RMT strike referendum passed

[RHolmes]

What I find interestin is the % of people at each TOC who voted "no"

Its probably an average of 10% - but at TPE and Avanti it's closer to 20%. Why so high at these two TOC's. And, the question is :- if they voted "no" then what % pay rise would these people be wanting in order to vote "yes".

I'm sure that, if the majortity had voted "no", then the RMT would now be announcing a couple of strike days before Xmas -resulting in even more lost money for it' members

It’s hardly surprising, TPE we’re the first TOC to take up industrial action several months before the National dispute over pay and conditions and are currently one of the TOC’s involved in a separate dispute for technology payments and overtime payments (the latter temporarily solved).

Avanti also had their own issues with traincrew rostering changes being forcibly imposed against agreements which I imagine has annoyed several members of staff.

Most people I know who voted no as it’s a poor offer. It’s acceptable in terms of no strings for now but after 5 years with no pay increase is pretty poor and although is similar, albeit slightly lower than most other public sector workers (despite railway staff not being public sector workers), it doesn’t reflect the cost of living, previous RPI for that year or match that of the rises of most private industries, triple lock pension or National wage increases (% vs % wise). The current accepted offer also delays the talks and payment for 2023 and 2024 throwing them later into next year where as 2023 was previously attached to the 2022 offer and would be paid at the same time rather than through back-pay.

Those who voted yes are happy to strike again in April and are already in the mentality of being prepared to do so - including myself. Sadly we know that this isn’t over yet

As several posters have mentioned above it’s relatively easy to make back any list earnings through overtime, but also it’s principal over money in terms of RMT members would rather lose a days pay than be forced to accept some of the more ‘one size fits all’ draconian changes to terms and conditions that were once imposed (before this offer) by the DfT and RG.

 

[jon0844]

It looks like strikes will be back on the cards next spring, along with nurses and other public sector workers. (Consultants got an additional payrise on top of the 6% already agreed for ‘23). Could be a dodgy time for the government if they wish to hold an election with strikes erupting everywhere.

If the Government stops with crazy plans to alter everyone's terms and conditions, I can't see anyone having the appetite to strike further, so common sense deals as done in the past could be achieved quite easily. It's all about whether the Government WANTS to continue with the culture wars and continuing to divide and conquer.

As most people (forget the right wing bots on X) are likely not into this whole race to the bottom thing, I don't think having strikes around and perhaps even ON election day is a wise move.. But then again, I want the current day Tories out so perhaps that IS a good strategy..

 

[ValentaFan1974]

For me, I don’t think about 2020/2021 for pay as during that time I was just grateful of still having a job during the pandemic and not having to be furloughed. I was happy to accept a pay freeze for job security.

 

[AlterEgo]

It's got sod all to do with the time of year. The government have finally stopped trying to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut and have come forward with a sensible offer. That is all.

It’s not a *good* offer though; in my view it represents a strategic defeat for the RMT even if RDG have suffered damage in the process. It’s an offer that was acceptable in the circumstances, one of which is the time of year. Industrial disputes are often magically resolved around this time of year, when staff morale to keep striking is usually lowest.

There’s no way most staff were financially better off during the strikes; some definitely will have been, but the strikes have ended for a reason. It’s Christmas and new year and there are cost of living pressures.

I bet several friends this would be resolved just before Christmas; I wasn’t born yesterday. Been there and done it for myself!

The RMT have been unable to properly leverage the weakness of the current government and missed the “iron is hot” moment when Sunak was being installed as PM.

It’s good that people are using their right to strike; everyone should be in a union. But I’m not going to pretend this is a victory for the union.

 

[KM1991]

It’s not a *good* offer though; in my view it represents a strategic defeat for the RMT even if RDG have suffered damage in the process. It’s an offer that was acceptable in the circumstances, one of which is the time of year. Industrial disputes are often magically resolved around this time of year, when staff morale to keep striking is usually lowest.

There’s no way most staff were financially better off during the strikes; some definitely will have been, but the strikes have ended for a reason. It’s Christmas and new year and there are cost of living pressures.

I bet several friends this would be resolved just before Christmas; I wasn’t born yesterday. Been there and done it for myself!

The RMT have been unable to properly leverage the weakness of the current government and missed the “iron is hot” moment when Sunak was being installed as PM.

It’s good that people are using their right to strike; everyone should be in a union. But I’m not going to pretend this is a victory for the union.

It’s a big fat L for the government though. Everything they have tried to do and implement has failed.

The final nail in the coffin was their embarrassing u turn on ticket offices…and what followed is the rest of the dominoes that fell down. There will be no changes to T&Cs next year either. They tried and they failed.

 

[AlterEgo]

It’s a big fat L for the government though. Everything they have tried to do and implement has failed.

The final nail in the coffin was their embarrassing u turn on ticket offices…and what followed is the rest of the dominoes that fell down. There will be no changes to T&Cs next year either. They tried and they failed.

Oh for sure the government were humiliated! Hugely so. But so what? You won’t get that government in the next round of pay talks. No changes to terms is good, but the pay rise in context is poor. The union failed to secure an improvement for its members, and has secured a poor settlement which is merely better than what was offered initially.

 

[KM1991]

Oh for sure the government were humiliated! Hugely so. But so what? You won’t get that government in the next round of pay talks. No changes to terms is good, but the pay rise in context is poor. The union failed to secure an improvement for its members, and has secured a poor settlement which is merely better than what was offered initially.

8.7% rise for the lowest earners on £20,000, 7% for those on £25,000.

…And no changes to T&Cs. For the lowest paid railway staff it’s really not a bad deal at all.

 

[AlterEgo]

8.7% rise for the lowest earners on £20,000, 7% for those on £25,000.

…And no changes to T&Cs. For the lowest paid railway staff it’s really not a bad deal at all.

8.7% in the context of previous rises and inflation isn’t really an improvement. It’s just the best deal that could have been hoped for.

 

[jon0844]

8.7% rise for the lowest earners on £20,000, 7% for those on £25,000.

…And no changes to T&Cs. For the lowest paid railway staff it’s really not a bad deal at all.

Agreed, although the only reason it works out higher than 5% is because of the minimum uplift (£1750?) - but that's a one off payment and the hourly rate has only gone up by 5% for subsequent years (pending the next deal, which might also have the same arrangement).

 

[Krokodil]

It’s not a *good* offer though;

I didn't say that it was, I said that it was a sensible offer. There was never going to be an inflation-busting one, but blocking a bonfire of T&Cs is a victory for the members.

Agreed, although the only reason it works out higher than 5% is because of the minimum uplift (£1750?) - but that's a one off payment and the hourly rate has only gone up by 5% for subsequent years (pending the next deal, which might also have the same arrangement).

Surely the underpin isn't a one-off bonus, it'll surely be baked into the base salary.

 

[Facing Back]

Surely the underpin isn't a one-off bonus, it'll surely be baked into the base salary.

Reading the detail in the February offer, the £1,750 underpin is a minimum increase to base salary, it is not a one off bonus payment

 

[jon0844]

Reading the detail in the February offer, the £1,750 underpin is a minimum increase to base salary, it is not a one off bonus payment

Ah, fair enough.

 

[infobleep]

It’s not a *good* offer though; in my view it represents a strategic defeat for the RMT even if RDG have suffered damage in the process. It’s an offer that was acceptable in the circumstances, one of which is the time of year. Industrial disputes are often magically resolved around this time of year, when staff morale to keep striking is usually lowest.

There’s no way most staff were financially better off during the strikes; some definitely will have been, but the strikes have ended for a reason. It’s Christmas and new year and there are cost of living pressures.

I bet several friends this would be resolved just before Christmas; I wasn’t born yesterday. Been there and done it for myself!

The RMT have been unable to properly leverage the weakness of the current government and missed the “iron is hot” moment when Sunak was being installed as PM.

It’s good that people are using their right to strike; everyone should be in a union. But I’m not going to pretend this is a victory for the union.

How come ASLEF haven't settle and did you place any bets on them settling?

 

[AlterEgo]

How come ASLEF haven't settle and did you place any bets on them settling?

ASLEF are in a much stronger political position than the RMT; they always are. Their members are almost exclusively medium to high earners on the railway and hence the disputes are a little more difficult to call.

I didn't say that it was, I said that it was a sensible offer. There was never going to be an inflation-busting one, but blocking a bonfire of T&Cs is a victory for the members.

It's a victory in as much as Dunkirk was a victory for the British and a sensible action to take at the time. Something to be proud of, and great solidarity, and perhaps something to rally around in the future, but nothing more than that.

 

[glasgowniteowl]

How come ASLEF haven't settle

They have not yet been given a similar offer to the one which RMT have accepted, I would suggest if they were, there is a fair chance of it being accepted

 

[Krokodil]

How come ASLEF haven't settle and did you place any bets on them settling?

They haven't been offered anything sensible yet.

It's a victory in as much as Dunkirk was a victory for the British and a sensible action to take at the time. Something to be proud of, and great solidarity, and perhaps something to rally around in the future, but nothing more than that.

Except that the Germans succeeded in the invasion of France. Our government on the other hand have just sunk further into the electoral quagmire they were already in so the analogy doesn't really follow.

 

[whoosh]

How come ASLEF haven't settle and did you place any bets on them settling?

Because the (2nd) offer they were given earlier in the year is for 4% in year 2 regardless of what terms and conditions are to change - they are different at each TOC, so some would be giving up more than others for the same 4%.
It's exactly why the previous RMT offer was rejected.

If ASLEF had a similar offer to the latest RMT one, it would be settled pretty soon.

But that isn't what the government want...
They want to prove their Minimum Service Bill does it's job of making the railways run on strike days, and after instigating a dispute, then prolonging it, and now settling most of it (RMT), it just needs the "greedy train drivers ruining Christmas" headlines for them to come riding in on their white horse to save the day by actually implementing their new law.
It's what this whole debacle has all been about.

 

[AlterEgo]

Except that the Germans succeeded in the invasion of France. Our government on the other hand have just sunk further into the electoral quagmire they were already in so the analogy doesn't really follow.

I didn't think the RMT's objective was to bring down the government and install a new one. We're getting a new government anyway which will have a much stronger mandate than the current one and which shows no sign of being any more union-friendly than the Tories.

Overall, a missed political opportunity for the RMT and they have not got a good deal - just a better one than the frankly terrible one that was on offer first. It was merely acceptable to the members. The protection of TnCs and no compulsory redundancies in their entirety will end up being a boiling frog over the next five years. "We gave the government a bloody nose" misses the point entirely, or at least it would for me, if I was a member.

I just cannot see how anyone thinks this is a win for the RMT; it's not. They lost, and frankly so did everyone else involved.

 

[Towers]

It’s not a *good* offer though; in my view it represents a strategic defeat for the RMT even if RDG have suffered damage in the process. It’s an offer that was acceptable in the circumstances, one of which is the time of year. Industrial disputes are often magically resolved around this time of year, when staff morale to keep striking is usually lowest.

There’s no way most staff were financially better off during the strikes; some definitely will have been, but the strikes have ended for a reason. It’s Christmas and new year and there are cost of living pressures.

I bet several friends this would be resolved just before Christmas; I wasn’t born yesterday. Been there and done it for myself!

The RMT have been unable to properly leverage the weakness of the current government and missed the “iron is hot” moment when Sunak was being installed as PM.

It’s good that people are using their right to strike; everyone should be in a union. But I’m not going to pretend this is a victory for the union.

It is, of course, not about whether this is a ‘victory’ for the union, it is entirely about whether it was acceptable to the membership. I think people sometimes forget that all the puff and bluster of union vs government is not where the decision making lies, it is the working men & women who make up the union and it is ultimately their opinion that makes or breaks the deal.

The membership decided that it was acceptable, they have earned a pay rise for 2022/23 broadly in line with the best that most other comparable industries have managed, they’ve not had to sell any Ts & Cs, they’ll receive a nice lump sum just before Christmas and have, for the time being, no strikes on the horizon. As far as they are concerned, that will be ‘victory’ enough. Nobody with their head screwed on would have expected the figures north of 10% that were being thrown around, that was merely negotiation.

I just cannot see how anyone thinks this is a win for the RMT; it's not. They lost, and frankly so did everyone else involved.

They’ve got 5% with no strings. What would you have considered “a win”? 15% and a nice fat turkey for christmas? This is the real world. Ticket offices aren’t being shut down, and the expected large sums will not be saved as a result. TOCs are offloading rolling stock that they really can’t spare, resulting in daily train cancellations in some places, to save the DfT money. Aslef are still in the wilderness, despite usually being seen as the priority for resolving disputes. In the grand scheme of things I’d say the RMT membership did okay!

 

[Krokodil]

I didn't think the RMT's objective was to bring down the government and install a new one

I didn't say that it was. The government's objective was to crush the rail unions. RMT's objective was to not be crushed and to protect the interests of their members. The government has utterly failed - they wanted 1984 and they've got 1974. RMT has not been crushed, and the members have not had their conditions decimated. The government will ask the country "who governs?" and the answer will again be "not you".

Booking offices large and small have also survived - partly because of the government's rash decision to try to decimate almost every last one rather than picking off one hopeless case at a time.

 

[RHolmes]

I just cannot see how anyone thinks this is a win for the RMT; it's not. They lost, and frankly so did everyone else involved.

It’s not a loss by any means.

- No redundancies extended until the conservative government are humiliated in the general election next year
- Small pay increase between 5-8% which is generally level with public sector workers
- No terms and condition changes
- No DOO.
- No ticket office closures.
- End to recruitment freeze for most RMT roles

 

[infobleep]

Because the (2nd) offer they were given earlier in the year is for 4% in year 2 regardless of what terms and conditions are to change - they are different at each TOC, so some would be giving up more than others for the same 4%.
It's exactly why the previous RMT offer was rejected.

If ASLEF had a similar offer to the latest RMT one, it would be settled pretty soon.

But that isn't what the government want...
They want to prove their Minimum Service Bill does it's job of making the railways run on strike days, and after instigating a dispute, then prolonging it, and now settling most of it (RMT), it just needs the "greedy train drivers ruining Christmas" headlines for them to come riding in on their white horse to save the day by actually implementing their new law.
It's what this whole debacle has all been about.

What I don't understand is why did they settle with the RMT but not ASLEF. Would make sense to settle with both but I do appreciate common sense doesn't always apply to politicians.

 

[yorksrob]

This is excellent news for passengers. Well done everyone for reaching an agreement.

 

[Class 317]

What I don't understand is why did they settle with the RMT but not ASLEF. Would make sense to settle with both but I do appreciate common sense doesn't always apply to politicians.

Political. Far less sympathy with well paid drivers so it allows them to play one side of against another.

 

[Krokodil]

What I don't understand is why did they settle with the RMT but not ASLEF. Would make sense to settle with both but I do appreciate common sense doesn't always apply to politicians.

You are trying to look for logic in government decisions. That's where you're going wrong.

 

[anthony1972]

It's got sod all to do with the time of year. The government have finally stopped trying to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut and have come forward with a sensible offer. That is all.


Not necessarily, partly because of covid backlogs and partly because of the government-induced climate, staff have left faster than they have been replaced in many cases so there may be more rest days going than usual. In any case, even if the ones who work so many rest days that they practically live at work are a little bit down then it shouldn't matter because they'll still have earned more than their basic pay and no one should plan their non-avoidable expenditure (bills and food) on the basis of non-contractural overtime.


Some small employers might treat each month as a silo but most employers calculate Income Tax on the basis of "year to date". NI is calculated as individual weeks but the only people who might be disadvantaged by a lump sum are those who would usually be below the Lower Earnings Limit.

Hi I am a train guard I am been told different things regarding the back payment. Will it be 12 months back payment. I have heard reports of 20 months even 22 months back payment.
Thanks again

 

[GalaxyDog]

Hi I am a train guard I am been told different things regarding the back payment. Will it be 12 months back payment. I have heard reports of 20 months even 22 months back payment.
Thanks again

March/April 22, as April is usually when the uplifts happen, so it'll be covering from April 2022-current. So 20 months.

 

[whoosh]

What I don't understand is why did they settle with the RMT but not ASLEF. Would make sense to settle with both but I do appreciate common sense doesn't always apply to politicians.

Because you are looking at this from a position of ending the dispute, so the rail workers, passengers, and the country's economy can move forward and get back to normal. Which is logical.

However, the government want to leave ASLEF out on a limb, disconnected from the other rail workers who've settled (for a different, more sensible deal, with the RMT union), make out they are greedy and disruptive and stopping poor old Fred the hospital porter from getting to work in his lowly but essential job. Then ride to his (and all the other "hard-working families") rescue by implementing their Minimum Service Bill (the details of which haven't quite been fleshed out yet - but stay tuned!).

Now Fred can get to work, "Hurrah for the government, quashing the greedy train drivers in their quest to disrupt everyone - including 'hard working families.'"

When the truth is - there haven't EVER been strikes from drivers on Chiltern Railways or LNER - to use two examples - up until now.
As a Driver, I'd only been on strike twice in 20 years - over pensions, not pay.

The Government have engineered these strikes, by denying the TOCs the ability to negotiate pay without their permission for over a year (all through 2022), then making ASLEF an unacceptable offer, and then making a second  worse offer.

Now the RMT have been made a more sensible (but still no where near good, offer). But ASLEF haven't.

There is a political reason why they haven't, and there is a political reason why all this has been engineered at every step - if you look at it - to lead to the Minimum Service Bill being a gift of heroism from the Government to the people.

Whereas actually, it's just doing everyone over by taking away their current rights and liberties. (But it won't seem like that, it'll look like they're doing the majority a favour - just like they'd planned the whole time.)

 

[anthony1972]

March/April 22, as April is usually when the uplifts happen, so it'll be covering from April 2022-current. So 20 months.

Thanks again for your quick response

 

[infobleep]

Because you are looking at this from a position of ending the dispute, so the rail workers, passengers, and the country's economy can move forward and get back to normal. Which is logical.

However, the government want to leave ASLEF out on a limb, disconnected from the other rail workers who've settled (for a different, more sensible deal, with the RMT union), make out they are greedy and disruptive and stopping poor old Fred the hospital porter from getting to work in his lowly but essential job. Then ride to his (and all the other "hard-working families") rescue by implementing their Minimum Service Bill (the details of which haven't quite been fleshed out yet - but stay tuned!).

Now Fred can get to work, "Hurrah for the government, quashing the greedy train drivers in their quest to disrupt everyone - including 'hard working families.'"

When the truth is - there haven't EVER been strikes from drivers on Chiltern Railways or LNER - to use two examples - up until now.
As a Driver, I'd only been on strike twice in 20 years - over pensions, not pay.

The Government have engineered these strikes, by denying the TOCs the ability to negotiate pay without their permission for over a year (all through 2022), then making ASLEF an unacceptable offer, and then making a second  worse offer.

Now the RMT have been made a more sensible (but still no where near good, offer). But ASLEF haven't.

There is a political reason why they haven't, and there is a political reason why all this has been engineered at every step - if you look at it - to lead to the Minimum Service Bill being a gift of heroism from the Government to the people.

Whereas actually, it's just doing everyone over by taking away their current rights and liberties. (But it won't seem like that, it'll look like they're doing the majority a favour - just like they'd planned the whole time.)

Ao why didn't they settle with the RMT sooner to make ASLEF look bad sooner? Bad in some people eyes.