Transpennine Industrial Relations

[Fokx]

Did the union not agree to previous terms?

In 2010 under Keolis/First Group…

 

[muz379]

You thinking they don't isn't fact, that's an opinion, so I can still say it. Did the union not agree to previous terms?

Or was everyone doing as they wish? I.e. different conductors being paid different amounts for rest days?

If union members and reps don't agree, they need to get that sorted before any sort of action.

Ok well I've subsequently fact checked and there is no union sanction for RDW so it's not negotiated in the same way driver RDW is . I never said you couldn't say it btw , just that it was incorrect .

Yes rates would have been agreed but that was years ago . Clearly the reps and members now feel that this is insufficient and are prepared to take action .

I think you have misread what I was getting at . Clearly both reps and members agree and feel that this current arrangement is not satisfactory .

 

[Atishyou]

Ok well I've subsequently fact checked and there is no union sanction for RDW so it's not negotiated in the same way driver RDW is . I never said you couldn't say it btw , just that it was incorrect .

Yes rates would have been agreed but that was years ago . Clearly the reps and members now feel that this is insufficient and are prepared to take action .

I think you have misread what I was getting at . Clearly both reps and members agree and feel that this current arrangement is not satisfactory .

.

 

[43096]

Not at all, I'm happy for whoever earns what and fair play to them, however you have taken my post in isolation whereas my first question was rather pertinent in someone claiming that you can only be professional if you earn lots of money .

I'm a professional social worker yet I don’t earn loads so am I now devalued in someone’s eyes because I don’t earn a lot?

"Professional" is about attitude, not what you're paid, in my view.

That said, railway staff bitching with each other about T&Cs on public websites probably doesn't reach the bar of being "professional".

 

[Atishyou]

"Professional" is about attitude, not what you're paid, in my view.

That said, railway staff bitching with each other about T&Cs on public websites probably doesn't reach the bar of being "professional".

Probably similar to others (usually spotters who failed at getting on the railway) coming on acting the big 'I am', criticising those 'bitching', thinking they're better than them (it's called a discussion, disagreements are allowed). If you'd been in a proper messroom, you'd know true discussion and true bitching and be able to distinguish between the two.

 

[BHXDMT]

Conductors 'crapped on'.

I wouldn't call getting £100 to sit and watch Netflix or go to sleep being 'crapped on'.

As if conductors haven't had spare at home throughout the pandemic? Oh wait, they have.

Don't make out conductors are getting a bad deal (you'd need to take that up with your union, they agreed it). Funnily enough, when I've seen some conductor friends, the majority I've spoken to think this isn't a fight worth fighting.

So some drivers got some short jobs. Obviously you've done extensive research to see what drivers at all the other depots were doing?

Sounds like you've got some unresolved issues about drivers? I'd look into applying for a vacancy next time they come up.

Not sure why you're bringing spare at home into a discussion about the dispute about rest day work agreements and ticket scanning.

It's weird how you've spoken to all these Conductors, but the ballot result clearly tells a different story given how many voted for strike action and action short of a strike.

As for doing my research... I've spent the last 2 years in various mess rooms with said drivers. So yeah, I'm very aware of what they were doing for their rest day payment thank you.

 

[Atishyou]

Not sure why you're bringing spare at home into a discussion about the dispute about rest day work agreements and ticket scanning.

It's weird how you've spoken to all these Conductors, but the ballot result clearly tells a different story given how many voted for strike action and action short of a strike.

As for doing my research... I've spent the last 2 years in various mess rooms with said drivers. So yeah, I'm very aware of what they were doing for their rest day payment thank you.

.

 

[BHXDMT]

Same reason you're bringing driver's Rdw payment into it. You're claiming conductors haven't benefited from anything during the pandemic, which is false.

Aren't other conductors allowed to talk? Just you? I spend a lot of time on stations and in some messrooms when I'm travelling to my next job or back pass. I like talking to staff of TOCs.

You've been in all messrooms have you so you can verify what every driver has done? Yeah right. Like I say, if you want what your drivers have, apply to be a driver.

I said no such thing. I said Conductors have been crapped on, I never specified in what regard.

Conductors can say what they like, just as you can make out you know everything because you "talk to Conductors." Zero problems with that at all... but the ballot still speaks volumes.

You're absolutely correct that it would be entirely impractical to have spoken to every driver.

There's clearly zero point engaging with you further.

 

[Atishyou]

Conductors (and other grades) have been continuously crapped on while Drivers get whatever they like throughout the whole pandemic. If it's good enough for Drivers (and the DfT were clearly willing to authorise said payments), it's good enough for the rest of them. This is essentially the same dispute as Scotrail had.

I said no such thing. I said Conductors have been crapped on, I never specified in what regard.

Conductors can say what they like, just as you can make out you know everything because you "talk to Conductors." Zero problems with that at all... but the ballot still speaks volumes.

You're absolutely correct that it would be entirely impractical to have spoken to every driver.

There's clearly zero point engaging with you further.

. final point.

 

[BHXDMT]

"Drivers get whatever they want through the pandemic"

Drivers had spare at home. Did conductors? (I'll answer that for you, they did).

So you DID imply that conductors didn't benefit from anything during the pandemic, whilst drivers got what they wanted. Let's not mention that the driver Rdw agreement was pre-pandemic and the conductors didn't come out of the rear cab, but that doesn't suit your agenda.

I'd get some salt to go with that chip on your shoulder.

Couldn't agree more on your final point.

Thank you anonymous railway worker who knows so much about me already.

FYI, I'm well aware Conductors got spare at home, it contributed to my mental breakdown early last year

 

[Fokx]

The conductors didn't come out of the rear cab

Yes we did.
We were instructed to perform regular safety checks and be physically present throughout journeys (for the purpose of customer service, assistance requests etc), but instructed not to carry out revenue checks (which was off and on but lasted no more than 3 months maximum - for as long as those pesky green/red seat labels lasted).

 

[SuperNova]

Yes we did.
We were instructed to perform regular safety checks and be physically present throughout journeys (for the purpose of customer service, assistance requests etc), but instructed not to carry out revenue checks (which was off and on but lasted no more than 3 months maximum - for as long as those pesky green/red seat labels lasted).

You might have. But many didn’t

 

[muz379]

But it's not incorrect, as it was agreed in 2010 according to a recent post. So an agreement was made then and a further agreement has been made between the drivers and their union to enhance their overtime rate, which obviously hasn't followed suit with the conductor side. If Rdw wasn't sanctioned, they wouldn't be doing it and they wouldn't 'pull' it.

I agree that if the conductors want a different level of pay, they should ask for one, but other posters who appear to have a chip on their shoulder about the rates drivers get are living in a dream world if they expect to get anywhere near what drivers get.

As I say, the conductors I've spoken to about it when out on my travels don't feel it's worth the fight, so on a local level they seem to disagree. Maybe it's just the certain depots I see whilst travelling pass.

And now it is following suit with the conductor side , you seem to be unclear on the situation with unions sanctioning RDW , the lack of union sanction/agreement does not stop RDW as was the case with conductors at TPE . It has not been pulled unilaterally by the reps/union like a RDW sanction can be , it is being called for as action short of a strike by the union as part of the dispute . If individuals wish to ignoe the union instruction they will be free to continue working RDW just as they are free to go to work on strike days .

Right now drivers at TPE are getting zero for their RDW because they are not permitted to work any as the RDW agreement ended , I am watching with interest to see what if any enhancement gets offered for a new RDW agreement . I dont think anyone expects that conductors will get the same hourly rate that drivers get , the same enhancement though is I think a reasonable demand , if drivers are getting 1.5X standard pay then I dont think conductors or any other grades for that matter including cleaners are wrong to demand the same .

That might have been the mood of conductors you have spoken to , perhaps you have been lucky enough to isolate the 15% that voted against action , perhaps you could find a second job selling this information to the RMT . As you say with these things there generally are pockets of members usually in a particular depot that dont always agree

 

[Solent&Wessex]

A lot of heat but little substance recently in this thread.

The current Conductors Ts & Cs date from February 2010 and were the result of the harmonisation of the former First North Western and Arriva Trains Northern conditions, as different depots had different conditions.

At that time the rates of pay for Sundays, Overtime and Rest Day Working were set as:

Overtime : Paid at flat rate

Rest Day Working: Paid at time plus 15%.

Sunday: Turns that commence on a Sunday will be paid at time plus 25% for the full shift. Conductors working Sundays will be guaranteed a minimum payment of 5 hours at the enhanced Sunday rate.

In the intervening 11 years the enhancements which drivers receive for working rest days have increased significantly, along with a variety of other conditions Aslef insisted on to go with the additional enhancements.

Part of the Harmonisation package included a clause that the Company committed to talks on a Productivity package.

These talks didn't start for many years, and even when they did start they took a very long time.

Around 2017 / 2018 the company had kept missing the various deadlines it had agreed with the union for the conclusion of the Productivity talks. As part of a temporary agreement reached at the time (essentially as an apology for missing the deadlines), enhanced minimum payments were agreed for working Rest Days and Sundays. These enhanced minimum payments were significantly better than the 2010 rates of pay and especially beneficial for short duties. The payment amounts were broadly based around what may have been paid if / when the proposed Productivity package was accepted. As the Productivity package was running late then the enhanced payments were broadly designed to reflect the expected outcome of those negotiations.

As the enhanced payments were basically an apology for missing agreed deadlines they were tied in to the negotiations - it was made clear that enhanced payments were linked to an eventual ballot. If the final Productivity proposal was accepted then the enhanced rates would be superceded by the new ts and cs, if the proposal was rejected then the enhanced rates would end and conductors would revert back to the previously agreed 2010 ts and cs.

After lengthy negotiations a final proposal was put to ballot of members in late 2019 / early 2020.

The enhanced payments for rest days and Sundays were tied in to this ballot.

The result of the ballot was that the Productivity proposal was rejected. As a result, and as made clear before and during the ballot, the enhanced rates would end if the proposal was rejected. The enhanced rates thus ended and the previously agreed 2010 ts and cs were used once again. For some reason conductors seemed shocked that this actually happened.

This was just before the Covid issues and I think that most if not all Conductors thought the company would come back for further negotiations- despite the fact that negotiations had been ongoing for years, numerous varied offers had been made to the union ( and rejected by them without evan a ballot), and the company had made clear that this was their best and final offer.

The company said there were no more negotiations.

Then Covid happened, the franchise was terminated and basically became a DfT management contract, and the rest is history.

When the current disagreement started the drivers were getting very very very generous rates of pay and minimum payments for working rest days, linked to other conditions which limited the flexibility of rostered staff and increased the likelihood of rest day working been given out. The company has basically said they were not prepared to discuss or negotiate on the rates of pay for enhancements for the conductor grade.

So it is, in my opinion, correct that conductors have the right to ask for the same level of enhancement in % terms as drivers - they both work the same sort of start and finish times, both work on trains, both are safety critical, both work 24 hours a day 7 days a week with some very antisocial start and finish times etc. What is good for one grade should be good for another.

The timing is, however, unfortunate when all the Covid issues, reduced passengers and income for 2 years, etc are taken in to account.

But, one important thing - the RMT propaganda is incorrect. The enhancements previously paid for Sundays and rest days were not removed during covid nor was their removal unexpected. They were removed pre-covid as a result of a ballot of conductors who rejected the Productivity offer and, as a result, the higher rates of pay that went with it.

 

[Fokx]

After lengthy negotiations a final proposal was put to ballot of members in late 2019 / early 2020.

The enhanced payments for rest days and Sundays were tied in to this ballot.

The result of the ballot was that the Productivity proposal was rejected.

I’d like to add here for the purpose of perspective that one of the main reasons for a strong rejection was due to the company wanting to bring Sundays into the working week and increasing hours for conductors rather than the financial aspect

 

[SuperNova]

I’d like to add here for the purpose of perspective that one of the main reasons for a strong rejection was due to the company wanting to bring Sundays into the working week and increasing hours for conductors rather than the financial aspect

But the financial aspect was being increased in pay. Again, as I put further up the thread - it was a reasonable deal. But some got greedy and wanted a lot more, problem is covid happened and then ball suddenly was in the other court with the DfT. reality is, nobody will see anything as good as that deal anymore.

 

[Moonshot]

I’d like to add here for the purpose of perspective that one of the main reasons for a strong rejection was due to the company wanting to bring Sundays into the working week and increasing hours for conductors rather than the financial aspect

Increasing hours? From what to what?

 

[BHXDMT]

But, one important thing - the RMT propaganda is incorrect. The enhancements previously paid for Sundays and rest days were not removed during covid nor was their removal unexpected. They were removed pre-covid as a result of a ballot of conductors who rejected the Productivity offer and, as a result, the higher rates of pay that went with it.

The bit about when it was withdrawn is not correct. The enhanced rate was paid for several months of the pandemic as the ballot was unable to be counted due to covid restrictions. You are correct that it wasn't unexpected, however.

Increasing hours? From what to what?

35 hour week to 39 hours.

 

[Moonshot]

Think I would refuse an increase in hours as well.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Increasing hours? From what to what?

Think I would refuse an increase in hours as well.

As is posted, it was an increase from 35 hours to 39 hours per week BUT....

That included moving Sundays inside the working week AND a 30% pay increase from circa £30,000 per annum to £40,000 per annum in two (possibly three) steps over two years (although the biggest increase came towards the end of the 2 year period).

If you consider that at the time most depots worked around 38 hours per week anyway, if you included all the rostered Sundays in the link (which are compulsory overtime, cannot be booked as leave, cannot be swapped unless you swap a whole week of work and can therefore be pretty difficult to get rid of unless someone wants to work additional overtime), and that if you worked all your booked Sundays, all year, at current rates of pay you would earn no where near £10,000 by working those Sundays.

Thus this aspect of the offer wasn't too bad and wasn't really an increase in hours at all. It was essentially consolidating what you were already contracted to work anyway (35 hours per week Mon to Sat + Rostered Sundays roughly once every three weeks which worked out around 38 hours per week Mon to Sun) into a higher base salary (of 39 hours per week Mon to Sun) which was thus fully pensionable and would have Sundays treated as any other day, so could be swapped, booked as leave etc.

As always there were other aspects to the offer which were less palatable, including one or two aspects which weren't very good at all, but I take the opinion that you never get something for nothing and that overall all things considered it wasn't a bad deal.

The bit about when it was withdrawn is not correct. The enhanced rate was paid for several months of the pandemic as the ballot was unable to be counted due to covid restrictions. You are correct that it wasn't unexpected, however.

Yes, sorry, I forgot about that. The ballot was before Covid, but the result wasn't counted as the closing date fell during the start of the first lockdown when everyone abandoned ship and refused to go in to London to work so there was a delay in counting the ballot. The enhanced rates were retained until such time as the ballot was counted and the result announced, which was what was agreed when the enhanced rates were offered in the first place.

 

[Killingworth]

Email being sent to TPE customers, potential strikes 13th, 20th, 27th February and 6th March, full letter here, long URL, contents difficult to paste; https://view.i.tpexpress.co.uk/?qs=...42950d6a996bb9b1f0329c1328fc741340df109efd8e1

 

[ComUtoR]

As always there were other aspects to the offer which were less palatable, including one or two aspects which weren't very good at all, but I take the opinion that you never get something for nothing and that overall all things considered it wasn't a bad deal.

You nicely outlined all the good bits but what was so unpalatable that people voted no ? I'm also of the mind that there is a little give and take but there are some lines I wouldn't ever cross.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

You nicely outlined all the good bits but what was so unpalatable that people voted no ? I'm also of the mind that there is a little give and take but there are some lines I wouldn't ever cross.

At this precise moment I can't remember the full details, but it was a range of smaller details which sound insignificant but when you work it out actually are not.

For example taking 5 minutes off the booking on time and 5 minutes off the booking off time. Thats 10 minutes per shift, every day all roster. Lots of 10 minutes added together means you have lots of time suddenly floating around which means you have to work more days to get the same number of hours in. In essence you would loose some rest days.

Altering the length of a spare turn from "an hour less than the longest turn at the depot" to "the average turn length at the depot" , which would also have the effect of reducing the length of each spare duty on the roster, meaning you have to work more days to get the same hours in, and loose some rest days.

Those were just two things which spring to mind, but I think were the most disagreeable aspects.

 

[Moonshot]

At this precise moment I can't remember the full details, but it was a range of smaller details which sound insignificant but when you work it out actually are not.

For example taking 5 minutes off the booking on time and 5 minutes off the booking off time. Thats 10 minutes per shift, every day all roster. Lots of 10 minutes added together means you have lots of time suddenly floating around which means you have to work more days to get the same number of hours in. In essence you would loose some rest days.

Altering the length of a spare turn from "an hour less than the longest turn at the depot" to "the average turn length at the depot" , which would also have the effect of reducing the length of each spare duty on the roster, meaning you have to work more days to get the same hours in, and loose some rest days.

Those were just two things which spring to mind, but I think were the most disagreeable aspects.

Loose some rest days ? I don't get that? Surely that just means 10 minutes more per day actually on trains?

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Loose some rest days ? I don't get that? Surely that just means 10 minutes more per day actually on trains?

No, not at all.

This is how it works, assuming no other things change:

You have a duty where the first train you work departs at 0512. You have a 20 minute booking on time which is counted backwards from the time the first train leaves. So the shift starts at 0452. At the end the last train you work arrives at 1336. You have a 10 minute booking off time which is counted forward from the time the last train arrives, so the shift ends at 1346. Thus this shift is length is 0452 - 1346, 8hrs 54 minutes long.

If you amend the booking on and off times and loose 5 minutes off each then that same shift now starts at 0457 (15 minutes before the train leaves) and finishes at 1341 (5 minutes after the train arrives) and is 8hrs 44minutes long. So that is 10 minutes less.

Imagine your depot has 20 duties per day. Loose 10 minutes off each of them and that is 200 minutes per day.

Multiply that by 6 days a week and that is 1200 minutes per week reduced from the time you are actually paid to be at work.

Divide that by 60 and you have 20 hours extra to work across the roster cycle to ensure you are working your contracted hours. The current roster, which say has 45 lines / members of staff in, has to have no more than 1575 hours of work in it to average out as 35 per week (45 lines x 35 hours per line = 1575). Before the amendments the roster might have, say, 1568 hours of work in it.

The spare turns are say 9 hours long, so you are working 1568 out of a maximum of 1575. The roster is 7 hours short, but you can't work any more days as adding in an extra spare duty of 9 hours would mean you are working more than you are contracted.

However, if you amend the booking on and off time, then you suddenly have lost 20 hours from the 1568, so you are now only working 1548 hours when you should be working 1575. So you owe the company 27 hours. Each spare duty is 9 hours long, so the company takes 3 rest days from you and changes them in to spare turns. 3 x 9 hours = 27hours. Great, you are now back up to working 1575 hours. But you are now working 3 extra days per roster cycle than you were before.


If you then factor in things like amending the spare turn length from being an hour less than the longest turn to average turn length then suddenly a 9 hour spare might suddenly become 8hrs 30 minutes spare. (The longest duty is 10 hours, but the average of all duties is 8hrs 30 mins). That's 30 minutes per spare turn. Imagine you have 12 spare turns a day, then that's 6 hours per day saved. Multiply by 6 days per week and you have another 36 hours saved. So you need to work another 36 hours across the cycle to average 35 hours per week. Divided by the now spare turn length of 8.5 hours then you now have to work an extra 4 days across the roster.

So with both things combined you have suddenly lost 7 rest days across the roster cycle. So you spending an extra 7 days at work compared to before.

So 5 minutes here or there is quite important.

And on a purely practical note, which people on this forum would no doubt moan about when they are stood in the cold waiting for the doors to open....

Is 15 minutes really long enough to collect your duty diagram, read all relevant notices, walk across the station to the cash office, collect a ticket machine and float and log in, check it is working and check the float is ok, walk across the station to the train, get in and open the doors to let the passengers on and depart on time? If it is long enough then everyone really will be waiting on the platform to the very last minute.

 

[fabs]

Right now drivers at TPE are getting zero for their RDW because they are not permitted to work any as the RDW agreement ended

Worth noting that the Driver RDW Agreement didn’t naturally end. ASLEF pulled it a week or two prior to it’s natural expiry.
Think that’s worth noting as some reps are allowing us to believe it simply ended and the company weren’t interested in a renewal, which is untrue.

 

[75A]

No, not at all.

This is how it works, assuming no other things change:

You have a duty where the first train you work departs at 0512. You have a 20 minute booking on time which is counted backwards from the time the first train leaves. So the shift starts at 0452. At the end the last train you work arrives at 1336. You have a 10 minute booking off time which is counted forward from the time the last train arrives, so the shift ends at 1346. Thus this shift is length is 0452 - 1346, 8hrs 54 minutes long.

If you amend the booking on and off times and loose 5 minutes off each then that same shift now starts at 0457 (15 minutes before the train leaves) and finishes at 1341 (5 minutes after the train arrives) and is 8hrs 44minutes long. So that is 10 minutes less.

Imagine your depot has 20 duties per day. Loose 10 minutes off each of them and that is 200 minutes per day.

Multiply that by 6 days a week and that is 1200 minutes per week reduced from the time you are actually paid to be at work.

Divide that by 60 and you have 20 hours extra to work across the roster cycle to ensure you are working your contracted hours. The current roster, which say has 45 lines / members of staff in, has to have no more than 1575 hours of work in it to average out as 35 per week (45 lines x 35 hours per line = 1575). Before the amendments the roster might have, say, 1568 hours of work in it.

The spare turns are say 9 hours long, so you are working 1568 out of a maximum of 1575. The roster is 7 hours short, but you can't work any more days as adding in an extra spare duty of 9 hours would mean you are working more than you are contracted.

However, if you amend the booking on and off time, then you suddenly have lost 20 hours from the 1568, so you are now only working 1548 hours when you should be working 1575. So you owe the company 27 hours. Each spare duty is 9 hours long, so the company takes 3 rest days from you and changes them in to spare turns. 3 x 9 hours = 27hours. Great, you are now back up to working 1575 hours. But you are now working 3 extra days per roster cycle than you were before.


If you then factor in things like amending the spare turn length from being an hour less than the longest turn to average turn length then suddenly a 9 hour spare might suddenly become 8hrs 30 minutes spare. (The longest duty is 10 hours, but the average of all duties is 8hrs 30 mins). That's 30 minutes per spare turn. Imagine you have 12 spare turns a day, then that's 6 hours per day saved. Multiply by 6 days per week and you have another 36 hours saved. So you need to work another 36 hours across the cycle to average 35 hours per week. Divided by the now spare turn length of 8.5 hours then you now have to work an extra 4 days across the roster.

So with both things combined you have suddenly lost 7 rest days across the roster cycle. So you spending an extra 7 days at work compared to before.

So 5 minutes here or there is quite important.

And on a purely practical note, which people on this forum would no doubt moan about when they are stood in the cold waiting for the doors to open....

Is 15 minutes really long enough to collect your duty diagram, read all relevant notices, walk across the station to the cash office, collect a ticket machine and float and log in, check it is working and check the float is ok, walk across the station to the train, get in and open the doors to let the passengers on and depart on time? If it is long enough then everyone really will be waiting on the platform to the very last minute.

I would have thought 30 minutes would be more appropriate.

 

[PupCuff]

Is 15 minutes really long enough to collect your duty diagram, read all relevant notices, walk across the station to the cash office, collect a ticket machine and float and log in, check it is working and check the float is ok, walk across the station to the train, get in and open the doors to let the passengers on and depart on time? If it is long enough then everyone really will be waiting on the platform to the very last minute.

I agree with your post; I would just add for some wider context back when I was out on the front line if our first diagram was a PASS or TAXI we were given five minutes from booking on to our first working - the clear implication was that we would rush the booking on procedure to have sufficient time to wait for the resource controller to answer the phone, read notices, collect equipment, get down in the lift and across the station to the train/taxi however the reality would be you would either book on early and accept unpaid overtime by coming in early or accept the reality of rushing and perhaps missing that critical notice that came out yesterday whilst you were rest day. Dare challenge the fact that five minutes isn't sufficient and the response would be "well its agreed by the union and it gets regularly reviewed" as though that makes it okay.

 

[Moonshot]

I'm not surprised that guards have rejected this. So now we have no services on Sundays ......if Northern drivers actually do the same thing and ballot for strike action, then Sundays would be the likely day as well.

 

[Carlisle]

They wouldn't be getting 70k . Though. It was said up thread that if you halved the money. Some tocs only pay mid 50's to 60 k. So would you really get the best applicants for 25 to 30.

Maybe not, but it’s debatable to what extent that’s crucial, given todays multitude of monitoring technologies used by the railway make recreating that old school culture you mention up thread of ignoring & covering up incidents virtually impossible