Rail strikes discussion

[GRALISTAIR]

----- but even already qualified drivers take time to learn new routes and traction. So if say five drivers leave or retire and put in their three months notice, the company put out an ad and take roughly two weeks to sift and another to interview. They then have to choose the new hires and put them through the medical and get the results. You are now half way through the leavers notice period and the oncoming qualified are starting their three months and you have six weeks with five drivers down. Then the new drivers have to learn the routes and traction and that usually takes three to six months, depending on the toc and routes/traction. You only save on the rules course for already qualified drivers, but still have to assess them and have available driver instructors. Even if the company has a talent pool , still need the routes and traction and still lose several months.

If this is the case, and your arguments sound reasonable, although it costs money, not relying on RDW but actually hiring more drivers, sounds like a great way for the industry to head. I doubt it will happen though. Shappsy will go on about driverless trains I fear.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Low wage imported labour is a myth. People came to the UK to work because the pay and conditions were better, not as slaves. A strong pound meant their pounds earned transferred into more Euros. When the pound value dropped due to the Brexit vote, their wages meant less Euros, so off they went.
Economic damage is caused by many things, but a weak pound is devastating.

I think the government still wants imported labour, but it should come world-wide not just from the EU states, and within quotas.
It answers why we could have Polish plumbers and Romanian bus drivers but not ones from South Africa or New Zealand.

 

[Efini92]

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.

You only have to look at the fruit picking industry. The wages were terrible, the conditions that they lived in were terrible. It’s no wonder no one from the uk would do it.

Low wage imported labour is a myth. People came to the UK to work because the pay and conditions were better, not as slaves. A strong pound meant their pounds earned transferred into more Euros. When the pound value dropped due to the Brexit vote, their wages meant less Euros, so off they went.
Economic damage is caused by many things, but a weak pound is devastating.

That is exactly low wage imported labour. Whilst their earnings may afford them a living in their own country the low wages in the Uk means they will struggle.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You only have to look at the fruit picking industry. The wages were terrible, the conditions that they lived in were terrible. It’s no wonder no one from the uk would do it.

Exactly. And I reckon they'd get students to do it in their holidays if they put effort into designing an environment they'd enjoy, and make getting the role and getting there easy (e.g. why not bus people from the main uni towns?). But they preferred to whine.

 

[yorkie]

So no pay rises on the railway until wages fall below a national average, so people have to leave having had their standard of living decimated over a period of time, which could be relatively short given likely inflation?

I'm not proposing this at all. I don't begrudge the fact the rail industry pays better than many other industries; I am pointing it out because some people seem to be claiming the opposite is the case.

And even then you wouldn't support industrial action. The situation would just have to resolve itself 'naturally'. It's fairly inevitable that the 'natural' solution will be too little, too late, as at that point the railway will be in disarray.

Says someone who supports action which would cause disarray.

We've seen what the 'natural' solution means in this country, that's why so many working people are struggling financially! But they can just apply for better paid job, if they can find one...

And your solution is? Pay everyone more? That makes inflation go away, right?

On one hand you'd argue the wrongs of financially burdening a worker by asking them to strike with their colleagues, as it suits your ideology, while you'd gladly commit the majority of railway workers to a large and sustained real terms loss of pay and standard of living.

You really do like trying to put words in other peoples mouths; instead of doing that, why don't you read what has actually been written?

I asked before but nobody seems to have an answer. What’s next? When, after next week the government still refuses a payrise, what do the RMT do next? Another week of strike’s two weeks later? ...

I think the plan is to keep threatening/implementing strikes until they get their way. It is therefore really important they don't get their way, otherwise it rewards such behaviour and gives them much more leverage in future. The Government will have to stand firm against the unions.

 

[brick60000]

I can safely say that I would not, under any circumstances break any strike action, especially that of my colleagues in order to feather my own nest. That is reprehensible and morally repugnant behaviour and would only be undertaken by people best described as parasites.

Again, more the insulting terms. Not the biggest sign of an intelligent debate.

Unfortunately this is the type of rail worker that the public are growing to have increasing disdain for. And it’s the type the right wing media will promote because it suits their agenda of “down with the unions”.

I would never refer to colleagues openly on any form of social media (or ever, to be honest) as “parasites”, or any other similarly insulting terms.

That can lead to mental illness and suicide and is not a healthy attitude.

Exactly! For an industry that is so well tuned to the impacts of mental illness and suicide, the railway needs to do better.

Ignoring somebody because they did something you don’t like is:

• Unprofessional
• Childish
• Rude
• Immature

Are these really the characteristics of people that we want to be responsible for our safety?

 

[Efini92]

To be honest I have no idea of the ins and outs. What I do know is that it is and was at my last toc. This is the first time or career/job ( I have had a few) in my life that I have had companies try and poach / headhunt myself and most of my colleagues have had this too. I know it happens in other industries , but first time for myself. I guess it also happens due to the lengthy cost and time to train new drivers , but even already qualified drivers take time to learn new routes and traction. So if say five drivers leave or retire and put in their three months notice, the company put out an ad and take roughly two weeks to sift and another to interview. They then have to choose the new hires and put them through the medical and get the results. You are now half way through the leavers notice period and the oncoming qualified are starting their three months and you have six weeks with five drivers down. Then the new drivers have to learn the routes and traction and that usually takes three to six months, depending on the toc and routes/traction. You only save on the rules course for already qualified drivers, but still have to assess them and have available driver instructors. Even if the company has a talent pool , still need the routes and traction and still lose several months.

It’s also worth noting that there is a bigger shortage than normal due to the way recruitment process’ have changed.
BR would recruit to the footplate straight from school. All the 16-21 year olds in the early 80’s are now at or nearing retirement age.
When they had the big recruitment in the early 2000’s a lot were second career people in their late 30’s early 40’s who are also at or near retirement now.
It’s essentially a double whammy as instead of maybe 10/15 at a depot being ready for retirement there’s 20/30. Add that up over the company/companies and it’s a lot of vacancies to fill.

 

[Wyrleybart]

I asked before but nobody seems to have an answer. What’s next? When, after next week the government still refuses a payrise, what do the RMT do next? Another week of strike’s two weeks later? And when the government still refuse a payrise, another one, and another one? What if the government never caves, (which they won’t as every strike saves them money)? Eventually staff will have to return to work, they can’t afford to stay off for weeks at a time indefinitely.

I’m estimating that at my place around 25% of RMT staff will report for duty as normal next week anyway. The strike vote was only just passed here. That figure will rise and rise as the weeks go by.

Well TSSA ballots and most of ASLEF's haven't come in yet, so it probably depends to a degree on whether their members signify ratcheting up of action. My TSSA ballot paper arrived in the post this morning.

 

[Carlisle]

I could not look my colleagues in the eye if I worked against my colleagues during industrial action. I would never abuse anyone that did but I certainly would have no interest in talking, helping or socialise with them.

Was the northern staff member you referred to in Manchester in the RMT ?, if they were & still worked I sympathise with your viewpoint, however if they weren’t it’s not really any concern of you or your colleagues what they chose to do unless rules weren’t followed. Where I work most are in the union but some aren’t and we generally appear able to respect that freedom of choice as adults .I wouldn’t really want it any other way in 2022.

 

[Efini92]

Exactly. And I reckon they'd get students to do it in their holidays if they put effort into designing an environment they'd enjoy, and make getting the role and getting there easy (e.g. why not bus people from the main uni towns?). But they preferred to whine.

Or upgrade the shanties that they expect the European workers to live in so that they are, at the very least, up to the basic standards.

 

[JamesT]

Sounds positive, but I would agree there should not be any age split, it should be the same for everyone. Even kids doing paper rounds.

I disagree. It's important that young people are able to get into employment. Failing to get a job when you're young can have a lasting effect as https://minimumwage.blog.gov.uk/2020/03/09/why-do-young-people-have-lower-minimum-wages/ from the LPC says.
I think the poster child for not making an exception is Spain where their minimum wage applies from 16. They have a youth unemployment rate approaching 30%, whereas ours is just over 10% (https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/youth-unemployment-rate?continent=europe).

 

[baz962]

If this is the case, and your arguments sound reasonable, although it costs money, not relying on RDW but actually hiring more drivers, sounds like a great way for the industry to head. I doubt it will happen though. Shappsy will go on about driverless trains I fear.

It's exactly one of the driver Union aslefs main goals. They want RDW practically eradicated. Also to add that there is almost 27k between the lowest and highest paid drivers and the highest paid are going up again, so will be 30k difference, so as soon as some of the higher paying tocs recruit . You guessed it.

 

[windingroad]

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.

In retrospect, it was a big mistake not to acknowledge this at the time, and propose meaningful ways to make this kind of exploitation harder (and help protect against wage depression) without curtailing freedom of movement itself.

Exactly. And I reckon they'd get students to do it in their holidays if they put effort into designing an environment they'd enjoy, and make getting the role and getting there easy (e.g. why not bus people from the main uni towns?). But they preferred to whine.

With a bit of creativity it could easily become something students actively compete for.

 

[Horizon22]

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.

Well you have a different experience of contingency staff then compared to mine. Although they probably were there “for the good of the railway” because presumably othewise, trains would be cancelled. That they benefited financially is another matter (as is boasting about it). Of course if there wasn’t a strike, the opportunity would never have arisen.

 

[HST274]

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?

Being nice is in my opinion not related to this question. Let's say you just want more money, that might make you money orientated but by no means an unkind or not nice person. If you disagree with strikes as some people do (not me), they might do this to make strikes mre ineffectual. Doesn't necessarily make them not nice.

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

On a counter note, striking may be unkind to the general populace, but could it not be argued the government is harming them by not only refusing a pay rise but also negotiations? In my opinion a pay rise should be given, in line with cost of living crisis, but I see the perspective that there is no attention being paid to the average passenger by EITHER side.

 

[adamello]

Again, more the insulting terms. Not the biggest sign of an intelligent debate.

Unfortunately this is the type of rail worker that the public are growing to have increasing disdain for. And it’s the type the right wing media will promote because it suits their agenda of “down with the unions”.

I would never refer to colleagues openly on any form of social media (or ever, to be honest) as “parasites”, or any other similarly insulting terms.



Exactly! For an industry that is so well tuned to the impacts of mental illness and suicide, the railway needs to do better.

Ignoring somebody because they did something you don’t like is:

• Unprofessional
• Childish
• Rude
• Immature

Are these really the characteristics of people that we want to be responsible for our safety?

Not only that, they think it's 'above the rules' but would come under Bully and Harrasment rules. In which exclusion, whether socially or professionally is considered actions of this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In retrospect, it was a big mistake not to acknowledge this at the time, and propose meaningful ways to make this kind of exploitation harder (and help protect against wage depression) without curtailing freedom of movement itself.

There were ways to do that. Unfortunately one of the key things that led to Brexit was successive UK Governments failing to use the tools available to them within EU membership to deal with what were problems for many of the population. In short, Government arrogance led to Brexit.

 

[Exscrew]

Surely this thread has exhausted the union or anti union debate.
Let's save it for facts or even sensible opinions about whats happening with the rail strike.
Not going off on tangents about amateur economics.

 

[windingroad]

Being nice is in my opinion not related to this question. Let's say you just want more money, that might make you money orientated but by no means an unkind or not nice person. If you disagree with strikes as some people do (not me), they might do this to make strikes mre ineffectual. Doesn't necessarily make them not nice.

While I agree that this whole kind/unkind nice/not nice thing isn't very helpful, aren't your examples at least morally dubious?

Making money might not be wrong in isolation, but doing so by undermining a striker is making money at the expense of someone else. I'm also struggling to reconcile your second example. What possible justification could there be for actively trying to make the strikes more ineffectual? Even if you disagree with the strikes being called, once they're happening all you'd be doing is undermining colleagues and potentially prolonging the dispute. That feels like a very spiteful action, even if you have concerns.

In my opinion a pay rise should be given, in line with cost of living crisis, but I see the perspective that there is no attention being paid to the average passenger by EITHER side.

But given striking is the main tool workers have to establish leverage, how can they possibly do so without disruption for passengers? Striking and disruption are part and parcel, otherwise employers wouldn't give a monkey's.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Some quite shocking things have been posted in this thread.

All this talk of 'exclusion', 'scabs', 'parasites' and 'vermin' paints a nasty picture of an industry I might be forgiven for being glad I don't work in!

I would never refer to colleagues openly on any form of social media (or ever, to be honest) as “parasites”, or any other similarly insulting terms.

It astonishes me that this is not a more widely-held view (at least in this thread).

Ignoring somebody because they did something you don’t like is:

• Unprofessional
• Childish
• Rude
• Immature

Are these really the characteristics of people that we want to be responsible for our safety?

I thought all this would have gone without saying. I, for one, would certainly not be comfortable entrusting my safety to someone describing their colleagues in manners seen in this thread.

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

But given striking is the main tool workers have to establish leverage, how can they possibly do so without disruption for passengers?

This comment reminds me of a suggestion posted quite a while ago, that rail workers could do things like not check tickets, which would certainly not inconvenience passengers but certainly would inconvenience the TOCs/DfT.
Maybe not the most realistic of proposals but there must surely be ways to annoy the DfT without annoying the passenger in the process?

 

[Horizon22]

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.

One good recent example of that having been road haulage - faced with an older workforce, a role unattractive to younger people and Europeans returning home through Brexit, wages shot up. And many bus drivers went onto drive lorries.

 

[Gems]

Some quite shocking things have been posted in this thread.

All this talk of 'exclusion', 'scabs', 'parasites' and 'vermin' paints a nasty picture of an industry I might be forgiven for being glad I don't work in!

I can quite understand your sentiments. But let me assure you that it isn't like this at all. Although I think it is fair comment that there are one or two depots that are a bit more odd than others. But most are full of pussycats.

This is a free to use forum, and when everyone is free to join, everyone will bogey on in. I don't take comments personally, because I know that the person you might disagree with on this thread, you might agree with them on another. This is a very topical topic, so you are going to get a bit of heat.

 

[Horizon22]

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.

Or perhaps some are willing to "muck in" and help keep the service moving somewhat in a time of significant disruption? The Southern OBS/Guard strike proved that once a certain % threshold of contigent guards, OBSs and substantial OBSs had been reached, the leverage was nearly zero and the strikes effectively fizzled out.

This is of course harder to do with drivers and signallers and is part of the reason they are paid so well - yes they do technical roles which require a lot of expertise but lets not forget they have leverage to stop the show.

 

[moleman212]

Reading the visceral replies in this thread makes me glad not to work for the railways.

Every time I see a railway worker now, I'll be wondering "does he/she also think it acceptable to label some colleagues as 'parasites' "

Repugnant. I hope the dispute falls into the abyss with the nasty attitudes displayed by the Jack Harpers in this thread.

 

[Horizon22]

I asked before but nobody seems to have an answer. What’s next? When, after next week the government still refuses a payrise, what do the RMT do next? Another week of strike’s two weeks later? And when the government still refuse a payrise, another one, and another one? What if the government never caves, (which they won’t as every strike saves them money)? Eventually staff will have to return to work, they can’t afford to stay off for weeks at a time indefinitely.

I’m estimating that at my place around 25% of RMT staff will report for duty as normal next week anyway. The strike vote was only just passed here. That figure will rise and rise as the weeks go by.

Well we don't know how things will go (I personally think next week's by-elections will be critical if the Tories lose both). If its prolonged, yes higher and higher %s of staff will report for duty as normal (again precedent with the Southen strike).

 

[Gems]

Reading the visceral replies in this thread makes me glad not to work for the railways.

Every time I see a railway worker now, I'll be wondering "does he/she also think it acceptable to label some colleagues as 'parasites' "

Repugnant. I hope the dispute falls into the abyss with the nasty attitudes displayed by the Jack Harpers in this thread.

Honestly. The railway isn't like this at all. If you think the posts on here are bad, have a read of the 'Daily Fail' forums

 

[Bluejays]

Reading the visceral replies in this thread makes me glad not to work for the railways.

Every time I see a railway worker now, I'll be wondering "does he/she also think it acceptable to label some colleagues as 'parasites' "

Repugnant. I hope the dispute falls into the abyss with the nasty attitudes displayed by the Jack Harpers in this thread.

How do you know which side the railway worker you are looking at took, or how they behave. Maybe that person you are eyeing upbsuspiciously has been a victim of bad behaviour. Surely it's much easier to just employ the basic technique of treating everyone as an individual.

If I treated every passenger with suspicion based on a few bad eggs, that wouldn't be right either.

 

[Horizon22]

Reading the visceral replies in this thread makes me glad not to work for the railways.

Every time I see a railway worker now, I'll be wondering "does he/she also think it acceptable to label some colleagues as 'parasites' "

Repugnant. I hope the dispute falls into the abyss with the nasty attitudes displayed by the Jack Harpers in this thread.

The vast majority of people aren't like this. Most train crew mess rooms are a friendly, helpful (if a bit moany!) place to be. Many are moderates and I think the reasons they have decided to strike are fair and reasonable, yet I can also see how the company having contingency plans to provide their raison d'etre (running trains) is perfectly reasonable and in fact would be a deriliction of duty if they didn't have a backup plan.

 

[43066]

Being nice is in my opinion not related to this question. Let's say you just want more money, that might make you money orientated but by no means an unkind or not nice person. If you disagree with strikes as some people do (not me), they might do this to make strikes mre ineffectual. Doesn't necessarily make them not nice.

I suppose the point I was making though, is that many of us object to making money *by undermining other workers who are striking*.

On a counter note, striking may be unkind to the general populace, but could it not be argued the government is harming them by not only refusing a pay rise but also negotiations? In my opinion a pay rise should be given, in line with cost of living crisis, but I see the perspective that there is no attention being paid to the average passenger by EITHER side.

The unions see it that they have no option as striking (and action short of strike) are the only tools in the tool box. The disruption to passengers is not the motive and it’s not something people take any pleasure in. I will be significantly disrupted myself due to the strike action next week!

Equally striking is something that costs union members a lot of money, so it’s not something to be done lightly. Nobody *wants* to go on strike.

The government have sat back and allowed this dispute to progress by preventing TOCs from getting around the negotiating table - so there’s fault on that side. The government (not the unions) are also the ones who are responsible to the travelling public.

Ignoring somebody because they did something you don’t like is:

• Unprofessional
• Childish
• Rude
• Immature

It’s human nature. The views expressed by @anorthenguard are perfectly valid and are held by many. Nobody has condoned abuse or anything other than acting professionally.

I can assure you the working railway environment is generally more positive and supportive than other workplaces I’ve worked in. There is a sense of solidarity and “railway family”. I find the brother stuff a bit cringy, but yes people do call each other that!

In other industries I’ve worked in people actively looked to get one over on their colleagues to get ahead. That is far worse than any attitudes expressed on here about strike breakers.

Was the northern staff member you referred to in Manchester in the RMT ?, if they were & still worked I sympathise with your viewpoint, however if they weren’t it’s not really any concern of you or your colleagues what they chose to do unless rules weren’t followed. Where I work most are in the union but some aren’t and we generally appear able to respect that freedom of choice as adults .I wouldn’t really want it any other way in 2022.

There’s probably some truth in that. But the railway is heavily unionised to the extent that it’s unusual to find a driver not in ASLEF or a guard in the RMT. Those who aren’t probably are often regarded as “freeloading”. Where collective bargaining is in place it’s impossible *not* to be affected by the unions decisions, so why wouldn’t you want to opt in to be able to influence it?

 

[Horizon22]

It’s human nature. The views expressed by @anorthenguard are perfectly valid and are held by many. Nobody has condoned abuse or anything other than acting professionally.

I can assure you the working railway environment is generally more positive and supportive than other workplaces I’ve worked in. There is a sense of solidarity and “railway family”. I find the brother stuff a bit cringy, but yes people do call each other that!

In other industries I’ve worked in people actively looked to get one over on their colleagues to get ahead. That is far worse than any attitudes expressed on here about strike breakers.

Hmm some of the viceral terms like "scab", "vermin" & "parasite" would suggest otherwise - such strong words certainly imply something deep-seated and I find it very difficult that this wouldn't spill out.

That being said I agree with your 2nd paragraph and there's definitely solidarity and a family feel (with some rare exceptions), even amongst those with differing opinions.