Rail strikes discussion

[ComUtoR]

It’s a breach of contract, which is why you don’t get paid when you strike. However you cannot be disciplined for it, unlike if you were just to go AWOL.

Cheers, I wasn't aware it would be a breach of contract.

It is a breach of contract but by the same token you are protected from repercussions from your employer for up to 12 weeks (that may have changed)

Thanks.

My take is that if you are a member of that union then you abide by the democratic decision of that union and strike even if you didn’t vote for it

I would agree.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Personally 11 days is a limit for me (based on 8h shifts generally)

That makes sense.

 

[Fokx]

Can those who work in the rail industry please explain why you have voted to strike rather than action short of a strike, like GTR have done.
Surely working to rule and nothing more or less will still cause chaos on the railways, and full pay will be guaranteed as those working to rule will not be breaking their contracts/rules/regulations?
Then, when the regime fails to take note, then move to full striking?

Because I’ve already been working to rule since January. The DfT do not care in the slightest so long as the burden is not reflected on the conservative government, hence the amount of cancellations across the UK and no financial punishment for doing so.

Additionally I’m aware that my TOC has no control over the 0% payrise offered and the ball is firmly in the DfT court.

The point is to cause disruption and demonstrate that without the staff there is no rail service.

 

[danielcanning]

Because I’ve already been working to rule since January. The DfT do not care in the slightest so long as the burden is not reflected on the conservative government, hence the amount of cancellations across rhe UK and no financial punishment for doing so, and I’m aware that my TOC has no control over the 0% payrise offered.

The point is to cause disruption and demonstrate that without the staff there is no rail service.

I could also make the argument that without passengers there would be no rail service, and you’re doing a very good job of driving them away…

 

[Thumper1127]

I sympathise with new starters to the industry. By definition you're doing a job you want to do, it probably still has the "shine" to it and you're probably very happy and at peace. You've applied for the Ts and Cs on offer and are probably very satisfied. You might just be getting on to full wages after training wage or worse, working through training wage time.

Suddenly people are telling you things are terrible and you should go on strike, lose money and suddenly you might feel at odds with your managers, or your reps, or your colleagues. It spoils that happy glow you go to work with.

I can sympathise because more than 10 years ago exactly the same happened to me. I believe in the basic principles of union membership, albeit not their political goals, and so I've always respected any action called and followed it, whether I voted for it or not - I've voted both with and against the union over time and I've seen ballots succeed and lose.

It is a fact - the way unions work within the has evolved over time but it is a slow process. Some people think it's good and some bad.

The honest answer is that if you attend work during a strike some people will probably hold it against you. If you're not in the union at all, probably less people than if you were a union member. It is up to you how much that may affect you.

I think it is unlikely that you will never be spoken to again in general and for the most part the reaction does fade with time.

Personally I speak to everyone. I don't care to have my actions ruled by other people's opinions.

It is a hard one to get your head around if you're new to the industry and without knowing your work area the likely reaction is hard to say.

Make your own choice and live by it is the best I can offer.

I have purposely kept myself out of contributing to this debate given some of the volatility. But I have to say, this is one of the most measured and reasonable replies given to a genuine question.

 

[FirstMinister]

As expected the usual suspects in the MSM are union bashing with talk of archaic Spanish Practices and how unions are opposed to the introduction of "new technology". I haven't rode a UK train for 20+ years and have absolutely no dog in this fight. I am, however, interested in, a) industrial relations; and, b) tech, hence the following questions:

* Are Spanish Practices actually a thing? When I was a kid in Birmingham all of my mates' dad's worked at Longbridge (British Leyland then Rover) and arcane working practices were absolutely part of the landscape. Red Robbo was very much as depicted in the media and walk outs were called at the drop of a hat and for the slightest grievance. My favorite was when my neighbor's dad was called out for 2 days because there was a lack of soap in one of the plant's bathrooms. Often times workers would not bother going in as they knew there was a decent chance of being instructed to walk out so why bother waste the bus fare?

Anyway, are there still practices which, in today's era could, objectively, be termed as arcane, petty, plain dumb etc.? Or is it media nonsense?

* Can someone share examples of alleged "opposition to new technology"? That's an extremely broad term and could mean absolutely anything. Whether it be in the cabs, ticket offices, back offices, control rooms, etc. what "new technology" has been rejected and for what reason(s)?

As an aside, while the public will largely be unsympathetic to rail workers I personally feel they should direct their ire at UK governments and the private companies who have continuously failed to provide a reliable, efficient and affordable rail service that is of merit. Perhaps the unions are "dinosaurs" - I don't know. I do know, however, that they're not the primary culprits for the UK's railways being well below par.

 

[choochoochoo]

I could also make the argument that without passengers there would be no rail service, and you’re doing a very good job of driving them away…

Seeing how busy the trains were today, I'd say we're doing a bad job at driving them away !!

How angry must we make the passengers for them not to want to travel ? Is a week of disruption not enough ?

They'll be back.

Just like people who vow never to fly on ryanair/easyjet again - The price and convenience is too good to turn down compared to the alternatives.

 

[Fokx]

I could also make the argument that without passengers there would be no rail service, and you’re doing a very good job of driving them away…

Call me selfish but if my job role is potentially going to be cut within a timeframe of less than 5 years, that’s my focus.

Passenger numbers wont decline that dramatically as a result of industrial action. They will decline, but the passengers will be back.

 

[LowLevel]

I think you have summarised my feelings better that I could ever do myself…
And as you say, a good couple of days to scratch my head and make a decision that I will need to live with…

I'd suggest you talk it through with people whose opinion you value in and out of the railway - but do think carefully about who that is.

I have purposely kept myself out of contributing to this debate given some of the volatility. But I have to say, this is one of the most measured and reasonable replies given to a genuine question.

Thanks, I care deeply about my job, the industry, my colleagues and my passengers. I am far from geared up for some tub thumping and sticking it to the man - on the contrary despite having been there before I feel sad and anxious myself about the whole affair. There are no winners here.

Call me selfish but if my job role is potentially going to be cut within a timeframe of less than 5 years, that’s my focus.

Passenger numbers wont decline that dramatically as a result of industrial action. They will decline, but the passengers will be back.

Things might change in the world but I doubt very much that your job being what and where it is will be gone in 5 years. Changes might happen, of course, but I would put money on it that you'll still be employed doing something that might be vaguely recognisable or even identical to what you're doing now, if you want to be.

 

[windingroad]

They'll be back.

They will decline, but the passengers will be back.

Exactly this. I don't think anyone is denying there may be a short-term impact, but I very much doubt it'll change travel habits. I have had many, many poor experiences with buses, taxis, planes and trains. I still use all of those travel modes depending on which makes the most sense for any given journey.

 

[Mcc1989]

"Non-union staff and striking

If non-union members go on strike, they are protected from dismissal and have the same rights as union members, as long as the industrial action is lawful."

If your business faces industrial action

Strikes and industrial action - rights and responsibilities for employers, when unions can take action and the effect on employees' pay and working records

www.gov.uk

Ah I stand corrected then! Thank you, I must've misread.

Re: breach of contract. I have read not turning up for work is a breach of contract but if it is part of a legal action it isn't punishable.

 

[43066]

Thanks, I care deeply about my job, the industry, my colleagues and my passengers. I am far from geared up for some tub thumping and sticking it to the man - on the contrary despite having been there before I feel sad and anxious myself about the whole affair. There are no winners here.

This is very well put indeed and largely sums up my own feelings.

 

[nedchester]

As expected the usual suspects in the MSM are union bashing with talk of archaic Spanish Practices and how unions are opposed to the introduction of "new technology". I haven't rode a UK train for 20+ years and have absolutely no dog in this fight. I am, however, interested in, a) industrial relations; and, b) tech, hence the following questions:

* Are Spanish Practices actually a thing? When I was a kid in Birmingham all of my mates' dad's worked at Longbridge (British Leyland then Rover) and arcane working practices were absolutely part of the landscape. Red Robbo was very much as depicted in the media and walk outs were called at the drop of a hat and for the slightest grievance. My favorite was when my neighbor's dad was called out for 2 days because there was a lack of soap in one of the plant's bathrooms. Often times workers would not bother going in as they knew there was a decent chance of being instructed to walk out so why bother waste the bus fare?

Anyway, are there still practices which, in today's era could, objectively, be termed as arcane, petty, plain dumb etc.? Or is it media nonsense?

* Can someone share examples of alleged "opposition to new technology"? That's an extremely broad term and could mean absolutely anything. Whether it be in the cabs, ticket offices, back offices, control rooms, etc. what "new technology" has been rejected and for what reason(s)?

As an aside, while the public will largely be unsympathetic to rail workers I personally feel they should direct their ire at UK governments and the private companies who have continuously failed to provide a reliable, efficient and affordable rail service that is of merit. Perhaps the unions are "dinosaurs" - I don't know. I do know, however, that they're not the primary culprits for the UK's railways being well below par.

There have been examples of train crew being given tablets (iPads) for notices etc and then demanding a one off payment for using them.

There’s the scanning tickets issue on TPE (accepted as not part of the current dispute but employers had to pay guards 2p a scan to check tickets using the scanner when a manual scan previously was done without issue.

There was another one in Liverpool where apparently a taxi is demanded by some crew to get to Chester if the TfW service isn’t available rather than using Merseyrail because the Merseyrail route isn’t an official route or similar. To be fair most staff ignore that one.

There was another issue where a company wanted to open a new train crew depot at X but staff at Y blocked it because they might lose a couple of turns.

A friend of mine who’s a TCS tells me he could write a book about some staff that take the p***. Staff need to be much more flexible within their working hours but no one should be working more hours in the week.

I think for example Lumo drivers can work as Ambassadors and v.v.

 

[Watershed]

* Are Spanish Practices actually a thing? When I was a kid in Birmingham all of my mates' dad's worked at Longbridge (British Leyland then Rover) and arcane working practices were absolutely part of the landscape. Red Robbo was very much as depicted in the media and walk outs were called at the drop of a hat and for the slightest grievance. My favorite was when my neighbor's dad was called out for 2 days because there was a lack of soap in one of the plant's bathrooms. Often times workers would not bother going in as they knew there was a decent chance of being instructed to walk out so why bother waste the bus fare?

Anyway, are there still practices which, in today's era could, objectively, be termed as arcane, petty, plain dumb etc.? Or is it media nonsense?

They absolutely still are, I'm afraid to say. Obviously it's worse at the moment with people officially or unofficially working to rule at a lot of TOCs, and it's nowhere near as widespead or bad as the BL examples you highlight.

But for example I'm aware of TOCs where the rules around who works an uncovered shift are deliberately structured so as to maximise the possibility of causing unnecessary overtime and rest day working (though of course the reps would never admit it). There are the pathetic politics of which depot signs what, to the point that it's sometimes easier to say "right, neither of you will be signing this then", reducing flexibility and increasing the likelihood of unnecessary disruption. And I've seen traincrew demanding a reissued diagram because an extra shunt is necessary due to disruption.

Sometimes it really seems like the reps just like complaining about the way things are run - I wonder how they'd actually like to be in charge...

Obviously I should stress that not all reps are like that, indeed it's probably just a vocal p***-taking minority. But the effect they have is significant.

* Can someone share examples of alleged "opposition to new technology"? That's an extremely broad term and could mean absolutely anything. Whether it be in the cabs, ticket offices, back offices, control rooms, etc. what "new technology" has been rejected and for what reason(s)?

Well obviously there is the hot button issue of DOO, where new build stock has had to be clumsily retro-fitted with guard door controls (and condemned to a lifetime of longer dwell times), seeing as the RMT has won that battle in almost all cases.

An insistence on getting a technology payment whenever anything, and I mean anything, new is introduced. Be that tablets for getting notices, increases in pay for new traction, or scanning barcodes rather than inspecting tickets using the Mk1 eyeball.

A refusal to accept that ticket offices will have to change, and in many cases shut.

Seeing how busy the trains were today, I'd say we're doing a bad job at driving them away !!

How angry must we make the passengers for them not to want to travel ? Is a week of disruption not enough ?

They'll be back.

Just like people who vow never to fly on ryanair/easyjet again - The price and convenience is too good to turn down compared to the alternatives.

Imagine how much busier the railway would be if it actually offered a good customer experience... no, we can't be doing with that!

 

[miklcct]

Because of the planned rail strike on June 21st, we are currently seeking an alternative date to hold this event.

How many businesses, entertainment venues, or events across the whole country have been closed, cancelled or postponed as a direct result of the rail strike like this one?

 

[Bluejays]

Hi all!
I’m going to be as clear as I can with my position and would really appreciate if someone gave me their views on this.
I’m quite new to the industry and love the job. Based in Waterloo. Never been affected by any industrial action before. I’m not member of any union as is not a position I share.
Respect unionist movement and my colleagues right to go on strike, really do, but do not share it. Until couple of days ago, that I started reading this topic, I truly believed I could go to work and this would be respected by my colleagues (yes, maybe too new and too naive).
Is it really the case that if I choose to work, I will be broadly (this is an important word, as I could cope and understand if some people do) discriminated by other colleagues?
Will really hurt to go on strike just because of fear, but equally, not keen to spend the test of my career isolated….

If you're not a member of the union then you would be unable to strike even if you wanted to. I'd hope and imagine most would respect that.

 

[nedchester]

They absolutely still are, I'm afraid to say. Obviously it's worse at the moment with people officially or unofficially working to rule at a lot of TOCs, and it's nowhere near as widespead or bad as the BL examples you highlight.

But for example I'm aware of TOCs where the rules around who works an uncovered shift are deliberately structured so as to maximise the possibility of causing unnecessary overtime and rest day working (though of course the reps would never admit it). There are the pathetic politics of which depot signs what, to the point that it's sometimes easier to say "right, neither of you will be signing this then", reducing flexibility and increasing the likelihood of unnecessary disruption. And I've seen traincrew demanding a reissued diagram because an extra shunt is necessary due to disruption.

Sometimes it really seems like the reps just like complaining about the way things are run - I wonder how they'd actually like to be in charge...

Obviously I should stress that not all reps are like that, indeed it's probably just a vocal p***-taking minority. But the effect they have is significant.


Well obviously there is the hot button issue of DOO, where new build stock has had to be clumsily retro-fitted with guard door controls (and condemned to a lifetime of longer dwell times), seeing as the RMT has won that battle in almost all cases.

An insistence on getting a technology payment whenever anything, and I mean anything, new is introduced. Be that tablets for getting notices, increases in pay for new traction, or scanning barcodes rather than inspecting tickets using the Mk1 eyeball.

A refusal to accept that ticket offices will have to change, and in many cases shut.


Imagine how much busier the railway would be if it actually offered a good customer experience... no, we can't be doing with that!

Exactly this.

Many of these practices are difficult to explain to the average job but they affect the efficient running of the railway and are in fact extremely costly. Stopping these could save a lot of money.

It is one of the reasons that I fear that if this dispute goes on and it isn’t solved by mutual means that conditions will be “imposed”.

I said weeks ago that the Government is up for a fight and the last few days of behaviour from the likes of Shapps seems to point to that being true.

If you're not a member of the union then you would be unable to strike even if you wanted to. I'd hope and imagine most would respect that.

That’s actually not true as has been pointed out above. You are protected by the law (even if you are not protected by the union)

 

[43066]

There have been examples of train crew being given tablets (iPads) for notices etc and the, demanding a one off payment for using them.

It’s a fairly standard thing in the railway industry. I used to work for a large professional services firm where I got paid £5k (IIRC) per year “car allowance”.

There was another one in Liverpool where apparently a taxi is demanded by some crew to get to Chester if the TfW service isn’t available rather than using Merseyrail because the Merseyrail route isn’t an official route or similar. To be fair most staff ignore that one.

A taxi agreement? Makes a lot of sense, staff should not be forced to use stations late at night when they are in uniform and a target. With all due respect that’s something you won’t have any understanding of as someone working in an office not wearing uniform.

There’s the scanning tickets issue on TPE (accepted as not part of the current dispute but employers had to pay guards 2p a scan to check tickets using the scanner when a manual scan previously was done without issue.

That’s because it has become long standing practice for payments for checking tickets, and this makes up a significant amount of income. The union’s objection is not to the technology per se, but to the loss of earnings.

There was another issue where a company wanted to open a new train crew depot at X but staff at Y blocked it because they might lose a couple of turns.

This sounds highly unlikely.

A friend of mine who’s a TCS tells me he could write a book about some staff that take the p***. Staff need to be much more flexible within their working hours but no one should be working more hours in the week.

In my experience traincrew tend to bend over backwards to help out when those supposedly running the show make an almighty pigs ear of it, as happens all too regularly. This is why working to rule can have such a devastating impact on services.

I think for example Lumo drivers can work as Ambassadors and v.v.

It has been stated that that isn’t the case. Generally you aren’t going to use a driver for a job that could be done by a lower paid member of staff, and which takes them away from their primary role.

 

[LowLevel]

If you're not a member of the union then you would be unable to strike even if you wanted to. I'd hope and imagine most would respect that.

As mentioned above - that is actually not true though Communications from the employer may attempt to lead you to believe it, either vaguely directly or by omission. Take the Merseyrail DOO strikes where the RMT pickets were respected, entirely unilaterally (you can believe it, I'm sure legal action would have been taken had ASLEF encouraged it even tacitly) by the train drivers, catching the employer completely unawares, as an example.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Sounds like there are still a lot of Peter Ian Stakers out there.

 

[danielcanning]

It’s a fairly standard thing in the railway industry. I used to work for a large professional services firm where I got paid £5k (IIRC) per year “car allowance”.



A taxi agreement? Makes a lot of sense, staff should not be forced to use stations late at night when they are in uniform and a target. With all due respect that’s something you won’t have any understanding of as someone working in an office not wearing uniform.



That’s because it has become long standing practice for payments for checking tickets, and this makes up a significant amount of income. The union’s objection is not to the technology per se, but to the loss of earnings.



This sounds highly unlikely.



In my experience traincrew tend to bend over backwards to help out when those supposedly running the show make an almighty pigs ear of it, as happens all too regularly. This is why working to rule can have such a devastating impact on services.



It has been stated that that isn’t the case. Generally you aren’t going to use a driver for a job that could be done by a lower paid member of staff, and which takes then away from their primary role.

A target in Uniform? What about nurses etc, who quite often come into work in uniform at unsociable hours. Should they be allowed to claim for a cab from the NHS?

 

[43066]

And I've seen traincrew demanding a reissued diagram because an extra shunt is necessary due to disruption.

Absolutely because if something goes wrong it’ll always be blamed on the driver. The alternative of course is simply refusing to do it.

A target in Uniform? What about nurses etc, who quite often come into work in uniform at unsociable hours. Should they be allowed to claim for a cab from the NHS?

Are nurses expected as part of their jobs to travel around late at night on trains full of drunks? If so they should certainly be allowed to claim for cabs, yes.

It’s a ridiculous comparison.

 

[Cavan]

As expected the usual suspects in the MSM are union bashing with talk of archaic Spanish Practices and how unions are opposed to the introduction of "new technology". I haven't rode a UK train for 20+ years and have absolutely no dog in this fight. I am, however, interested in, a) industrial relations; and, b) tech, hence the following questions:

* Are Spanish Practices actually a thing? When I was a kid in Birmingham all of my mates' dad's worked at Longbridge (British Leyland then Rover) and arcane working practices were absolutely part of the landscape. Red Robbo was very much as depicted in the media and walk outs were called at the drop of a hat and for the slightest grievance. My favorite was when my neighbor's dad was called out for 2 days because there was a lack of soap in one of the plant's bathrooms. Often times workers would not bother going in as they knew there was a decent chance of being instructed to walk out so why bother waste the bus fare?

Anyway, are there still practices which, in today's era could, objectively, be termed as arcane, petty, plain dumb etc.? Or is it media nonsense?

* Can someone share examples of alleged "opposition to new technology"? That's an extremely broad term and could mean absolutely anything. Whether it be in the cabs, ticket offices, back offices, control rooms, etc. what "new technology" has been rejected and for what reason(s)?

As an aside, while the public will largely be unsympathetic to rail workers I personally feel they should direct their ire at UK governments and the private companies who have continuously failed to provide a reliable, efficient and affordable rail service that is of merit. Perhaps the unions are "dinosaurs" - I don't know. I do know, however, that they're not the primary culprits for the UK's railways being well below par.

You sound a tabloid journalist looking for stuff to put in an article. Why would you suddenly join a "railuk" forum when you haven't rode a UK train for 20 years

I'm sure the Daily mail have given you a good pay rise hey?

 

[nedchester]

It’s a fairly standard thing in the railway industry. I used to work for a large professional services firm where I got paid £5k (IIRC) per year “car allowance”.



A taxi agreement? Makes a lot of sense, staff should not be forced to use stations late at night when they are in uniform and a target. With all due respect that’s something you won’t have any understanding of as someone working in an office not wearing uniform.



That’s because it has become long standing practice for payments for checking tickets, and this makes up a significant amount of income. The union’s objection is not to the technology per se, but to the loss of earnings.



This sounds highly unlikely.



In my experience traincrew tend to bend over backwards to help out when those supposedly running the show make an almighty pigs ear of it, as happens all too regularly. This is why working to rule can have such a devastating impact on services.



It has been stated that that isn’t the case. Generally you aren’t going to use a driver for a job that could be done by a lower paid member of staff, and which takes then away from their primary role.

Meanwhile outside of the “railway bubble”………….

If the unions moved on some of the issues similar to highlighted then it would go a long way to solving this dispute. But by all means carry on because this is all going to get very nasty from U.K. Gov.

Oh and the one about using a taxi and not Merseyrail was late afternoon not late evening.

 

[danielcanning]

Absolutely because if something goes wrong it’ll always be blamed on the driver. The alternative of course is simply refusing to do it.



Are nurses expected as part of their jobs to travel around late at night on trains full of drunks? If so they should certainly be allowed to claim for cabs, yes.

It’s a ridiculous comparison.

Okay then, what about bus drivers? They work more unsociable hours (especially in London) than train drivers, and have to travel in uniform to their depot, do they expect a fully expensed taxi?

 

[43066]

Meanwhile outside of the “railway bubble”………….

If the unions moved on some of the issues similar to highlighted then it would go a long way to solving this dispute. But by all means carry on because this is all going to get very nasty from U.K. Gov.

Oh and the one about using a taxi and not Merseyrail was late afternoon not late evening.

You’re part of the the railway bubble yourself, a much cushier part of it than many of the low paid front line staff who are striking next week.

Okay then, what about bus drivers? They work more unsociable hours (especially in London) than train drivers, and have to travel in uniform to their depot, do they expect a fully expensed taxi?

Why do you keep drawing comparisons with totally different jobs?

In another industry I used to get a fully expensed taxi home and dinner paid for me if I was in the office after 8pm. Maybe that should be brought to the railway…

 

[High Dyke]

So rail workers who want to work are to be shunned and ostracised? If that’s the game that’s going to be played then anyone who’s a member of the RMT should be blacklisted out of the industry…

I've stated before there's no place for abuse. Ironically though Network Rail were offering double time and lieu leave for those came into work. If I chose to do that I could actually be paid twice as much as normal to do nothing, as the incumbent TOC has cancelled all services at the locations I work.

 

[142blue]

Do 13 days on the trot reasonably regularly because of shortages.. and schapps wants to ban RDW lmao funniest thing I have heard in a while.

Yep let's do a week of no rest days, overtime or swaps.

The job would stop

 

[1D54]

Seeing how busy the trains were today, I'd say we're doing a bad job at driving them away !!

How angry must we make the passengers for them not to want to travel ? Is a week of disruption not enough ?

They'll be back.

Just like people who vow never to fly on ryanair/easyjet again - The price and convenience is too good to turn down compared to the alternatives.

I'd not bank on such a statement being true. People, including myself have returned to EZY and FR after being treated like dirt in the past simply down to the economics of it, the same doesn't apply to the shameful way the paying public are about to be treated by the rail industry because we have other options available. We are innocents in all of this but are paying a high price.

 

[nedchester]

You’re part of the the railway bubble yourself, a much cushier part of it than many of the low paid front line staff who are striking next week.

Indeed I am but I am able to look outside of my bubble and see it from the outside rather than the rather self entitled inside.

Change is going to happen on the railways whether you or I like it or not. I actually see some streamlining of train planning with the formation of GBR.