Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Since when? The last communication I can find mentioning legal details was that the RMT "will be considering our legal position" on the 27th February. If they've given up on this avenue in the following 10 days it's not been communicated out to us, which to be fair, would be par for the course with this dispute.
Since when? The last communication I can find mentioning legal details was that the RMT "will be considering our legal position" on the 27th February. If they've given up on this avenue in the following 10 days it's not been communicated out to us, which to be fair, would be par for the course with this dispute.
Since when? The last communication I can find mentioning legal details was that the RMT "will be considering our legal position" on the 27th February. If they've given up on this avenue in the following 10 days it's not been communicated out to us, which to be fair, would be par for the course with this dispute.
Legal positions are normally considered very quickly, given how important they are perceived to be. I’ll leave you to work out why it may not have been communicated.
I believe, going on speaking to numerous Network Rail RMT reps, that the feeling across the country varies somewhat. That makes it very difficult to call.
I believe, going on speaking to numerous Network Rail RMT reps, that the feeling across the country varies somewhat. That makes it very difficult to call.
That’s interesting, thanks. Clearly there are different opinions around the country, but what I’m hearing is definitely much more in favour of settling than carrying on the dispute. You can see that on this thread.
And I can think of lots of ways they could shaft ops, and thanks to this awful awful government we are going to lose the right to withdraw our labour.
I'm honestly ashamed of this country.
I believe it’s far more subtle. When it comes to law decisions, the only real test is in court. Until then, legal advice is just that, an opinion.
Network Rail believe one thing, the RMT believe the opposite. But deciding to take it to court, that will depend on the relative strengths and how much money they want to spend/risk. Recently Network Rail have lost various court cases where they have failed to follow their own internal procedures. But as I’m not trained in this area, I’m going to shut up on this subject now.
That’s interesting, thanks. Clearly there are different opinions around the country, but what I’m hearing is definitely much more in favour of settling than carrying on the dispute. You can see that on this thread.
I think they mean that (then) new power signal boxes (PSB) in the (mainly) 1960s, 1970s and 1980s resulted in thousands of mechanical signal boxes closing, with a substantial reduction in signallers.
And in more modern times, in turn, ROCs and signalling centres replacing the PSBs (and some mechanical signal boxes), again reducing the number of signallers. Especially when combined with ARS and other technology.
Signalling trains is now a lot easier than it was sixty years ago. A lot of a signallers workload now, is answering the ‘phone and dealing with the resulting requests (permission to use a level crossing, staff asking for a line block, S&T asking the signaller to test an item of equipment, dealing with a T3 being taken, dealing with a failure, the list appears to be endless).
Of course how busy a signaller is, very much depends on where they are, which area they are controlling, what time of day/day of the week it is, plus various other factors. But some signallers on some shifts have a fairly quiet time.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
1994. Still got the T-shirt somewhere. Lots of arcane practices/payments got rid off …
The point is , ALL departments & roles get “modernised” at some time … and the RMT knows and accepts this.
This dispute over modernising maintenance is over. It’s being imposed. It’s like a signaller objecting to the closure of a signal box … they close it regardless.
I have every sympathy for those affected , it is obviously a very worrying time , but the die is cast and the RMT should now focus on making sure no one gets made redundant by working with NR to fill roles which are currently vacant
Yes, when you consider how low some signalling pay rates were then, even accounting for inflation, that strike was perhaps more understandable than this one .
Yes, when you consider how low some signalling pay rates were then, even accounting for inflation, that strike was perhaps more understandable than this one .
Most likely the case that, as with most operational railway roles, rather more is expected now than was the case in the early 90s…
You do seem strangely preoccupied with the subject of pay. If you speak to people actually involved in the current disputes, Ts and Cs are actually the biggest concern.
Well from my point of view as a signaller I will be voting NO, im not shafting my maintenance colleagues... firstly on principle and secondly we will need them when NWR decide that ops need "modernising", as us signallers will not be allowed to engage in strike action to fight against it. Think long term people
And the "MM is not in this deal" people it kind of is as we will no longer be able to strike to fight it.
This whole thing is the slow death of the railways for staff and people are jumping for a very average pay rise in exchange for selling terms.
Even the signalling terms are vague and dodgy IMHO.
I'm a strong 'no' too. However, due to the very leading question in favour of accepting this deal I don't see it being rejected. It's a surprise to me that the union can be in such a weak position when the offer is dreadful and the company has treated staff disgracefully.
Many are looking to leave where I am (myself included). Going to be an interesting few months with the company unaware of just how much resentment towards them is bubbling under the surface.
I'm a strong 'no' too. However, due to the very leading question in favour of accepting this deal I don't see it being rejected. It's a surprise to me that the union can be in such a weak position when the offer is dreadful and the company has treated staff disgracefully.
Many are looking to leave where I am (myself included). Going to be an interesting few months with the company unaware of just how much resentment towards them is bubbling under the surface.
What will be interesting, is how the company manage, as about 2400 staff get told, sorry, no, you can’t leave under voluntary severance, if a substantial number of them just resign or retire anyway.
In one depot, where the staff hated the new awful roster so much, three of them left the company. The result is some teams made up of a single person instead of a full team…
The maintenance side is literally going to be a skeleton staff, with very little slack if anyone leaves or goes off long term sick.
Not when they are still required. They are refused voluntary severance because their jobs are still needed, so when they are left vacant, as has happened a lot on my area, jobs don't get done, maintance backs up and failures increase.
Well from my point of view as a signaller I will be voting NO, im not shafting my maintenance colleagues... firstly on principle and secondly we will need them when NWR decide that ops need "modernising", as us signallers will not be allowed to engage in strike action to fight against it. Think long term people
And the "MM is not in this deal" people it kind of is as we will no longer be able to strike to fight it.
This whole thing is the slow death of the railways for staff and people are jumping for a very average pay rise in exchange for selling terms.
Even the signalling terms are vague and dodgy IMHO.
'Modernisation' of Signalling has gone on for years, and will continue to do so, small manual boxes will contimue to close, and more workstations going into IECC's / PSB's and ROCs, In all the resignalling projects I have known, the Unions have neve backed the Signallers, in fact I don't recall any other department taking any action in support of Signallers !
You say 'think long term', so are NR, rock the boat too much, and it will hasten box closures.
The 'dispute' for Signalling staff, is just a payrise, the strikes are simply to back up maintainance staff, they have a no compulsary redundancy in place until 2025, yet voluntry redundancy applications are over subscribed,
Not taking sides, but when was the last time another dept, supported any signaller 'action' ?
I think they mean that (then) new power signal boxes (PSB) in the (mainly) 1960s, 1970s and 1980s resulted in thousands of mechanical signal boxes closing, with a substantial reduction in signallers.
And in more modern times, in turn, ROCs and signalling centres replacing the PSBs (and some mechanical signal boxes), again reducing the number of signallers. Especially when combined with ARS and other technology.
Signalling trains is now a lot easier than it was sixty years ago. A lot of a signallers workload now, is answering the ‘phone and dealing with the resulting requests (permission to use a level crossing, staff asking for a line block, S&T asking the signaller to test an item of equipment, dealing with a T3 being taken, dealing with a failure, the list appears to be endless).
Yes and the point is that modernisation has been started, NR are slowing down migration to ROCs and I think what's being raised is that there's a law of diminishing returns where you can only get so many "efficiencies" from operations.
I think they mean that (then) new power signal boxes (PSB) in the (mainly) 1960s, 1970s and 1980s resulted in thousands of mechanical signal boxes closing, with a substantial reduction in signallers.
And in more modern times, in turn, ROCs and signalling centres replacing the PSBs (and some mechanical signal boxes), again reducing the number of signallers. Especially when combined with ARS and other technology.
Signalling trains is now a lot easier than it was sixty years ago. A lot of a signallers workload now, is answering the ‘phone and dealing with the resulting requests (permission to use a level crossing, staff asking for a line block, S&T asking the signaller to test an item of equipment, dealing with a T3 being taken, dealing with a failure, the list appears to be endless).
Of course how busy a signaller is, very much depends on where they are, which area they are controlling, what time of day/day of the week it is, plus various other factors. But some signallers on some shifts have a fairly quiet time.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I believe, if my memory is correct, that the last big signalling strikes happened under Railtrack.
The last Signaller strike was as you say a good 30 years ago, but no others were called out to support, in the end it dragged on and and on, and subesquently could be said 'failed'
As for workload, I have seen NX panels go over to MCS, and when I watched the Signaller working, it was a lot 'harder' than NX working, even with SARS or ARS, the increase in Line Blocks, has made a big difference, with large areas being covered by one Signaller. SARS/ARS takes no prisoners either, check, double check, and triple check !
The 'dispute' for Signalling staff, is just a payrise, the strikes are simply to back up maintainance staff, they have a no compulsary redundancy in place until 2025, yet voluntry redundancy applications are over subscribed,
Not taking sides, but when was the last time another dept, supported any signaller 'action' ?
I didn't quote the first part, as I've seen first hand closures of individual locations for larger signalling centres.
However, it hasn't been all about a payrise for Ops staff. Don't forget a yes vote will also replace the current Managing for Health policy with the inferior Managing for Absence and Sickness. Changes to notice of leaving the company (currently 4-weeks, replaced by 4-months) and the introduction of the Employer Justified Retirement Age.
I didn't quote the first part, as I've seen first hand closures of individual locations for larger signalling centres.
However, it hasn't been all about a payrise for Ops staff. Don't forget a yes vote will also replace the current Managing for Health policy with the inferior Managing for Absence and Sickness. Changes to notice of leaving the company (currently 4-weeks, replaced by 4-months) and the introduction of the Employer Justified Retirement Age.
Managing for Absence and Sickness, I think everyone would agree, that needs overhauling, its currently not fit for purpose, very simple to beat/flout the 'system'
exactly. I heard today that around 40% of services will be running on strike days. Obviously on some routes it will be a normal service, and some routes none.
However, it hasn't been all about a payrise for Ops staff. Don't forget a yes vote will also replace the current Managing for Health policy with the inferior Managing for Absence and Sickness. Changes to notice of leaving the company (currently 4-weeks, replaced by 4-months) and the introduction of the Employer Justified Retirement Age.
Managing for Absence and Sickness, I think everyone would agree, that needs overhauling, its currently not fit for purpose, very simple to beat/flout the 'system'
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
