if we're looking at an average of around £40k for the role, why wouldn't those with the skillset be flocking to GNE en-mass for paying well above the median? 

I wonder if this goes back to a topic done to death on here in the past: misleading pay/salaries being posted by this company on their job adverts. I assume the figure they're quoting will be some kind of enhancement for working a bank holiday or something like that, and in no way reflective of the usual hourly rate, hence the use of 'up to'

All I know is that there's definitely fitters that worked for GNE who have went over to Stagecoach, I don't know them well enough to confirm if they went for better money, but that's what other drivers who do know them better have said. So it's either the salary or working conditions weren't good enough for them.

Consett depot cancellations have also been increasing as the week has went on, specifically around peak times, as multiple buses are being pulled from service on the X5/X15 & 16/16A to run school buses.

(10 Jan 2025, 3:16 pm)Adrian wrote I noticed they're advertising for a whole host engineering positions at the moment:

• Vehicle Electrician - £26.42p/h
  
• Chargehand Technicians - £27.67p/h
  
• Coachbuilders - £26.42p/h
  
• Master Technicians - £28.29p/h
  
• PCV/HGV Technicians - £26.42p/h
  

Looking at the salaries posted, and based on what you've written, it seems very odd! They're listing salary of 'up to' £26.42 for their Coachbuilder and PCV/HGV Technician roles, for example, which would equate to a £55k salary based on a 40 hour week (they say shifts will be 5 days over 7).

If that is anywhere near being accurate, then they're paying £13k-£20k more than Stagecoach? https://www.stagecoachbus.com/careers/jo...ng-3-24135
Arriva have a similar role at £18.95p/h: https://www.arrivabusjobs.co.uk/job-desc...d=JR028518

So if we're looking at an average of around £40k for the role, why wouldn't those with the skillset be flocking to GNE en-mass for paying well above the median? 

I wonder if this goes back to a topic done to death on here in the past: misleading pay/salaries being posted by this company on their job adverts. I assume the figure they're quoting will be some kind of enhancement for working a bank holiday or something like that, and in no way reflective of the usual hourly rate, hence the use of 'up to'

Think you've nailed it with the last bit there, I'd assume that they're an overtime rate, no doubt at 1.5x the actual salary. Mind I've never heard of any company doing upto salaries, talk about lack of transparency as an understatement.

(It's 'upto' £45k on here btw - https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/careers)

Credit to Arriva for being transparent here without any upto bollocks - https://www.arrivabusjobs.co.uk/job-desc...d=JR028638. Mind not sure £12.92 is exactly attractive, but that's for another thread.

Edit: Mind one thing that's noticeable is both Stagecoach and Arriva are both minimum NVQ Level 3 and GNE is NVQ Level 2. Quite a big difference there considering one is A-Level Grade and the other is GCSE Grade. Not sure I'd want a bunch of GCSE Grade staff in my garage if I had one, unless it was an apprenticeship.

(10 Jan 2025, 4:46 pm)PH - BQA wrote 8804 didn’t even make it to 4pm today, being pulled after the 1500 to the Freeman. It wasn’t replaced until 1620, again GNE missing 2 full round trips on a NHS workers contract due to no vehicle.

Really doesn't make sense to me, I don't understand why they don't use the two diesel Yutongs which they used for ages on the service without an issue. Mind it'd be interesting to see what the fines are like for it. Similar for BSIP services since I noticed the tax payer is now paying for cancelled services on the 21.

(10 Jan 2025, 3:16 pm)Adrian wrote I noticed they're advertising for a whole host engineering positions at the moment:

• Vehicle Electrician - £26.42p/h
  
• Chargehand Technicians - £27.67p/h
  
• Coachbuilders - £26.42p/h
  
• Master Technicians - £28.29p/h
  
• PCV/HGV Technicians - £26.42p/h
  

Looking at the salaries posted, and based on what you've written, it seems very odd! They're listing salary of 'up to' £26.42 for their Coachbuilder and PCV/HGV Technician roles, for example, which would equate to a £55k salary based on a 40 hour week (they say shifts will be 5 days over 7).

If that is anywhere near being accurate, then they're paying £13k-£20k more than Stagecoach? https://www.stagecoachbus.com/careers/jo...ng-3-24135
Arriva have a similar role at £18.95p/h: https://www.arrivabusjobs.co.uk/job-desc...d=JR028518

So if we're looking at an average of around £40k for the role, why wouldn't those with the skillset be flocking to GNE en-mass for paying well above the median? 

I wonder if this goes back to a topic done to death on here in the past: misleading pay/salaries being posted by this company on their job adverts. I assume the figure they're quoting will be some kind of enhancement for working a bank holiday or something like that, and in no way reflective of the usual hourly rate, hence the use of 'up to'

It'd be a bit like my employer advertising my role as being up to £45.66 an hour when that actually reflects a special enhancement we get for working Christmas Day *if* we're rostered. Good catfish exercise.

(10 Jan 2025, 3:12 pm)Ambassador wrote Surely there's a contigency? Hire vehicles in from a competent operator or someone like Ensign?

Whacking a load of the Solos that could have worked the 34, on to the 4 - seemed to be the solution.

(10 Jan 2025, 7:56 pm)Andreos1 wrote Whacking a load of the Solos that could have worked the 34, on to the 4 - seemed to be the solution.

To be fair, not sure the new open top bus on the 4 would be very fun

(10 Jan 2025, 7:59 pm)Storx wrote To be fair, not sure the new open top bus on the 4 would be very fun

Why would a Solo be an open topper?

Seem some interesting comments on randomly a local football forum forum drivers basically blaming cost cutting, lack of weekend engineering cover and general management incompetence

Gonna be death knells until franchising isn’t it?

(10 Jan 2025, 10:52 pm)Andreos1 wrote Why would a Solo be an open topper?

It's all deckers on the 34 mostly. No use for the 4 unless you want to smash it into the bridge at Fatfield.

(10 Jan 2025, 11:10 pm)Storx wrote It's all deckers on the 34 mostly. No use for the 4 unless you want to smash it into the bridge at Fatfield.

Why would they stick a decker on the 4?

The gaps are huge on the 34. Solos being reallocated from the 4 to the 34 would surely be the easiest option. 

Minimal impact on the 4.
Problems solved on the 34.

The bridge at Fatfield is fine for a decker. 
It's the tunnel at Penshaw that has the height restriction.

(10 Jan 2025, 11:33 pm)Andreos1 wrote Why would they stick a decker on the 4?

The gaps are huge on the 34. Solos being reallocated from the 4 to the 34 would surely be the easiest option. 

Minimal impact on the 4.
Problems solved on the 34.

The bridge at Fatfield is fine for a decker. 
It's the tunnel at Penshaw that has the height restriction.

To be fair, the 4 seems to be down to every 30 minutes for a fair chunk of the day or it has been anyway.

Get you now though, I thought you meant swapping the vehicles around rather than dropping boards.

No arguments on the bridges, always get mixed up around there.

On that I'm surprised they haven't lent something from another depot and share the hits out, like if the 20 lost the odd board during the day would it really be the end of the world? I was down that way today and seen around 4 of them and they were mostly carting around fresh air anyway. Similar arguments could be made for the 2/2A and 49/49A at Riverside aswell. The Versa's being the most obvious choice of moving across.

If GNE had a remotely competent commercial team to support a remotely competent engineering team we might see something

But I suspect unless you’re a goldmine route…well basically the 21, they don’t care. Saves them a few bob

(09 Jan 2025, 10:09 pm)Storx wrote It's a strange one mind but I do agree.

Btw there seems to be something very wrong with the Yutongs across the board, seems that the vast majority of them have been pulled tonight for some reason including all of them on the 53/54. Wonder if there's issues with the chargers? It wouldn't be a surprise as everything else seems to be broken lately. I was going to say cold weather but they're all out in Inverness so that puts that out the equation.

Mileages were once balanced between Yutong boards at Riverside, ensuring all were roughly the same mileage so that they didn’t run out of charge.

I am told that is no longer the case, with discrepancies in how many miles each bus operates. This could be in a bid to improve driver efficiency, at the expense of running the correct vehicle type.

At this time of year, charge is degrading more rapidly because more electric is being used to keep the buses warm.

Pair both together, and that’s why school buses operate the 53/54 and Q3 most of the time on evenings.

(10 Jan 2025, 3:12 pm)Ambassador wrote Surely there's a contigency? Hire vehicles in from a competent operator or someone like Ensign?

If the issue is lack of engineering labour (which I suspect it is), then hiring more vehicles into the fleet isn’t the answer: they can’t maintain the fleet they have, without adding more into the mix.

I already hazard a guess that Washington are housing more than the 65 vehicles they are permitted to on their operators licence - assuming nothing has changed in the last year, the PVR at Washington was 57 with 8 spare buses (total 65), meaning there was no wiggle-room to house buses not intended to be there. Washington have been running a Sprinter over and above their fleet allocation for some time now (while the baby Solo has been running on normal Solo work).

The situation is dire. I’m told this week it has been commonplace for up to 33% of Washington and Consett’s buses to be missing at school times. It is going to take a long time to recover from this, and I’d argue Nexus and Durham County Council should be taking action to, as a minimum, temporarily suspend some of GNE’s contracts (so they can focus on running their commercial services, including those in receipt of BSIP funding to boost frequencies). There have been numerous times vehicle availability has been poor in the post-Covid world we live in, but nothing to this extent.

(11 Jan 2025, 12:03 am)Ambassador wrote If GNE had a remotely competent commercial team to support a remotely competent engineering team we might see something

But I suspect unless you’re a goldmine route…well basically the 21, they don’t care. Saves them a few bob

Exactly this! Contrary to the previous commercial team who wanted minimum remote reliefs at Stanley on the Derwentside 'X' routes, this lot can't even implement a far more efficient interworking pattern that would release more E400MMC (low height) to help out at Riverside, where one of their X routes (X10) have not enough suitable spares / vehicles to rotate....and the other (X21) still being operated by unsuitable vehicles!

(10 Jan 2025, 11:46 pm)Storx wrote To be fair, the 4 seems to be down to every 30 minutes for a fair chunk of the day or it has been anyway.

Get you now though, I thought you meant swapping the vehicles around rather than dropping boards.

No arguments on the bridges, always get mixed up around there.

On that I'm surprised they haven't lent something from another depot and share the hits out, like if the 20 lost the odd board during the day would it really be the end of the world? I was down that way today and seen around 4 of them and they were mostly carting around fresh air anyway. Similar arguments could be made for the 2/2A and 49/49A at Riverside aswell. The Versa's being the most obvious choice of moving across.

Must admit, the boards I saw in the PM 'seemed' to be running to time.

But either way, divvying up the resources would make the most sense to me.

It may mean someone doing some work with a pen (or crayon if they can't be trusted) and paper to do something the computer can't tell them, but it offers some positive impact.

(11 Jan 2025, 7:48 am)Dan wrote Mileages were once balanced between Yutong boards at Riverside, ensuring all were roughly the same mileage so that they didn’t run out of charge.

I am told that is no longer the case, with discrepancies in how many miles each bus operates. This could be in a bid to improve driver efficiency, at the expense of running the correct vehicle type.

At this time of year, charge is degrading more rapidly because more electric is being used to keep the buses warm.

Pair both together, and that’s why school buses operate the 53/54 and Q3 most of the time on evenings.

Must admit, doesn't seem very sensible to me as surely the efficiency is lost by the fact there's now a vehicle swap being made and the dead runs which are coming with it, especially with the H service which I can't imagine the NHS being exactly happy about when it's the peak time boards.

(11 Jan 2025, 10:07 am)L469 YVK wrote Exactly this! Contrary to the previous commercial team who wanted minimum remote reliefs at Stanley on the Derwentside 'X' routes, this lot can't even implement a far more efficient interworking pattern that would release more E400MMC (low height) to help out at Riverside, where one of their X routes (X10) have not enough suitable spares / vehicles to rotate....and the other (X21) still being operated by unsuitable vehicles!

I'm not sure that this is the issue with this mind and it's more linked to whoever thought closing Chester Le Street down was a good idea without any real consultation and/or a replacement depot. When you've got staff striking over the situation, I wouldn't be exactly surprised if those same staff took their money for moving and then bolted at the first opportunity to somewhere closer. It's not like there's not ample jobs around for mechanics.

The reputation for GoNorthEast isn't particularly great and the wage isn't anything special either regardless to their bs 'upto' nonsense. 

It's not a surprise the only other depot which has had this problem is Arriva's Blyth depot which had the exact same problem but that one kind of made more sense since they had to leave Jesmond since the lease was up and building a new depot for pretty much only the 51/52/53/54/55 was never going to be sustainable with Covid.

Credit to Arriva though they got a grip of that, mainly because of Ashington loaning a chunk of their fleet. It seems like there's now 3 depots with GoNorthEast going South, it'll be interesting to see how they deal with this as less buses means flogging what's left and that usually ends up going one way and that's more and more off the road. It's a pretty dire situation, much worse than the driver issues imo as you can just hire some temps in to deal with that (if you actually want to deal with it).

(11 Jan 2025, 11:47 am)Andreos1 wrote Must admit, the boards I saw in the PM 'seemed' to be running to time.

But either way, divvying up the resources would make the most sense to me.

It may mean someone doing some work with a pen (or crayon if they can't be trusted) and paper to do something the computer can't tell them, but it offers some positive impact.

Aye didn't see any 4's yesterday so can't really comment on them was just getting some chips at West Rainton and that's where we saw a few 20's pass by, including two following each other - what ever happened to regulation...? Both were pretty much empty, similar to the one going the other way towards Sunderland aswell.

There seems to be a lot of 'breakdowns' reported at Hexham today too. The 683 and 686 are not running and there is cancelled journeys on the 684 and 687.

(11 Jan 2025, 10:07 am)L469 YVK wrote Exactly this! Contrary to the previous commercial team who wanted minimum remote reliefs at Stanley on the Derwentside 'X' routes, this lot can't even implement a far more efficient interworking pattern that would release more E400MMC (low height) to help out at Riverside, where one of their X routes (X10) have not enough suitable spares / vehicles to rotate....and the other (X21) still being operated by unsuitable vehicles!

Not like you to mention the Derwentside ‘X’ routes and associated interworking patterns!

(11 Jan 2025, 1:11 pm)Dan wrote Not like you to mention the Derwentside ‘X’ routes and associated interworking patterns!

Makes a change from the Coast Road

(11 Jan 2025, 1:10 pm)Dans_bus_photos wrote There seems to be a lot of 'breakdowns' reported at Hexham today too. The 683 and 686 are not running and there is cancelled journeys on the 684 and 687.

Consett that now isn't it (engineeringwise)? Not much of a surprise since they can't keep their own stuff on the road.

(11 Jan 2025, 12:24 pm)Storx wrote Must admit, doesn't seem very sensible to me as surely the efficiency is lost by the fact there's now a vehicle swap being made and the dead runs which are coming with it, especially with the H service which I can't imagine the NHS being exactly happy about when it's the peak time boards.


I'm not sure that this is the issue with this mind and it's more linked to whoever thought closing Chester Le Street down was a good idea without any real consultation and/or a replacement depot. When you've got staff striking over the situation, I wouldn't be exactly surprised if those same staff took their money for moving and then bolted at the first opportunity to somewhere closer. It's not like there's not ample jobs around for mechanics.

The reputation for GoNorthEast isn't particularly great and the wage isn't anything special either regardless to their bs 'upto' nonsense. 

It's not a surprise the only other depot which has had this problem is Arriva's Blyth depot which had the exact same problem but that one kind of made more sense since they had to leave Jesmond since the lease was up and building a new depot for pretty much only the 51/52/53/54/55 was never going to be sustainable with Covid.

Credit to Arriva though they got a grip of that, mainly because of Ashington loaning a chunk of their fleet. It seems like there's now 3 depots with GoNorthEast going South, it'll be interesting to see how they deal with this as less buses means flogging what's left and that usually ends up going one way and that's more and more off the road. It's a pretty dire situation, much worse than the driver issues imo as you can just hire some temps in to deal with that (if you actually want to deal with it).



Aye didn't see any 4's yesterday so can't really comment on them was just getting some chips at West Rainton and that's where we saw a few 20's pass by, including two following each other - what ever happened to regulation...? Both were pretty much empty, similar to the one going the other way towards Sunderland aswell.

Noticed two 78s Sunderland bound at Penshaw yesterday PM. 
With a 2 sandwiched between them.

Quite why/how a half hourly service is shadowing the earlier board...

(11 Jan 2025, 1:20 pm)Andreos1 wrote Noticed two 78s Sunderland bound at Penshaw yesterday PM. 
With a 2 sandwiched between them.

Quite why/how a half hourly service is shadowing the earlier board...

Isn't it the case that the central Service Delivery Centre was disbanded, in favour of each depot having its own operation? If so, it's still appears that they're either not empowered to make a decision or lack competence in that decision making.

I've noticed similar several times on the 84/85, on a 20 minute frequency, and they'll just shadow each other for the rest of the day. Despite it being one of the easiest routes to regulate due to its small circular nature.

(11 Jan 2025, 2:05 pm)Adrian wrote Isn't it the case that the central Service Delivery Centre was disbanded, in favour of each depot having its own operation? If so, it's still appears that they're either not empowered to make a decision or lack competence in that decision making.

I've noticed similar several times on the 84/85, on a 20 minute frequency, and they'll just shadow each other for the rest of the day. Despite it being one of the easiest routes to regulate due to its small circular nature.

SDC still runs the operations in terms late runnings/diversions/disruptions, the depots now are in charge of dealing with calls from breakdowns, at least that's the case at Sunderland.

(11 Jan 2025, 2:17 pm)deanmachine wrote SDC still runs the operations in terms late runnings/diversions/disruptions, the depots now are in charge of dealing with calls from breakdowns, at least that's the case at Sunderland.

Interesting! Does that work better for breakdowns?

I'd say from a customer perspective, disruption information has gone backwards.

My wife decided to take our little boy on the bus yesterday, as he often asks to ride, and with us usually driving, he doesn't get to do so much. They typically take the 'Voyager' (formerly the XLINES X5/X15) to Durham without any problems. However, yesterday, she waited for 90 minutes for the 6 bus at Lanchester to head to Stanley. When I checked the app, there were only four buses showing, all north of Stanley. In the end, she walked back up the road and used the car. This is a perfect example of why people are reluctant to give up their personal cars for public transport.

It's also worth noting that Tesco at Annfield Plain is only a 10-minute drive from Lanchester. However, if someone wanted to get the bus from Lanchester or Burnhope to Tesco, it would take over 35-45 minutes and require two buses. Some might argue that you can take the X5/X15 to Consett for supermarkets or stay on the 6 to reach Stanley, but I find it strange that, despite having supermarkets near both areas, you can no longer easily take the bus there (not since the X31 stopped going through Greencroft, which used to make the connection in just 10 minutes before the Stanley 'Changes' of the late 2010's).

I don't think it's just Washington either. I've spent the day cross crossing the region using GNE and I've encountered an endless stream of cancelled trips on the app and trips which haven't been cancelled but didn't run. Ambition appears to have been overtaken by reality.....well worth the extra 50p per single trip!

(11 Jan 2025, 2:05 pm)Adrian wrote Isn't it the case that the central Service Delivery Centre was disbanded, in favour of each depot having its own operation? If so, it's still appears that they're either not empowered to make a decision or lack competence in that decision making. 

I've noticed similar several times on the 84/85, on a 20 minute frequency, and they'll just shadow each other for the rest of the day. Despite it being one of the easiest routes to regulate due to its small circular nature.

No idea what the deal is, but whatever it is. It clearly isn't working as it should.

(11 Jan 2025, 5:55 pm)DeltaMan wrote I don't think it's just Washington either. I've spent the day cross crossing the region using GNE and I've encountered an endless stream of cancelled trips on the app and trips which haven't been cancelled but didn't run. Ambition appears to have been overtaken by reality.....well worth the extra 50p per single trip!

6353/4/5 all taken off the X10 today, and replaced with 2 Angel Streetdecks and an ex-London B9. 

Angel Streetdecks which have issues even working the 21, and a 12 year old Volvo. Each of those look to have been grabbed because they were close by, rather than because of their suitability. If you’re having issues because of the demands of the X10, surely you need a sensible fall back should vehicles fail? Constantly using vehicles which are proving themselves unsuitable to work far less intensive services as replacements cannot be a sustainable business plan.

---

(11 Jan 2025, 3:04 pm)Adrian wrote Interesting! Does that work better for breakdowns?

I'd say from a customer perspective, disruption information has gone backwards.

I was on a GNE service into Newcastle the other night, and quite frankly the communications I heard from (I assume) engineering were laughable. 

The driver had rang in multiple times to report the issue, until eventually they told them to pull over and await more information. They were told to continue the route, and swap vehicle in Eldon Square with 6067. They then got back in touch to say that was to be disregarded (I assume because it is no longer a vehicle…) and told to pick up 6292 instead (which has never been a vehicle…). I got off the bus at this point so heard nothing else, but there certainly wasn’t an immediate replacement so I’m unsure how the rest of the conversations went.

(11 Jan 2025, 6:09 pm)PH - BQA wrote 6353/4/5 all taken off the X10 today, and replaced with 2 Angel Streetdecks and an ex-London B9. 

Angel Streetdecks which have issues even working the 21, and a 12 year old Volvo. Each of those look to have been grabbed because they were close by, rather than because of their suitability. If you’re having issues because of the demands of the X10, surely you need a sensible fall back should vehicles fail? Constantly using vehicles which are proving themselves unsuitable to work far less intensive services as replacements cannot be a sustainable business plan.

Hit the nail on the head! 

6352-55 can't be solely relied upon. And throwing StreetDecks & leggy B9TL's on does not help the situation at Riverside either!

---

(11 Jan 2025, 1:11 pm)Dan wrote Not like you to mention the Derwentside ‘X’ routes and associated interworking patterns!

Well you hit the nail on the head despite our previous disagreements about vehicle allocations and not having the X30 & X31 standalone (pre Jul 2024) to avoid needless remote reliefs in Stanley!

The difference being now.....GNE could still avoid remote reliefs and significantly reduce the low height decker PVR, enabling some of the issue at Riverside to be addressed. But choose not to!