Rail strikes discussion

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Some might wonder why you didn’t last in any of them.

Didn’t last? ITV Production & Theatre contracts are six month ones while the production runs, I worked at all three catering places simultaneously for several years until I moved from London to South Wales, and I continue to work for the TOC and the radio station now. I don’t feel as though I should have to justify that, but your assumption making is really quite unbelievable.

I’d rather you didn’t derail the thread on my behalf anymore though.

You mean the ability of some militant rail staff (again it's a minority), some of whom happen to be on here. It's by no means representative.

Of course. I shall edit that post accordingly.

 

[yorkie]

You are lucky you don't live in Russia
You are lucky to just have a job
You are lucky to be paid so well

Yes we are and you shouldn't forget that.

Put the brake on the race to the bottom;

Anyone who uses that phrase is really scraping the barrel. I've never heard it used in intelligent debate.

The idea that rail industry (as a whole/in general - there will always be the odd exception) wages are rock bottom is absolutely absurd.

public services (The railway included) are falling apart in front of our eyes and times are getting hard for most people, yet we, as railway employees, are meant to just meekly comply? No, if anything, more people should be following our example and attempting to resist.

So your proposal is for everyone to be paid more money. Right. And what do you think would happen with inflation ?

 

[windingroad]

I don't see how striking is being kind to anyone, which appeared to be the suggestion. If you think striking is a kind thing to do, I'm all ears as to the explanation.

Striking is about being kind to your colleagues, and to yourself, by acting in solidarity to maintain fair wages and conditions. Without the unions employment rights would be much, much worse than they are today across the board. And that would be "anything but kind", as you put it.

 

[yorkie]

Striking is about being kind to your colleagues, and to yourself, by acting in solidarity to maintain fair wages and conditions. Without the unions employment rights would be much, much worse than they are today across the board. And that would be "anything but kind", as you put it.

This really is an absurd argument. Striking isn't kind to anyone; the argument that striking it is being kind to those striking is just bizarre. As for unions, the correlation for me has been the more unionised the work, the lower the pay, so what you say is by no means universally true.

 

[43066]

No it isn't, but this is what some (a minority of) rail staff are like. Anecdotally, It tends to be more likely (but not exclusively) drivers who act like this, but of course most drivers wouldn't say anything like that so that's not in any way a generalisation of drivers, but just based on my observations of such behaviour and what I've heard from others.

Okay so, my previous example. I’m a driver. If my cleaner colleagues go on strike next week, and I agree to go in for twice my daily wage to cover for them, would you think I was a nice person?

That just sums it up really, doesn’t it. On a passenger railway/public transport.

You’re taking this completely the wrong way. This isn’t about passengers - we’re talking about employees withdrawing their labour.

With all due respect it’s not a conversation you can be credibly be part of as a young gun at uni. You’re clearly a smart bloke. Shouldn’t you be razzing it up at uni? My degree (between intensive study periods) was mostly spent smashing back pints and scoring myself silly, not arguing online with a load of middle aged trainspotters!

I don't see how striking is being kind to anyone, which appeared to be the suggestion. If you think striking is a kind thing to do, I'm all ears as to the explanation.

I’m not sure you fully appreciate what striking is. To be clear, it’s withdrawing your labour in protest at the conditions in your employer is imposing (or proposing to impose).

It’s neither kind nor unkind, rather a necessity.

I do think it is looking like some reforms will be needed in this area.

Such as what?

 

[Jason48]

If Grant Shapps bans next day overtime, does this mean we conductors here at Northern are banned from covering our Sundays. Sundays are not part of our working week, they're all overtime shifts.

I do hope this is the case. A day at the stockcars could beckon.

That is tosh. He can't ban overtime

 

[yorkie]

Okay so, my previous example. I’m a driver. If my cleaner colleagues go on strike next week, and I agree to go in for twice my daily wage to cover for them, would you think I was a nice person?

Can you ask a realistic question?

You’re taking this completely the wrong way. This isn’t about passengers - we’re talking about employees withdrawing their labour.

With all due respect it’s not a conversation you can be credibly be part of as a young gun at uni. You’re clearly a smart bloke. Shouldn’t you be razzing it up at uni? My degree (between intensive study periods) was mostly spent smashing back pints and scoring myself silly, not arguing online with a load of middle aged trainspotters!

This isn't a spotters forum by any means.

I’m not sure you fully appreciate what striking is. To be clear, it’s withdrawing your labour in protest at the conditions in your employer is imposing (or proposing to impose).

It’s neither kind nor unkind, rather a necessity.

It's hardly a "necessity"!

Such as what?

I'm not sure, and it really depends on how this goes, but I don't think the RMT (or any of the other unions involved) should be allowed to win this.

 

[windingroad]

Anyone who uses that phrase is really scraping the barrel. I've never heard it used in intelligent debate.

Unfortunately I've never heard "scraping the barrel" used in intelligent debate, so we're at sixes and sevens here! Or perhaps we could stop being silly, and you could engage with what they were saying rather than ducking the substance.

This really is an absurd argument. Striking isn't kind to anyone; the argument that striking it is being kind to those striking is just bizarre. As for unions, the correlation for me has been the more unionised the work, the lower the pay, so what you say is by no means universally true.

You are the one who framed this in terms of kindness. I'm simply explaining it to you in the context of this industrial dispute. Are you aware what solidarity means?

 

[DanNCL]

Some of the posts on the last few pages sum up nearly everything that’s wrong with the railway. There is a remarkable lack of respect for others coming from some of the same people who are moaning about a lack of respect themselves. Perhaps if more people had some basic manners they’d get more sympathy. It’s only a minority (albeit a very vocal minority), but there’s too many people doing this and it gives the railway an even worse reputation than the poor reputation it already had.

I don’t support the strikes, but accept that it is people’s right to strike, the RMT do have a mandate for this action, and these strikes will go ahead. But that doesn’t change the fact that I think resolving the issues is much more likely to happen without strikes.

Freezing passengers? In June? You're at it.

That wasn’t the point he was trying to make.

Really? Surely helping out with the dreadful staff shortages is a kind thing to do. It helps improve the service for the passengers affected. Those striking are choosing to strike, are they not? Or do they have no choice? That would make a difference.

Boris Johnson also has a choice to lie to the British public or not. Except only one of those will save his job so that’s the option to take. It’s a similar principle here, or at least it would be if the RMT hadn’t lied through their teeth to get their members to vote for strike action in the first place.

That said, the 0% pay rise offers that have been mentioned upthread are completely unacceptable and I can fully understand why people would want to strike if that’s what they’d been offered.

Maybe wait until you’ve experienced a workplace before telling people what they are allowed to think about theirs?

You can’t assume someone hasn’t been in the professional workplace just from their age.

 

[Jason48]

This really is an absurd argument. Striking isn't kind to anyone; the argument that striking it is being kind to those striking is just bizarre. As for unions, the correlation for me has been the more unionised the work, the lower the pay, so what you say is by no means universally true.

I'm a Conductor with 33 years experience. Hoping to take Pension in about 10 years, But if the Government get their mitts on it as they want to, there would be a few more years worth of work to do. Also I'm walking out next week, my company put out some spill that we have to be nice to our colleagues no matter what they decide to do.

 

[DanNCL]

That is tosh. He can't ban overtime

He can if he wants. All he has to do is change the contracts the TOCs have with the DFT to specifically ban it.

 

[yorkie]

Unfortunately I've never heard "scraping the barrel" used in intelligent debate,

That's fine; you can be as unhappy as you like with the terminology but the point remains that the term "race to the bottom" is absolute nonsense and particularly ludicrous in the context of being applied to the rail industry.

so we're at sixes and sevens here! Or perhaps we could stop being silly, and you could engage with what they were saying rather than ducking the substance.

I have engaged; if you disagree, that's your prerogative.

You are the one who framed this in terms of kindness. I'm simply explaining it to you in the context of this industrial dispute.

I wasn't the one who brought it up; I was merely responding to the post I quoted.

Are you aware what solidarity means?

Of course; it means people looking out for others within a group / individuals with a common interest; it doesn't necessarily mean it's the right thing to do, or a kind thing to do, or good for society generally.

 

[ar10642]

Fully appreciate that.

I suppose it comes down to whether it’s part of their job or whether it’s something they’re doing just to enrich themselves.



To be honest it’s difficult to imagine the whole scenario if you’ve never worked in a unionised industry. It’s *not* about the passengers, it’s about your colleagues. The whole ethos of striking (which nobody wants to do) is that people are making a sacrifice for the good of the whole.

If my employer said to me as a driver, “the cleaners are on strike, can you go and do their job for double your own daily rate?”. And I said, “yes please”! What would that make me? Lower than a snake’s belly is what.

It’s visceral.



Disgusting behaviour.

To be honest if anyone in my life acted like that, whether friend or colleague, I’d want nothing further to do with them. So I can well see how people get to the stage of “X doesn’t speak to Y because of what happened twenty years ago”.

I’m dreading the next few months tbh.

Honestly I've never heard such a load of rubbish in my life. It's a job, you do it for money. You're choosing to strike. You can leave whenever you like and choose a differenr career path.

It's not a class war or a crusade. The railway looks the most toxic place to work I could imagine. Imagine having to focus a job also but also think about this class war nonsense.

 

[43066]

Can you ask a realistic question?

It’s a valid question.

Okay I’ll ask you the same thing. If you were asked to go and do a completely different job to your usual role for extra £££. Would you do it, knowing you were doing others out of a job?

Generally considered not a nice thing to do amongst those you work with?

This isn't a spotters forum by any means.

Not like I spot trains myself is it?

I don’t support the strikes, but accept that it is people’s right to strike, the RMT do have a mandate for this action, and these strikes will go ahead. But that doesn’t change the fact that I think resolving the issues is much more likely to happen without strikes.

Fair play to you for saying that.

 

[windingroad]

Honestly I've never heard such a load of rubbish in my life. It's a job, you do it for money. You're choosing to strike.

It's not a class war or a crusade. The railway looks the most toxic place to work I could imagine. Imagine having to focus a job also but also think about this class war nonsense.

It's not a crusade, but it is a moral issue, which is why people feel so strongly about it. Why would you want to undermine your striking colleagues? I do not work in a unionised industry but I would be pretty disgusted by that kind of behaviour if I did, as would any empathetic person.

 

[43066]

Honestly I've never heard such a load of rubbish in my life.

Specifically what do you disagree with?

It's a job, you do it for money. You're choosing to strike.

I do my job for money, yes. Why do you do your job? I haven’t chosen to strike. I haven’t even been balloted.

You can leave whenever you like and choose a differenr career path.

Can I? Thanks for telling me. Maybe I like trains too much to leave it. Good money already earned from previous career paths, thanks for reminding me they’re available .

It's not a class war or a crusade. The railway looks the most toxic place to work I could imagine. Imagine having to focus a job also but also think about this class war nonsense.

Nobody has asked you you to join it? So that’s alright then!

 

[yorkie]

It’s a valid question.

Okay I’ll ask you the same thing. If you were asked to go and do a completely different job to your usual role for extra £££. Would you do it, knowing you were doing others out of a job?

Who is being done out of a job?

Generally considered not a nice thing to do amongst those you work with?

The last time I went on strike (which I will never do again) there may well have been some tasks that someone else had to do; I could hardly complain at that!

Not like I spot trains myself is it?

I am not sure who you are suggesting does, or what the relevance would be if they do.

It's not a crusade, but it is a moral issue, which is why people feel so strongly about it. Why would you want to undermine your striking colleagues?

If anyone chooses not to do their job, they can hardly complain when someone else does it!

I do not work in a unionised industry but I would be pretty disgusted by that kind of behaviour if I did, as would any empathetic person.

Are you also disgusted by the attitude of those who go on about "scabs" etc?

 

[the sniper]

I'm not sure, and it really depends on how this goes, but I don't think the RMT (or any of the other unions involved) should be allowed to win this.

Against winning what, a pay rise? At a time of 10%+ inflation. Or ever again?

Are you so vociferously against all public sector workers receiving a pay rise, for the 'good for society generally'?

 

[yorkie]

Against winning what, a pay rise? At a time of 10%+ inflation. Or ever again?

If inflation continues at such a rate, then obviously wages are going to rise somewhat; that would happen naturally regardless of strikes; it's not the case that when inflation is high the only people who see wage increases are those who (threaten to) strike, if that's what is being suggested.

Are you so vociferously against all public sector workers receiving a pay rise, for the 'good for society generally'?

It's not a binary thing. But to suggest that paying everyone even more money would make the problems go away is naive.

A bit more parity between rail jobs and [other] public sector jobs would be good, but let's be realistic; there is little to no chance of that happening!

The reality is that for many (not all) in the rail industry, if they switched to an alternative job in another industry, they'd be unlikely to earn as much money (or not have such good T&Cs).

Of course, there will always be exceptions, but as a general rule, the rail industry does tend to offer better pay and/or T&Cs compared to many other industries. And you know what? I don't necessarily have a problem with that. Where I have a problem is when the militant types try to claim otherwise, using phrases such as "race to the bottom" to describe the situation in the rail industry, which really couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[Egg Centric]

I'm interested in whether there can be a common ground agreed by thread participants and something worked towards from there. Identifying points of commonality is the first way toward settling differences.

Here are some points I think (I admit the first three are not objective. I also say them as someone who is a classical in liberal in outlook, usually holding-my-nose votes tory, occasionally lib dem but absolutely no chance of former in coming election unless current cabinet sent to a processing centre in Rwanda):

1. Boris Johnson is awful (but probably cunning)
2. Grant Shapps is awful (can't think of redeeming quality)
3. Kier Starmer is probably not awful but is a bit rubbish
4. There is a right to withhold your labour
5. There is a right to criticise others for withholding their labour
6. Non-railway workers do not understand railway roles very well
7. Expanding upon that, there is a great deal of condescension and ignorant sneering by certain types, such as thinking drivers just press a stop and go button, signallers just pull leavers, a total lack of understanding about the effect of compressed leaves on adhesion, and so on
8. Railway roles are generally currently surprisingly well paid
9. But some aren't - and got worse - an example given here is moving cleaners to contract roles where they lose PRIV etc.
10. Similarly, some railway roles have changed over the years, for the worse, and without fair compensation for this
11. Many railway roles involve doing things a typical office worker wouldn't do. For example, a twelve-hour shift signalling where if things go wrong and you want to do more than piss out the window you need to delay trains and potentially embarrassingly explain yourself to management
12. Because of things like the above point, continually squeezing railway terms and conditions may have safety implications
13. Most railway roles have had a pay freeze for a few years
14. The railway is closer to being nationalised now since... well, it was nationalised. Largely speaking, railway employees can be considered as being on the government payroll
15. There is a massive cost of living crisis in the country
16. Railway jobs have had huge wage increases since BR times
17. Civil service jobs have *also* had huge wage increases since the times of BR - but not so large
18. This government could do with some distractions and an 'enemy within'
19. The railways have less demand than pre-covid and are unlikely to return to those numbers while we continue with this work-from-home revolution (which *is* a real thing - it's why I'm writing this from my home office in County Durham rather than sweltering unable to sleep at a billion degrees down south)
20. This strike, if extended, will damage demand in the short and medium-term
21. The amount of money available to pay rail staff is a function of the demand for rail travel
22. The demand for rail travel will decrease with this strike
23. Certain aspects of the railway are outdated (and often counterproductive). Most ticket offices are obvious ones.
24. The non-specialised press is generally against this strike
25. If significant concessions were made towards the strikers, others on the government payroll such as the NHS, civil service, etc would be more likely to enter their own industrial action.

I actually wrote a load more of these but thought it better to start out with these few and go from there, if anyone thinks it useful. If not well oh well I tried.

I remain convinced this is a very foolish strike because the above points (and others) draw me to only one conclusion but also remain open-minded.

I find things like point 9 disgusting btw and can totally understand striking for that sort of thing. But that I think is just one TOC, not the entire country?

 

[windingroad]

If anyone chooses not to do their job, they can hardly complain when someone else does it!

While I know you're being deliberately reactionary, could you explain why you believe this in the context of strikes? Are there any scenarios in which you would disapprove of strike breakers? If not, why not?

Are you also disgusted by the attitude of those who go on about "scabs" etc?

If I see that happen I'll let you know!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jun 2022 ==

A bit more parity between rail jobs and [other] public sector jobs would be good, but there is little to no chance of that happening!

Sounds like they need stronger unions.

 

[yorkie]

While I know you're being deliberately reactionary, could you explain why you believe this in the context of strikes? Are there any scenarios in which you would disapprove of strike breakers? If not, why not?

I don't see why people should be made to feel they can't go into work and you've not said anything to convince me otherwise.

If anyone tried to tell me I shouldn't go into work or that I shouldn't do something that was for the benefit of customers/society in general then I'd know they don't have the moral high ground, no matter how much they dress up their argument.

If I see that happen I'll let you know!

You've not been following this thread then?

Sounds like they need stronger unions.

Ah, that old argument!

Just to be clear, you are happy to pay more tax to fund this, correct? And if you are, great, but would the majority of people?

On a related note, I personally would be happy to pay more tax to enable rail fares to be reduced in price, and for every staff to have a visible staff presence in the form of someone constantly patrolling the train (or all stations to be staffed in the case of a suburban network like LO). But would most people be happy to do this? I think we all know the answer to that!

 

[the sniper]

If inflation continues at such a rate, then obviously wages are going to rise somewhat; that would happen naturally regardless of strikes; it's not the case that when inflation is high the only people who see wage increases are those who (threaten to) strike, if that's what is being suggested.

It's not a binary thing. But to suggest that paying everyone even more money would make the problems go away is naive.

'Obviously'...? This is year three for many with no pay rise, when will these 'natural' pay rises kick in? What mechanism will ensure these rises are given if they can only be achieved through the benevolence of an employer or Tory Government?

A bit more parity between rail jobs and [other] public sector jobs would be good, but there is little to no chance of that happening!

You're right, there's little chance of it happening because any attempt by them to achieve that will see them demonised in the same way rail staff are here, unfortunately!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

You're right, there's little chance of it happening because any attempt by them to achieve that will see them demonised in the same way rail staff are here, unfortunately!

With respect, I think some of the more disrespectful, impolite and entitled posts that are plentiful in this chat, made by some of the more militant rail staff on this forum, could suggest a reason why rail staff might be “demonised.”

 

[the sniper]

With respect, I think some of the more disrespectful, impolite and entitled posts that are plentiful in this chat, made by some of the more militant rail staff on this forum, could suggest a reason why rail staff might be “demonised.”

So you'd support all other public sector workers engaging in industrial action, so long as you didn't encounter any of them saying something you didn't like on the internet?

Please spare me the righteousness. There's been enough aggravation on both sides. It's not surprising, as both sides are exasperated by the ideological viewpoint of the other side.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

So you'd support all other public sector workers engaging in industrial action, so long as you didn't encounter any of them saying something you didn't like on the internet?

Please spare me the righteousness. There's been enough aggravation on both sides. It's not surprising, as both sides are exasperated by the ideological viewpoint of the other side.

It was you who mentioned a decline in attitude towards staff in recent times, and I was not referring specifically to online. The point is I, and many others, have encountered similar arrogant attitudes from many rail staff on a regular basis. Sure, it's a minority - that I must be completely clear about - but it's that minority that contribute to the more negative perception of rail staff that you address.

 

[Vespa]

True - the government cannot afford to lose, because the rest of the public sector will then say, "good enough for RMT, good enough for us". I really hope that this isn't going to be a replay of the miners' strike in 1984/5. My sympathies were with the miners, but when the hotheads started throwing bricks through car windows I knew they were going to lose. If people start using language like 'scab', then I'm pretty sure this will go the same way. Outdated class hatred won't get anyone anywhere.

The Conservatives remembered the Coal Miners strike of 1973/1974 and the three day week which collapsed the Conservative government in a hung parliament at the next election.

Thatcher learned from this and prepared for the next confrontation and of course we all know the result of the Miners Strike of 1984/1985, intimidation of strike breakers, the violent "battle of Orgreave" scenes and a murder of a strike breaker destroyed the case of the strike, there was no public sympathy after these incidents.

Boris shouldn't be underestimated, he is certainly a Thatcherite and studied history in that way.

When you make a strike political, you lose as the public are not interested.

 

[Horizon22]

that’s a bit of a stretch!

(Hospitality says ‘hello!’)

I meant to say was “not”!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jun 2022 ==

It’s a difficult one isn’t it.

I personally have no issue with “strike breakers” who are doing so as part of their job. The most obvious example being guard managers working trains during a guard dispute, as will be happening next week (or for that matter drivers continuing to drive trains, as I’ll be doing myself next week!).

But volunteering to do a completely different job to your own for a few extra quid, undermining strikers? I find that a pretty revolting way to behave. You’re effectively stealing someone else’s living from them.

I’m not sure “stealing someone else’s living” is correct once those individuals have withdrawn their labour and other staff cover them for a limited time. Outside of strikes, these people have substantive roles to be getting on with. In fact, contingency staff are normally there in case of the exact circumstances we are discussing here.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jun 2022 ==

Those people are parasites. During the scotrail guard/TE strike last year we had office staff out working the trains, boasting that they were being paid as much as drivers and having lunch and taxis laid on for them.

Vermin.

Nice to know you see your fellow colleagues as “vermin” and “parasites”. And you wonder why some believe railway staff attitudes should be confined to a bin in a previous generation.

I’ve done contingency roles before in the past to help “keep the job running” and I would do it again. But I wouldn’t go around boasting about it, I’d just quietly get on with things in a professional manner.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jun 2022 ==

With all due respect it’s not a conversation you can be credibly be part of as a young gun at uni. You’re clearly a smart bloke. Shouldn’t you be razzing it up at uni? My degree (between intensive study periods) was mostly spent smashing back pints and scoring myself silly, not arguing online with a load of middle aged trainspotters!

So his opinion is invalid because of his age? That’s a slippery slope.

I have a fair amount of sympathy and support for the strikes - whilst at the same point acknowledging the impact it will have both short-term and potentially long-term and the damage it might do to the industry.

A minority of the posts on here however really highlight some rather old-fashioned and somewhat poisonous views. Those who tentatively support the strikes could certainly be put off by attitudes like this.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

So his opinion is invalid because of his age? That’s a slippery slope.

I'm actually employed by a TOC now, which makes it all the more amusing, but we'll let it go.

 

[STKKK46]

I'm actually employed by a TOC now, which makes it all the more amusing, but we'll let it go.

Just as a thought and I by no means guarantee they will be able to help..

Are your studies linked to your role with a TOC? If so, could be worth speaking to them about accommodation and/or alternative travel for your Cardiff-Reading dilemma.