• 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.
S

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
p123 said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's a cheap shot because it ain't industrial action it's drivers not doing overtime on a day off because thats how Scotrail want to run it.Two separate things and Aslef have already reacted demanding an apology as its not industrial action therefore cheap shot.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

C

Captain Chaos

Member
Joined
31 Jan 2011
Messages
835
Since when has opting to take your rostered day off been considered as industrial action? If that is the case then I guess I am being quite militant right now. Sat at home, on my laptop, on my day off. How dare I do such a thing!
 
Last edited:
4

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
p123 said:
Why should the reason of
"industrial action"
on this list be some kind of massive state secret?
Click to expand...

Because there is no industrial action, any driver booked to work has worked, a driver having a day off when it is his booked day off is not industrial action.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
There must be some 'industrial action' in Cornwall today because managers have been working as conductors as there were not enough volunteers, or maybe its to do with the blokes leaving do last night! :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
O L Leigh

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
A-driver said:
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.
Click to expand...

Back to school for everyone, I fear.

Rest day working (RDW) is possible due to agreement reached between the ASLEF Company Council and the TOC. It is true that ASLEF do not especially want indiscriminate use of RDW to cover jobs because the union believes in full employment and want to drive up recruitment. However, it is a necessary evil and balances the wishes of some drivers to work overtime and provides flexibility for the TOC, and so the compromise exists.

However, if there are issues relating to industrial relations within the company that cannot be sorted it is possible that a RDW agreement, or sanction as it is called, will be withdrawn or not renewed. Often times this is sufficient to restart discussions and to restore industrial relations to their former state.

Sundays are a separate matter as long as they are outside of the working week. These do not form any part of the RDW agreements so it is still possible for drivers to work their rostered Sundays and, indeed, any additional Sundays as they see fit.

O L Leigh
 
P

p123

Member
Joined
1 Oct 2011
Messages
146
455driver said:
Because there is no industrial action, any driver booked to work has worked, a driver having a day off when it is his booked day off is not industrial action.
Click to expand...

Please see the definition of industrial action here:

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/industrial-action

Working to rule and overtime bans are industrial action. They do not necessarily require to be arranged by a union, and can simply be a group of individuals that choose to refuse overtime working - as is the case today.

While you are correct in identifying Sunday as a 'day off', it is well known that the rail network depends on drivers to work it as overtime in order to function effectively. If one or two drivers decided to stop working Sundays then, yes, this would be them taking their day off. However, a large group of drivers have got together and have refused to work overtime today with the purpose of disrupting services as part of a dispute, and as such the incident is defined as "industrial action".

I trust this explanation addresses your point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
4

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
So you think that because drivers (as a group) are not volunteering for extra Sundays that constitutes industrial action, Industrial action is when the Union asks the drivers (as a group) not to work.

When the drivers (as individuals) dont want to work it could be because they (as individuals) have other things planned (we do actually have a life outside work even if its just on web forums arguing with people like you) or it could be collective action which is when drivers (as a group) decide they wont volunteer to work!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
p123 said:
Please see the definition of industrial action here:

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/industrial-action

Working to rule and overtime bans are industrial action. They do not necessarily require to be arranged by a union, and can simply be a group of individuals that choose to refuse overtime working - as is the case today.

While you are correct in identifying Sunday as a 'day off', it is well known that the rail network depends on drivers to work it as overtime in order to function effectively. If one or two drivers decided to stop working Sundays then, yes, this would be them taking their day off. However, a large group of drivers have got together and have refused to work overtime today with the purpose of disrupting services as part of a dispute, and as such the incident is defined as "industrial action".

I trust this explanation addresses your point.
Click to expand...

Doesn't change fact that if a driver is not rostered to work a Sunday then they do not have to and can have it as a "day off" as per their terms of employment.
It may be a well known fact that certain parts of the railway depend on Sunday work being covered voluntarily but this needs to be addressed through negotiations not on a company twitter feed.
 
W

Willie mcbeath

Member
Joined
17 Jun 2013
Messages
50
Clever of scotrail to advertise the pay offer as 6.4% when it's not really as the deal was due from April this year and scotrail have offered the 6.4 rise starting from now therefore not backdating the money to April the first.
The deal on the table equates to less than the first offer that was knocked back in April.
And scotrail drivers only earn £39k not 42.
 
4

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
Using the link provided by P123 gives us-

There's no protection for:

unofficial industrial action
action called by a union unsupported by a ballot
secondary industrial action that is in support of workers of another employer
action promoting 'union labour only' practices
action in support of anyone dismissed for taking 'unofficial action'
Click to expand...

So lets see how many of these nasty drivers are sacked for not working their day off today because this (in)action has not been called by any union so using P123s (il)logic the drivers are in breach of their contracts. :lol:
 
O L Leigh

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
Can I ask whether or not the Rest Day Working agreement has been withdrawn/not renewed in light of a breakdown of industrial relations...?

O L Leigh
 
S

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
No they are being balloted on it but there are talks scheduled for this week to try and conclude negotiations
 
O L Leigh

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
Withdrawal of RDW agreements are the remit of the company council, not a ballot of the membership. If there is a ballot in the offing, this would be for strike action or other action short of a strike.

O L Leigh
 
S

SkinnyDave

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2012
Messages
1,242
O L Leigh said:
Withdrawal of RDW agreements are the remit of the company council, not a ballot of the membership. If there is a ballot in the offing, this would be for strike action or other action short of a strike.

O L Leigh
Click to expand...

It's a ballot for overtime ban, this is according to tweets by Scottish sec of Aslef
 
O L Leigh

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
SkinnyDave said:
It's a ballot for overtime ban, this is according to tweets by Scottish sec of Aslef
Click to expand...

Righto.

There is a little bit of a difference there still. A withdrawal of the RDW agreement and a ban on overtime are not quite the same thing. You can still work overtime on a rostered day even where there is no agreement for RDW, but a ban on overtime would stop that as well.

This does sound like a ballot for action short of a strike rather than a withdrawal of RDW, though.

O L Leigh
 
D

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
455driver said:
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.
Click to expand...

For years I've read about similar situations to that in Scotland, whereby train crew actually decide to stay away from work on their rostered days off (outrageous!) - and I always ask myself: why does this keep happening? Why are so many TOCs either unwilling or unable to find a solution to the ongoing reliance on RDW?

Now suddenly it all makes sense. Finally - an answer. So the point is that bringing Sunday into the normal working week is in everyone's best interests, both passengers and staff (except in the run-up to Christmas with all that lovely overtime! :lol:). Everyone's best-interests except the shareholders that is, because ultimately it's cheaper to rely on RDW.

I'm presuming that as TOCs employ new train crew, it is included in their contracts that Sunday working is required. If that guess is correct then the reliance on voluntary RDW will diminish over time - but that's a very long-term solution!
 
O L Leigh

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
Darren R said:
I'm presuming that as TOCs employ new train crew, it is included in their contracts that Sunday working is required. If that guess is correct then the reliance on voluntary RDW will diminish over time - but that's a very long-term solution!
Click to expand...

Nope.

Staff are all employed on the same contracts and terms of employment no matter when they were employed. To do anything else would be an erosion of conditions of employment by the back door and would be strongly resisted. This is what happened in the bus industry.

ASLEF has, as a policy position, a desire to drive up recruitment. The problem is that recruiting enough drivers to cover all work without having to resort to any RDW is inefficient and the TOCs don't want to do it. You would have far more drivers than you actually need at some periods of the year to cover times when there is a lot of annual leave, etc, meaning lots of drivers being paid to sit around spare. TOCs don't want this and so want to keep driver numbers artificially low and are happy to pay drivers to work overtime. The problem is that it leaves them vulnerable to the effects of a withdrawal of RDW agreements or an overtime ban.

O L Leigh
 
D

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
O L Leigh said:
Nope.

Staff are all employed on the same contracts and terms of employment no matter when they were employed. To do anything else would be an erosion of conditions of employment by the back door and would be strongly resisted. This is what happened in the bus industry.

ASLEF has, as a policy position, a desire to drive up recruitment. The problem is that recruiting enough drivers to cover all work without having to resort to any RDW is inefficient and the TOCs don't want to do it. You would have far more drivers than you actually need at some periods of the year to cover times when there is a lot of annual leave, etc, meaning lots of drivers being paid to sit around spare. TOCs don't want this and so want to keep driver numbers artificially low and are happy to pay drivers to work overtime. The problem is that it leaves them vulnerable to the effects of a withdrawal of RDW agreements or an overtime ban.

O L Leigh
Click to expand...

Fair enough point about erosion of T&Cs I suppose.

Your other points appear to suggest the problem is intractable and this type of situation is just going to keep happening. As a passenger that's not good to hear!
 
O L Leigh

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,611
Location
In the cab with the paper
Darren R said:
Your other points appear to suggest the problem is intractable and this type of situation is just going to keep happening. As a passenger that's not good to hear!
Click to expand...

Well there are two answers to that, both of which lie mostly in the remit of the employers. Either they employ more staff so that the reliance on RDW is reduced or they work a bit more closely with their staff to ensure better industrial relations.

I'm sure it will generate a degree of flak, but my experience with breakdowns in industrial relations generally come when a TOC ignores agreements with the staff rather than any bolshiness on the part of the staff. But I'm sure I speak for the vast majority of my colleagues when I say that I'm sure we'd all like to be left alone to get on with our jobs and to know that agreements will be followed and respected.

O L Leigh
 
N

notadriver

Established Member
Joined
1 Oct 2010
Messages
3,653
Darren R said:
Fair enough point about erosion of T&Cs I suppose.

Your other points appear to suggest the problem is intractable and this type of situation is just going to keep happening. As a passenger that's not good to hear!
Click to expand...

To be fair it could happen in any other transport industry.
 
S

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,628
RDW was supposed to end within Scotrail - permenantly - on 1st April this year. An agreement was reached historically (with union backing) where the company agreed to recruit enough drivers to cover all work and eliminate RDW completely. This failed to happen and the company asked for an extension to August when it was meant to end. Again they asked for another extension to 1st October. However when they asked for yet another extention it was refused until such times as the 1st April 2013 pay deal was resolved.
 
M

michael769

Established Member
Joined
9 Oct 2005
Messages
2,006
At new agreement on pay and conditions was reached between Scotrail and Aslef negotiators at their meeting yesterday. It is subject to ratification by the union executive.

I understand the agreement covers the period until 31 March 2015.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top