• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Scotrail Industrial Relation Issues

Status
Not open for further replies.

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
Scotrail take to Twitter to advise Drivers have rejected an increase in Salary therefore there may be issues with services tomorrow in West
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Looks like a very cheap propaganda dig from scotrail-publishing that drivers rejected 6.4% rise but not giving any info on the strings which are attached to that deal or the actual reasons drivers have cited against the pay offer.

Mixed reactions on their twitter feeds, usual idiots tweeting back without a clue what they are on about describing the drivers as greedy etc but to be fair quite a few replies from people pointing out that it's just drivers not volunteering to do overtime and that scotrail arnt actually giving the full picture or explaining the reasons the offer was rejected.

A rather poor and shameless tactic from scotrail if you ask me and one that is only going to inflame the dispute and push a 'peaceful' resolution further away...
 

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
Looks like a very cheap propaganda dig from scotrail-publishing that drivers rejected 6.4% rise but not giving any info on the strings which are attached to that deal or the actual reasons drivers have cited against the pay offer.

Mixed reactions on their twitter feeds, usual idiots tweeting back without a clue what they are on about describing the drivers as greedy etc but to be fair quite a few replies from people pointing out that it's just drivers not volunteering to do overtime and that scotrail arnt actually giving the full picture or explaining the reasons the offer was rejected.

A rather poor and shameless tactic from scotrail if you ask me and one that is only going to inflame the dispute and push a 'peaceful' resolution further away...


I don't think Scotrail have thought that one through going into pay negotiations next week. The Scottish Aslef organiser seems ****ed off already at this!
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
Is it the 'increase in salary' the drivers have supposedly rejected or is it all the strings attached to it?
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Is it the 'increase in salary' the drivers have supposedly rejected or is it all the strings attached to it?

Plus, as far as I'm aware, a number of existing disputes between union and management which have led to this breakdown in relations.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
Plus, as far as I'm aware, a number of existing disputes between union and management which have led to this breakdown in relations.

So the rejection is actually sweet FA to do with the money on offer then, what a surprise! :roll:

Cheers A-driver.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
So the rejection is actually sweet FA to do with the money on offer then, what a surprise! :roll:

Cheers A-driver.

Well I don't know that as fact, just hinted at strongly from the replies on twitter and I know there were a few disputes recently up there.
 

michael769

Established Member
Joined
9 Oct 2005
Messages
2,006
Yeah as I understand it there is some ongoing discontent around existing conditions especially in Glasgow which has come to a head, and led to members voting to reject the pay offer.

There is currently a ballot for an overtime and Sunday working ban in progress (results due Oct 17). This suggests that they are now struggling to get enough drivers willing to provide voluntary Sunday cover.

In some ways it feels like an extension of the issues of last year which led to similar action, also focussed in Glasgow.
 
Last edited:

Sadsmileyface

Member
Joined
20 Sep 2010
Messages
184
Location
Glasgow, Scotchland
They're not interested in more money because they're going to hit the 40% tax rate. They want something along the lines of more days off and 100% sick pay for a year.
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,627
They're not interested in more money because they're going to hit the 40% tax rate. They want something along the lines of more days off and 100% sick pay for a year.


Erm - what a load of tosh. The pay deal was rejected purely on the number of strings attached to it. Everyone knows a 6.4% over 2 years (3.2%pa) was a decent offer had it been simply that. However there were all sorts of things which I'm not going into on here attached to it that the actual rise was nowhere near that. Since most train drivers in other TOC's are well into the 40% tax band I've no idea where you came up with that from.
 
Last edited:

Sadsmileyface

Member
Joined
20 Sep 2010
Messages
184
Location
Glasgow, Scotchland
Erm - what a load of tosh. The pay deal was rejected purely on the number of strings attached to it. Everyone knows a 6.4% over 2 years (3.2%pa) was a decent offer had it been simply that. However there were all sorts of things which I'm not going into on here attached to it that the actual rise was nowhere near that. Since most train drivers in other TOC's are well into the 40% tax band I've no idea where you came up with that from.

I'm only summarising what I was told by a union rep.

Would you care to elaborate on what these "strings" are?
 

Andrewlong

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2013
Messages
373
Location
Earley
Looks like a very cheap propaganda dig from scotrail-publishing that drivers rejected 6.4% rise but not giving any info on the strings which are attached to that deal or the actual reasons drivers have cited against the pay offer.

Mixed reactions on their twitter feeds, usual idiots tweeting back without a clue what they are on about describing the drivers as greedy etc but to be fair quite a few replies from people pointing out that it's just drivers not volunteering to do overtime and that scotrail arnt actually giving the full picture or explaining the reasons the offer was rejected.

A rather poor and shameless tactic from scotrail if you ask me and one that is only going to inflame the dispute and push a 'peaceful' resolution further away...

You only have 140 characters in a tweet and so Scotrail providing a full explanation is impossible. I don't know the detail but I use twitter to follow NR and TOCs for information and I would rather be told of a potential disruption then left in the dark - speaking as a rail passenger and not an employee in the rail industry.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
You only have 140 characters in a tweet and so Scotrail providing a full explanation is impossible. I don't know the detail but I use twitter to follow NR and TOCs for information and I would rather be told of a potential disruption then left in the dark - speaking as a rail passenger and not an employee in the rail industry.

They don't need to spend those 140 characters stating details of a 6.4% pay rise then do they? And it's not an official ban, drivers are working their rostered Sundays, it's just that they have chosen (and this is the drivers, not the union) not to volunteer to do any extras. So drivers booked a day off today are taking a day off rather than working during it. That is their right and anyone in any job has the right not to spend their day off going into work! It just shows how reliant scotrail is on drivers working overtime and therefore how short of staff they are. If they had enough drivers then there would be no issue.

I agree, tweet out possible disruption and cancelations but using up 'precious' twitter characters trying to turn the public against its own staff is disgusting behaviour and whoever a decision it was to do so (at a guess it came from high up) needs to have a serious think about the decision as it could have a big impact on industrial relations and prevent any quick fixes to this dispute.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
I'm only summarising what I was told by a union rep.

Would you care to elaborate on what these "strings" are?

Probably best that he dosnt elaborate on these strings at this stage as it's still in ongoing negotiation and so publishing such details into the public domain would be irresponsible and could jeopardise negotiations. I have spoken to a friend who drives in Scotland though and I can assure you it wasn't a 6.4% pay rise for nothing!
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
They're not interested in more money because they're going to hit the 40% tax rate. They want something along the lines of more days off and 100% sick pay for a year.

And your proof for this 100% sickpay for a year is?

PS the bloke down the pub, at the station told me doesnt count! :roll:
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,627
Probably best that he dosnt elaborate on these strings at this stage as it's still in ongoing negotiation and so publishing such details into the public domain would be irresponsible and could jeopardise negotiations. I have spoken to a friend who drives in Scotland though and I can assure you it wasn't a 6.4% pay rise for nothing!

Indeed! I won't be saying any more about it. Hopefully it will get resolved this week.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
And your proof for this 100% sickpay for a year is?

PS the bloke down the pub, at the station told me doesnt count! :roll:

Even if they are after 100% sick pay and more days off I don't see what is so wrong with that. They may well decide that they don't want more money but want to improve their working conditions instead. I can't see anything wrong with that, and it's why they go into negotiations with the company.

The issue here however is nothing to do with withdrawing labour, it is drivers not volunteering to go into work on their day off. Those whoa re rostered to work today (Sunday) will be in as usual however those rostered to have a day off will be taking that day off like hundreds of thousands of other people in the UK and won't be spending it in work.

I assume that many of those attending the Scottish great run today will be doing so on their days off work, as opposed to going into their own jobs for an extra day.
 

p123

Member
Joined
1 Oct 2011
Messages
146
I tend not to reply to these kind of posts due to it often becoming a massive argument between those on the forums who are passengers and those who are staff... but I feel quite strongly about some of the comments that have been made here.

(Feeling a bit like David Dimbleby here)... back to the original topic from post 1 - re: ScotRail taking to Twitter to vent their side of the argument.

With regards to the many, many of you who have replied expressing displeasure (to put it politely) at this happening... may I ask why? Taking all emotion, and personal feelings out of this what we have at the core of this is a dispute. It's not a resolution (yet), it's a dispute. Meaning no side has 'won'. Therefore, why can't both sides publicise their points?

Whenever there's industrial action, I have found that it's the unions (Aslef, RMT etc.) who shout about it the loudest. In fact, until recently, I never heard any of the other side of the story. In fact, the unions are always the ones on the TV/radio shouting the loudest whenever there's industrial action.

At the moment, I don't know who is more 'right', and I'm not going to attempt to present any argument because I do not have enough information to do so. But what I am glad of, is that now I can at least start to see both sides of the case, rather than simply watching (for example) Bob Crow shout on the 6 O'Clock news about his side of the story only without gaining any further insight to the problem.

I'd say I have a fairly neutral point of view. And from that point I'd say that there's no problem with ScotRail doing what they've done on Twitter today. Why? If they were being pro-active, being the ones attacking, then it'd be wrong. But they're not, they're being reactive - starting to tell the other side of the story that none of us have really had access to until recently.

Passengers deserve to be able to see both sides of the argument, and I'm all for ScotRail simply doing what the union has been doing for years. And until the dispute is resolved, I think we all need to appreciate that both sides deserve equal spotlight in the media.
 

michael769

Established Member
Joined
9 Oct 2005
Messages
2,006
The ASLEF Scottish head tweeted that progress had been made during the talks last week, so there is no reason to think this cannot be resolved without industrial action.

Of course Scotrail trying to link a staff shortage caused by a failure to manage their staffing levels and maintain employee goodwill, to an ongoing negotiation cannot be helpful.
 

Sadsmileyface

Member
Joined
20 Sep 2010
Messages
184
Location
Glasgow, Scotchland
I don't understand opposition to revealing the cause of disruption. If ScotRail were simply to say "Nae trains th'morra.", would the critics still be silent?

And to those of you defending drivers collectively agreeing to take rest days with the purpose of essentially, damaging operations on Sunday like to know what those same drivers would say to the suggestion of "increasing staffing levels"? They'd turn the bothy air blue, because for so many of them, 42k plus per year still isn't enough, and they're dependant on those rest day workings.
 

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
I tend not to reply to these kind of posts due to it often becoming a massive argument between those on the forums who are passengers and those who are staff... but I feel quite strongly about some of the comments that have been made here.

(Feeling a bit like David Dimbleby here)... back to the original topic from post 1 - re: ScotRail taking to Twitter to vent their side of the argument.

With regards to the many, many of you who have replied expressing displeasure (to put it politely) at this happening... may I ask why? Taking all emotion, and personal feelings out of this what we have at the core of this is a dispute. It's not a resolution (yet), it's a dispute. Meaning no side has 'won'. Therefore, why can't both sides publicise their points?

Whenever there's industrial action, I have found that it's the unions (Aslef, RMT etc.) who shout about it the loudest. In fact, until recently, I never heard any of the other side of the story. In fact, the unions are always the ones on the TV/radio shouting the loudest whenever there's industrial action.

At the moment, I don't know who is more 'right', and I'm not going to attempt to present any argument because I do not have enough information to do so. But what I am glad of, is that now I can at least start to see both sides of the case, rather than simply watching (for example) Bob Crow shout on the 6 O'Clock news about his side of the story only without gaining any further insight to the problem.

I'd say I have a fairly neutral point of view. And from that point I'd say that there's no problem with ScotRail doing what they've done on Twitter today. Why? If they were being pro-active, being the ones attacking, then it'd be wrong. But they're not, they're being reactive - starting to tell the other side of the story that none of us have really had access to until recently.

Passengers deserve to be able to see both sides of the argument, and I'm all for ScotRail simply t doing what the union has been doing for years. And until the dispute is resolved, I think we all need to appreciate that both sides deserve equal spotlight in the media.

Simple fact of the matter is one side of the argument is having a cheap shot at the Drivers taking a day off when they are rostered to do so. That's all that's happening here.
 

ANorthernGuard

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2010
Messages
2,662
I don't understand opposition to revealing the cause of disruption. If ScotRail were simply to say "Nae trains th'morra.", would the critics still be silent?

And to those of you defending drivers collectively agreeing to take rest days with the purpose of essentially, damaging operations on Sunday like to know what those same drivers would say to the suggestion of "increasing staffing levels"? They'd turn the bothy air blue, because for so many of them, 42k plus per year still isn't enough, and they're dependant on those rest day workings.

Actually ASLE&F's major argument regarding things like RDW is they want to increase staffing levels, that is one of the reasons why here in Northern Land that there isn't RDW. The sad fact is that all TOC's want to erode conditions but increase pay (within what they see as reason). BUT conditions can mean in the long term a lot more than just a few percent. I am not a fan of ASLE&F being a RMT member BUT they are doing exactly what they are Paid to do, which is do there utmost to protect their members interests. Which from what I can gather is exactly what they are doing
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
I don't understand opposition to revealing the cause of disruption. If ScotRail were simply to say "Nae trains th'morra.", would the critics still be silent?

And to those of you defending drivers collectively agreeing to take rest days with the purpose of essentially, damaging operations on Sunday like to know what those same drivers would say to the suggestion of "increasing staffing levels"? They'd turn the bothy air blue, because for so many of them, 42k plus per year still isn't enough, and they're dependant on those rest day workings.

Ok, and if you can get us some evidence to your rather stupid claim that drivers depend on rest day work to survive then your post may be able to be taken even slightly seriously rather than as just yet another troll on here.

There are a small minority of drivers who are perhaps slightly to reliant on rest day work but the vast majority of drivers would have no issue at all with staffing levels being increased.

And no one has to work overtime, each individual has every right to take a rostered day off as a day off, weather it harms their employer or not. The only thing that this is highlighting is quite how dependant TOCs currently are on goodwill. FCC had the same thing some years back to.

So unless you can back up your stupid claims with evidence rather than just rumour and hearsay I would ask you to stop trolling.
 

Captain Chaos

Member
Joined
31 Jan 2011
Messages
835
If there are any that work RD's to survive then they are in a small minority. I work RD's and additional Sundays. Not to survive. It goes into a savings account instead. So does my commission and any other extras I might see. Admittedly not everyone can be in my position. For that I consider myself fortunate. But reliant on overtime? You'd be silly to be like that!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As a further point, I fail to see why the company is getting upset with driver's not willing to work their days off. It is there day off after all! If anyone is reliant on overtime I would suggest it is the companies themselves that are, not the staff.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
I don't understand opposition to revealing the cause of disruption. If ScotRail were simply to say "Nae trains th'morra.", would the critics still be silent?
The pay talks havent really started yet, the dispute (or withdrawal of rest day working) is because of ongoing diciplinary disaggreements and has nothing to do with the pay talks.

And to those of you defending drivers collectively agreeing to take rest days with the purpose of essentially, damaging operations on Sunday like to know what those same drivers would say to the suggestion of "increasing staffing levels"? They'd turn the bothy air blue, because for so many of them, 42k plus per year still isn't enough, and they're dependant on those rest day workings.

ASLEF have been trying to get Sundays inside the working week for years but it is the TOCs that dont want it preferring to pay the drivers overtime (which isnt pensionable) to bringing Sundays inside and paying drivers flat rate (which would be pensionable) plus all the extra staff which would be needed (probably about an extra 10% on average) which would need to be recruited, trained, route learned, Managed (so they would need more managers as well) and kept competant on all the operational side of things.

But then you already know this because you have done some research on the subject rather than believe what one side is telling you on Twitter havent you! :roll:
 

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
Sadsmileyface said:
And to those of you defending drivers collectively agreeing to take rest days with the purpose of essentially, damaging operations on Sunday like to know what those same drivers would say to the suggestion of "increasing staffing levels"? They'd turn the bothy air blue, because for so many of them, 42k plus per year still isn't enough, and they're dependant on those rest day workings.

Where is your proof ? I suggest it's tosh according to what I've seen on ASLEFs Facebook page.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
Of course what Sadsmileyface is saying is that drivers should not be allowed to have a day off and if the company needs them to work they should be forced to, you know like slavery, just well paid slaves! ;)
 

Captain Chaos

Member
Joined
31 Jan 2011
Messages
835
Of course what Sadsmileyface is saying is that drivers should not be allowed to have a day off and if the company needs them to work they should be forced to, you know like slavery, just well paid slaves! ;)

Though not as well paid as footballers. As one C Ronaldo once said ;)

Seriously though. If you are rostered a day off, then you have a day off. Working your day off if the company needs it is voluntary, not compulsary. You cannot tell people that they no longer have the day off they were expected to have because the company feels like it. Being paid extra doesn't even come into it.
 

p123

Member
Joined
1 Oct 2011
Messages
146
Simple fact of the matter is one side of the argument is having a cheap shot at the Drivers taking a day off when they are rostered to do so. That's all that's happening here.

I don't understand how it's a cheap shot? So far between today and yesterday, information from ScotRail's twitter feed, website and electronic information screens at stations essentially simplifies to "Your train has been cancelled because __________"

No different to
"signalling problems"
"overhead wire problems"
"train fault"
"disruptive passengers"
"passenger taken ill"
"poor weather conditions"

Why should the reason of
"industrial action"
on this list be some kind of massive state secret?

Like I have stated before, I've not quite formed an opinion on this yet, but hypothetically the only reason I can think of for union members not wanting the reason in the public domain is if they think the public won't support them. And if that's the case, then members might want to think hard before taking such action again.

Also, I know what ScotRail have said is all true, because if it wasn't it would be defamatory, and if this is what's happened then I look forward to the court case.
 
Last edited:

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
How can not working your rostered day off be 'industrial action' ?

So you know for a fact drivers depend on overtime and 42k wouldn't be enough ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top