Rail strikes discussion

[Sifyu]

Strikes are never a good thing but an absolute last resort when no other solution presents itself.

I do wonder what ASLEF is planning though. Over here at LUL, RMT are coordinating action with the rest to maximise the impact.

We have talk in the mess rooms for more coordinated 'attacks' but this is pending on these disputes going on without any resolution.

 

[Starmill]

The pressure is on government to sort this out - this is of their making.

Is it? From whom?

I agree that Ministers have been quite happy to let the dispute progress. But from where is the pressure to change their minds coming?

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

Strikes are never a good thing but an absolute last resort when no other solution presents itself.

I do wonder what ASLEF is planning though. Over here at LUL, RMT are coordinating action with the rest to maximise the impact.

We have talk in the mess rooms for more coordinated 'attacks' but this is pending on these disputes going on without any resolution.

Worth noting that Aslef have already announced strike action at Hull Trains on Sunday 26 June (there will be no service on this date) and on London Tramlink on 28 and 29 June, 13 and 14 July. They are also taking action at Greater Anglia.

 

[Efini92]

(Train drivers can retire at 62) So can Joe Soap and Mrs Mopp if they so wish, as long as they have a pension that can cover their retirement. So the article is attacking drivers and rail workers who pay into a pension. Often these pensions are topped up with a previous pension. And when can MP's retire on a full pension? Try after 10 years.

(Northern cancelled 60 trains on the day of the world cup) Well, there is a simple solution to the rest day working part of the Northern agreement for the former North West part of the franchise. Negotiate in the agreement the east side has which generally works quite well. But they don't want to do that do they. And why not? Because it serves Northern to rely on overtime.

The rest day working agreement is the same for all three parts of northern.

 

[Cavan]

The Scottish Government/Scotrail has probably caused teeth gnashing at thr DfT - why would the RMT settle for anything less in England and Wales?

 

[SynthD]

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.

They have gone up by RPI+1% for a while.

 

[Egg Centric]

Could you explain how compromising safety is s good idea please

Good luck with that. I'd hate to be the one standing up in court after a death saying "yes we deliberately made things less safe than before because it was cheaper for us". It's simply not how the legal and regulatory system works in this country.

Safety comes at a cost, and has diminishing returns. The railways are many orders of magnitude safer than the roads and if we want to improve "transport safety" over all we're far better spending it there instead.

One example of where the railway is incurring huge costs at present for fairly small gain is the level crossing closure programs.

It's my understanding that railway staff have been (rightly) culturally and more recently psychometrically selected to be risk-averse and rule focussed so I expect this argument to go down like a bucket of cold sick but I stand by it.

There really isn’t. Not for the roles with the most bargaining power such as drivers and signallers (and to some extent guards).

At my TOC we use don’t use agency staff but we do use sub-contractors for cleaning and dispatching at some locations and the turnover is extremely high. It seems that nobody actively wants to be cleaning human waste off a toilet cubicle wall on a Saturday night or dispatching a train at 2am on a Tuesday for £9.90 an hour.

Where are these staff?

The desirable roles get hundreds of applicants (or this is my understanding). Sounds like the agency staff are still being found but if they're not then there will be no alternative but to either raise wages or (in the case of dispatch) come up with alternative ways of working.

I'm quite happy to accept that others have differing opinions, but the post I quoted is pretty much hot air written by someone who doesn't understand the issues.

I'm very clear I don't understand the issues in depth. I'm also certain I don't need to to understand public opinion, because believe me Joe Bloggs understands far less.

That is open to debate.

Let's take a guard for example. At my TOC the pay is around £28,000. Long shifts with starting times from around 0345 and the latest finish times around 0200. The personal responsibility is that if you do something wrong you could end up in prison. Not to mention the fact that you are frequently assessed. The salary seems fair for the work. And not to mention this dispute is not just about pay.

I do not think £28 000 is at all unreasonable for that (although how much do they make on top in overtime, pension contributions, etc?) but a bus driver with similar hours and responsbiltiy on £20 000 might and that is who you need to persuade.

I prefer “Electorate voting for Boris” as a more accurate way of describing the current mess

The alternative was Corbyn.

There is something deeply wrong with a system that made that the choice, but that is for another thread.

 

[Fokx]

The desirable roles get hundreds of applicants (or this is my understanding). Sounds like the agency staff are still being found but if they're not then there will be no alternative but to either raise wages or (in the case of dispatch) come up with alternative ways of working.

Desirable roles receive thousands of applicants, but over 95% don’t pass the assessments for the role even if they’re lucky (In reality it’s not down to luck, it’s down to the quality of the completed application and the candidate demonstrating their transferable skills) enough for their application to be selected.

Thousands of applicants apply to be an astronaut but very few make it to the moon

 

[skyhigh]

The desirable roles get hundreds of applicants (or this is my understanding)

Of which a small percentage are actually suitable.

Safety comes at a cost, and has diminishing returns. The railways are many orders of magnitude safer than the roads and if we want to improve "transport safety" over all we're far better spending it there instead.

One example of where the railway is incurring huge costs at present for fairly small gain is the level crossing closure programs.

It's my understanding that railway staff have been (rightly) culturally and more recently psychometrically selected to be risk-averse and rule focussed so I expect this argument to go down like a bucket of cold sick but I stand by it.

I get where you're coming from with things like level crossing closures, but the way you wrote before made it sound like it's a good idea to re-write existing working practices to make things cheaper while knowingly reducing safety. If rail is safer than roads it is a poor idea to reduce rail safety from where it currently is to increase road safety.

 

[Vespa]

"in a time of great squeeze". We are always in a a time of great squeeze according to the tories and Media. We have been in a time a of great squeeze since the last reccession 15 odd years ago. Why is it always the people, the workers, regular folk who have to foot the bill all the time and slerode their standard of life, record number using food banks, record personal debt simply to cover bills.

Why is it not the record setting corporations footing the bill for once? I have lost count how many of these business have made record profits during this "cost of living crisis" we don't have a cost of living crisis, we have a cost of greed crisis with big business.

The people of this country need to learn to support one another and stop doing the government and big business dirty work.

I was talking about the effect of the strike on the public and how the public will cope along with the cost etc.

Not Tories v Labour unless however if the aim of the strike is political, then RMT will lose, you only have to look at the miners strike to see what happened to a former formidable union now reduced to a shadow of its former self.

 

[102 fan]

Will Mick Lynch lose a day's pay on the strike dates?

 

[KenA]

The government quoted a figure of a £600 subsidy per household for the railways and that data i probably out of date

The railways have lost about 20% of its passengers so either costs have to be cut or fares increased. The current level of subsidies cannot continue in my view

 

[westv]

Is that £600 per year, month, week?

 

[Class 466]

The government quoted a figure of a £600 subsidy per household for the railways and that data i probably out of date

The railways have lost about 20% of its passengers so either costs have to be cut or fares increased. The current level of subsidies cannot continue in my view

They do fail to mention that they did subsidise the railway pre pandemic so this £600 isn’t all new money.

 

[Egg Centric]

I get where you're coming from with things like level crossing closures, but the way you wrote before made it sound like it's a good idea to re-write existing working practices to make things cheaper while knowingly reducing safety. If rail is safer than roads it is a poor idea to reduce rail safety from where it currently is to increase road safety.

Perhaps sometimes it could be, for example stating this as neutrally as possible DOO aiui is more or less universally acknowledged to be cheaper and increased risk albeit with significant controversy about how much cheaper and how much increased risk.

 

[Some guy]

The government quoted a figure of a £600 subsidy per household for the railways and that data i probably out of date

The railways have lost about 20% of its passengers so either costs have to be cut or fares increased. The current level of subsidies cannot continue in my view

That 20% loss of passengers has to be lie. Some trains now are as bad as before Covid especially with sports events concerts and leisure travel

 

[KenA]

That 20% loss of passengers has to be lie. Some trains now are as bad as before Covid especially with sports events concerts and leisure travel

No it is correct. The 20% is an average it is nearer 12% at weekends

 

[Efini92]

No it is correct. The 20% is an average it is nearer 12% at weekends

That puts us at levels roughly 10 years ago. The trains were very busy then and the subsidies were a lot higher.

 

[Goldfish62]

That 20% loss of passengers has to be lie. Some trains now are as bad as before Covid especially with sports events concerts and leisure travel

"Some trains.." And sports and leisure events did take place before Covid.

I can see quite easily that passenger levels are not back where they were pre-Covid. And how could they be given that a significant number of those travelling 4-5 days per week are no longer doing so? The peak service on my line has been cut by 50% and trains in the peaks are no busier, perhaps actually quieter, than they were pre-Covid, so being generous that means a 50% reduction in peak hours passenger numbers on just one formerly busy line into London.

 

[Starmill]

That 20% loss of passengers has to be lie. Some trains now are as bad as before Covid especially with sports events concerts and leisure travel

By definition, it is more likely that one travels on overcrowded trains. It does not mean that all trains are well loaded or even that on average trains are well loaded.

 

[wobman]

The t

No it is correct. The 20% is an average it is nearer 12% at weekends

The trains I'm on at weekends are busier that pre covid, the commuters aren't all back in the week but non commuters has very much increased. The figures vary between 80 to 92% from the data I've seen. Which will rise once the summer & holidays users start travelling, there's so much doom & gloom about passenger figures.

 

[Falcon1200]

Should a government mandated rest day ban be implemented then it’ll only cripple the railway more than a few days strike!

From what I have read the overtime ban is just on each day after a strike, to prevent staff from 'cashing in' according to the Government; Still a nasty thing to do however.

I was recently told "nobody wants a strike" which I guess wasn't true at all then.

I don't believe that rail staff, or the TOCs or Network Rail want a strike; OTOH, the Government and the RMT however seem utterly entrenched and I see no easy or quick resolution as a result.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Will Mick Lynch lose a day's pay on the strike dates?

Why should he? He’s not on strike.

 

[Llanigraham]

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

As I know after my injury at work that precluded me working a manual box, nothing. I knew I could have worked my nearest "computer signalling control centre" but they wouldn't consider the promotion needed.

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).

Fine, until you realise like what happened on the Crewe line that the new control centre is over 100 miles away, and in a much more expensive area. And that will be typical of many rural boxes remaining.

 

[exbrel]

it may well do, but if the strikes win or a deal is agreed, the public will associate any rise with the strike...

 

[JamesT]

I don't believe that rail staff, or the TOCs or Network Rail want a strike; OTOH, the Government and the RMT however seem utterly entrenched and I see no easy or quick resolution as a result.

If rail staff don’t want a strike, why did they vote for one? As is often pointed out on here, a union is merely the collective will of their members.

 

[skyhigh]

If rail staff don’t want a strike, why did they vote for one?

It's quite possible to not want to strike but feel you have no other option.

 

[12C]

From what I have read the overtime ban is just on each day after a strike, to prevent staff from 'cashing in' according to the Government; Still a nasty thing to do however.

I wonder if the overtime ban will apply to Sunday 26th June? If so the government will in effect be adding an extra strike day, with further knock on effect on the Monday.

 

[Goldfish62]

The t

The trains I'm on at weekends are busier that pre covid, the commuters aren't all back in the week but non commuters has very much increased. The figures vary between 80 to 92% from the data I've seen. Which will rise once the summer & holidays users start travelling, there's so much doom & gloom about passenger figures.

The weekend is two days. The railways have lost significant custom over the five other days, particularly from season ticket holders.

 

[Efini92]

I wonder if the overtime ban will apply to Sunday 26th June? If so the government will in effect be adding an extra strike day, with further knock on effect on the Monday.

I don’t think there is an overtime ban, the quote was they won’t be able to top up with RDW due to tocs running a reduced service on non strike days that week.

 

[TheEdge]

I don't believe that rail staff, or the TOCs or Network Rail want a strike; OTOH, the Government and the RMT however seem utterly entrenched and I see no easy or quick resolution as a result.

This, I feel, is probably the most sensible thing that will be posted in this thread