• 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!

Railway Industrial Disputes Mk2

Status
Not open for further replies.

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
If they've already offered no compulsory redundancies, I don't possibly see the point of withdrawing that offer at this stage.

Perhaps someone like ACAS ought to be able to verify such claims and counter-claims about what has actually been offered.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,646
I think that if there was one reform to Union legislation I would heartily support (and I say this as a union member myself) it's that they should be forced to go back to their membership more often. Six months seems a ridiculously long time to stretch out a mandate for industrial action.
Completely agree with you on that. I would have thought that was a relatively easy thing to do as well bearing in mind all the technology we have at our hands.
 

mpthomson

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2016
Messages
948
It's also worth noting that lots of non-unionised workers have won large pay rises in the past couple of years, including above-inflation rises. These are mainly in the private sector though, so wouldn't include Network Rail or franchised passenger train operator staff.
Indeed, my staff (who are non-unionised) are part of a large private sector organisation and the lowest paid recently received an 11% pay rise. Those on higher grades will get less than this.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,646
About 40% of the general public voted for this government. The majority of us didn't.
That's a fact for every election .....the 1997 Labour government got in on the back of 43% of the electorate actually voting for them
 

M&NEJ

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2021
Messages
176
Location
Lancashire
That's a fact for every election .....the 1997 Labour government got in on the back of 43% of the electorate actually voting for them
I don't want to take this too far off topic unless we start a fresh thread for this.

But my point is: we choose (or tolerate) a system in this country in which a minority takes power, either way.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
I'd love a bit of positive input right now. To those commenting on the impact of industrial action, I'd like to pose this question.

In the face of attacks on pay and conditions, job security and even employment rights, what actions do you think should be taken?

I don't want answers telling me what you think we shouldn't be doing (e.g. inconveniencing customers), but rather some positive alternatives to strike action.
 

M&NEJ

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2021
Messages
176
Location
Lancashire
I'd love a bit of positive input right now. To those commenting on the impact of industrial action, I'd like to pose this question.

In the face of attacks on pay and conditions, job security and even employment rights, what actions do you think should be taken?

I don't want answers telling me what you think we shouldn't be doing (e.g. inconveniencing customers), but rather some positive alternatives to strike action.
I don't profess to understanding the details of this dispute (because I think there is too much opinion and too little fact in the media reports to help lay-folk like me understand the actual issues). So I give an opinion based on what I think may be a key issue, taken from this thread, and by all means please let me know if I've got it wrong!

If the TOCs are prevented by government from entering into negotiation with the unions then I think Grant Schapps should grow up and start negotiating like a responsible adult, so we the public can get back to using the service we pay for.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I don't profess to understanding the details of this dispute (because I think there is too much opinion and too little fact in the media reports to help lay-folk like me understand the actual issues). So I give an opinion based on what I think may be a key issue, taken from this thread, and by all means please let me know if I've got it wrong!

If the TOCs are prevented by government from entering into negotiation with the unions then I think Grant Schapps should grow up and start negotiating like a responsible adult, so we the public can get back to using the service we pay for.

Exactly. We have Employers and Unions offering opposing accounts of what's been offered and a Government pulling the strings while exercising full denial, none of which provides much information to anyone.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,812
Location
Sheffield
Elections are a big digression, but only 42.4% of the votes cast were for the Tory Party, 40% for Labour, 7.4% LibDems and 3% for ScotNats - that's from 67.3% of the electorate who voted. That brings the percentages giving consent to all the parties down quite a lot.

In democracy many vote against a party, vote for a party holding their noses, vote for a third party to avoid the big two, consciously abstain from voting - or plain can't be bothered. What is clear is that only about a third of the electorate at best voted positively for the Tories.
 

Islineclear3_1

Established Member
Joined
24 Apr 2014
Messages
5,811
Location
PTSO or platform depending on the weather
I'd love a bit of positive input right now. To those commenting on the impact of industrial action, I'd like to pose this question.

In the face of attacks on pay and conditions, job security and even employment rights, what actions do you think should be taken?

I don't want answers telling me what you think we shouldn't be doing (e.g. inconveniencing customers), but rather some positive alternatives to strike action.
I'm a bit lost on the specific details of the dispute but why are the Government putting the responsibility of bargaining and negotiating onto the TOCs when the Government hold the purse strings?
 

baz962

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2017
Messages
3,280
I don't profess to understanding the details of this dispute (because I think there is too much opinion and too little fact in the media reports to help lay-folk like me understand the actual issues). So I give an opinion based on what I think may be a key issue, taken from this thread, and by all means please let me know if I've got it wrong!

If the TOCs are prevented by government from entering into negotiation with the unions then I think Grant Schapps should grow up and start negotiating like a responsible adult, so we the public can get back to using the service we pay for.
Trouble is that different tocs might have had different offers. However I know of one that had 0% offered last year and exactly the same this year. Zero .

I'm a bit lost on the specific details of the dispute but why are the Government putting the responsibility of bargaining and negotiating onto the TOCs when the Government hold the purse strings?
Exactly. Apparently we are public sector when it suits and when Mr Shapps is asked to come to the table we are told it's upto the private employer.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
I'm a bit lost on the specific details of the dispute but why are the Government putting the responsibility of bargaining and negotiating onto the TOCs when the Government hold the purse strings?
because they are charlatans.

That got tried right at the very beginning and didn't work, hence finding ourselves here.
but that is what people with no recourse to industrial action think should happen. When the answer is no you should either grumble or get a new job.

( and pay "talks" have gone on for several years with no progress)
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,162
I'm a bit lost on the specific details of the dispute but why are the Government putting the responsibility of bargaining and negotiating onto the TOCs when the Government hold the purse strings?
Because legally the union can only negotiate with the employer ie TOC or NR. But as the TOCs and NR are directly under DfT control, they first need to get funding agreement from DfT. Essentially the DfT is hiding behind this arrangement to obfuscate what’s really happening.
 

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
but that is what people with no recourse to industrial action think should happen. When the answer is no you should either grumble or get a new job.

... hence the endless arguments on this forum. After more than 15 years here I am well aware of that.

But it doesn't actually address my question.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
... hence the endless arguments on this forum. After more than 15 years here I am well aware of that.

But it doesn't actually address my question.
I agree - the answer is ask nicely and depart when refused.

Personally I would suggest key resource working absolutely to rule and not a minute more. No, I wont do another 30 mins to get this train to depot. No, I wont stay on in the box till relief comes. Its is lunchtime, I am entitled to my break now. Back in an hour. No, I wont step up to cover this establishment gap etc etc.

That is simply working and not doing anymore. Many in the industry are not paid for that goodwill so why do it? We all know the system runs on (often) free labour. Don't offer that freebie.

EDIT - I would also get a good comms strategy in place explaining the what and the why. RMT have done a good job on comms.
 
Last edited:

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,219
Location
London
That is simply working and not doing anymore. Many in the industry are not paid for that goodwill so why do it? We all know the system runs on (often) free labour. Don't offer that freebie.

Hopefully won’t come to that, but agreed that kind of thing is very effective.

“Do us a favour and split this train”?
“It’s not on my diagram, so no.”

Etc.
 

JamesT

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
2,640
I'm a bit lost on the specific details of the dispute but why are the Government putting the responsibility of bargaining and negotiating onto the TOCs when the Government hold the purse strings?
Because that's what they're for? Employees negotiate with their employer, not a third party. It's also the cynical reason why the TOCs exist in the first place, handling the day to day matters at arms length from Government.
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
9,219
Location
London
Because that's what they're for? Employees negotiate with their employer, not a third party. It's also the cynical reason why the TOCs exist in the first place, handling the day to day matters at arms length from Government.

In this case the “third party” has control over the TOCs, though.
 

Fokx

Member
Joined
18 May 2020
Messages
721
Location
Liverpool
Exactly. We have Employers and Unions offering opposing accounts of what's been offered and a Government pulling the strings while exercising full denial, none of which provides much information to anyone.
Who’s more likely to be lying?

This conservative government or the employees affected by such changes, withdrawing labour for no pay
 

SJN

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
388
Location
Birmingham
Because that's what they're for? Employees negotiate with their employer, not a third party. It's also the cynical reason why the TOCs exist in the first place, handling the day to day matters at arms length from Government.
Unfortunate the TOC’s have their hands tied. Any offer they make has to be approved by the DFT. as far as I’m aware the offers have been 0%.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Who’s more likely to be lying?

This conservative government or the employees affected by such changes, withdrawing labour for no pay

I'm sure we all have our suspicions, but frankly it does no one any good having to guess.

I'm inclined to think that such discussions should be independently arbitrated and a mutually agreed summary published so that we're not left with such claims and counter claims.
 
Last edited:

Islineclear3_1

Established Member
Joined
24 Apr 2014
Messages
5,811
Location
PTSO or platform depending on the weather
Because that's what they're for? Employees negotiate with their employer, not a third party. It's also the cynical reason why the TOCs exist in the first place, handling the day to day matters at arms length from Government.
So who exactly is the employer? The TOC or the Government? Seems like one or the other is only the employer when it suits them
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
But it doesn't actually address my question.
Also, you could include railway workers in an independent and binding ( on all sides) pay review commission composed of reps from government, operators, unions, economists and lay people.
 
Last edited:

O L Leigh

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2006
Messages
5,612
Location
In the cab with the paper
Personally I would suggest key resource working absolutely to rule and not a minute more. No, I wont do another 30 mins to get this train to depot. No, I wont stay on in the box till relief comes. Its is lunchtime, I am entitled to my break now. Back in an hour. No, I wont step up to cover this establishment gap etc etc.

That is simply working and not doing anymore. Many in the industry are not paid for that goodwill so why do it? We all know the system runs on (often) free labour. Don't offer that freebie.

... which brings us straight back to inconveniencing the customer.

Also, you could include railway workers in an independent and binding ( on all sides) pay review commission composed of reps from government, operators, unions, economists and lay people.

Love to see it, but it's not going to happen. It's very idealistic and not a little bit legally questionable.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
Love to see it, but it's not going to happen. It's very idealistic and not a little bit legally questionable.
you didn't ask for the practicality of the suggestion to be reviewed ;) There is an NHS pay review body so it could be possible but I agree it is unlikely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top