Rail strikes discussion

[Gems]

Wrong, when St Pancras was being rebuilt we spoke regularly with the Poles that were being employed, to a person they said that their wages were considerably lower than their UK counterparts but much higher than they would receive back home and that was 10 years before the Brexit vote that people love to use as an excuse for everything under the sun, they were used in the UK because they were cheap labour

That's not cheap labour. That is being offered something, being happy with it, and accepting it. Like you say, they were earning more than they got in Poland, so it was a conscious decision to accept it. That is what 'Freedom of movement' was all about, being free to move. But when their savings were transferred into Euros to take back to Poland, the strong pound probably put them on parity with the UK based workers. It's all smoke and mirrors my old love, and Brexit ended it. Enjoy the fruits of the vote.

 

[Starmill]

A £15 minimum wage, if you assume an 8 hour day, 5 day week and 4 weeks' annual leave, is an annual salary of £28,800. For now that probably is a bit high for entry level roles at least.

£11-12, giving a salary of between £21-23K ish, is probably achievable and sensible, though, and it should increase automatically by RPI each year.

Government policy is to set the minimum wage at two thirds of the median, although disappointingly only for those who've reached their 23rd birthday. Over the next two years it will definitely hit £11 if the government stay on course. It is planned that then be uprated with CPI, RPI shouldn't be used for anything as it's been withdrawn.

 

[43066]

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):

Similar position to me, and I agree with pretty much all of the numbered points for the record.

Objectively I can see that Johnson is awful but I find it impossible to actually dislike him, which I suppose is the secret to his success.

 

[Gems]

Similar position to me, and I agree with pretty much all of the numbered points for the record.

Objectively I can see that Johnson is awful but I find it impossible to actually dislike him, which I suppose is the secret to his success.

PMSL. And this is exactly the reason why we are where we are. Because you love the devil you know, even though the devil is laughing at you.
It's like when a yob totals himself in a stolen car. He's always the cheeky chappie to his family isn't he.

 

[ar10642]

My point isn't that there are no other jobs; it's that better paid jobs are finite, and your advice was to find a better paid job. If all underpaid workers found better paid jobs (which isn't possible, as not enough roles exist, but nevertheless) who would be left to fill the roles they left behind? It doesn't make sense as a solution if applied on a wider scale.

If someone tries to pay below the market rate they will find it very difficult to recruit staff, and will have to increase the wage they are offering in response. So in answer to the question "who would be left to fill the roles they left behind" the answer is nobody, unless the employer accepts the reality of market rates.

 

[Watershed]

My point isn't that there are no other jobs; it's that better paid jobs are finite, and your advice was to find a better paid job. If all underpaid workers found better paid jobs (which isn't possible, as not enough roles exist, but nevertheless) who would be left to fill the roles they left behind? It doesn't make sense as a solution if applied on a wider scale.

Yet that's exactly what people do outside of the railway bubble. If enough people leave because the conditions are better elsewhere, then the employer will have to improve conditions to retain and replace people.

Indeed rail staff have benefitted massively from this over the last 25 years, with TOCs poaching off each other leading to a race for conditions. Unfortunately the good times are now over.

The irony of being happy to take advantage of market forces when it suits, and yet complaining as soon as those conditions stop, seems lost on a lot of people.

 

[Iskra]

My point isn't that there are no other jobs; it's that better paid jobs are finite, and your advice was to find a better paid job. If all underpaid workers found better paid jobs (which isn't possible, as not enough roles exist, but nevertheless) who would be left to fill the roles they left behind? It doesn't make sense as a solution if applied on a wider scale.

I edited my post prior to your response (to say "a fair wage") for this reason. My position is that railway workers on the whole tend to be paid a fairer wage, in large part thanks to the unions, and it is important they maintain this and don't facilitate backsliding. The difference between the highest paid in society and the lowest paid in society should be less than it is today, and that is what I mean by "fair". However I don't imagine you would support any such rebalancing.

Should the wage budget remain the same though (or even decline considering the fare income decline), are you prepared to accept the redundancies and productivity enhancements to offset any pay rise given?

Is that fair on those who would lose their jobs in order to accommodate a payrise for already fairly paid workers?

 

[Moonshot]

Yet that's exactly what people do outside of the railway bubble. If enough people leave because the conditions are better elsewhere, then the employer will have to improve conditions to retain and replace people.

Indeed rail staff have benefitted massively from this over the last 25 years, with TOCs poaching off each other leading to a race for conditions. Unfortunately the good times are now over.

The irony of being happy to take advantage of market forces when it suits, and yet complaining as soon as those conditions stop, seems lost on a lot of people.

Which makes you wonder why rail unions are so keen to see the industry totally nationalised when the better terms and conditions have come about because of rail franchises and more involved private sector operations.

 

[Gems]

Yet that's exactly what people do outside of the railway bubble. If enough people leave because the conditions are better elsewhere, then the employer will have to improve conditions to retain and replace people.

Indeed rail staff have benefitted massively from this over the last 25 years, with TOCs poaching off each other leading to a race for conditions. Unfortunately the good times are now over.

The irony of being happy to take advantage of market forces when it suits, and yet complaining as soon as those conditions stop, seems lost on a lot of people.

Drivers have benefitted massively from this over the years. Other train crew less so.

 

[Bluejays]

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.

You keep banging this drum over and over again, 'that the railway looks a toxic place to work'. It's really not, as has been explained by numerous posters.

As for 'class war nonsense '. It's really not 1 sided this time around,and I question the intelligence of anybody who claims it is. I've got no time for RMT socialist nonsense but I also have no time whatsoever for the nonsense coming from tory party hq. 4 emails I've had this week about ' labours strikes ' or how the rmt militants are stitching up working people.

 

[ar10642]

Which makes you wonder why rail unions are so keen to see the industry totally nationalised when the better terms and conditions have come about because of rail franchises and more involved private sector operations.

"Get rid of fat cat profits!!!"

"No... not like that!"

 

[windingroad]

If someone tries to pay below the market rate they will find it very difficult to recruit staff, and will have to increase the wage they are offering in response. So in answer to the question "who would be left to fill the roles they left behind" the answer is nobody, unless the employer accepts the reality of market rates.

But the whole point is that all these better paid job vacancies don't actually exist in anywhere near the numbers required for the millions of underpaid workers to obtain them. Most existing vacancies are already the very lowest paid roles, so downwards or sideways mobility is really the only thing on offer for most people. And despite the record number of vacancies for low paid roles, we simply aren't seeing the kind of wage increases you're talking about. In fact wages are dropping at record rates!

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

The irony of being happy to take advantage of market forces when it suits, and yet complaining as soon as those conditions stop, seems lost on a lot of people.

But this is exactly what opponents of the strikes are doing! You advocate for market forces to solve pay issues, and yet when workers apply market forces (by withdrawing labour as leverage) this is condemned!

 

[ar10642]

You keep banging this drum over and over again, 'that the railway looks a toxic place to work'. It's really not, as has been explained by numerous posters.

As for 'class war nonsense '. It's really not 1 sided this time around,and I question the intelligence of anybody who claims it is. I've got no time for RMT socialist nonsense but I also have no time whatsoever for the nonsense coming from tory party hq. 4 emails I've had this week about ' labours strikes ' or how the rmt militants are stitching up working people.

Just because I don't like the union socialist class war stuff it doesn't mean I'm some sort of Tory fanboy either. It would be nice if both sides could come together like grown ups and just get to whatever the inevitable settlement is going to be without trashing the service for potentially months and losing the union members a stack of money.

As for the toxic workplace, just in this thread we've had the words "scab", "vermin" and "disgusting" thrown around for people that are seen to not show sufficient solidarity so I'm not sure I believe it.

 

[brick60000]

Having witnessed, over an 8 month period, “contingency staff” undermining their colleagues who were partaking in industrial action i’m content with my description of them.

Office staff out working trains when it was unrelated to their grade, gleefully boasting about being paid as much as drivers at the expense of their colleagues, actively hoping that the strike went on past Christmas because of the amount of money they were making.

These people weren’t there for the good of the railway or the passengers, they were there, primarily, to benefit financially from their colleagues industrial action.

The amount of money that was on offer for undermining colleagues versus the low number that actually took it up tells you exactly the way opportunistic behaviour like this is viewed in the workplace.

Why shouldn’t people take up the option to earn more money whilst keeping the railway moving?

You don’t know what these individuals’ personal circumstances are. Maybe they need the money, too.

If someone offered you extra money, and you needed it (or even if you didn’t) can you honestly say that you would turn it down? I don’t think many people would.

If I go and break a strike, I am undermining someone else’s ability to withdraw their labour. If I do so as part of my job that’s one thing, to volunteer to do so to enrich myself is quite another. I personally see that as utterly low.

Not at all. They are still withdrawing their labour…unless I’ve missed something that says contingency guards are required to force all substantive guards to work trains rather than strike…

Were you a strike breaker and left with no option but to resign?

Surely you aren’t implying that people at your place of work are intimidating those that do not wish to strike?

If so, I’m sure the your company’s HR department might be interested to know who is doing the intimidating. They’ll be violating company policy and will likely face discipline.

I know that my employer and others in this forum has said we must be kind, respect the wishes of those who choose not to strike, but when you see the vitriolic language of the last century used on here (scabs, strike breakers etc) and I know in my mess there are will be people who feel the same way... it makes for an uncomfortable situation.

It’s such a horrible situation. It won’t help with the sneers, but you should report any instances of intimidation to your line manager or HR department. TOCs will likely take a zero tolerance approach to any intimidation of workers.

I think some operators are offering those that do not wish to strike the option to work away from their usual place of work. Maybe see if this is an option, too?

 

[ar10642]

But the whole point is that all these better paid job vacancies don't actually exist in anywhere near the numbers required for the millions of underpaid workers to obtain them. Most existing vacancies are already the very lowest paid roles, so downwards or sideways mobility is really the only thing on offer for most people. And despite the record number of vacancies for low paid roles, we simply aren't seeing the kind of wage increases you're talking about. In fact wages are dropping at record rates!

Something doesn't make sense there then. If we have record numbers of vacancies the only way to fill the roles is to offer something better than your competitors or the vacancy will remain unfilled.

 

[87015]

If so, I’m sure the your company’s HR department might be interested to know who is doing the intimidating. They’ll be violating company policy and will likely face discipline.


It’s such a horrible situation. It won’t help with the sneers, but you should report any instances of intimidation to your line manager or HR department. TOCs will likely take a zero tolerance approach to any intimidation of workers.

Sadly this is very unlikely to result in action being taken, its near impossible to stick.

 

[windingroad]

Not at all. They are still withdrawing their labour…unless I’ve missed something that says contingency guards are required to force all substantive guards to work trains rather than strike…

The point of withdrawing your labour is to provide leverage, without which workers are powerless. If someone else simply slots in to fulfill your role, that leverage disappears, which is a bit of a stab in the back to the person who is sacrificing their wages to support a better deal.

Personally, I wouldn't ever abuse a strike breaker (or anyone at all) and I'm well aware that some people really do need the money. But that is absolutely not universally true, and people who engage in strike breaking out of greed, rather than necessity, deserve all the criticism they get.

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

Something doesn't make sense there then. If we have record numbers of vacancies the only way to fill the roles is to offer something better than your competitors or the vacancy will remain unfilled.

Well, by definition (given there are a record number of vacancies) this isn't happening, as they are indeed remaining unfilled. Perhaps market forces will kick into gear eventually, but to my mind it's clear that unions are a much, much more effective means for improving worker pay and conditions.

 

[GB]

Paying someone less due to their nationality is illegal in the UK. Sorry, I'm rather sceptical of the claims made to you.

Of course that would be illegal, but it would never be written or set up like that.
With contractors and sub contractors its entirely possible for two different groups doing very similar jobs being paid different rates.

 

[Starmill]

Do note the quotes. They are quite deliberate.

I find the level of "champagne socialism" in the Remain camp (despite being a member of it myself) quite astounding. "It's OK for me to be paid well and enjoy freedom of movement, but I should be able to have a meal at a rock bottom price served by an immigrant waiter who is paid a pittance and shares a bed so they can afford to live". No. Everyone in the UK should be paid enough (or the benefits system should adjust things for them) to maintain a basic quality of living.

I certainly think that those at the bottom being paid a little bit more is absolutely a critical requirement for the country over the next few years. It will result in those of us lucky enough to be on average incomes having to take an overall small hit as prices of labour intensive luxuries like pubs and restaurants rise, but it's a price worth paying. Fundamentally, I can survive with fewer nice meals out per year. But people being paid less than the real living wage aren't surviving.

 

[DC1989]

A £15 minimum wage, if you assume an 8 hour day, 5 day week and 4 weeks' annual leave, is an annual salary of £28,800. For now that probably is a bit high for entry level roles at least.

£11-12, giving a salary of between £21-23K ish, is probably achievable and sensible, though, and it should increase automatically by RPI each year.

Without wanting to get too much into economics etc - the issue that many dont' seem to grasp is that if they made the minimum wage £29k from tomorrow, everyone up the scale would want a bump. The people on 30k would want at least 38k, those on 35k at least 43k etc. This would include railway staff of course too

 

[ar10642]

Well, by definition (given there are a record number of vacancies) this isn't happening, as they are indeed remaining unfilled. Perhaps market forces will kick into gear eventually, but to my mind it's clear that unions are a much, much more effective means for improving worker pay and conditions.

Is that particularly clear? It might be the case in the railway because it's backed up the the taxpayer, but I have a friend who works in printing and their union haven't been able to do much for them at all.

 

[Bluejays]

You do realise that if everyone gets a payrise, that nobody really gains because it would just cause inflation?

Give it a rest

 

[ExRes]

How much were they paid and how much were workers from the UK paid? What role was this? I know someone who was involved in the project so I will ask if he can check this out...

Absolutely no idea, these were conversations held at the time with Polish employees, male and female, who were working in any number of roles

 

[Iskra]

Give it a rest

Have you got anything constructive to add? This is literally what has just happened in the US after they gave everyone cash handouts- they now have even higher inflation than us!

 

[ExRes]

Paying someone less due to their nationality is illegal in the UK. Sorry, I'm rather sceptical of the claims made to you.

Well you'll have to find the people we were speaking to every day and query it with them

 

[Bluejays]

Just because I don't like the union socialist class war stuff it doesn't mean I'm some sort of Tory fanboy either. It would be nice if both sides could come together like grown ups and just get to whatever the inevitable settlement is going to be without trashing the service for potentially months and losing the union members a stack of money.

As for the toxic workplace, just in this thread we've had the words "scab", "vermin" and "disgusting" thrown around for people that are seen to not show sufficient solidarity so I'm not sure I believe it.

I just find it interesting how people always fixate on the most extreme examples of behaviour. There have been uses of those terms by a small minority. Just as a small minority want to completely denigrate rail workers. Most people are somewhere in the middle though.

As for the 'tory fanboy' . Really wasn't trying to suggest you were. Your politics is your business. Was just trying to make the point that the culture war element of the strikes is being stoked up by tory hq as much or more than the unions. The emails I keep receiving from them show that loud and clear

 

[windingroad]

Is that particularly clear? It might be the case in the railway because it's backed up the the taxpayer, but I have a friend who works in printing and their union haven't been able to do much for them at all.

That's a fair point. I think it comes down to the difference between strong unions (like the RMT) and weak unions. This won't be true in all cases, but membership of the latter probably isn't worth bothering with.

I listened to this interview with Mick Lynch, and he made the point that if you don't know the name of a trade union leader, their union probably isn't doing their job. The approach of the stronger unions is naturally much more public and combative, which is one of the reasons this thread is so heated, but I do think it tends to get results.

I can understand why some people aren't keen.

 

[DC1989]

Have you got anything constructive to add? This is literally what has just happened in the US after they gave everyone cash handouts- they now have even higher inflation than us!

I think at the end of the day it's simple - they want a bumper payrise but if everyone got one they'd be against that

 

[Bluejays]

Have you got anything constructive to add? This is literally what has just happened in the US after they gave everyone cash handouts- they now have even higher inflation than us!

Your idiotic post didn't deserve a constructive response. Your suggestion that nobody wins if everyone gets a rise was idiotic. There are many factors that affect inflation, not just wages. The major factor at present of course is fuel.

 

[ExRes]

That's not cheap labour. That is being offered something, being happy with it, and accepting it. Like you say, they were earning more than they got in Poland, so it was a conscious decision to accept it. That is what 'Freedom of movement' was all about, being free to move. But when their savings were transferred into Euros to take back to Poland, the strong pound probably put them on parity with the UK based workers. It's all smoke and mirrors my old love, and Brexit ended it. Enjoy the fruits of the vote.

And how precisely did their lower wages help them to eat, travel and find accommodation while they were in the UK? it certainly wasn't putting them on par with UK workers, as for your final worthless comment, you're on the wrong forum