ASLEF - LNER drivers to strike every Sat & Sun for 3 months from 31 Aug - Now called off

[Snow1964]

From Sky news, with lead negotiator Nigel Roebuck

Speaking to Sky News, Mr Roebuck said he didn't think the transport secretary Louise Haigh had been made to look "foolish" and praised her for doing the "adult thing".

"The people that locked the doors on the trade unions and didn't want to speak and sort out any issues are now throwing the rocks from the side.

"At the end of the day, it's not soft at all."

He said a "pretty toxic" relationship between ASLEF and LNER had led to a breakdown in industrial relations and called for the operator to "come to the table".

I know ASLEF doesn't always get public mood in its approach to news releases but this seems just weird.

Why mention adult thing unless implying not childish or perhaps the other adult meaning of carnal type.

Relationships are 2 way (otherwise dictatorship or subservient etc) so if it's toxic, they are half responsible for toxic state.

Why these strange generalisations, no one is going to resolve things if just going with throwing insults and not tackling any source problem.

Why does the operator have to go and meet around ASLEFs table, why can't the Union go the operator to discuss.

ASLEF union denies new government seen as 'soft touch' as fresh LNER strikes announced

The dispute is separate from a long-running row over pay, which looks likely to be resolved after a new offer.

news.sky.com

 

[InkyScrolls]

This will just be the beginning. They've bent down and given them a no-strings-attached deal for additional pay backdated two years, and ignored any attempt to bring the working conditions inline with any normal job. It won't end here - they know that they've got the government by the short and curlies. Huge wage rises, no reform, outdated practices.

I don't think they quite understand how low the public perception will be of them here....

(Interesting read: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/oth...ay-rise/ar-AA1oU1zu?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds)

The pay 'rises' just put forward don't match inflation, so it's not a rise at all. What working conditions do you think need changing to bring train driving in line with a 'normal' job (whatever that is)?

 

[Adam Williams]

I see LNER have stopped selling tickets for the first weekend of strikes. Anyone know why they haven't stopped selling for all of them?

If there's likely to be a reduced timetable, why would you prevent retail of tickets entirely?

Just tell the customer about the strike action. They can use their brain and decide what to do. They have every right to purchase a walk-up (or an Advance) and rely on their rights under the NRCoT to travel on an adjacent service once a timetable is confirmed.

 

[Chester1]

Whilst the drivers at LNER will probably have legitimate grievances, given that the Government has (we think) just broken the logjam over the wider pay/conditions agreement, it might be politically astute for ASLEF to cut the Government some slack and park this one for the time being.

Maybe try a bit of back door negotiation - a word in the Minister's ear, instead of generating negative headlines.

Afterall, the Minister hasn't been in place for long. They may be more willing to sort things out behind the scenes.

The timing is the bit I don't get. Yes the dispute has been going on two years but the government only changed six weeks ago! Was it really necessary to go for the nuclear option and lose good will with a new Labour government? If the problems continued into the autumn then strikes would make sense. Announcing 22 days of strikes the day after the government settled a long running pay dispute makes Labour look bad with the public. Why alienate a natural ally before they have had time to grasp issues like the LNER dispute?

 

[Osian85]

This will just be the beginning. They've bent down and given them a no-strings-attached deal for additional pay backdated two years, and ignored any attempt to bring the working conditions inline with any normal job. It won't end here - they know that they've got the government by the short and curlies. Huge wage rises, no reform, outdated practices.

I don't think they quite understand how low the public perception will be of them here....

This isn’t true at all, your conveniently missing key points to make a big damning statement, did you write the article in the Daily Mail too by any chance?

It is perceived as a great offer, but its still a pay cut in real terms which is what the fight was against. However whilst the offer does feel good to me (im very happy with it) I believe it was also tactical to reset the playing field of relations and gives a foundation for future negotiations whereby changes are coming, ASLEF have illuded to it already in the email to its members, some changes do need to happen and this offer wasn’t rolling over and giving in to all demands, it was giving a below inflation rise, that looks good to all, resetting relations and softening the blow of changes that will come further down the line.

However, I agree with others that this is a PR disaster for ASLEF; calling a big strike within 48hrs of settling the national dispute was a huge own goal as far as public perception and giving the media extra ammunition they didnt need! we will all be tarred with this brush now regardless of the details and truth.

 

[newtownmgr]

Would a £600 rest day payment like XC and Avanti have sort the problem.

Don’t think that’s the issue from what I’ve read of it.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Some of the outdated working practices in parts of the railway industry include:

• Refusal to use electronic means such as iPads to receive communications such as late notices or TSLs

Incorrect, many TOCs do exactly that, as do OA and FOCs.

• Staff members claiming an entitlement to restart the duration of a break if a manager speaks to the staff member during the break, even as little as saying hello

Incorrect, nowhere does that happen and if a driver attempted it they'd be (rightly) told to get a grip.

• Claiming of "walking time" of 10-15 minutes for distances that can be covered in less than two

Also not true - unless management haven't kept station diagrams up to date, but that's nothing the drivers can change themselves.

• Strict demarcation of locations where work will be carried out where there is no rationale or benefit to the business

Not sure what this means - on the railway, presumably?

• Demanding money for use of scanning equipment to read e-tickets

It wasn't 'demanded' and is only in place at a few TOCs.

• Refusing to use videoconferencing technology such as Zoom for meetings

Definitely not true, it's used all the time!

• Refusing rest day working and then objecting to other competent employees working those rest days

Refusing to come in on a day off? Since when was that a crime?

• Claiming of paid time off every six months to check that the staff member's health hasn't been adversely impacted by the microwave in the break room

I'm afraid that's not been the case (if indeed it ever was) since the seventies.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not state that all or any of these practices are in place at LNER or any specific TOC, and I will not respond to seriatim refutation or rebuttal.

Then why bring them up?

I am citing them as examples of categories of behaviour that belong in the history books.

You'll be pleased to know then, @island, that nothing in your post reflects reality.

 

[Elecman]

Can Louise Haigh order any change of management at LNER with it be ing OLR or are her hands tied?

Yes as she can indicate to the OLR senior management it’s LNER management or them on the dole queue

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yes as she can indicate to the OLR senior management it’s LNER management or them on the dole queue

Why would Louise Haigh fire the very people she needs to run GBR?
OLR and LNER management are the nearest thing we have to a GBR management team.

 

[yorksrob]

The timing is the bit I don't get. Yes the dispute has been going on two years but the government only changed six weeks ago! Was it really necessary to go for the nuclear option and lose good will with a new Labour government? If the problems continued into the autumn then strikes would make sense. Announcing 22 days of strikes the day after the government settled a long running pay dispute makes Labour look bad with the public. Why alienate a natural ally before they have had time to grasp issues like the LNER dispute?

Indeed. "Keep your powder dry".

 

[Horizon22]

Time off is precious. It allows us to connect with family and friends; this is especially important when one starts work at silly'o'clock in the morning and, at the other end of the scale, finishes at stupid o'clock in the morning. These are things that we accept as shift workers; it goes with the territory.

However, there's nothing worse than when your long-planned weekend off is interrupted by a call from your boss asking you to cover a shift because of a staff shortage. I used to work a 4-on, 2-off pattern which meant that I only ever had Saturday and Sunday off once every seven weeks and it was totally frustrating to be phoned at 6am on that Saturday to be asked to come into work.

Sometimes you have to say "no"; it's not because you're unwilling to help the business or your colleagues, but simply because your own life outside of work comes first.

Surely this is not mutually exclusive though; a manager/roster clerk asking an employee if they wish to do RDW is fine, but so is simply answering "no"? That's the end of the conversation and most railway managers would accept this and are completely reasonable when it comes to appreciating there is a low response - especially during periods like the Summer holidays. They are simply firefighting a wider shortage due to lack of drivers / full annual leave / low overtime rate and are doing their best to keep the job running and prevent cancellations.

There should be some sort of agreed communication times to ask though I would agree - a 0600 call at Saturday would be quite grating but normally there's some system of being agreed to be asked - as @Falcon1200 alluded to here - which could be easily implemented.

This "us vs them" attitude when it does rear its head is one of the worst elements of the industry.

 

[Clarence Yard]

The dispute is about some over aggressive methods of filling holes in the roster and the disregarding of management/union agreements when management feels like it.

These kind of tactics played into the preferred method of treating staff under the previous Government and perhaps the MD thought he was doing “the right thing” there. It was incredibly naive.

If he fancies a role under GBR, he had better sort it out. He may try and justify his position but if I was DOHL, it would be “if you can’t behave, you are down the road”. He may be down the road anyway, as a message to others.

The aim of the proposed action is to either get a change of attitude at LNER or a change in management.

I’m not a fan of some union behaviour but in this dispute they have a case.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Certain people who are posting in this thread need to realise that an employer does not own its employees and that we no longer live in Victorian times.

Time off is precious. It allows us to connect with family and friends; this is especially important when one starts work at silly'o'clock in the morning and, at the other end of the scale, finishes at stupid o'clock in the morning. These are things that we accept as shift workers; it goes with the territory.

However, there's nothing worse than when your long-planned weekend off is interrupted by a call from your boss asking you to cover a shift because of a staff shortage. I used to work a 4-on, 2-off pattern which meant that I only ever had Saturday and Sunday off once every seven weeks and it was totally frustrating to be phoned at 6am on that Saturday to be asked to come into work.

Sometimes you have to say "no"; it's not because you're unwilling to help the business or your colleagues, but simply because your own life outside of work comes first. As far as I'm concerned, if you fulfil your contractual obligations, your employer has no cause for complaint, especially if they fail to recruit sufficient staff to meet the needs of the business.

I'd be interested to know how many of the critics in this thread work nine-to-five and wouldn't ever consider working beyond their contracted hours without overtime payments.

Back when I was young (long ago) & in the Trains Office S.T.P. we had to plan (freight) weekend working by, I think, Thursday lunchtime because overtime/weekend working required 48 hours notice to drivers/secondmen.
It seemed a cast-iron national condition, may I ask was it negotiated out or just ignored?
The background was that with wagonload traffic (particularly coal) yards might fill up with arrivals beyond the capacity of timetabled forward service - this condition meant we had to make judgments to avoid either wasted resources or delays. Happy days though, gone completely. Now, it's just a matter of covering the W.T.T..

 

[Horizon22]

The dispute is about some over aggressive methods of filling holes in the roster and the disregarding of management/union agreements when management feels like it.

Yes, there are certain grievances and it does seem more like a localised cultural/management issue because otherwise other TOCs would also be in dispute.

 

[Iskra]

Surely this is not mutually exclusive though; a manager/roster clerk asking an employee if they wish to do RDW is fine, but so is simply answering "no"? That's the end of the conversation and most railway managers would accept this and are completely reasonable when it comes to appreciating there is a low response - especially during periods like the Summer holidays. They are simply firefighting a wider shortage due to lack of drivers / full annual leave / low overtime rate and are doing their best to keep the job running and prevent cancellations.

There should be some sort of agreed communication times to ask though I would agree - a 0600 call at Saturday would be quite grating but normally there's some system of being agreed to be asked - as @Falcon1200 alluded to here - which could be easily implemented.

This "us vs them" attitude when it does rear its head is one of the worst elements of the industry.

There are quite simple ways of not receiving a call, such as turning a phone off, having a second phone for work purposes, having Do Not Disturb Mode set or muting whatsapp groups/conversations. It’s quite easy to manage devices so that they don’t encroach at times you don’t want. That whole aspect of this industrial action is bizarre.

 

[Horizon22]

There are quite simple ways of not receiving a call, such as turning a phone off, having a second phone for work purposes, having Do Not Disturb Mode set or muting whatsapp groups/conversations. It’s quite easy to manage devices so that they don’t encroach at times you don’t want. That whole aspect of this industrial action is bizarre.

True - you could even block numbers if you didn't want them to get through! Might be difficult if it was your line manager though when you did actually need to call/recieve a call on other occasions.

 

[Sheridan]

I thought (from the original press release) that the problem isn’t simply managers phoning drivers - as others have said, in that situation you can simply say no, or not answer, or have your phone off, or any other solution. But does the press release not say that the issue is that drivers are being asked to work in a way that breaks agreements? That would be a problem whether they’re being asked by phone call, email, in person or any other method.

Edit: my mistake, it does say that being contacted remotely is outside agreements as well.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Hopefully GBR will hire more drivers and things will improve

LNER have been recruiting heavily for some time. As have most TOCs, several of which now have substantially more drivers than they have ever had.

LNER are also ending daily extensions to Glasgow, Stirling and Sunderland in December 2024 but I do not know how much that will help. All TOCs should recruit whatever number of additional drivers they need to deliver the full timetable seven days a week without regularly having to ask drivers to work overtime and rest days.

 

[Chester1]

The dispute is about some over aggressive methods of filling holes in the roster and the disregarding of management/union agreements when management feels like it.

These kind of tactics played into the preferred method of treating staff under the previous Government and perhaps the MD thought he was doing “the right thing” there. It was incredibly naive.

If he fancies a role under GBR, he had better sort it out. He may try and justify his position but if I was DOHL, it would be “if you can’t behave, you are down the road”. He may be down the road anyway, as a message to others.

The aim of the proposed action is to either get a change of attitude at LNER or a change in management.

I’m not a fan of some union behaviour but in this dispute they have a case.

It's clear to me that they have a case but it's not clear why they haven't tried to resolve this quietly with the new government and instead chose the worst time to announce 22 days of strike action. Did ministers tell ASLEF that nothing would be done or is it just ASLEF making it clear they want a transactional relationship with Labour? I am not trying to sound anti union, I am genuinely baffled by the strategy.

 

[BlueLeanie]

So what's the best way to get someone in to drive a train that doesn't currently have a driver if asking ("badgering") staff isn't acceptable?

Would an form of online auction help?

Opposite to me last week in EWR (The other Newark) when I raced to the gate staff when they announced $2,500 in Amex Gift cards for the first 4 people to get you the desk who would be prepared *not* to travel until tomorrow.

An App with the bonus pinging up from £100 to £10,000 with fastest finger first.

 

[En]

In no other industry does anyone need an "agreement" for managers to do work of a lower grade. If the managers are willing and able to do it, then it isn't anybody else's business. If the managers are not so willing or able, then that's a dispute between managers and their managers.

exactly this , in fact it's an expectation in the organisations i've worked for in the past across both public and private sectors. if a manager is qualified to work 'down' they do so if needed ( there are a few uniformed operational managers in the Ambulance service who aren't comptent to crew ambulances - but they are competent in EOC or / as Scene Managers and as Emergency Responders)
but food industry , Healthcare, Supply chain all entirely normal for Managers at all grades up to Very Senior Managers to be able to muck in at times of pressure and disruption within their current competencies ( and also have protected tiem to maintain competencies)

 

[stephen rp]

Why would Louise Haigh fire the very people she needs to run GBR?
OLR and LNER management are the nearest thing we have to a GBR management team.

The very people?

I imagine she's just hoping some of the present TOC managers aren't covered by TUPE.

 

[LowLevel]

The dispute is about some over aggressive methods of filling holes in the roster and the disregarding of management/union agreements when management feels like it.

These kind of tactics played into the preferred method of treating staff under the previous Government and perhaps the MD thought he was doing “the right thing” there. It was incredibly naive.

If he fancies a role under GBR, he had better sort it out. He may try and justify his position but if I was DOHL, it would be “if you can’t behave, you are down the road”. He may be down the road anyway, as a message to others.

The aim of the proposed action is to either get a change of attitude at LNER or a change in management.

I’m not a fan of some union behaviour but in this dispute they have a case.

That's quite interesting to hear, particularly coming from someone on the management side of the world!

 

[En]

I wonder when they actually do the day job!

lots of organisations have this issue,

the Health Service is both good and bad at this ( and has learnt the lesson of not doing things sensibly such as when they made Senior Sister /Charge Nurses 'supernumerary ' whiche meant they just hid in the office all day rather than leading from the front )

There are sometimes options in some jobs where you can 'do the day job' as a manager and maintain operational competencies -
from the Emergency services Police Sergeants (and some Inspectors), Fire Service Station Managers and Area Managers , Ambulance Managers who are Paramedics (or otherwise 'road' qualified) are examples of this whether that's by rostering onto an Operational resource or by being 'available' to respond from the office and having a car with blues and twos available to them. In Hospitals Senior Nurses / AHPS and Consultant Doctors can be fetched ' from the office; if pressure on the service demands it

in 'ordinary' jobs again there are managers who can be gto 'out the office' to do things if needed

it;s not an alien concept as some seem to be painting it

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Aug 2024 ==

The way I see various arguments here about outdated working practices is that people consider drivers having a union and being able to stand up to protect their T&Cs an outdated working practice.

It's not, by the way, it's just that other industries take their staff for granted, bleed every last bit of energy out of them and most don't have a union or at least a good one which can help them when they need it.

If that's outdated, then I don't want to be in the modern world! Give me cheesy 80s hits and good employment rights any day of the week.

This is very bizarre view to take the pettiness over Job Demarcation - where it's seen as a problem that fully competent staff who happen to now be Managers or Trainers are taking advantage of offered but otherwise unclaimed Overtime to do the job they are Manager / Trainer of ... this is an utter none -event in other settings including Life and Safety Critical ones.

 

[6Gman]

It does rather undermine your other, relatively well-grounded examples, though, to include the one about microwaves, which, on the face of it, seems deeply unserious, and it appears appears nobody other than you even really understands. The one about restarting breaks because a manager "interrupted" by saying hello also appears totally unsupported by actual evidence. Both of these seem like things which could have been lifted straight from the tabloids without the first bit of scrutiny.

I find it interesting that the source quoted by the Mail article regarding microwaves was ... a story in the Sun several years ago.

Surely if such a requirement exists the relevant page of the Conditions of Service Handbook could be produced?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Aug 2024 ==

Back when I was young (long ago) & in the Trains Office S.T.P. we had to plan (freight) weekend working by, I think, Thursday lunchtime because overtime/weekend working required 48 hours notice to drivers/secondmen.
It seemed a cast-iron national condition, may I ask was it negotiated out or just ignored?
The background was that with wagonload traffic (particularly coal) yards might fill up with arrivals beyond the capacity of timetabled forward service - this condition meant we had to make judgments to avoid either wasted resources or delays. Happy days though, gone completely. Now, it's just a matter of covering the W.T.T..

Ah, another STP (short term planning) veteran!

In my time - late 70s, early 80s - everything had to be issued (largely via internal mail) by Thursday evening but plenty of depots would go out of their way to assist if it was later. Still have occasional dreams/ nightmares in which I find a pile of work that still needs covering the following day!

 

[Starmill]

I find it interesting that the source quoted by the Mail article regarding microwaves was ... a story in the Sun several years ago.

Surely if such a requirement exists the relevant page of the Conditions of Service Handbook could be produced?

Indeed. Reasonable people don't simply regurgitate claims printed in the Mail or Sun when there's no other evidence for them that's forthcoming...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Aug 2024 ==

I think the intended implication is that ASLEF are keeping them quiet because the infractions are only minor ones. Of course, I don't know if that's true or not.

I agree that's an implication, but these things are always so awkward to pin down.

 

[12LDA28C]

This will just be the beginning. They've bent down and given them a no-strings-attached deal for additional pay backdated two years, and ignored any attempt to bring the working conditions inline with any normal job. It won't end here - they know that they've got the government by the short and curlies. Huge wage rises, no reform, outdated practices.

I don't think they quite understand how low the public perception will be of them here....

(Interesting read: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/oth...ay-rise/ar-AA1oU1zu?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds)

Just the beginning? Nonsense. And 'huge wage rises'... that are some way below inflation over the same period. Hardly 'huge' but don't let the facts get in the way of your anti-union rhetoric.

 

[Bald Rick]

Do you not reckon that this is a final attempt at calling a headline large lump of action with a few weeks notice to kick the management team into coming to a mutual agreement on how to conduct themselves going forwards with regard to agreements and so on?

That's certainly my immediate first impression.

Not at all. From what I can see - and this is my opinion - it appears to be an attempt to capitalise on the new Government‘s attitude in settling the pay dispute to strengthen the future power of ASLEF in LNER.

I can’t see any way that LNER drivers would willingly take a 22 day (more likely 10-12 for most) hit on pay (nudging £5k before deductions) for this, and everybody knows that. So it comes to who blinks first. Thats why it is such a big gamble for the local rep, not least because he is testing the mettle of a new minister and a new secretary of state, both of whom will have invested significant personal ‘capital’ to conclude the pay dispute.

Has it been kept confidential because it's something sensitive, or is it merely that it's a technical point that the general public wouldn't, and don't need, to understand.

No idea.

The dispute is about some over aggressive methods of filling holes in the roster and the disregarding of management/union agreements when management feels like it.

These kind of tactics played into the preferred method of treating staff under the previous Government and perhaps the MD thought he was doing “the right thing” there. It was incredibly naive.

If he fancies a role under GBR, he had better sort it out. He may try and justify his position but if I was DOHL, it would be “if you can’t behave, you are down the road”. He may be down the road anyway, as a message to others.

The aim of the proposed action is to either get a change of attitude at LNER or a change in management.

I’m not a fan of some union behaviour but in this dispute they have a case.

That is not my understanding of the case, having spoken to many of those involved (at several levels from footplate to management).

It's clear to me that they have a case

How is it clear to you, other than having read this thread? Do you know anybody personally involved? I know LNER drivers who have no idea why this is happening, and are auite uoset about it!

It would be interestign to see the results if a ballot was to be taken on this dispute now…

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The very people?
I imagine she's just hoping some of the present TOC managers aren't covered by TUPE.

Well where else do you expect GBR senior TOC/Regional management to come from?
They are very likely to be either current TOC MDs (Horne was retained as LNER MD on transfer to OHL), or senior DfT Rail people, or senior Network Rail people, or perhaps managers from Roscos and manufacturers.
Or maybe even politicians - Richard Marsh was a (Labour) transport minister before becoming chairman of BR.
Senior management/directors aren't normally part of the TUPE arrangements.

 

[Starmill]

- it appears to be an attempt to capitalise on the new Government‘s attitude in settling the pay dispute to strengthen the future power of ASLEF in LNER.

Seems to be a big misreading indeed if so, because the government has played a hard line against the young children and pensioners. NHS doctors are also quite unhappy with the deal they've been offered.