Arriva Rail North DOO

[jayah]

Were they? Can you say which ones? I'm not aware of any TOC ones being killed off.

Virgin Trains, Northern, LNER and Scotrail all advertising final salary schemes.

 

[Halifaxlad]

The law changed after the RMT balloted Northern, so they can continue using a ballot which is 2+ years old (?) but have to keep reballoting every 6 months for SWR

Thanks, thats very interesting.

 

[Starmill]

clearly the dispute is going to run and run with no end in sight.

There's not much evidence, but what there is suggests that this is exactly what will happen.

 

[Starmill]

It seems to be working fine so far.

If it's working, why has the company not made them an offer? Or indeed changed their position one tiny bit? If it's working, at what point will it actually achieve something, given it hasn't after 39 days of action. Will it achieve something at 40 days of action? At 80 days? At 200 days?

 

[Killingworth]

Virgin Trains, Northern, LNER and Scotrail all advertising final salary schemes.

So there could indeed be more trouble ahead if any changes are proposed, as the Sunday Times suggested, see article linked here;
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...2?shareToken=f6112a69ced532938f701fe35b595519

"Railways face strike threat over pensions

Walkout feared if workers are told to boost contributions

John Collingridge
December 9 2018, 12:01am, The Sunday Times

Train companies and workers have been told to plug deficits in their final-salary schemes

Urgent talks are under way to avert a mass walkout on the railways in a growing row over pensions.

Tensions have risen over the Pensions Regulator’s demands that train companies and workers plug yawning deficits in their final-salary schemes.

The regulator’s demands come at a crucial time for the sector, which is wrestling with threadbare finances, weak growth in passenger numbers, punctuality problems and long-running industrial action over the role of guards on trains.

After the collapse of the East Coast franchise and financial woes on routes including Northern and Greater Anglia, industry sources warned that making train companies shoulder extra risk for pensions could drive operators away.

The regulator’s demand that rail workers should make greater pension contributions risks inflaming the situation. In 2006 all three main rail unions threatened a national strike over this issue.

“This is the one thing no one wants to tackle because it could cause a national rail strike,” said an industry expert.Aslef leader Mick Whelan said workers were promised their pensions would be protected.

The dispute dates back to privatisation in the 1990s, when British Rail was carved up into the track operator Railtrack and individual franchises. Separate pensions tied to each franchise form part of the overall Railways Pension Scheme, which has £27.5bn of assets and 340,000 members. Franchise owners typically commit to pumping in pension cash during the lifetime of a contract, before the liability passes to the next operator.

However, the reserves of many of these schemes have slumped. Arriva Trains Wales had a £223m deficit at the end of last year. It has since been taken over by a joint venture of Keolis and Amey. Northern Rail, run by Arriva, had a gap of £486m as of March last year.

The regulator has been spurred into action after stinging criticism over the collapse of Carillion and BHS, both of which had hefty pension deficits, and has increased pressure on the rail industry in recent months. It is understood to be demanding more action on clearing deficits during franchise periods, which can run for 10-15 years. However, that risks forcing a huge burden on to operators, which typically operate on thin margins.

The row has also stoked concerns among Treasury mandarins, who fear the liabilities could land back in the public purse — or set a precedent for former nationalised pension schemes.

The Department for Transport said it was an issue for the pensions watchdog and declined to comment. The Pensions Regulator also declined to comment.

Mick Whelan, the general secretary of train drivers’ union Aslef, said: “We were promised people’s pensions would be protected under the 1993 Railway Act and have always worked within the agreed mechanisms to deal with surpluses and/or deficits. Much of that work has been to keep pensions affordable for everyone.

“We will always seek to protect our members’ deferred wages and resolve any issues in the best way possible, based on their wishes.”"

However, there's time to resolve this one. My point was that the RMT are embroiled in one long running dispute and need to get it settled in case another grievance of any sort comes along.

 

[muz379]

They might threaten action if just one or two guards try it, but if every single one did so, it would be impractical to discipline them all!


Besides, aren't guards already allowed to remain in their back cab and not sell tickets if they feel unsafe?

The legal action would not be against the individual guards so much as against the union if it instructed them to do something such as this . The possible fines could be significant

 

[HH]

Virgin Trains, Northern, LNER and Scotrail all advertising final salary schemes.

I think it was Fake News.

 

[HH]

So there could indeed be more trouble ahead if any changes are proposed, as the Sunday Times suggested

I reckon this is also Fake News.

Basically we've had issues around pensions not being fully funded before, which is how we ended up with a new section that retires at 62, rather than 60, and pays a little less. There is talk of coming up with an industry solution; DfT is talking to RDG; everyone's talking to TPR.

People are concerned, but I think it's in everyone's interests to come up with a solution; and I think that most people will realise that the pain will have to be shared, even if nobody is happy about it.

 

[Wombat]

That's quite interesting. Who can fill the pensions shortfall? The options, and I'm happy to be corrected, seem to be:

a) The TOCs
b) The workers
c) The passengers
d) The taxpayer

I don't see (c) or (d) volunteering, frankly. Presumably (a) ultimately ends up as some combination of all of the other three, given the margins involved.

Is there an argument against expecting the workers to pay whatever the going rate happens to be for their pensions?

 

[HH]

That's quite interesting. Who can fill the pensions shortfall? The options, and I'm happy to be corrected, seem to be:

a) The TOCs
b) The workers
c) The passengers
d) The taxpayer

I don't see (c) or (d) volunteering, frankly. Presumably (a) ultimately ends up as some combination of all of the other three, given the margins involved.

Is there an argument against expecting the workers to pay whatever the going rate happens to be for their pensions?

The Railway pension payments are split 60% Employer, 40% Employee, so if you have to pay in 25% the employer pays 15% and the employee 10% (which gets tax relief and if you join the salary sacrifice scheme, NI relief as well).

Passengers will not pay directly because the fares are regulated. I guess there's a risk that DfT go back to RPI+1%, rather than flat RPI, but I'd say that wasn't politically acceptable at this point.

Whether the government will pick up some of the cost; I think they'll have to if the overall amount is too large, which it may well be for some operators.

 

[Meerkat]

The discussion about guards not going sick.....didn’t Southern accuse the guards of covert industrial action through increased sickness?
Obviously the counter argument is that more stress and less loyalty increases sick levels.....

 

[jayah]

The Railway pension payments are split 60% Employer, 40% Employee, so if you have to pay in 25% the employer pays 15% and the employee 10% (which gets tax relief and if you join the salary sacrifice scheme, NI relief as well).

Passengers will not pay directly because the fares are regulated. I guess there's a risk that DfT go back to RPI+1%, rather than flat RPI, but I'd say that wasn't politically acceptable at this point.

Whether the government will pick up some of the cost; I think they'll have to if the overall amount is too large, which it may well be for some operators.

Sounds rather different to the public sector / government schemes that have peppercorn subscriptions of 5-6% employee and the employer contribution is basically an IOU mortgaged on future tax revenues.

 

[Dave1987]

One thing that makes me chuckle about all this is that Tories are supposed to be the party of working people. Yet they are going hammer and tongs against organisations that represent working people i.e unions. That makes no sense unless they are lying about being on the side of working people!

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing that makes me chuckle about all this is that Tories are supposed to be the party of working people.

Has anyone ever bought that idea?

 

[pemma]

Has anyone ever bought that idea?

Perhaps some of those who they have punished for being out-of-work believe they represent those in work better.

 

[Dave1987]

Has anyone ever bought that idea?

I did foolishly.

 

[Robertj21a]

I did foolishly.

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll be delighted to vote for Corbyn, and his totally professional team, very shortly......

 

[woodmally]

One thing that makes me chuckle about all this is that Tories are supposed to be the party of working people. Yet they are going hammer and tongs against organisations that represent working people i.e unions. That makes no sense unless they are lying about being on the side of working people!

Hang on a minute here. Who is preventing hardworking Saturday workers from getting to work for months now? Yep thats right the Union. Who is the organisations thats stifling businesses by shutting down the rail network on saturday risking people losing their jobs. Yep Unions again. Who is the organisation that stops their members from working to achieve something that is impossible.. You can see the thread cant you. Its not the tories stopping the working classes from earning a crust its the union.

 

[Dave1987]

Don't worry, I'm sure you'll be delighted to vote for Corbyn, and his totally professional team, very shortly......

Well it might take a Corbyn Government to shake the Westminster bubble enough for the elites to take notice of the plebs at the bottom.

 

[Dave1987]

Hang on a minute here. Who is preventing hardworking Saturday workers from getting to work for months now? Yep thats right the Union. Who is the organisations thats stifling businesses by shutting down the rail network on saturday risking people losing their jobs. Yep Unions again. Who is the organisation that stops their members from working to achieve something that is impossible.. You can see the thread cant you. Its not the tories stopping the working classes from earning a crust its the union.

Hmmmm we are talking about a Tory Government that has overseen a very big increase in ‘gig’ working and the casualisation of work. That’s seen the unemployment rate at the lowest levels for decades yet people are still poorer than the were 10 years ago. Kind of suggests all jobs created are low paid insecure work doesn’t it eh?

 

[woodmally]

Hmmmm we are talking about a Tory Government that has overseen a very big increase in ‘gig’ working and the casualisation of work. That’s seen the unemployment rate at the lowest levels for decades yet people are still poorer than the were 10 years ago. Kind of suggests all jobs created are low paid insecure work doesn’t it eh?

Ah you mean new jobs that are flexible so students and those who want seasonal work can do them. The tories are not forcing people to do these gig economy jobs you know.

 

[HH]

Sounds rather different to the public sector / government schemes that have peppercorn subscriptions of 5-6% employee and the employer contribution is basically an IOU mortgaged on future tax revenues.

It is. I don't know how accurate the Times figures are - the two I've heard about are much smaller, albeit a nasty hike in contributions.

 

[LM93]

The 'gig' economy is increasing across the western world, I don't think you can lay the blame at the feet of one government, nor is it something bad.

 

[Ken H]

Although you can say a small number of guards already do that (the back cab lodgers, only popping out to do station duties, the ones who love working 150s)

When I used Leeds buses as a kid, the conductor was quite keen to get all the fares. because at the next stop there might be an inspector who would check everyone had a ticket. I assume if there were people without a ticket the conductor got a b0ll0cking. Dont guards have the same checks?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 'gig' economy is increasing across the western world, I don't think you can lay the blame at the feet of one government, nor is it something bad.

It has benefits, both to business agility and individual choice - but it does, to work well, require a shift in the "safety net" from the employer to the Government, for instance something like State redundancy insurance would be of help, or universal basic income.

 

[Dave1987]

Ah you mean new jobs that are flexible so students and those who want seasonal work can do them. The tories are not forcing people to do these gig economy jobs you know.

Aren’t they? Are you so out of touch with people’s fears that you cannot or refuse to see what people perceive is going to happen? People see a huge increase in the ‘gig’ economy and casualisation of work with plenty of companies exploiting it so people perceive this is what the Government wants and what the future of work is.

 

[Dave1987]

The 'gig' economy is increasing across the western world, I don't think you can lay the blame at the feet of one government, nor is it something bad.

You can lay the blame at a Government allowing it to become more and more commonplace and a perceived replacement for full time contractual employment.

 

[Confused52]

Aren’t they? Are you so out of touch with people’s fears that you cannot or refuse to see what people perceive is going to happen? People see a huge increase in the ‘gig’ economy and casualisation of work with plenty of companies exploiting it so people perceive this is what the Government wants and what the future of work is.

That is abject nonsense I have seen very little evidence of people doing what they perceive the Government want. If they did these damned strikes wouldn't be happening would they?

 

[scrapy]

Are the current regime running the RMT really interested in talking? Evidence over the past week or two would suggest not, unless virtually all of their demands are met prior to the meeting even taking place

When have the RMT refused to talk? The RMT entered into talks without any preconditions. The RMT asked Northern 3 questions which Northern said it didn't know the answers to and were told by ACAS to adjourn and come back when they had spoken to the DFT and had some firm proposals.

 

[Confused52]

When have the RMT refused to talk? The RMT entered into talks without any preconditions. The RMT asked Northern 3 questions which Northern said it didn't know the answers to and were told by ACAS to adjourn and come back when they had spoken to the DFT and had some firm proposals.

But we have seen the questions! They amounted to asking have you agreed our conditions, to claim the meeting was without any pre-conditions is pure sophistry. If you have minutes of the meeting to prove otherwise please publish them.