Railway Industrial Disputes Mk2

[fatlad68]

Correct as 95% of signallers and operations staff would accept it, that would leave maintenance in a difficult place out on their own.

I work in ROC with 100+ other Signallers and as you can imagine this is the main topic of conversation. I've not heard anyone saying they would be happy to accept the deal, and this has been fed back up the line by the area reps. I think you are way off the mark with your 95% estimate, more like 95% of signallers would reject it.

 

[Skymonster]

There is a vast difference between the number of applicants, and those capable of making the grade.

No there isn’t - the problem is the railway has created ridiculously high barriers to entry. Take my own case (not that I particularly want to drive trains): I have a pilot’s licence, I am entirely free to fly commercially, and yet I would not be offered a train driver position. Tell me which of the two - pilot or train driver - is more critical from a passenger safety point of view. I’ll give you a clue - if yiu say train driver you are delusional.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

I work in ROC with 100+ other Signallers and as you can imagine this is the main topic of conversation. I've not heard anyone saying they would be happy to accept the deal, and this has been fed back up the line by the area reps. I think you are way off the mark with your 95% estimate, more like 95% of signallers would reject it.

What deal would they be happy to accept? That is realistic of course.

 

[Annetts key]

But if I'm going to be honest there does seem to be a bit of a culture within the rail industry, based on what I have read in these forums, of an expectation pay rises in line or above of inflation.

The RMT union asked for a reasonable pay rise in autumn last year, before inflation went mad. No specific figures were mentioned by the RMT, the company (Network Rail) response was that there would be NO pay rise.

This isn't regular inflation, it's global Pandemic + Ukraine war inflation.
We will all be losers unless our GDP output counterbalances the increased costs - which it won't.
So the question is, how can the railway increase its earnings (or cut its costs) by 10-ish percent?

Unfortunately it’s not just about a pay rise. The companies (and here I know most about Network Rail so will talk about them the most) also want to make substantial and radical changes to terms and conditions, working practices, and cut a substantial number of jobs. And by jobs, I mean employees. Meanwhile, vast amounts of money are wasted in various ways, large amounts of money flow out to private companies (with the ROSCOs doing really well), Network Rail still hire in labour only subcontractors and main contractors, and some management level engineers get an improvement package that is worth between 12% and nearly 40%.

With the push to NO Red Zone working, overall they get less work done, as the time it takes to do the paperwork before work starts, and still give up in time for green signals is very short in many places, a big gang will get a fair amount done, reduce the headcount, less work, more ESR's !
With bigger signal centres covering a bigger area with one signaller, even less work is done, with limits on the amount of line blockages at one time on a panel / workstation

Exactly, with less staff on the tools, it won’t be possible to get as much done. And the solution from the company (Network Rail) is to HALF the amount of routine scheduled (MST) maintenance work.

 

[Bald Rick]

some management level engineers get an improvement package that is worth between 12% and nearly 40%.

thats I’m afraid, is completely false.

 

[Dieseldriver]

No there isn’t - the problem is the railway has created ridiculously high barriers to entry. Take my own case (not that I particularly want to drive trains): I have a pilot’s licence, I am entirely free to fly commercially, and yet I would not be offered a train driver position. Tell me which of the two - pilot or train driver - is more critical from a passenger safety point of view. I’ll give you a clue - if yiu say train driver you are delusional.

Why wouldn’t you be offered a Train Driver position?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The point is they did guarantee no compulsory Redundancies until GBR come in. Am I right in saying the pay rise won't happen in 2 years if those severance aren't met though?

Yup they have and as i say with VS can't see it being needed but RMT clearly can see that their membership numbers are under attack across the industry be it NR mtce staff, ticket office staff, platform staff etc.

Eddie Dempsey has been fielded all day from Transport Select Committee to various media interviews and he has clearly been watching Arthur Scargill/Red Robbo videos with the way he turns any outing into the workers of the country need to unite against the capitalistic management rhetoric. Wonder why Mick Lynch keeping a low profile?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Haha Veterinary science would you believe.

More than one species to deal with.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jul 2022 ==

I thought it was all automated these days

Have you been watching the recent Meerkat adverts that talk about automation?

 

[High Dyke]

Attached is a copy of the full document, I referred to in my earlier post. This shows the extent of the reforms that Network Rail management want. One question from this; if the job cuts are achieved, then who is going to be doing specialist engineering tasks (e.g. Welding) if the workforce has been cut. And yes, i probably already know that answer.

Another question is about a healthy work / life balance. How is this achieved by individuals when NR management want staff to work more night turns etc.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Attached is a copy of the full document, I referred to in my earlier post. This shows the extent of the reforms that Network Rail management want. One question from this; if the job cuts are achieved, then who is going to be doing specialist engineering tasks (e.g. Welding) if the workforce has been cut. And yes, i probably already know that answer.

Another question is about a healthy work / life balance. How is this achieved by individuals when NR management want staff to work more night turns etc.

View attachment 117605

I listened to Tim Shoveller at the Transport Committee earlier and he was basically saying there are too many people in each team for the work required. He was saying four people turn up for a job when two will do and that if more than one discipline is required this gets multiplied up hence they want to create multi disciplined response teams. My guess on the above rostering changes is that NR has all but given up the need to have people working days now other than for response since it banned red zone working. This means its having to payout overtime for more shifts to get staff when it can deploy them hence this drastic change in T&C's. I won't go off at a tangent how this is sensible on many low frequency routes but its hardly surprising if you don't offer remuneration to compensate for such a change the workforce aren't going to be very amenable.

 

[Hellzapoppin]

But how many staff are already working these type of shifts. Certainly the S&T have 24/7 coverage. I believe the mechanism for 13 week rostering already exists, are these proposals so far removed from the existing?
Be interested to know.

 

[choochoochoo]

No there isn’t - the problem is the railway has created ridiculously high barriers to entry. Take my own case (not that I particularly want to drive trains): I have a pilot’s licence, I am entirely free to fly commercially, and yet I would not be offered a train driver position. Tell me which of the two - pilot or train driver - is more critical from a passenger safety point of view. I’ll give you a clue - if yiu say train driver you are delusional.

It may be more safety critical but having spoken to ex-pilots at my TOC they’ve said that train driving is more demanding which may be why the barriers to entry are higher.

There’s often 2 crew on a flight deck both equally capable of flying the aircraft. So if one makes an error the other is most likely to spot it. Drivers don’t have that 'backstop'.

Also whilst I only have a PPL, concentration at critical moments is easier to maintain flying than driving. You switch off during cruise for a few seconds its no big deal, you switch off during driving you shoot through a station you were meant to stop at. Whilst taking off/landing the adrenaline is pumping and there’s very low probability of zoning out.

So that may be why the psychometrics focusing on attention and concentration set the bar so high.

 

[Annetts key]

Note that some of the candidates in the Conservative election race want 20% cuts to budgets in all departments.

And where are these wannabe PMs getting the money from for these tax cuts?

The BBC report says that this time GTR Thameslink will also be strike-bound - are they right on this?

Yes, the last time the result was just under the threshold due to spoil ballot papers, so a new ballot took place. And the result was above the threshold.

So far there effectively has not been a pay offer made. All that is happening is Government taking the current pot of money used for pay and saying to RMT that from that pot, we will give some of your members a notional increase, paid for by job cuts from other RMT members, whilst also syphoning some of the pot off for ourselves as efficiency savings, all whilst the real value of the pot itself is also being eroded by inflation and not being topped up. The headline offer could be 2%, 5% or 20%, but that figure is an irrelevant red herring when the total remuneration on offer still represents a cut to RMT members collectively.

Regardless of individual views on funding for the railway, I don't see how anyone could reasonably think the RMT would accept this, when their mandate is to fight for all of their members equally.

An offer has been made by Network Rail, but yes, the funding is coming from the cost savings caused by 1850 maintenance employees leaving the industry plus nearly all the current vacancies (a large number, as in thousands) in maintenance being removed by abolishing these posts. The references to 1/3 of staff being cut, is front line maintenance staff.

Who is telling the truth on the matter of no compulsory redundancies? The RMT official and the Network Rail official being interviewed tonight told two different stories.

Network Rail has given a conditional no compulsory redundancies proposal. However, they have not provided any template charts showing what the structure of the new organisation will look like. So it’s impossible to know at this time if this is the end of the cuts, or if it’s likely that there will be more when the railways become GBR. I don’t know the situation with the TOCs.

I have no glee about that whatsoever. I do though think that staff who have become accustomed to inflation busting payrises expecting to circumvent restrictions in the current circumstances will have a bloody nasty shock. I know people working in HMT.

So, how many years ago did the RMT railway members last get an inflation busting pay rise?

The RMT official on the evening news tonight confirmed that the offer had not been put to the membership.

Despite the apparent progress, the feedback to the reps from the members, and hence to the NEC (national executive committee) was that due to all the conditions, it’s still very far from acceptable. During a video conference involving over 400 members on Network Rail maintenance, not a single person said that it’s acceptable.

And when will Rail Union leaders stop prattelling on about , our members worked through the pandemic !
so did Doctors , Nurses , Firemen , Police , Teachers , workers in care homes etc etc !!

The RMT would not have a problem with the respective trade unions for these groups of staff from asking for a pay rise. Some RMT members would be happy to chat with them on their picket lines.

Frankly if this no compulsory Redundancies was guaranteed declining this offer, calling it paltry and immediately announcing strikes was dangerous. Perhaps the first action was fair- mandating lots of weekends and later retirement is not good- but otherwise this deal is a huge improvement and I believe should not have been so hugely declined. As well as this, putting such a deal to the members is the definition of democracy is it not?

See my answers above.

That’s nowhere near a third of front line staff.

I have no problem with RMT rejecting the offer but this claim and the one about giving senior staff a 40% pay rise (or whatever it says) are somewhere between disingenuous and outright lies. That sort of misrepresentation can heavily influence members and that feels wrong.

thats I’m afraid, is completely false.

The RMT negotiating team asked Network Rail’s negotiating team about this, and asked them about the Network Rail document (which the RMT have a copy of). The company did not deny it. True, it’s not a straight 40% pay rise, as it’s a package of various items including some allowances, and it looks like it’s over three years. But this document does exist.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jul 2022 ==

But how many staff are already working these type of shifts. Certainly the S&T have 24/7 coverage. I believe the mechanism for 13 week rostering already exists, are these proposals so far removed from the existing?
Be interested to know.

It’s not about 24 hour / 7 days a week cover. It’s about maximising the number of weekends and nights that any maintenance or infrastructure staff can be forced to work. See also my comments below.

I listened to Tim Shoveller at the Transport Committee earlier and he was basically saying there are too many people in each team for the work required. He was saying four people turn up for a job when two will do and that if more than one discipline is required this gets multiplied up hence they want to create multi disciplined response teams. My guess on the above rostering changes is that NR has all but given up the need to have people working days now other than for response since it banned red zone working. This means its having to payout overtime for more shifts to get staff when it can deploy them hence this drastic change in T&C's. I won't go off at a tangent how this is sensible on many low frequency routes but its hardly surprising if you don't offer remuneration to compensate for such a change the workforce aren't going to be very amenable.

Keep in mind that it’s the companies’ line that there are too many people in each team. Unfortunately some of the day to day planning is shockingly bad. We are not allowed to carry out any routine maintenance work unless it’s been properly planned in. So if the planning goes wrong, you end up with either no work being done and you will find staff sat in the messroom, or more than one team on site or an oversized team on site.

And also the company are relying on computer modelling. We suspect that their computer modelling is suffering from GIGO (garbage in, garbage out, meaning if the data input to the system is not accurate, the outcome will be incorrect).

Yes, under a safe system of work where all train movements have been stopped (safeguarded / green zone), there is no need for a lookout. But that does not mean that one staff member stands around doing nothing. There is always plenty of work that needs doing.

The number of signals reported as being partially obscured due to vegetation growth each year is astonishing. And often you will find the same signal gets reported either every year, or every couple of years.

It’s not unknown for an S&T team to have to cut their way to a signal or to an equipment cubicle/cupboard (location in S&T speak). So one team member can be cutting the vegetation (while not cutting the cables) while the rest of the team carry out the maintenance. Or if there are multiple cubicles/cupboards, one person can work in each simultaneously.

And there are various tasks where there is a specified minimum number of staff required for safety reasons. For example, when working at height. Or in order to be able to properly test equipment is safe before returning it to service (such as certain work on points or multicore cables). Multiple people are needed so that the work can be done in a reasonable period of time, and so that the tester can remain independent from the installation work. That’s an important feature brought in after the Clapham rail disaster.

The company also ignore the fact that one S&T team may have multiple different P.Way (track) jobs to cover on one shift, all at different places. Or the S&T may have some of their own work as well as covering the P.Way job.

Note by cover P.Way work, I mean carry out the S&T work associated with whatever the P.Way are doing. I don’t mean the S&T do the P.Way work.

The company also appears to be ignoring the level of staff needed to cover other team members on training courses and taking leave/holidays.

Network Rail’s big idea, is to instead get rid of a lot of experienced and trained staff, and then get us to do other engineering disciplines work. So they for example want S&T to lift rails (currently a team of six P.Way do this, but they want to cut the P.Way down to four person teams). Have you ever tried to lift a rail? It not easy and don’t expect your steel toe capped boot to protect you if you drop the rail on your foot.

Welders or P.Way to carry out S&T FPL tests (FPL - facing point lock, a safety critical item of point operating equipment designed to prevent points moving under trains, or signals being cleared to a proceed aspect of the switch rails of the points are not in a safe position for the train movement). And what happens if the Welders/P.Way have a problem when doing this work? They should call the S&T! But where are these S&T going to materialise from if no S&T are booked on duty?

They also want any track staff to carry out earthing of the OHL (overhead line) equipment rather than the fully trained OHL staff.

Yes, they also want multi disciplined response teams. They keep saying that a typical “team” would be two S&T and one OHL person. But they can’t answer where the OHL person would put all their tools and equipment in the van. The van already being full with all the S&T tools and equipment.

Let alone tell us what the OHL person is supposed to do when we are carrying out S&T work. Or what the S&T are supposed to do when the OHL person is needed…

To put this into laypersons terms, it’s like asking a gas fitter to do the work of an electrician. Would you feel safe getting a gas fitter to wire up all the electrical wiring in your home? No disrespect intended to any gas fitters mind.

 

[Signal_Box]

I work in ROC with 100+ other Signallers and as you can imagine this is the main topic of conversation. I've not heard anyone saying they would be happy to accept the deal, and this has been fed back up the line by the area reps. I think you are way off the mark with your 95% estimate, more like 95% of signallers would reject it.

Why ? No real impact on current signallers, TMS actually benefits us (where we’re trained to use it) no compulsory redundancies for the life of the deal. The only issue I can see is the uplift to 67 vice 65.

The proposed increase in pay will now cover the current lose in strikes, I’d also say the self evidence proposals need work to allow us the time to compile the files.

 

[Annetts key]

On the enforced retirement, why should ordinary workers have to retire at 67, when management don’t? Hint, look at the age of one of the top level management…

 

[Signal_Box]

Retire at 67 after 40+ years of anti social / life shortening shift work die shortly after reduces the pension burden.

At 67 I would of done 46 years service, I assume the RPS service requirement for full pension will increase as well?

 

[choochoochoo]

Monopoly buyer of labour. They run thousands of almost permanently unfilled nursing roles. A lot of what you describe could have been BR in the early 1990s.

Why ever did the rail unions want to compete with nurses for public cash?

We now have a Dutch auction of fantasy tax cuts in the Conservative Party. The idea drivers are going to get 4% this year to cover RPI and 10% the next, without paying for it in productivity is fantasy.

It is far easier to cut train services than cut the number of people needing hip replacements although the NHS does have a few tricks there.

It could be argued this monopoly buyer gives unions more power.

Before a strike would normally affect one operator. The other operators on the route would still run. Giving passengers some alternative means to travel. Minimising the effectiveness of the action.

If there is now only the one monopoly operator, a strike by its employees completely disrupts all the trains everywhere.

 

[142blue]

I left the grade as I saw the writing on the wall, secure your own future or lose it unfortunately.

My thoughts too

 

[Bald Rick]

The RMT negotiating team asked Network Rail’s negotiating team about this, and asked them about the Network Rail document (which the RMT have a copy of). The company did not deny it. True, it’s not a straight 40% pay rise, as it’s a package of various items including some allowances, and it looks like it’s over three years. But this document does exist.

The document does exist, which I have seen too. There is no 40% pay rise over any time period. For a very, very few people who are having their working arrangements completely changed, it is half that. The RMT negotiatiors evidently have misunderstood it at best, or can’t add up at worst.

when you say “true it’s not a 40% pay rise”, does that mean you knew what you originally said was incorrect when you wrote it?

 

[westv]

Is this dispute the same or different to the ASLEF dispute with GA and Hull Trains?

 

[Falcon1200]

However, high gas prices are baked in now for next two years and its gas prices that drive cost of electricity across Europe although the sensible Germans are rapidly getting their mothballed coal/ignite power stations back on line unlike us that took great delight in getting a politician to blow them up before the boilers were even cold.

Would these be the same sensible Germans who closed their nuclear power stations and instead depend on gas supplies from another country ruled by a mad dictator, and who are now having to re-activate the most environmentally-damaging forms of power generation ? BTW ignite is a very appropriate Freudian slip for lignite !

Another question is about a healthy work / life balance. How is this achieved by individuals when NR management want staff to work more night turns etc.

Those shift proposals sound dreadful and I am not surprised people are deeply concerned - But what do they actually mean ? Does a week of nights mean 7 turns (as it did for me on BR back in the old days, every third week !) or split into say 4 nights one week and 3 another, as per my roster pre-retirement ? And weekend working, my roster in 2016 included shifts on 4 weekends out of every 5, either night shift finishing or starting at the weekend, or day shift on the Saturday or Sunday. It would be instructive to know exactly how the proposed new rosters differ from those existing now; But if the shift patterns are significantly worse than at present, if they are really necessary they should only apply to new starts and should not be applied retrospectively to anyone.

And where are these wannabe PMs getting the money from for these tax cuts?

Perhaps from the same place unlimited finance is available for the railway ?!!

 

[Kite159]

Of course if any network rail engineer isn't happy about the work shifting from days to more nights/weekends they always have the option to hand their notice in and go to work elsewhere for more stable hours.

 

[KM1991]

Of course if any network rail engineer isn't happy about the work shifting from days to more nights/weekends they always have the option to hand their notice in and go to work elsewhere for more stable hours.

Yeah. Let’s just change everyone’s contracts. Forget about workers rights. Sod it, let’s scrap the minimum wage and let children sweep chimneys again.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Retire at 67 after 40+ years of anti social / life shortening shift work die shortly after reduces the pension burden.

At 67 I would of done 46 years service, I assume the RPS service requirement for full pension will increase as well?

There has been an increase on the age when state pensions are paid in recent years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jul 2022 ==

Yeah. Let’s just change everyone’s contracts. Forget about workers rights. Sod it, let’s scrap the minimum wage and let children sweep chimneys again.

I notice the somewhat less-than-subtle mention of the minimum wage and the even more ridiculous mention of children sweeping chimneys above.

Neither of those two points has anything whatsoever to do with any railway industrial dispute. You appear to have had an outbreak of childish petulance.

 

[Kite159]

Yeah. Let’s just change everyone’s contracts. Forget about workers rights. Sod it, let’s scrap the minimum wage and let children sweep chimneys again.

How can you link the foreign concept of "if you don't like the changes you can always leave" to "let's go back to the Victorian era of chimney sweeps"

That unless you don't think you will get half as much pay for the same levels of work outside that little railway bubble.

 

[Moonshot]

Of course if any network rail engineer isn't happy about the work shifting from days to more nights/weekends they always have the option to hand their notice in and go to work elsewhere for more stable hours.

Which is what will happen....and they will do that walking away with a payout as well in some cases.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jul 2022 ==

Yeah. Let’s just change everyone’s contracts. Forget about workers rights. Sod it, let’s scrap the minimum wage and let children sweep chimneys again.

Give your head a wobble, everyone is perfectly entitled to walk away from a job if they dont like it.

 

[LowLevel]

Of course if any network rail engineer isn't happy about the work shifting from days to more nights/weekends they always have the option to hand their notice in and go to work elsewhere for more stable hours.

Highly specialised engineers who train for years to do their jobs should accept working up to 39 weeks a year on nights for a small pay increase at best with a loss of conditions or just go and work elsewhere at the drop of a hat, despite being employed in a state owned monopoly, just because it now suits the employer to do things this way and the state says it isn't interested in paying them a decent sum to accept the imposition, or in giving them a choice over it?

Perhaps they can go and find a job labouring, working in a café or similar and if they lose their home because society has required them take out a mortgage to be able to cover huge costs afford it, then again, that's life.

 

[LAX54]

Just to add to what you've posted...

An increasing number of the smaller signalboxes also have limits on line blockages now. Some have a block at certain times, and some have a limit on the number depending upon other stuff going on.
One of the boxes I work has a policy of a minimum of a 12 minute gap for a lineblock to be given. With a mix of freight and passenger trains of around 5 an hour each way, unless there is late running and a gap, the answer is usually a no.

From what we have been told (and I accept it may be wrong) is that more faults will be left until night shift so that staff can get then get lineblocks, with degraded working until then.

From many posts on here, I get the impression that many posters don't "get" what the impact has been from the move away from red zone working.

and with degraded working going on for hours, a far bigger risk of an incident, then when you get down to actual 'line blocks', there is the nightmare of outside contractors !

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jul 2022 ==

I listened to Tim Shoveller at the Transport Committee earlier and he was basically saying there are too many people in each team for the work required. He was saying four people turn up for a job when two will do and that if more than one discipline is required this gets multiplied up hence they want to create multi disciplined response teams. My guess on the above rostering changes is that NR has all but given up the need to have people working days now other than for response since it banned red zone working. This means its having to payout overtime for more shifts to get staff when it can deploy them hence this drastic change in T&C's. I won't go off at a tangent how this is sensible on many low frequency routes but its hardly surprising if you don't offer remuneration to compensate for such a change the workforce aren't going to be very amenable.

If 2 turn up for most Line Blockages there will not be any work done ! you will have a person each end to put out the dets (if needed) and that leaves..........
even if it's not a SOL Line Blockage, if you take from an Auto, you still need staff to key back, you could say, go back to a controlled signal, and you can, but, that maybe 5 signal sections back, and if you have a fair level of service, then the request for a LB will be declined !

 

[mpthomson]

I am probably wrong but didn’t the BoE predict an 11.5% inflation rate next year?

Without action to head that off then yes.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

and with degraded working going on for hours, a far bigger risk of an incident, then when you get down to actual 'line blocks', there is the nightmare of outside contractors !

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jul 2022 ==


If 2 turn up for most Line Blockages there will not be any work done ! you will have a person each end to put out the dets (if needed) and that leaves..........
even if it's not a SOL Line Blockage, if you take from an Auto, you still need staff to key back, you could say, go back to a controlled signal, and you can, but, that maybe 5 signal sections back, and if you have a fair level of service, then the request for a LB will be declined !

Im guessing the issue is that as NR has banned red zone working along with making sure line blockages can be managed safely its pushing a lot of work into nights and weekend possessions and thus the current team structure isn't optimised to that way of working. That said this isn't of the workforces making and whilst it theoretically makes it safer for them (i have a view that working in the dark brings other risks albeit less risky than being hit by a train) they shouldn't be penalised in this way. Yes tell the workforce we are moving to this way of working for reasons , y & z and we need to amend your t&c's and open up a dialogue with the union. Then from the savings you make by reducing the number of staff no longer required for lookout duties you recycle this back into the workforces pay. Whats happening here is a pay rise is being linked to agreeing this the two are separate issues.