First will not take over West Coast from December

[Monty]

How many other companies have that in 2012 for new starters?

Even the state schemes (Civil Service, NHS etc) are moving away from Final Salary - most private companies offer only money purchase schemes to new employees (and have for some time now). Yet rail staff complain about their conditions.

I can't speak for other TOCs but as of this year South West Trains still offer a Final Salary pension scheme.

 

[HH]

Its been suggested a few times that the DfT and First both "made the same mistake" in some aspects of this.

I wonder whether First used the Department's model to ensure that they "showed the figures the Department wanted", whilst not necessarily agreeing with the methodology, and having modelled the same thing themselves internally for their own consideration.

That doesn't sound like DfT, but if they did it then it would certainly be an error of process.

Note that First were originally told £205m, according to them, and it was lowered to £190m after they challenged it. It has not been said what form that challenge took, but...

Virgin said they were originally given a figure of £71m. They asked how that number had been arrived at. They were never given an answer, but the amount was lowered to £40m.

It doesn't give me a lot of comfort that the process was a rigorous one.

 

[jon0844]

In other words for three years running Rail has been 3% better off than the general populace. Against some groups, like local government (no increase at all for two years), the divergence is much greater. Guess what increases would have been paid under BR?

How much was staff in general as against the drivers? I say this because when the drivers are threatening action for more pay (and usually get it because of the power they have), other rail staff are often somewhat resentful as they consider their jobs as easily replaceable. Which they probably are.

 

[Caped Crusader]

Virgin Drivers were supposedly one pay rise away from £60,000, which isn't too shabby. Most Drivers at other TOCs are in the 40% tax bracket. Crow's men and women have done well from privatisation - however much he'd hate to admit it.

Ok I'll bite:
There are 3 main unions in the rail industry:

Train drivers traditionally belong to ASLEF.
Operational (Signalers, platform, track staff) traditionally belong to the RMT.
Clerical staff (Ticket Office, managers, back office) traditionally belong to TSSA.

Bob Crow is General Secretary of the RMT.
Most of the Virgin train drivers wouldn't give a crap about Bob, as their union leader would be Mick Whelan of ASLEF.

The vast majority of rail workers are employed below the UK average wage of around 30k per year.

Never let reality get in the way of a good story.....

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Care to explain the 29% real term increase in staffing costs then since 1994?

Drivers.

 

[Realfish]

You didn't mention Simon Burns who is supposed to be in charge of Rail Strategy at the DfT.
His input was feeble and seemed to be solely about avoiding ministerial blame.
Agreed
Tom Smith at least knew his subject.
Agreed
The earlier BBC journo seemed very muddled as well, and contradicted herself.
Allegra Stratton, I think. Not very good was she. Did she say that the SoS was still sticking to the 'all is OK' line when he appeared before the TSC last week. If I'm correct that apppearance was three weeks ago.
They find covering party political conferences much easier than the rail industry.
Clearly

.....

 

[Pumbaa]

Drivers.

Oh I completely agree - I was just providing context for the poster concerned.

For my tuppenny's worth I think drivers are significantly overpaid, Guards/TM/dispatch/other safety critical underpaid.

 

[HH]

How much was staff in general as against the drivers? I say this because when the drivers are threatening action for more pay (and usually get it because of the power they have), other rail staff are often somewhat resentful as they consider their jobs as easily replaceable. Which they probably are.

Agreed Drivers tend to get a better deal than other staff, but recently the differences have been much smaller, in some cases non-existent.

 

[jon0844]

While the other staff may moan about the pay to drivers, I doubt they'd do too much to change things given how many will put in for driver training if they can!

 

[YorkshireRider]

How much was staff in general as against the drivers? I say this because when the drivers are threatening action for more pay (and usually get it because of the power they have), other rail staff are often somewhat resentful as they consider their jobs as easily replaceable. Which they probably are.

I can only speak for GNER/NXEC/EC, but all pay rises were the same for all staff (excluding level 2 managers or above). Drivers have recieved the same as everyone else. Usually the deal agreed is x% or RPI, which ever is the greater, or some years it has been RPI+1 or 2%

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Ok I'll bite:
There are 3 main unions in the rail industry:

Train drivers traditionally belong to ASLEF.
Operational (Signalers, platform, track staff) traditionally belong to the RMT.
Clerical staff (Ticket Office, managers, back office) traditionally belong to TSSA.

Bob Crow is General Secretary of the RMT.
Most of the Virgin train drivers wouldn't give a crap about Bob, as their union leader would be Mick Whelan of ASLEF.

The vast majority of rail workers are employed below the UK average wage of around 30k per year.

Never let reality get in the way of a good story.....

Agreed.

In My TOC Drivers (almost all of whom are in Aslef) seem to hold the company to ransom every year, with withdrawal of rest day working (Aslef decides whether Drivers can work overtime or not - it is not down to the driver's to decide for themselves) and various other threats regularly banded around. Their conditions, and rostering principles seem very good to me. I believe their pay is around the £44,000 mark. Guards are on around £24,800 whilst station staff grades are around £16,000 - £21,000 ish depending on job.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can only speak for GNER/NXEC/EC, but all pay rises were the same for all staff (excluding level 2 managers or above). Drivers have recieved the same as everyone else. Usually the deal agreed is x% or RPI, which ever is the greater, or some years it has been RPI+1 or 2%

Whilst this is often the case now, it is not always the case, and may not have always been so in the past - which is why you have the huge differences between grades, and between the same grades at different TOCs. And of course 3% of £45,000 is more than 3% of £25,000, and only increases the gap further each year.

 

[jon0844]

I can only speak for GNER/NXEC/EC, but all pay rises were the same for all staff (excluding level 2 managers or above). Drivers have recieved the same as everyone else. Usually the deal agreed is x% or RPI, which ever is the greater, or some years it has been RPI+1 or 2%

What did the level 2 managers and above get? I know, access to the executive bathroom...

http://facedl.com/fvideo.php?f=auiqkiuiuwxe&family-guy-executive-bathroom

 

[Realfish]

That doesn't sound like DfT, but if they did it then it would certainly be an error of process.

Note that First were originally told £205m, according to them, and it was lowered to £190m after they challenged it. It has not been said what form that challenge took, but...

Virgin said they were originally given a figure of £71m. They asked how that number had been arrived at. They were never given an answer, but the amount was lowered to £40m.

It doesn't give me a lot of comfort that the process was a rigorous one.

It's interesting to re-read this from the TSC transcript:


Q536 Chair: Was there a point during the assessment process where you were called in to discuss the nature of the risk and before the decision was made about what financial provision you would be required to make?

Vernon Barker: If I understand the question correctly, we respond to the invitation to tender and we present our bid. We put in a certain level of funding requirement at our own behest in terms of the risk that we see within the bid to meet the Department for Transport’s solvency tests. The Department for Transport would then come back to us, as they did after we had submitted our bid, to say that they felt the solvency requirements should be "Y’" and would we put that amount of money in, hence the reason it was £200 million. We say yes and then we move on to the chosen bidder-

Q537 Chair: What kind of discussion took place at that point and when did that happen?

Vernon Barker: That would have happened a few weeks before the award. The discussion was that their assessment of risk differed from ours, which probably isn’t surprising. We have a very confident view of all of the different delivery plans that we are intending to do. They have a slightly more cautious one, which you would perhaps expect them to take. They sought some higher level of funding. They moved it up to the £200 million, past where we had already predicted it was required. We feel that it doesn’t need the £200 million but we were prepared to move there. There was a very short discussion, "Will you present further insurance"-I think that was the term used earlier-to cover our concerns?" We said yes and then we moved on to the next stage.

Q538 Chair: Was there a negotiation before you reached that figure?

Vernon Barker: Not with the Department, no. It was, "Will you meet this figure?"

Q539 Chair: It was yes or no, or was there some discussion about it?

Tim O’Toole: There can be a negotiation.

Q540 Chair: But was there?

Tim O’Toole: In this case, the negotiation was primarily internal. It was our deciding.

Vernon Barker: There wasn’t so much negotiation as clarification of the requirement and the level needed. Once we had helped them understand our numbers better, their level of funding actually came down.

Q541 Chair: So in the course of your discussion at this point the requirement from the Department was reduced; is that right?

Tim O’Toole: Just marginally. It was a very small amount.

Q542 Chair: It was reduced by how much?

Vernon Barker: Only £15 million, I think; a very small amount.

Q543 Chair: It was reduced by £15 million as a result of your discussion with them.

Vernon Barker: Yes.

 

[HH]

Ok I'll bite:
There are 3 main unions in the rail industry:

Train drivers traditionally belong to ASLEF.
Operational (Signalers, platform, track staff) traditionally belong to the RMT.
Clerical staff (Ticket Office, managers, back office) traditionally belong to TSSA.

You seem to have ignored the Engineers (UNITE). Also RMT have muscled in on a lot of former TSSA members.

The vast majority of rail workers are employed below the UK average wage of around 30k per year.

This is misleading. Apart from Drivers & Engineers, senior TO staff generally get more than £30k too, and various supervisors (sometimes called managers, but subject to collective bargaining). In an average commuter TOC that probably accounts for over 40% of staff.

In any case, as I stated previously, like for like rail staff are generally better paid than comparators in other industries. That drivers are so overpaid (and we know why) does not mean that other groups are badly paid, despite the envy that the difference engenders.

Never let reality get in the way of a good story.....

Quite.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The vast majority of rail workers are employed below the UK average wage of around 30k per year.

Where did you find the information that the UK 2012 average wage was circa £30,000 per annum?

 

[jon0844]

Rail staff (not all, but many) also enjoy some good perks do they not?

If you're not agency or on a part-time contract, don't you get good discounts on rail travel (and free travel to/from work?). Most people have to deduct travel costs from their salary, which can be in the thousands every year.

 

[HH]

It's interesting to re-read this from the TSC transcript:

SNIP

Q543 Chair: It was reduced by £15 million as a result of your discussion with them.

Vernon Barker: Yes.

Yes, so it went from £205m to £190m after First "helped them understand our numbers better".

That's not the same as they both used the same model and came up with the same number. If DfT had given First the model, and not other bidders, that would be a very serious breach of process. I very much doubt that this happened.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Rail staff (not all, but many) also enjoy some good perks do they not?

If you're not agency or on a part-time contract, don't you get good discounts on rail travel (and free travel to/from work?). Most people have to deduct travel costs from their salary, which can be in the thousands every year.

Absolutely. When I was computing salaries of managers to compare against outside companies I factored in both the free travel and the pension, and calculated the benefit as somewhere between three and ten thousand pounds. Of course it can be worth rather less, but from what I've seen once you are established you make good use of the travel perk, and you'd be daft not to join the pension if you are full time.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What did the level 2 managers and above get?

At First Group Senior Managers have been held to below inflation rises for several years. Needless to say this has given rise to both resentment, and some localised chicanery (reorganisations anyone?) to get around the restriction.

 

[EM2]

Where did you find the information that the UK 2012 average wage was circa £30,000 per annum?

The most recent ONS data I can find suggests £26,244 as an average UK salary
http://www.averageuksalary.co.uk/uk-salary-statistics/

 

[HH]

The most recent ONS data I can find suggests £26,244 as an average UK salary
http://www.averageuksalary.co.uk/uk-salary-statistics/

I don't have much data to hand, but one TOC's average is around £33,500.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19819569

Tim O'Toole explains that he may be suing DfT...

 

[YorkshireRider]

What did the level 2 managers and above get? I know, access to the executive bathroom...

http://facedl.com/fvideo.php?f=auiqkiuiuwxe&family-guy-executive-bathroom

.
They were all subject to their own negotiations. Im mainly refering to GNER when i say level 2 and above managers, im not really sure how EC grades them or pays them. Theres also much less of them than in the GNER days.

 

[johnnychips]

Train drivers a very responsible job needing a great deal of skill and knowledge. It seems self-evident they should be paid above the average wage. Train drivers are not forced to join a trade union.

If British Rail still existed, you don't think the unions would be any less pressing in fighting for their members' interests simply because it was a nationalised industry, surely?

 

[Caped Crusader]

Where did you find the information that the UK 2012 average wage was circa £30,000 per annum?

I guessed, just like most people do on here about rail staff salaries.

 

[HH]

If British Rail still existed, you don't think the unions would be any less pressing in fighting for their members' interests simply because it was a nationalised industry, surely?

No, but it would be much harder for them, as is pretty much proved by how much better off they are now than under BR.

That they should be above average pay is probably universally accepted. That they should be twice average pay (and some a fair bit more), probably not.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I guessed, just like most people do on here about rail staff salaries.

You should work for DfT, they also Fidel the numbers.

 

[Caped Crusader]

In any case, as I stated previously, like for like rail staff are generally better paid than comparators in other industries. That drivers are so overpaid (and we know why) does not mean that other groups are badly paid, despite the envy that the difference engenders.


Quite.

When I'm driving to work at 4am or finishing a shift at 1am, I don't see these masses of comparitive workers causing traffic jams on our nations highways.

And yes I have to drive to work as I have to be on shift for the 1st train or finish after the last.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

The most recent ONS data I can find suggests £26,244 as an average UK salary
http://www.averageuksalary.co.uk/uk-salary-statistics/

Which is only a few £hundred less than what I get paid for working early shifts starting at 0400, late shifts finishing at 0100, night shifts, Saturdays, getting sworn at, threatened, having to single handedly deal with the drunks, ne'er do wells and assorted other idiots who frequent trains at certain times of the day, have all but 5 days of my annual leave entitlement decided for me and arranged in weekly blocks that I don't particularly want.

I don't particularly moan about it as I enjoy my job, but it does sometimes rile me when you hear people saying, or I am told, that I should get a proper job as I am paid too much for doing too little.

And the travel to and from work perk is fine, but it isn't universal, and is no use really as 95% of the time I need to drive as I either start too early or finish too late to catch the train. And nor are PRIV rate tickets much use either - for all but the short journeys the public rate Advance fare is normally better value - in fact I often have to pay more than the public as I am not entitled to a railcard.

But would I swap it for another job? No. It is an industry I like. And am I doing it just because I want to be a driver? No. I don't want to be a driver at all.

Anyway, back on topic...

 

[MCW]

First group never deserved it, they are a waste of space on this planet. The future don't look good for first group now... not in the UK.

also Virging deserve it they have done a really good job over the last 15 years so why get rid of something that works?

Branson hasn't scared the government. He has made a point. a good one at that. I also think first wouldn't have been able to financially sustain anything anyway.

 

[johnnychips]

That they should be above average pay is probably universally accepted. That they should be twice average pay (and some a fair bit more), probably not.

Market forces then? Rail travel numbers are increasing, so rail staff should be paid more. I think, on reflection, your argument may have some validity, since BR (provided their political masters agreed) could say 'stuff it, let rail staff strike until they run out of money', whereas private companies could end up paying a penalty if they don't meet targets, so they have to pay staff a decent wage to run the services.

Of course, the downside to this is that the railway companies may then decide to cut 'non-essential staff' to save money.

Complicated, isn't it!

 

[fgwrich]

First group never deserved it, they are a waste of space on this planet. The future don't look good for first group now... not in the UK.

also Virging deserve it they have done a really good job over the last 15 years so why get rid of something that works?

Branson hasn't scared the government. He has made a point. a good one at that. I also think first wouldn't have been able to financially sustain anything anyway.

Oh dear, this argument again. Have you actually read any of the comments through this and the previous threads on the West Coast debate? Just because they may be rather useless on your local bus operations side, dosent mean they are a waste of space. Indeed, have you seen who the current Train Operator of the Year is? Ah yes, First Transpennine Express - for the second time. So they must be doing something good up there. Also, down here in our patch FGW works very well - yes it has it's flaws, but the bulk of those are rolling stock shortages.

As for Verging?. Ill leave that up to someone else to exaplain. Funny how though, they've never really shown much of an inherit interest in expanding their network untill the reccent FG Announcements though.

First's WC Finances are debateable, but who said Virgin couldnt pull it off without having to go cap in hand to the DfT for more public money / revenue support?Ah yes, something they actually are good at!

Looking at what's publicly availible - I prefered the First Group Bid purely from it's list of station improvements to it's idea of increasing the fleet upwards by 11 new units.

 

[johnnychips]

First group never deserved it, they are a waste of space on this planet.

That's a sweeping generalisation, and there are too many of these on the forum. I'm sure parts of the First group do need improvement, but parts are excellent. Their buses are regular in taking me into town, if a bit dear; they take me to Manchester Airport several times a year at a reasonable price and on the occasions trains have been delayed I've received compensation without fuss.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

First group never deserved it, they are a waste of space on this planet. The future don't look good for first group now... not in the UK.

also Virging deserve it they have done a really good job over the last 15 years so why get rid of something that works?

Branson hasn't scared the government. He has made a point. a good one at that. I also think first wouldn't have been able to financially sustain anything anyway.

No company, including Virgin has a right to anything. First have as much right to bid, and potentially win, as anyone else.

I could argue that Virgin don't deserve it as they haven't looked after lots of the stations, made the peak period longer and more expensive, have - on numerous occasions - bullied the government into giving them more money, ruined Cross Country, and have the highest profit margin of any TOC and are therefore taking too much money out of the industry and ripping us tax payers off. I could argue that Stagecoach don't deserve it as once upon a time they had lots of problems with driver shortages and cancelled trains at SWT after they got their numbers wrong - and I went on one of their buses once which was filthy, rattly and the driver a lunatic. I could argue National Express don't deserve it as they made a mess of East Coast. I could argue Arriva don't deserve it as they had problems with ATN, have ruined XC even more, and I don't like their buses. I could argue Abellio shouldn't be involved as all their trains at Northern are a mess internally. We can all think of reasons why a certain company should or shouldn't run a franchise - which is why the franchising process is meant to evaluate all the bids and pick the best.