-
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
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
A screenshot of the tweet below
Attachments
Shrop
On Moderation
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 649
This is a sad predicament deserving of sympathy. There's something wrong when there are strikers who are damaging the industry yet would be perfectly able to walk into different jobs if they had to. I do wonder about the motivation of union bosses who are pushing their membership into strikes, is it because they themselves would be in dire straits if their demands are not met? Somehow I doubt it, and meanwhile the industry is losing the faith of the public, and goodwill from Government. It's tricky, but certainly sad when some people with genuine needs are being used as pawns by those with other motives, who quite possibly have no genuine affection for the railway.
Killingworth
Established Member
What happens in many industries is that the employee is offered generous voluntary redundancy terms. Within a few weeks they apply for a fixed term self-employed contract to do virtually the same job on terms that they feel give them more freedom to pick and choose where and what they do - and quite often brings more money thanks to the way the tax regime works. The individual will lose a lot of the protections of a salaried job but as long as they plan prudently, and keep fit they usually do fine. It doesn't suit a lot who would worry about where the next contract was coming from or have concerns if they were ill.
This may be a somewhat short sighted approach to managing if it overlooks all the expensive training that has been given to get leavers to the point where they can play the job market.
HST274
Member
That is a very strong accusation to be made public...
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Surely they would have checked the legality of the statement with their legal team first.
That’s is one blinkered and selfish statement.
In this country, and most ‘free’ countries the right to strike is a legally protected and democratic process to ‘put your point across’ (sorry, couldn’t think of the words I wanted to say!) and say to your employer that ‘we are not happy’.
What do you propose then, anyone who goes on strike should lose their job and never be employed again?
HST274
Member
That's what I was thinking. Despite the multitude of commenters calling out 'lies' I suspect there is likely some truth to this, though who knows what has actually happened.
Of course a reduced headcount also impacts on Unions......less subs going into the coffers
Which is the problem with fake news, people who don’t know read it and think “surely Avanti wouldn’t tweet that if it wasn’t true….”
The fact is that if any driver or group of drivers took their own unofficial action they would be sacked, and prosecuted.
Deciding not to volunteer to work a rest day isn’t striking.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
If "fake news" is the case as you suggest, will it be worth the union taking the matter to the courts, noting the wording that is stated.
martin2345uk
Established Member
Mick Whelan of ASLEF has told Avanti to "remove their lies".
Good on him I say, if it's true that the drivers are just not working overtime then that's a shameful thing for them to put out to the public.
Good on him I say, if it's true that the drivers are just not working overtime then that's a shameful thing for them to put out to the public.
Last edited:
Annetts key
Established Member
Err, you have it all wrong. The vast majority of the union members want the union to arrange industrial action. And the decisions in the RMT are made by elected committee members, not the General Secretary Mick Lynch. The General Secretary carries out the instructions of the elected committee. Each elected committee member is voted in by the members in elections. Each is usually elected for a three-year term.
And of course before any industrial action, it has to go to ballot.
O L Leigh
Established Member
As interesting as these matters are to postulate, that really has nothing to do with the question I posed. I’m simply asking those people who believe that customers should never be inconvenienced under any circumstances just what they think workers should do instead of striking.
SJN
Member
They have trains running so it’s very likely that the drivers rostered to work are in but they are short of volunteers to cover any vacant turns.
thelongestroad
Member
Can you imagine how much NR and their army of PowerPoint makers would completely mess it up too?
Shrop
On Moderation
- Joined
- 6 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 649
Sorry if I phrased that badly, I don’t have any problem with people going on strike, so long as their reasoning is sound. I just fear that some of those who know they can easily transfer their skills into jobs outside railways, might not realise how much they are putting the livelihoods at risk, of those who may be less able to do so. Neither public support, nor Government support, should be taken for granted. I genuinely hope that a fair deal is proposed, and accepted quickly.
The rail industry receives a huge public subsidy. That means it receives and indeed deserves a strong degree of public scrutiny.
The job you do has absolutely no bearing on whether you are 'entitled' to take part in that scrutiny. It's getting rather boring for you to keep on asking people what they do, as if it were somehow relevant.
Indeed you're just as entitled as anyone else to comment on how much subsidy you think the industry should be getting. But, naturally, others may well treat your comments with an 'appropriate' level of caution given the conflict of interest!
Depends.
Is it that drivers with booked committed Sundays for today have not turned in (could easily be described as unofficial strike action).
Or is it that no drivers (who do not have a booked committed Sunday,) have made themselves available for additional work today. That is clearly not remotely unofficial strike action
Estrella709
Member
Yes, the cancellations are due to some drivers choosing not to work their day off.
And why shouldn't they.
I thought Avanti drivers had to work their booked Sunday.
SJN
Member
Well they have trains running so the booked drivers do seem to be working. There will be uncovered turns though due to annual leave and sickness and people probably haven’t volunteered to cover them.
OK thanks that makes sense. Also very difficult to say that is unofficial action. Interesting so see what happens when the lawyers get involved.
Such extraordinary bitterness. I can assure you plenty of people on £65k+ still work overtime…
It’s very relevant when many of the comments are made from a position of ignorance, are motivated by bitterness and jealousy, and have nothing to do with legitimate scrutiny.
I’m still waiting for @Carlisle to name the “favourable agreements” he referred to earlier. Surely he wouldn’t have made such a comment without said knowledge.
Falcon1200
Established Member
Might depend on the exact circumstances. Railway staff do of course have an absolute right not to work their Rest Days, during my railway career there were those who grabbed every bit of overtime going, those who worked Rest Days occasionally, and some who were unavailable for any overtime, at all.
But there could be situations where someone has agreed to work a Rest Day but has then changed their mind, quite possibly of course for an unavoidable reason, eg sickness. Or, where staff have Sundays outside the working week and are committed to work those rostered, but cannot or will not work them.
But I agree, Avanti's wording, unless based on fact, is inflammatory to say the least.
What is the important issue for signallers?
This is not true. Everything has been explained and clarified. In some cases multiple times. Having been involved in negotiations with unions more times than I care to remember (albeit not these negotiations), it is the first priority of the ‘management’ side to make sure the ‘staff’ side fully understand what is being presented to them. And, I’m sorry to say, it is quite common for union reps to say they understand what they have been offered, and then claim subsequently that they don’t. Sometimes this is a delaying tactic, and I would bet a few quid thatthis has been deployed in this negotiation.
See above.
I’m afraid it does.
We must speak to different people.
Collective bargaining is by bargaining groups of course…
Indeed. But why haven’t signallers - a different bargaining group to maintenance - not had the chance to vote on their deal?
Which is not true. Read the documents more carefully.
And, as you know, scheduled maintenance is just one part of maintenance activity.
it’s sort of true. The owning company, if it makes profit, will use that profit however it chooses. If the owning company is a ’foreign’ National railway, then profit made here can and will be sent to the parent company. It would be pretty difficult to demonstrate that profit here directly led to development of “local” railway abroad though.
Conversely, if the operation here loses money, then the ‘foreign’ railway is subsidising our railway. Abellio did precisely this to an eye watering degree Pre Covid. Hundreds of millions.
They would only have put that out based on what drivers / reps will have told them. I know this is the case for another TOC this weekend.
Annetts Key wrote ", However, earlier this year it became clear that, that’s not what the company wanted to do. Hence, the union asked the members via the reps for feedback. The members were not happy, hence the union balloted for industrial action to show the company the resolve of the members. The company still did not move significantly. Hence we are now striking. Since the first group of strike days, Network Rail have at least moved a little bit more. But not enough to take it to the members as a referendum."
Now i;ve just returned off holiday so have not been keeping up to date on here, so please excuse if these 3 points have been asked and answered,
Concerning the above quote, "Network Rail have at least moved a little bit more" have the union;s moved any?
Also it was reported that RMT negotiator had reported back to the executive, with a positive responce from the latest round of meetings, only for the executive to dismiss them?
Are the unions paying strike pay yet?.
Now i;ve just returned off holiday so have not been keeping up to date on here, so please excuse if these 3 points have been asked and answered,
Concerning the above quote, "Network Rail have at least moved a little bit more" have the union;s moved any?
Also it was reported that RMT negotiator had reported back to the executive, with a positive responce from the latest round of meetings, only for the executive to dismiss them?
Are the unions paying strike pay yet?.
They are failing to explain in full the changes to maintenance, and they are failing to explain how it will work in the real world, and how it will be safe.
If you can explain this in full, please do, as lots of workers would like to know, and if the explanation is reasonable, it could help to resolve this dispute.
If you can't, but have contacts who can, please ask them to do so as they need to provide a proper and clear explanation to the company as a whole in order to end this.
It is being explained, in full, as it has to be. But I’m afraid that some of the information is not getting through the union channels, and some of what is getting through is being presented in a way that is, let’s say, clouded a little.
There is a whole host of information explaining the detail on the internal website. But if you need further explanation, talk to your line manager, and if that doesn’t satisfy you, keep going up the chain.
Having said that I will check to make sure everything is clear and fully available to everyone affected.
- Status