Rail strikes discussion

[DarloRich]

.


A pay rise recommended by an independent committee.

And being a MP can be a hard job dealing with enquiries/issues raised from their constituency (although some MPs are better than others, across all parties).

2nd home allowances should be more limited to those MPs who live within say 50 miles of parliament , better than paying out for endless hotels for when the MP for Lancaster (etc) has to stay in London for an evening session in parliament.

In my mind MPs are underpaid, pay them more money and you might get better candidates, rather than waste of space career MPs who only get elected due to that area always voting for that particular party. Just with more rules that when they are a sitting MP they can't have another job. Also more limits of what can be claimed for on expenses, and get rid of the 'cheap' bars.

I don't disagree however it smells, once again, of hypocrisy when it is ok for hard working MPO's to have a pay rise but the rest of us have to show pay restraint to keep down inflation (or whatever argument is in vogue this week)

All in it together aint we?

 

[baz962]

I think that would be quite a sensible idea, although it would obviously not be popular with the higher earners. Possibly also quite a good way for the government to cause infighting within the unions!


Not sure where you get that idea from? The courts are increasingly deferential to the government, for fear of having their wings clipped. If Parliament makes it the law that rail workers can't strike, that's what the law is. They could even exclude the possibility of judicial review etc. if they were concerned about a legal challenge.

That said, I don't think the government is heading down that road at the moment. Instead I foresee a repeat of the Flexible Rostering dispute (which was ultimately resolved following a leak that BR had printed millions of redundancy notices).

I get that idea because it happens. People have beaten the government in court before. Police and other agencies like them are needed as people could lose life etc without. Rail staff are safely critical in a different way. No one loses their life if trains don't run .

 

[Philip]

The workers have an agenda as much as the papers do. Take both views and the truth will be in the middle somewhere.

Who are you to say rail workers have an 'agenda'? You don't know their circumstances. Very few rail workers want these strikes to happen, especially if they continue for months. They just want a reasonable deal and with some indication about their job future/security, nothing excessive, just like most workers.

 

[ar10642]

And be beaten in the court.

The courts enforce the laws the government make, and they can pretty much get anything they like through at the moment. Whatever challenge the unions make, the government can change whatever it was they were being challenged on to make it favourable for them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2022 ==

I don't disagree however it smells, once again, of hypocrisy when it is ok for hard working MPO's to have a pay rise but the rest of us have to show pay restraint to keep down inflation (or whatever argument is in vogue this week)

All in it together aint we?

The MPs don't set their own pay.

 

[JonathanH]

I think that would be quite a sensible idea, although it would obviously not be popular with the higher earners.

Why has it got to be popular with the higher earners? They have more discretionary income and aren't as challenged by the implications of a cost of living crisis as lower earners?

I think there would be a lot more sympathy about getting more money in to the hands of those who literally live hand to mouth has to be a priority over those who already have plenty.

A sensible offer constructed along the lines of £2,000 (or 2% if greater) (substitute the right figures) could be about right here.

 

[WelshBluebird]

It's the train crew unions pulling the strings but there's so many other roles affected by this.

You do realise that actually its the ToC's who have generally wanted to keep it that way, in order to avoid having to hire more staff.

Also the argument of the cost of living crisis isn't really justifiable. The cost of living crisis won't last forever, but wage increases will. What happens when it's over? Will unions agree to no pay rises for the next few years to balance things out again? Maybe some kind of bonus supplement would be better to support those through the crisis.

If you are not getting a pay rise that matches inflation then you get a pay cut. That is the simple truth of the matter. You say the cost of living crisis won't go on forever, but that is totally ignoring the fact that the price rises we are currently seeing won't suddenly get revered. Sure price raises may calm down but the level at which those prices have risen to will remain. So again if you don't get a pay rise to match that then you will be seeing a drop in your standard of living.

 

[DarloRich]

The MPs don't set their own pay.

I am aware of that - they could, in the interests of pay restraint ( or whatever) decline the rise in order to show solidarity with the plebs who they decide aren't worth a pay rise. They wont though.

 

[thedbdiboy]

MP'S got a £2,212 pay rise this year.

£84,144 per annum they're on now.

Various expenses claims, 2nd home allowances, jobs for the family in their constituency offices.

Where's the outrage regarding the above.

The government want a race to the bottom pitting everyone against everyone.

Yet make the unions and workers look bad for asking for a reasonable pay rise when inflation is 11%.

.


A pay rise recommended by an independent committee.

And being a MP can be a hard job dealing with enquiries/issues raised from their constituency (although some MPs are better than others, across all parties).

2nd home allowances should be more limited to those MPs who live within say 50 miles of parliament , better than paying out for endless hotels for when the MP for Lancaster (etc) has to stay in London for an evening session in parliament.

In my mind MPs are underpaid, pay them more money and you might get better candidates, rather than waste of space career MPs who only get elected due to that area always voting for that particular party. Just with more rules that when they are a sitting MP they can't have another job. Also more limits of what can be claimed for on expenses, and get rid of the 'cheap' bars.

Using MPs as a yardstick is a complete distraction - unless you also want each job to expire at any point within a five year period and be subject to re-election.

 

[Caaardiff]

You do realise that actually its the ToC's who have generally wanted to keep it that way, in order to avoid having to hire more staff.

Yes I am aware of that. But the government needs to use this now to get it sorted to provide a reliable and consistent full week service.

You do realise that actually its the ToC's who have generally wanted to keep it that way, in order to avoid having to hire more staff.

If you are not getting a pay rise that matches inflation then you get a pay cut. That is the simple truth of the matter. You say the cost of living crisis won't go on forever, but that is totally ignoring the fact that the price rises we are currently seeing won't suddenly get revered. Sure price raises may calm down but the level at which those prices have risen to will remain. So again if you don't get a pay rise to match that then you will be seeing a drop in your standard of living.

So what happens when the cost of living drops again? If there is an inconsistency between continual future pay rises and the cost of living drop, will unions agree to lower percentage pay rises in the future?

 

[Watershed]

We should be debating the job loses at network rail, maintenance staff seem an easy target.
The management talk about multi tasking and things like that, does that mean the senior managers can cover for the maintainance staff then ?

Everyone goes on about pay but this dispute is far more complicated than people realise, it's a multi facetted dispute.

I agree; that's certainly one of the biggest concerns for a lot of NR staff. My comment purely served to show that MPs are by no means receiving a huge payrise, indeed I would be amazed if this ends up being resolved at less than 2.7%.

 

[Need2]

Certainly rail workers shouldn't get paid extra to work on Sundays - I can't even imagine how that ever was agreed

Please explain why you think this.

I don't see what MPs' pay has to do with this at all. It just underlines how politically driven this all is.

I do!
When your TOC management (funded by the gov) says there is no money to fund a pay rise.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2022 ==

Using MPs as a yardstick is a complete distraction

So are all the other (usual) comparison’s between railway staff (primarily drivers) and nurses, soldiers and teachers.
Just because someone gets more pay than another does not mean they shouldn’t get or don’t need a pay rise!

 

[ar10642]

I do!
When your TOC management (funded by the gov) says there is no money to fund a pay rise.

The RMT have been banging on about fat cat foreign owned rail companies' profits for years and demanding for the railways to be brought under public ownership, sounds like they didn't really think through what that would mean for their members.

And yes it's quite possible there is money for a £2k payrise for MPs (650 x £2,000 = £1.3million) vs 42,000 Network Rail employees alone, let alone the TOCs to receive 10% in a railway where revenue is down significantly.

 

[DC1989]

So if this dispute isn't only about pay, say the government agreed to all of the demands EXCEPT pay rises - would that be accepted by the RMT?

 

[43096]

Who are you to say rail workers have an 'agenda'? You don't know their circumstances. Very few rail workers want these strikes to happen, especially if they continue for months. They just want a reasonable deal and with some indication about their job future/security, nothing excessive, just like most workers.

So you believe everything written on here by the staff? Both sides have an agenda - to suggest otherwise is naïve.

 

[Bluejays]

Who are you to say rail workers have an 'agenda'? You don't know their circumstances. Very few rail workers want these strikes to happen, especially if they continue for months. They just want a reasonable deal and with some indication about their job future/security, nothing excessive, just like most workers.

Of course we have an agenda. An agenda to look after our pay and conditions, everyone does. I don't think he necessarily meant it in a derogatory way.

 

[matacaster]

MP'S got a £2,212 pay rise this year.

£84,144 per annum they're on now.

Various expenses claims, 2nd home allowances, jobs for the family in their constituency offices.

Where's the outrage regarding the above.

The government want a race to the bottom pitting everyone against everyone.

Yet make the unions and workers look bad for asking for a reasonable pay rise when inflation is 11%.

I agree that mps have lots of perks like subsidised meals and bar (from when they used to sit all night). They also have some absurd working practices (should do electronic voting rather than physically walking thru lobby). However, many are lawyers, consultants etc and could earn much more outside parliament, others get elected and do as little as possible in fairness. Nonetheless, few drivers or guards are likely to command much higher wages than they get on the railways. That isn't to say they don't deserve an increase, but it needs to be realistic in the light of the UK economy.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2022 ==

I'm quite bullish about the strike action. It isn't really about the pay for me even though I am only a very low grade. The terms and conditions and actually 'modernisation' to S&T and P-Way will have a big impact on signaller workload. There's a very good reason to strike to keep the job a good one, and to not do so, at this point, will see us taken to the cleaners.

It's like Bob Crowe used to say: if you take strike action, I can't promise you that we'll win. However, if you don't take strike action, I guarantee that you lose.

What changes to the working terms and conditions would adversely affect you?

 

[Philip]

Of course we have an agenda. An agenda to look after our pay and conditions, everyone does. I don't think he necessarily meant it in a derogatory way.

Use of the word 'agenda' tends to have a negative connotation, it's usually more politically motivated.

 

[2021_Signaller]

So if this dispute isn't only about pay, say the government agreed to all of the demands EXCEPT pay rises - would that be accepted by the RMT?

Clearly it wouldn't. The government has forced the RMT up to the top of the hill now. They ain't marching them down again without a victory package that they can sell to their members. They have overwhelming support for the strikes. The pressure is on government to sort this out - this is of their making. Stop making threats and realise this is going to cause massive disruption to a lot of people.

 

[physics34]

The passenger only sees a very limited view of the railway and how it works. They tend to see the railway as Driver/train/signals/track with not much else. There is a plethora of jobs and people that ensures the trains run smoothly. The back office folk, the support staff, admin, maintenance, IT, customer service, delay attribution. planning, and a whole lot more.

This isn't just about Guard/Driver/Signaller

Its very difficult to describe the railway to the general public. I remember speaking to someone in depth about the working of the railways... then afterwards, after all my spew, he asked why trains dont have a steering wheel!

There is alot of ignorance out there

 

[muz379]

Also the argument of the cost of living crisis isn't really justifiable. The cost of living crisis won't last forever, but wage increases will. What happens when it's over? Will unions agree to no pay rises for the next few years to balance things out again? Maybe some kind of bonus supplement would be better to support those through the crisis.

Prices are not going to suddenly drop , "cost of living crisis" is just political buzz words for rapidly rising inflation .Prior to the pandemic the pay claims were settled with pay rises just above inflation unless some other productivity item was factorered in , so if inflation was lower from year to year the pay rises would vary along those lines .

Although if the government thought that , why wouldn't it try and cut accross this dispute by offering a small payrise coupled with a one off bonus payment for this year to address the higher than usual inflation ?

Using MPs as a yardstick is a complete distraction - unless you also want each job to expire at any point within a five year period and be subject to re-election.

similar to a full time official of the RMT then except the election cannot be at any point , just at the end of a 5 year period

So if this dispute isn't only about pay, say the government agreed to all of the demands EXCEPT pay rises - would that be accepted by the RMT?

Id expect that the union and members would want all demand met to some degree .

 

[mac]

I keep reading here that the strike is about T&Cs as well as pay but what happens when someone looks at the cost of running my signal box and decides it is now cheaper to close it like many others in my area so I'm jobless, they go on about no compulsory redundancies but what have NR got for me to do

 

[Bletchleyite]

I keep reading here that the strike is about T&Cs as well as pay but what happens when someone looks at the cost of running my signal box and decides it is now cheaper to close it like many others in my area so I'm jobless, they go on about no compulsory redundancies but what have NR got for me to do

Because signalbox closures (like booking office closures) are done progressively, natural wastage (i.e. people choosing to leave the grade or retiring) can take care of it provided people are flexible in terms of where they work (within reason).

 

[matacaster]

Because signalbox closures (like booking office closures) are done progressively, natural wastage (i.e. people choosing to leave the grade or retiring) can take care of it provided people are flexible in terms of where they work (within reason).

That's a fair point. If the bean counters work out that over a decent payback period it's cheaper to add your box / route to a regional workstation, then that will likely bring plans forward if there is capacity. Maintaining old boxes is a skilled and dying trade too.

 

[SynthD]

What changes to the working terms and conditions would adversely affect you?

The claim I’ve seen is a reduction in headcount of people in safety critical jobs. If they want to go from two to one in certain roles I, a passenger, would like to know someone worked out it’s safe enough.

I keep reading here that the strike is about T&Cs as well as pay but what happens when someone looks at the cost of running my signal box and decides it is now cheaper to close it like many others in my area so I'm jobless, they go on about no compulsory redundancies but what have NR got for me to do

Have you asked about retraining?

 

[exbrel]

i'm not anti-union, or anti-govt. just a pensioner, but a 10% rise, if given will then be the norm for every other union... and lets be honest the railways are in a tough place, they are trying to entice the public to get back on the trains. If they do "win" the rise, some passengers will have found alternative means of travel, then fares will be the next to go up, so more passengers will leave the trains, so inevitably we get to cutting services and staff.
So the havn't had a wage rise for 2-3 years, which lets face it a lot of people have not, argument means apart from the railways, prices will rise... so your 10% rise will take you a bit further, but those who have not got the union clout or even a union, will fall farther behind.
The national debt has gone sky high due to covid, but i think the government did well, with the measures it took, but that money borrowed has to be paid back, as our grand-children will find out.
I honestly think you deserve a rise for providing a service during the covid, but other workers did also, and are they now waiting to see what you get before they put a claim in...
Anyway excuse my rambling on, but i worked on the railways for 28yrs before redundancy caught me, but i still love them and want to see them thrive...

 

[JonathanH]

If they do "win" the rise, some passengers will have found alternative means of travel, then fares will be the next to go up, so more passengers will leave the trains, so inevitably we get to cutting services and staff.

Train fares may well go up with inflation regardless of what happens with staff wages as other costs will have increased, perhaps by a greater percentage than retail price inflation.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

I think this is where a lot of the problems for the rail industry going forward are going to stem from. I've relied on the railways for 22 years, my whole working life. I don't drive. This summer I have a full slate of work around the country and would ordinarily do that by train. Instead, I'm flying (domestically), using coaches and in worst case scenarios, holding meetings online. I've also decided that I may as well block-book an intensive driving course and get a car.

I'm currently sorting out an intensive driving course since public transport is getting worse and I hate my current job.

But if this continues on for a few months, could we see long term effects on the railway? Public trust in the railway lost? Declining numbers?

I can see quite a few services lost in the long term and in some cases a load of stations going the same way as Croxley Green, Kirton Lindsey and Brigg.

 

[AlterEgo]

Who are you to say rail workers have an 'agenda'? You don't know their circumstances. Very few rail workers want these strikes to happen, especially if they continue for months. They just want a reasonable deal and with some indication about their job future/security, nothing excessive, just like most workers.

That is an agenda. Just one that you find more reasonable and palatable.

 

[DarloRich]

I keep reading here that the strike is about T&Cs as well as pay but what happens when someone looks at the cost of running my signal box and decides it is now cheaper to close it like many others in my area so I'm jobless, they go on about no compulsory redundancies but what have NR got for me to do

In a no compulsory redundancy situation NR would offer you the chance to secure a new job at your grade in a new location. Accepting will require some flexibility from you. If you turn it down you make your self redundant. Of course, it is semantics but semantics are important in these situations. You essentially become natural wastage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In a no compulsory redundancy situation NR would offer you the chance to secure a new job at your grade in a new location. Accepting will require some flexibility from you. If you turn it down you make your self redundant. Of course, it is semantics but semantics are important in these situations. You essentially become natural wastage.

Potentially also a slightly different job. For instance, if a TOC like Southern goes DOO with OBS and all guards are offered OBS roles on their existing pay and conditions then that isn't compulsory redundancy either.