ASLEF strikes 5th-8th April weekend

[VP185]

They aren't going to be going out of their way to be antagonistic though. Not like the current lot who have done their best to scupper any kind of progress.

They won’t need to antagonistic, you’ll just get the “we would love to settle this dispute but all these years of Tory rule has left the finances in tatters, far worse than we thought” type of excuse.

 

[dk1]

As a Union man from outside the industry, the ASLEF strike now has very little impact on the travelling public. TOCs have got contingencies worked up with more staff trained.

ASLEF probably do need to ramp strike action up as an election is still planned for the second half of the year. 2 years in and the strategy has got nowhere sadly

Just got to stick at it. I see no signs of weakness at my depot. In fact quite the opposite.

 

[infobleep]

As a Union man from outside the industry, the ASLEF strike now has very little impact on the travelling public. TOCs have got contingencies worked up with more staff trained.

ASLEF probably do need to ramp strike action up as an election is still planned for the second half of the year. 2 years in and the strategy has got nowhere sadly

Is that why at some TOCs so few trains run on strike days? Govia Thameink Railway being one.

 

[Thirteen]

I would guess Labour would offer a no strings deal that would settle the dispute.

 

[JonathanH]

As a Union man from outside the industry, the ASLEF strike now has very little impact on the travelling public. TOCs have got contingencies worked up with more staff trained.

That may be the case with RMT, but for drivers there aren't so many contingencies, and in some cases agreements mean that driver managers don't drive on strike days. An ASLEF strike can still lead to full cancellations on some operators.

 

[12LDA28C]

As a Union man from outside the industry, the ASLEF strike now has very little impact on the travelling public. TOCs have got contingencies worked up with more staff trained.

Really? How come even a rest day working or overtime ban results in a substantially reduced service on almost all routes then? Let alone an actual strike day when on some routes no trains run at all.

 

[Krokodil]

They won’t need to antagonistic, you’ll just get the “we would love to settle this dispute but all these years of Tory rule has left the finances in tatters, far worse than we thought” type of excuse.

They can start by cutting the strings on the offer. Said strings would have saved sod all.

 

[Class 170101]

Going forward I see the below potential options for both sides. Please note I'm not taken one side or the other just laying out the options as I see them and in no particular order. I'm also not suggesting any of these will happen or are necessarily a good course of action.

Government / TOC's:
- Withdraw all overtime so that strike day pay losses can't be made up with overtime pay.

haha what?

No this isn't stupid, it would force operators to cut their cloth accredoingly and services would be adjusted to match resources, but it would mean drivers not getting their leave beyond the agreed number of people allowed to be off at any one time.

- Make a lower pay offer which is completely no strings attached.

Unlikely as the strings wouldn't get agreed in future

- Instruct TOC's where driver managers do not drive trains during strikes to unilaterally withdraw from these agreements subject to safety competencies.

I think that might well inflame the situation even further

- Carry on asking for a vote on the offer made.
- Bring a new offer to the table with T&C changes clearly communicated.

Not sure either will help at this stage, its an offer with no strings that looks to be the only solution now, most likely post Election 2024/25.

- Send direct details of the previous offer to all drivers cutting out ASLEF from the communication but not the negotiation. Ensures all drivers have correct details of deal offered.

This would need a third party (ACAS maybe) to be involved as members wouldn't be guaranteed to trust what is being said by their own TOC (the members are in dispute with them after all).

- Instruct TOC's to carry out a vote on deal with all drivers directly irrespective of union involvement.

TOCs would expect to be paid for that (ie DfT cost) though interestingly I'm surprised the DfT haven't tried this already.

Aslef:
- Permanent overtime ban.

Unfortunately some rely on the overtime to make ends meet otherwise I am sure this would have been done already. Additionally of course as OT is voluntary, members could decide not to work anyway.

- Call governments bluff and put offer to members to be likely rejected. Would likely strengthen their hand.

But a potentially an unquantifiable risk it could backfire on ASLEF and the offer accepted, additionally why pay out for the cost of a ballot, it is members subs after all.

- Longer strikes.

But again costs members a lot of money, some cannot afford it.

- Put forward the basis of a realistic offer to government / TOC's and maybe press which includes a realistic % rise in return for changes to T&C's with working towards bringing Sunday into the working week over a period of time.

Logically yes, but this government seems to want 'something for nothing' so I doubt this will head anywhere any time soon.

 

[Krokodil]

but it would mean drivers not getting their leave beyond the agreed number of people allowed to be off at any one time.

You realise that traincrew leave is already quota-controlled and that overtime wouldn't generally be authorised to cover for ad hoc days beyond the quota? Ad hoc days are only granted at three days notice if sufficient spare cover exists.

 

[muz379]

- Withdraw all overtime so that strike day pay losses can't be made up with overtime pay.

Didn't Grant Shapps suggest this right at the start of the dispute with the RMT , and by my recollection it was actually Senior figures at a number of TOC's that reacted in horror .

- Instruct TOC's where driver managers do not drive trains during strikes to unilaterally withdraw from these agreements subject to safety competencies.

This would still only be a drop in the ocean in terms of ability to deliver train services dependant on TOC's and depots .

- Instruct TOC's to carry out a vote on deal with all drivers directly irrespective of union involvement.

TOC's in my experience have enough trouble getting staff to complete staff surveys , this would likely just result in drivers ignoring it and not voting anyway .

 

[Snow1964]

I would guess Labour would offer a no strings deal that would settle the dispute.

Possibly, but they might have quite a few things to deal with, so takes a few weeks after election, and then effectively wraps up 2022, 2023, 2024 and year after 2025 (and maybe 2026) into one combined deal.

They are not going to want new dispute starting weeks after settling, so will want at least 18 months stability too.

 

[Bantamzen]

Perhaps the DfT should stop wanting a vote on the 2023 offer and just accept the alternative vote on strick action as the opinion of staff and then move on with this.

Perhaps so, but the bottom line is they are not going to. The last year is stark evidence of this. ASLEF have been trying to stare down a government that is not even looking in their direction.

So the options are simple. One is to stick to the current line and hope that Labour both make a majority at the next election & look favourably on the current dispute & prioritise it over pretty much anything else. At lot of people seem to have nailed their hopes on this, but Starmer has kept himself and his party at arms length from all the various disputes, so I wouldn't be so sure they will be keen on simply handing the unions what they want. In fact if they do get in through by swaying former Tory voters <cough><splutter>*, then they won't want to alienate them too much in the opening period of their administration. Labour isn't the party it once was, where support for unions was the default position.

Alternatively ASLEF could navigate around the current rules (BTW for those people asking if I knew about this, please see one of my first posts on this thread where I reference said rule), its been done before by other unions by simply putting a temporary block on said rule for the purpose of a ballot on the offer. This could be included in that as an initial question to ask if members are happy for the rule to be overridden, and then if they accept or reject the offer. Then the ball truly goes back to RDG / DfT to come back with a better offer. ASLEF could even use this moment to propose an RMT style, no-strings deal that wraps up all the previous years and resets the negotiations to the 2024-25 deal, and gets it's members the backpay I'm sure they'd all be happy to receive.

Of course this option would cost the union for the ballot, but given that a GE is probably still many months away they are almost certainly going to have to re-ballot members on continuing the industrial action, so why not just ballot the offer instead? There quite literally is nothing to lose, and possibly a bit to gain.

(*I'm sure some members of the forum will recognise the irony here)

 

[JonathanH]

Possibly, but they might have quite a few things to deal with, so takes a few weeks after election, and then effectively wraps up 2022, 2023, 2024 and year after 2025 (and maybe 2026) into one combined deal.

They are not going to want new dispute starting weeks after settling, so will want at least 18 months stability too.

I wonder what they have budgeted for in the real world. Isn't the broad plan to stick broadly with current spending and tax raising plans and hope growth measures improve?

 

[Horizon22]

The reality for many of us is that we now work from home several days a week. The days we are in the office driving or catching the train are equal options. Strike for a month and we'll either work from hoke for more days or drive. The reasons the strikes have had little public profile is that they really do impact life much less than even five years ago.

Not if you’re commuting into London a few (increasingly more it seems) days a week you can’t just drive.

And London & SE travellers still make up a huge chunk of overall rail journeys - although the Elizabeth line is not on strike.

As a Union man from outside the industry, the ASLEF strike now has very little impact on the travelling public. TOCs have got contingencies worked up with more staff trained.

ASLEF probably do need to ramp strike action up as an election is still planned for the second half of the year. 2 years in and the strategy has got nowhere sadly

Where are these “contingency” drivers? Excluding driver managers and other senior managers who keep competency, the best you can hope for is a skeleton service on core routes.

 

[ThameslinkUser]

No this isn't stupid, it would force operators to cut their cloth accredoingly and services would be adjusted to match resources, but it would mean drivers not getting their leave beyond the agreed number of people allowed to be off at any one time.

An overtime ban on GTR effectively shuts the railway in a usable manner. It causes greater grief than the strike days. Why on earth would the government voluntarily inflict this on themselves?

 

[infobleep]

Perhaps so, but the bottom line is they are not going to. The last year is stark evidence of this. ASLEF have been trying to stare down a government that is not even looking in their direction.

So the options are simple. One is to stick to the current line and hope that Labour both make a majority at the next election & look favourably on the current dispute & prioritise it over pretty much anything else. At lot of people seem to have nailed their hopes on this, but Starmer has kept himself and his party at arms length from all the various disputes, so I wouldn't be so sure they will be keen on simply handing the unions what they want.

Kier Starmer is at arms length to avoid the right leaning press using that as amo against him.

The Daily Fail ran 14 consecutive front pages on beergate and he hadn't even broken the law, unlike Boris Johnson, where they didn't do this. So that gives some idea of what he's up against. I'm not a Labour support either.

There quite literally is nothing to lose, and possibly a bit to gain.

(*I'm sure some members of the forum will recognise the irony here)

What have the government got to lose by changing their position?

 

[Snow1964]

An overtime ban on GTR effectively shuts the railway in a usable manner. It causes greater grief than the strike days. Why on earth would the government voluntarily inflict this on themselves?

Don't know about GTR, but aren't some operators eg Government run Northern actively increasing staffing to reduce reliance on overtime, eg Northern recruiting for over 300 roles

'No experience required': Northern set to recruit more than 300 drivers and conductors across the North of England in 2024

Northern is looking to recruit more than 300 drivers and conductors across the North of England this year.

media.northernrailway.co.uk

Northern is looking to recruit more than 300 drivers and conductors across the North of England this year.

The train operator says the roles are part of a normal, on-going process to recruit as and when existing staff members retire, earn promotions or join another company.
It is looking to hire 108 train drivers and 198 conductors in 2024 and actively encouraging people with no rail industry experience to apply.

 

[irish_rail]

As a Union man from outside the industry, the ASLEF strike now has very little impact on the travelling public. TOCs have got contingencies worked up with more staff trained.

ASLEF probably do need to ramp strike action up as an election is still planned for the second half of the year. 2 years in and the strategy has got nowhere sadly

Ah that's right. Down here for instance on a strike day you may be able to travel from Plymouth out to Gunnislake due to managers driving a 2 hourly service out there. Your a bit screwed if you want to go anywhere other than Gunnislake mind you, but hey.

They won’t need to antagonistic, you’ll just get the “we would love to settle this dispute but all these years of Tory rule has left the finances in tatters, far worse than we thought” type of excuse.

I think Starmer understands the importance of a flourishing economy, something the Tories no longer do. He knows by settling this dispute with a fair and reasonable offer, the railways can once again flourish and grow, and this will benefit the economy. So I'd be shocked, yes shocked if train drivers don't have a deal before the end of this calendar year.

 

[infobleep]

Ah that's right. Down here for instance on a strike day you may be able to travel from Plymouth out to Gunnislake due to managers driving a 2 hourly service out there. Your a bit screwed if you want to go anywhere other than Gunnislake mind you, but hey.

That could form a Monty Pyhton sketch.

They would like a ticket to Reading but all the person offers them is any combination of ticketed journeys to Gunnislake, including breaking their journey on route but always ending up at Gunnislake.

 

[Bantamzen]

What have the government got to lose by changing their position?

Nothing. However they also know they are on their way out, so won't have to deal with it soon. ASLEF don't have that same privilege, they will have to negotiate with a Labour government that might have PTSD after seeing the state of the country's finances and may not be able to offer a quick win. Especially as the backdating claim will be becoming a rather large figure to come out of one year's budget.

So there's no harm in testing the waters to see if at least the pay dispute for previous years can be wound up.

Kier Starmer is at arms length to avoid the right leaning press using that as amo against him.

The Daily Fail ran 14 consecutive front pages on beergate and he hadn't even broken the law, unlike Boris Johnson, where they didn't do this. So that gives some idea of what he's up against. I'm not a Labour support either.

That's just my point, Labour isn't just leaning on the right wing press, they need some of the right leaning voters to cross over to nail down a new government. So appearing to side with the unions may not be an option pre or post election.

 

[greyman42]

When did you last get a pay rise?

Every one or two years depending on the previous deal. It usually takes around three months to negotiate and then gets backdated. I think this is the norm with any large company.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Nothing. However they also know they are on their way out, so won't have to deal with it soon. ASLEF don't have that same privilege, they will have to negotiate with a Labour government that might have PTSD after seeing the state of the country's finances and may not be able to offer a quick win. Especially as the backdating claim will be becoming a rather large figure to come out of one year's budget.

DafT or the operators would have made financial provision in their accounts for backpay but of course it won't necessarily be at the level of any future settlement but it will avoid an outright bombshell on the finances. This year, for example, DafT have had to stump significant extra cash to HS2 due to cost plus contracts they are on and found the cash.

That's just my point, Labour isn't just leaning on the right wing press, they need some of the right leaning voters to cross over to nail down a new government. So appearing to side with the unions may not be an option pre or post election.

Maybe not but they've made no secret of rowing back on many of the Torys employment policies so not sure they would be overtly worried about pay levels. However, no party will want to be seen as being held to ransom so one would hope Haigh and Whelan are working behind teh scenes now on a deal that Reeves will underwrite.

Separately Merriman mention in the HoC on Transport topical questions last Thursday that he sitting down with Whelan

I do listen to those in the north and I am delighted that I will be listening to the leader of ASLEF, because he has agreed to sit down with me so we can discuss those terms. I hope I can work with all Members of the House to make that happen.

This was in the context of an AWC agreement over only doing one round trip on nay route but you can't not see the wider dispute being discussed and where the path for a solution lies from both camps.

 

[newtownmgr]

You realise that traincrew leave is already quota-controlled and that overtime wouldn't generally be authorised to cover for ad hoc days beyond the quota? Ad hoc days are only granted at three days notice if sufficient spare cover exists.

Not sure what company you work for but with mine, each depot as a set quota per day depending on size. If a rest day agreement is in place then the quota is increased by 1 or 2 per day. So for example 12 is the normal allowed off,mixture of block & ad hoc. If rest day agreement in place that increases to 14. Anybody applying over that quota is put in abeyance in number order & only given the day if the job can be covered on the 48 hour roster.

 

[dk1]

You realise that traincrew leave is already quota-controlled and that overtime wouldn't generally be authorised to cover for ad hoc days beyond the quota? Ad hoc days are only granted at three days notice if sufficient spare cover exists.

At my depot there are 4 drivers (SX) 2 drivers (SO) guaranteed to get ad-hoc leave regardless of whether or not their turns can be covered by the roster clerk. Anybody over this quota will still get leave if cover is available. Should anyone get declined leave (which can be upwards of eight or more at holiday times) then it’s up to the shift duty traincrew managers who will break their backs and cross palms with silver to get everybody who wants the day off, off. They are fantastic.

 

[43066]

You simply can’t continue to call a days strike once every few months. Thats simply not achieving anything. Time to go big.

Thing is it’s clear that the government simply don’t care about the economy, or about public services in general.

The view of the ASLEF leadership is that going out for (say) a week at a time would hurt members in the pocket, wouldn’t achieve anything, and would be ultimately self defeating, as support for the action would dwindle, so would only play into the government’s hands. Personally I agree with them, and I think we will be continuing with strikes every few months until there’s movement, which might be after the election.

At lot of people seem to have nailed their hopes on this, but Starmer has kept himself and his party at arms length from all the various disputes, so I wouldn't be so sure they will be keen on simply handing the unions what they want. In fact if they do get in through by swaying former Tory voters <cough><splutter>*, then they won't want to alienate them too much in the opening period of their administration. Labour isn't the party it once was, where support for unions was the default position.

It isn’t a question of “handing the unions what they want”; it’s a case of just allowing the usual negotiation process to take place, rather than actively paralysing it, and not insisting on fundamental changes to Ts and Cs that will never be acceptable. Plenty of “right leaning” voters would prefer to see a sensible deal reached, rather than the industry being allowed to carry on in a total mess. It’s also not lost on many of us that this Tory government - not Labour - have just presided over the worst period of industrial unrest in the country since the 1980s.

Every one or two years depending on the previous deal. It usually takes around three months to negotiate and then gets backdated. I think this is the norm with any large company.

So you’re alright, Jack, with regular pay rises and “excellent Ts and Cs”, so it seems a little odd that you’re so staunchly opposed to other people standing up for theirs.

I think Starmer understands the importance of a flourishing economy, something the Tories no longer do. He knows by settling this dispute with a fair and reasonable offer, the railways can once again flourish and grow, and this will benefit the economy. So I'd be shocked, yes shocked if train drivers don't have a deal before the end of this calendar year.

Agreed.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It isn’t a question of “handing the unions what they want”; it’s a case of just allowing the usual negotiation process to take place, rather than actively paralysing it, and not insisting on fundamental changes to Ts and Cs that will never be acceptable. Plenty of “right leaning” voters would prefer to see a sensible deal reached, rather than the industry being allowed to carry on in a total mess. It’s also not lost on many of us that the Tory government - not Labour - have just presided over the worst period of industrial unrest in the country since the 1980s.

Indeed but it was the unions failure to work with Callaghans Labour administration that left the door wide open for Thatcher to walk through and then make things a lot worse for working people that we have never recovered from. This is why i dearly hope that whether its ASLEF, junior doctors or others that the Union Leaders are already meeting with the appropriate shadow Labour minister to get at least an outline agreement that is underwritten by Reeves now so it can be just implemented should/when they get into Downing St.

 

[Bantamzen]

It isn’t a question of “handing the unions what they want”; it’s a case of just allowing the usual negotiation process to take place, rather than actively paralysing it, and not insisting on fundamental changes to Ts and Cs that will never be acceptable. Plenty of “right leaning” voters would prefer to see a sensible deal reached, rather than the industry being allowed to carry on in a total mess. It’s also not lost on many of us that this Tory government - not Labour - have just presided over the worst period of industrial unrest in the country since the 1980s.

I'm not getting into this circular argument again. We all know what the sticking point is, we just can't agree on who should blink first. Personally I don't see any reason why ASLEF can't do as I suggested above, with the mandate of their members, and stick in a counter offer as I mentioned above. What is there to lose? You might get bugger all, and the closer we get to the GE the higher that risk becomes. But you also might get the same deal your colleagues in the industry got, that is bring the pay awards up to date on the offered percentage increases but with no strings. Then end the existing industrial action and move into a new period of negotiations for future awards and T&Cs.

Frankly I'd say that makes more sense than sitting on your hands sulking and blaming the government. It wouldn't hurt for ASLEF to try to be proactive in this situation.

 

[43066]

Indeed but it was the unions failure to work with Callaghans Labour administration that left the door wide open for Thatcher to walk through and then make things a lot worse for working people that we have never recovered from. This is why i dearly hope that whether its ASLEF, junior doctors or others that the Union Leaders are already meeting with the appropriate shadow Labour minister to get at least an outline agreement that is underwritten by Reeves now so it can be just implemented should/when they get into Downing St.

We really, really aren’t in a comparable position to the 1970s, when unions had got totally out of control. The fact the Tories have tried to imply that we are is ludicrous, and based on polling referred to above they have utterly failed to make that link in the public’s mind.

I'm not getting into this circular argument again. We all know what the sticking point is, we just can't agree on who should blink first. Personally I don't see any reason why ASLEF can't do as I suggested above, with the mandate of their members, and stick in a counter offer as I mentioned above. What is there to lose? You might get bugger all, and the closer we get to the GE the higher that risk becomes. But you also might get the same deal your colleagues in the industry got, that is bring the pay awards up to date on the offered percentage increases but with no strings. Then end the existing industrial action and move into a new period of negotiations for future awards and T&Cs.

Frankly I'd say that makes more sense than sitting on your hands sulking and blaming the government. It wouldn't hurt for ASLEF to try to be proactive in this situation.

The sticking point is the government refusing to settle the dispute for ideological reasons: ASLEF allowing a ballot on this offer would not change that. As an ASLEF member I wouldn’t want to be balloted on a deal the leadership doesn’t endorse, when it’s obvious that it would make no difference anyway.

You are as usual just trying to blame ASLEF for the government’s failings.

 

[VP185]

I think Starmer understands the importance of a flourishing economy, something the Tories no longer do. He knows by settling this dispute with a fair and reasonable offer, the railways can once again flourish and grow, and this will benefit the economy. So I'd be shocked, yes shocked if train drivers don't have a deal before the end of this calendar year.

Starmer is just a Red Tory. I hope you’re right but I’m not hopeful.

Thing is it’s clear that the government simply don’t care about the economy, or about public services in general.

The view of the ASLEF leadership is that going out for (say) a week at a time would hurt members in the pocket, wouldn’t achieve anything, and would be ultimately self defeating, as support for the action would dwindle, so would only play into the government’s hands. Personally I agree with them, and I think we will be continuing with strikes every few months until there’s movement, which might be after the election.

We haven’t had movement on negotiations for how long? If ASLEF are going to persist with their current strategy we may as well not strike.

 

[Bantamzen]

The sticking point is the government refusing to settle the dispute for ideological reasons: ASLEF allowing a ballot on this offer would not change that. As an ASLEF member I wouldn’t want to be balloted on a deal the leadership doesn’t endorse, when it’s obvious that it would make no difference anyway.

You are as usual just trying to blame ASLEF for the government’s failing.

The government have set an exact stipulation for the offer and any future negotiations. ASLEF have a rule that they cannot take an executive decision back to the members. Neither side will budge, both are as bad as each other quite frankly.

But this is isn't about blaming anyone, well at least not from my point of view. Its about trying to find a way through it. ASLEF could, as I described above, at least shift the process on a bit. But they won't, and members on here seem to think this is the right way to go. Yet it is literally a free roll of the dice, your situation won't be any worse for taking the ballot, making that counter offer and seeing what they come back with. Seriously, what about that is so worrying that everyone pushes back against it?