Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Perhaps one toc finds it harder to recruit suitable staff and retain them as wages are typically higher in some areas than others. Eg cost of living in South East is much higher than say Oldham, so salaries in many businesses will tend to be higher in South East. On the other hand, they might have to pay extra to get anyone to come to Oldham.
I should also add that the wage for any job tends to be arrived at by supply and demand. So, a railway driver takes time and considerable cost to train, is probably reliable, reasonably intelligent and passed some exams. Thus the supply of drivers is limited hence the comparatively high wages compared to other railway staff, except for senior signallers and some management. Booking office staff are trained in a narrow field, but the job can be largely automated and whilst they can be very helpful and appreciated (by me at least) , their value is diminishing as time proceeds.
sounds like the govt are leaving it up to network rail to negotiate on behalf of the TOCS too through talks with the rail delivery group. Is this correct ?
NR saying the basic offer -is or was - 2.5% no strings with more on top with efficiencies ??
So as per my post last night 5pc seems do-able with 2.5% awarded through efficiencies within each company.
In which case, I suggest that you campaign for food shops to not be allowed to operate independently, because their purpose is to supply food. As it happens, the supermarkets both make profit and do a remarkably good job of providing us with food at historically very low costs.
The railways were built as private companies, and provided public transport as an economic activity that made them profit and served their communities well. Profit is usually also a good indication of a well run business providing a service that it's customers need and value.
We have a form of quasi-privatised railway in the UK; many of it's worst weaknesses are where it is told how to deliver public transport rather than being allowed to do so on a commercial basis.
We have a form of quasi-privatised railway in the UK; many of it's worst weaknesses are where it is told how to deliver public transport rather than being allowed to do so on a commercial basis.
But if it was actually allowed to do so on a purely commercial basis, a lot of small, unprofitable stations and services would be removed, which is only a good thing if you look at the railway purely from a business perspective. If you want it to still be there to provide a public service, and to adapt into something that might tempt people out of their cars, then that's no good.
How much would the average worker lose off three days strike? And is it deducted from a monthly pay and how is this determined? Pay per annum / 365? Stupid question/s maybe but I was just interested.
Most railway pay is 4 weekly. So you're looking at ~10% reduction (presuming it is not clawed back by RDW or overtime). For someone on £40K, its probably about £300-350 lost in that pay packet.
The government's position is an ideological one, they have a track record of profligate financial waste:
£5bn on COVID loan fraud.
£16bn on COVID loan defaults.
£11bn because the chancellor couldn't be bothered to fix the interest rate on our national debt.
20% of COVID procurement contracts have red flags for alleged corruption.
For every day of strike action I’m going to lose two days worth of pay, as my partner works on the railway too. We have a mortgage and a child to think about, as well as various other bills and debts.
And ‘when a pay award is won’ is not certain in the slightest. I would be astonished if a pay award is forthcoming. Where is the incentive from HMG to give rail staff a payrise? Remember, they are saving money on every day that trains don’t run.
What’s more, I don’t want a payrise. I want to come to work and work hard and go home at the end of the day and not worry about things, and I’m quite happy to continue doing that on my current salary. @driverd puts it better than me.
Well you can consider yourself very lucky that you comfortable on your present salary. Maybe just maybe I have children, bills, debts , huge mortgage, transport costs etc too. And its getting increasingly UNCOMFORTABLE. I'm very pleased that you have a great little life but the sad reality is so many haven't, especially none driving roles. Just because you are OK doesn't mean everyone else can afford to carry on with these real terms pay cuts....
Yes, so they may want to rethink what choice on this matter would save money overall. It’s no good only thinking of the next 8 days before the by election, it’s the lifetime of the country that should matter.
For every day of strike action I’m going to lose two days worth of pay, as my partner works on the railway too. We have a mortgage and a child to think about, as well as various other bills and debts.
And ‘when a pay award is won’ is not certain in the slightest. I would be astonished if a pay award is forthcoming. Where is the incentive from HMG to give rail staff a payrise? Remember, they are saving money on every day that trains don’t run.
What’s more, I don’t want a payrise. I want to come to work and work hard and go home at the end of the day and not worry about things, and I’m quite happy to continue doing that on my current salary. @driverd puts it better than me.
Also I suspect you shouldn't need to worry too much about a driver strike happening as our grade is more and more afflicted by Boris loving Tory types more worried about the few hundred refugees entering the country per year than worrying about the man on the streets wages or plight. I strongly suspect drivers will vote no to strikes....
In which case, I suggest that you campaign for food shops to not be allowed to operate independently, because their purpose is to supply food. As it happens, the supermarkets both make profit and do a remarkably good job of providing us with food at historically very low costs.
The railways were built as private companies, and provided public transport as an economic activity that made them profit and served their communities well. Profit is usually also a good indication of a well run business providing a service that it's customers need and value.
We have a form of quasi-privatised railway in the UK; many of it's worst weaknesses are where it is told how to deliver public transport rather than being allowed to do so on a commercial basis.
Using the top level figures @Bald Rick provided way up thread, the BoE's inflation calculator and a quick bit of Excel, you get this picture of the railway's finances from 2014/15 to 2019/20 (i.e. pre-pandemic).
So taking into account inflation, for a 6% increase in revenue, costs went up by 39% - subsidy more than doubled even when compared like-for-like. To say that the industry has a cost problem is a huge understatement. It's absolutely appalling.
Using the top level figures @Bald Rick provided way up thread, the BoE's inflation calculator and a quick bit of Excel, you get this picture of the railway's finances from 2014/15 to 2019/20 (i.e. pre-pandemic). View attachment 116311
So taking into account inflation, for a 6% increase in revenue, costs went up by 39% - subsidy more than doubled even when compared like-for-like. To say that the industry has a cost problem is a huge understatement. It's absolutely appalling.
Forgive me Bald Rick, proposed by whom - the RMT? I don't believe that I have seen their package of reforms? So much on here I could have easily missed it though.
From the latest ORR passenger usage figures they show 2022 Q1 usage as 82% and Q2 as 85%, to me that is rising numbers of passenger usage. There was a peak figure of 92% in May at the time of school holidays, we are only 8 weeks away from the summer holidays.
Your figures do not correlate with ORR figures.
ORR is somewhat lagging. I’m using daily figures. Yesterday was 78%, and was the same as last Tuesday. this week as a whole is the same as last week, which in turn is lower than the week before.
Regarding the Network Rail staff dispute let's say I believe the posts from staff involved, many taking redundancy as they had no other choice. Redeployment to another job in another area is not suitable for most people, so in them circumstances they will take voluntary redundancy.
We’ll that’s odd. I know over 50 people in the industry who have (or will be) taking redundancy; they all had a choice, and not one of them regrets leaving.
I also know about 100 who have been redeployed, and whilst not ideal for all of them, for many it is a new opportunity, and at worst it’s more ideal than not having a job. It is certainly ’suitable‘ for all of them. In fact I’m one of them. As this is a post from a member of staff involved, I trust you’ll believe me too.
It certainly seems appropriate that RMT have called for talks with Ministers directly. I agree that this is the only kind of talking that's going to achieve a resolution now. I also agree with the line from Labour that it is a dereliction of duty on the part of the government that they've refused.
I disagree. Ministerial involvement needs to be the last resort if and only if all possible avenues of discourse and negotiation have failed, including a trip to ACAS. This is patently not the case here. Talks are underway, serious talks, all week. Involving ministers directly now, none of whom are expert in the matter (unlike those negotiating), would surely make matters worse.
It is a remarkable coincidence that the letter from Mick Lynch to Shapps arrived on the morning of the debate in Parliament.
The inside story of this dispute will be fascinating when it emerges.
sounds like the govt are leaving it up to network rail to negotiate on behalf of the TOCS too through talks with the rail delivery group. Is this correct ?
not correct. NR is negotiating for NR. TOC discussions are a matter for the TOCs, as any agreement must be with the employer. However I gather the RDG are helping, I would guess to help the unions with workload, as well as to provide consistency.
Using the top level figures @Bald Rick provided way up thread, the BoE's inflation calculator and a quick bit of Excel, you get this picture of the railway's finances from 2014/15 to 2019/20 (i.e. pre-pandemic). View attachment 116311
So taking into account inflation, for a 6% increase in revenue, costs went up by 39% - subsidy more than doubled even when compared like-for-like. To say that the industry has a cost problem is a huge understatement. It's absolutely appalling.
Do you have the comparable figures for the NHS subsidy? It would be interesting to compare these. I know it’s apples and oranges but it puts things into perspective.
I disagree. Ministerial involvement needs to be the last resort if and only if all possible avenues of discourse and negotiation have failed, including a trip to ACAS. This is patently not the case here. Talks are underway, serious talks, all week. Involving ministers directly now, none of whom are expert in the matter (unlike those negotiating), would surely make matters worse.
It is a remarkable coincidence that the letter from Mick Lynch to Shapps arrived on the morning of the debate in Parliament.
The inside stour of this dispute will be fascinating when it emerges.
I guess it depends on where you draw the line of all other avenues having failed. I would say that this threshold is now passed because at this point both sides have priced in the cost of the disruption next week. Of course you may be right because after this round of disruption there's an opportunity for a 'reset' of sorts.
If the Union position is that they will not accept anything less than a carve-out from the general public sector pay settlement (the 2% with flex for efficiency savings) then it's pretty obvious that only Ministerial direction can resolve the dispute. However, it may well be that there is a settlement available within this. I don't know.
Most railway pay is 4 weekly. So you're looking at ~10% reduction (presuming it is not clawed back by RDW or overtime). For someone on £40K, its probably about £300-350 lost in that pay packet.
A fair chunk then. While I would agree with the sentiment it is ideal to follow majority position, no one should be mocked/abused for needing to cross that line.
I disagree. Ministerial involvement needs to be the last resort if and only if all possible avenues of discourse and negotiation have failed, including a trip to ACAS. This is patently not the case here. Talks are underway, serious talks, all week. Involving ministers directly now, none of whom are expert in the matter (unlike those negotiating), would surely make matters worse.
feels a bit top heavy but whatever it is thats more cost on the bottom line of running the railway. So better to put down a decent offer like 5% to get strikes suspended and negotiations reopened.
Lynch sounds half reasonable to me compared to Cortes who somehow thinks TSSA can wield power dream on.
Strike action by Aslef is taking place at Greater Anglia, London Tramlink and Hull Trains. They're also in dispute in a handful of other places, including ScotRail.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
feels a bit top heavy but whatever it is thats more cost on the bottom line of running the railway. So better to put down a decent offer like 5% to get strikes suspended and negotiations reopened.
Lynch sounds half reasonable to me compared to Cortes who somehow thinks TSSA can wield power dream on.
Mr Lynch has had some very good interviews this time.
However, an offer of 5% with no strings attached simply isn't going to be on the table unless there's more senior involvement. The employers and DfT aren't permitted to agree it.
Mr Lynch has had some very good interviews this time.
However, an offer of 5% with no strings attached simply isn't going to be on the table unless there's more senior involvement. The employers and DfT aren't permitted to agree it.
It's almost as if the RMT have FINALLY hired some PR/comms professionals because frankly this area of their management has been woeful the past few years.
The govt needs to authorise 5% with RMT signing up to working with NR and operators to right size the industry to a lower passenger demand. RMT are realistic on T&C's and imv far more sensible than TSSA's language.
"The union has the same position as it always has - to seek job security with a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies; that any changes to structures, working practices, or conditions have to be agreed with our union, not imposed;
It's almost as if the RMT have FINALLY hired some PR/comms professionals because frankly this area of their management has been woeful the past few years.
What’s more, I don’t want a payrise. I want to come to work and work hard and go home at the end of the day and not worry about things, and I’m quite happy to continue doing that on my current salary. @driverd puts it better than me.
How many years will you be willing to go without anything but a token pay rise or no pay rise at all? If you're not looking for pay rises at times of 10%+ inflation, when would you?
The parameters by which the Tories will consider the railway to have financially 'recovered' sufficiently for a worthwhile pay rise to be offered benevolently will probably never be met.
Essentially, if not in the short term, how much are you willing to lose in the long term?
and came away with a fundamentally different view of the man than the one portrayed in the media and by the government. He is very different to Bob Crow and maybe he's just better at playing to the audience but the government (BoJo) should put behind his dealings with Bob Crows RMT when he was mayor.
ORR is somewhat lagging. I’m using daily figures. Yesterday was 78%, and was the same as last Tuesday. this week as a whole is the same as last week, which in turn is lower than the week before.
Indeed, much of the success in offsetting the lost commuter traffic has been leisure traffic which is now starting to drop away as the save for a rainy day funds from covid and cost of living increases start to bite.
Shows how fickle the railway recovery can be, commuter traffic with annual season tickets paid for up front gave the industry some certainty, leisure travel is far more discretionary.
Since leisure and most commuter travelers can change their arrangements or work remotely to avoid disruption, strikes need to be far longer than before to achieve the same outcome - with the following consequences:
Rail workers will lose far more pay before a settlement is reached
Those who cannot work remotely - by nature often skewing toward the lower paid - will suffer far more disruption
The above makes me think the calculus has changed on strikes. While I respect the right of rail workers to withdraw their labour, they strike me as an outdated model (and already were 10 years ago) since the disruption they cause is no longer immediate and universal.
There is a lot of talk of solidarity above - I think it would behoove those in the industry to think about who they are most harming through their action and to ensure that they are more than reasonable in any discussions, as opposed to pushing for the most they could get by holding out to the last (which is how strikes have historically worked). Obviously the government needs to be prepared to negotiate in good faith as well.
Despite some posts above, I believe (through thousands of interactions on the network) that the vast majority of rail workers enjoy their jobs and care about their passengers, and therefore will not support indefinite strikes of the duration required to attain the settlements they have historically enjoyed.
Many of the reasons why so many unions are less able to use industrial action as effectively is because of action taken in the past, which has seen governments crack down on it through legislation & some instances attrition.
Indeed. Which is why all the rubbish on this thread about the 1970s, miners strikes etc. is just that. There are going to be no wildcat strikes, flying pickets, entirely different industries walking out in solidarity with each other etc. The fact of the matter is that trade unions are far, far weaker these days.
Of course the Daily Mail pedals the false narrative that nothing has changed and plants the fear into the small minds of its readers that any kind of organisation of the workforce will transport the country back to the 70s and is a threat that must therefore be stamped out.
Hyacinth Bucket types also don’t like to be reminded how dirty working class railway staff earn more than call centre wages these days and, God forbid, perhaps even live in nicer houses than they do, so it’s a compelling message. It entirely suits the current government to jump onto the same bandwagon. It’s just a shame so many in this country (and on here) have swallowed it hook, line and sinker.
I find it utterly depressing that in the U.K. in 2022 there was someone on this thread earning £10 an hour during a cost of living crisis and and lashing out at (of all people) the railway unions… Talk about looking the wrong way for someone to vilify. I sincerely hope he succeeds in his application to join the railway where he might just find better Ts and Cs. If he does he will have occasion to rethink his assessment of unions.
many younger people are far less inclined to join unions, or at least take part in action every time a rep cries "everybody out!". Unions have to evolve to survive.
On the railway the unions are thriving. That’s probably because they’re not the useless talking shops unions have been reduced to in most other industries and are still prepared to actually do something.
That said, do reps often cry “everybody out”? Certainly not on the railway they don’t. I’ve also been on seven years-ish and never so much as been balloted so I’ll call bull droppings on that!
The last time I took my turn on a picket line, my union gave very specific instructions that we were to try and persuade would-be strike breakers not to. And any form of coercion or treating colleagues differently during or after a dispute was heavily frowned upon. Sadly some reps continued to behave like they were still stuck in the 1970s, and for these reasons I felt I could no longer be a rep.
Nobody on this thread has condoned coercion or bullying. As I keep saying if people simply don’t like you they might talk to you to the extent necessary to do their jobs (ie being professional) but they won’t go out of their way to help you. I think you don’t realise the extent to which the railway relies on goodwill both between company and employee, and (from an employee’s perspective) between each other.
It also sounds from the description above that your union also took a dim view of strike breakers - surprise surprise it comes with the territory in unionised industries. So can we all stop pretending the railway is somehow exceptional in that regard?
Actually, for all the faux concern on here about bullying and abuse of strike breakers by “scum bags” and “dinosaurs”, I’m happy to report the operational railway is generally a pretty supportive place to work. People tend to look out for each other and their colleagues. It’s not perfect but on balance I’d much rather work here than in a “kill or be killed” corporate environment where everyone is stabbing each other in the back in order to get ahead and secure a bonus/promotion or whatever.
I’ve also seen more cases of bullying and of people being “managed out” of jobs because their face didn’t fit in my time in the non unionised private sector than I ever have on the railway.
Strikers v. strike breakers is purely about internal relations between colleagues. It has nothing whatsoever to do with relations with passengers. As a former union rep you must be aware of that and it’s extremely disingenuous of you to try and suggest otherwise.
Strikes generally also have nothing to do with punters (who are obviously inconvenienced, but that is *never* the motivation for industrial action, nor something anyone takes pleasure in). Unless we should conclude you hate tax payers because you’ve been out in the civil service?!
we'll just slavishly come back when its over. Or will we? You and your colleagues might just want to give that more than a brief thought when considering future industrial action.
Let me think. The punters have come back after every other rail strike in history. They’ve also largely come back after Covid - in fact we could do with a few less at weekends. So, on balance, I can see why the unions think it’s worth the risk….
And talking to many colleagues about it, the general consensus is given the current administration's desire to cut budgets deeply, going on strike would be an act of masochism.
Well then, given this comment, I’m sure you’ll agree with me that it’s high time tax payers and fare payers were stopped expecting to fund the profits of ROSCOs?
You won’t, of course, because that doesn’t suit your (glaringly obvious) agenda of citing faux concern about costs to attack unions trying to get cleaners a modest pay rise.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
and came away with a fundamentally different view of the man than the one portrayed in the media and by the government. He is very different to Bob Crow and maybe he's just better at playing to the audience but the government (BoJo) should put behind his dealings with Bob Crows RMT when he was mayor.
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
