New law will enshrine ‘right’ of commuters to minimum service during strikes, says Grant Shapps

[sheff1]

How will this draconian measure work?

I do not know how it works, but I have been in France on strike days and the trains shown as guaranteed to run have run where I was travelling.

 

[Raul_Duke]

I've worked without pay to help my department out. Sometimes it's just professional to deal with a backlog or an issue or to help others. I'm a lowly Band 2 office clerk, my take home pay is £16-17k. So yes, I know what it feels when better paid workers go on strike. According to Indeed, a Northern conductor (their term) can expect £23k.

Those “better paid,” workers probably are already doing things unasked and unpaid to help out.

What’s the maximum salary grade that’s allowed by you to protect its conditions?

 

[Raul_Duke]

It amazes me why the Unions don’t put a bid together to run a TOC for themselves?

Is there anything to prevent this?

Apologies if there is but being a long time lurker on the board, it would seem a better solution?

Money. They’re not as rich as the Daily Mail would have you believe. It’s costs a few million to even prepare a bid. Let alone the money you have to bond and front up. I’m sure someone on here will know the figures.

 

[PR1Berske]

Those “better paid,” workers probably are already doing things unasked and unpaid to help out.

What’s the maximum salary grade that’s allowed by you to protect its conditions?

That's a daft question. I'm not anti-Union, I'm not anti-strike. My issue has always been with disproportionate action which grinds the wider economy to a halt.

 

[Raul_Duke]

That's a daft question. I'm not anti-Union, I'm not anti-strike. My issue has always been with disproportionate action which grinds the wider economy to a halt.

But you specifically said you knew how it felt when better paid workers go on strike.

 

[Cestrian]

Money. They’re not as rich as the Daily Mail would have you believe. It’s costs a few million to even prepare a bid. Let alone the money you have to bond and front up. I’m sure someone on here will know the figures.

Makes sense. What if they could put a business case forward and partner with private investment ie demonstrate to outside investors the worth of running the railway their way instead of how others seeking to do it?

Or would DFT defining bid terms prevent it?

If I was RMT or ASLEF knowing I had members who know the industry inside out so well, surely trying this got to be worth a go? Could even use on one franchise to roll out to others if successful?

I realise that this may sound pie in sky Or there would be issues, but from an outsiders position as someone who infrequently needs to use the railway, it looks like an out of the box solution like that is needed rather than going around the same circles time after time, whether that be from a TOC or Union perspective.

 

[transmanche]

I think only the Police are legally unable to strike, or be in a union.

Police officers have been banned from joining a union since 1919, following strikes in 1918 & 1919. The current law stems from the Police Act 1996.

Although isn't there something similar called the police federation?

The Police Federations are exempted from those provisions of the 1996 Act, but the government effectively controls how Police Federations operate (via the Police Federation Regulations 1969).

 

[JamesT]

I would imagine that a minimum service level would require an agreement between the Union and the employer as to how many staff were required to provide that level. The Union would then be responsible for organising the strike in such a way that enough staff continued to show up for work. (Have a rota of striking so everyone gets a turn?)
It doesn’t seem to much of a stretch that if a Union is acting as a collective for the purposes of negotiations, it also acts as one when it comes to strike action. An individual member would lose the ability for independent action, but by joining a Union they’ve already agreed to act on a collective basis?

 

[philthetube]

I've worked without pay to help my department out. Sometimes it's just professional to deal with a backlog or an issue or to help others. I'm a lowly Band 2 office clerk, my take home pay is £16-17k. So yes, I know what it feels when better paid workers go on strike. According to Indeed, a Northern conductor (their term) can expect £23k.

Being professional means that you are paid in your profession soi you are being unprofessional.

What happens if the backlog is not cleared, it either grows or staff are employed to clear it.

your department is either very badly ron with inadequate staff or more likely very well run with a manager who gets loads of brownie points for getting his staff to work unpaid for him.

I have worked unpaid on occasions, either to help out a colleague and let them get away early or even to help out a manager who has made an error and to save them from a tea with no biscuits, however your company is paid to provide goods or services and it is not up to you to subsidise their business.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not being sure of how this would be viewed by the RMT and ASLEF, but if Northern as the franchisee in post were to withdraw all Sunday services at a stroke, stating they had not the available rail staff to run those services on Sundays, what would be the responses be from the RMT and ASLEF?

 

[Bald Rick]

It amazes me why the Unions don’t put a bid together to run a TOC for themselves?

Is there anything to prevent this?

Apologies if there is but being a long time lurker on the board, it would seem a better solution?

They could. But they don’t want to. Why would they? It’s hard work, and they’d be on a hiding to nothing.

Firstly they’d have to bid: £5m - £10m. RMT could afford that, although ASLEF probably couldn’t.

Then they’d have to stump up two bonds, which depending on the TOC could be well into the tens of millions of pounds. It’s quite complicated, but the very simplified version is that one protects the franchising authority from the financial effects of the TOC giving up the franchise if it gets too difficult, and the other is to stop the TOC running away with all the cash it gets when all the annual season tickets are renewed around Christmas.

But even if they jumped all those hurdles, they would still be running a TOC, and be on the receiving end of all the opprobrium that almost every TOC gets.

 

[Bald Rick]

Co-ordination of major works at weekends/bank holidays should be an integral part of the plan for those works. I still don't get why you would want to do that work without being paid ..... but each to their own.

It is an integral part of the plan. And it relies on people like me coming in at weekends / Christmas etc to make it work. And if it goes wrong you stay on.

 

[talltim]

Where was the IT union when thousands of IT works jobs were outsourced to India - where was the flight crew union when the third crew member was removed from the cockpit of airliners - where was the retail workers union when workers in bars, restaurants and shops saw their terms and conditions eroded and contracts moved to part time or zero hours?

Fixed that for you

 

[arb]

You are perfectly entitled to work late or at weekends etc without getting paid, although I really don't get why anyone would want to do so.

Because, if there is a good relationship between the employer and the employee, the result of occasionally doing this is that I am likely to be given flexibility to occasionally leave work early when I have a personal reason for wanting to do so, without having to use up my holiday allowance. It benefits both of us.

If one of us stops playing ball to help out the other (in either direction) then I would fully expect the other side to stop keeping their side of the (unofficial) bargain as well, at which point we both lose out. If the two sides don't trust each other, then I would indeed expect to be paid hourly for any working late that I do, but, equally, I would expect to have to use holiday (or lose pay) if I ever wanted/needed to leave work a couple of hours early.

I admit that my job is about as far removed from the railway (or any job where staff need to be present at specific hours) as you can get, but I would have thought that the principle of providing flexibility both ways where possible is a sign of a healthy workplace.

 

[DarloRich]

Union leaders, particularly in the RMT, need to think very carefully how they respond to this and come up with a sensible plan to undermine it. Sadly I think they lack the mental agility to do so.

I've worked without pay to help my department out. Sometimes it's just professional to deal with a backlog or an issue or to help others. I'm a lowly Band 2 office clerk, my take home pay is £16-17k. So yes, I know what it feels when better paid workers go on strike. According to Indeed, a Northern conductor (their term) can expect £23k.

I suspect this is the nub of the issue with this poster:

I am poorly paid despite being a decent chap who works hard so am a bit envious of people doing what I think is an easy job getting paid loads more than me despite in my view not working as hard as I have to THEN Having the gall to try to ensure they are not treated as badly as I am. Therefore rather than try to improve my situation I want to pull others down to my level.

It is exactly the kind of messaging the Tories have been planting for years and it is sad to see it lapped up and regurgitated so openly.

 

[option]

They don't you know........

So the UCU doesn't do work to rule?
They've done it multiple times, they stop marking exams as it's not part of lecturers contracts.

 

[Taunton]

Do you think BJ gives a flying fig if you can’t get to work? Of course he doesn’t.

You need to read some history. In the run-up to the 2012 London Olympics, Sebastian Coe and all the Olympic Committee stated that they wanted all the Olympic road lanes wholly to themselves for two months or more, and other excessive transport grabs, as had been done in Beijing the previous time. Boris, then as Mayor of London, would not accept this inappropriate disruption, and to the surprise of Coe's lot, who were not used to being argued with, consistently refused to have it. Eventually he talked the government round to the view as well. BJ and Peter Hendy, as Commissioner for Transport, very substantially watered down what the Olympics had demanded. Hendy was able to make the very public statement that "the roads will be closed to the people of London for not one minute longer than is necessary". Coe's embarrassment. Boris's doing.

 

[transmanche]

Hendy was able to make the very public statement that "the roads will be closed to the people of London for not one minute longer than is necessary". Coe's embarrassment. Boris's doing.

So, Peter Hendy's work then. Not Johnson's. That's why Hendy earned £650k per year as Transport Commissioner.

In 2015, even the Mayor's Office said, "He [Hendy] delivered a near-perfect transport plan during the Olympic and Paralympic Games and earned TfL the admiration of passengers from around the world."

 

[ainsworth74]

I think we managed to avoid going wildly off-topic onto the well trod ground of the various politics threads as can be found in General Discussion for about twelve hours. This thread is now locked until we have some meat on the bones of what is being proposed. An idea has been put forward but until there is some sort of white paper, draft legislation, briefing note or similar there really is very little to discuss. And seeing various people just cannot help themselves rather than having yet more political chat this thread is locked. If you all want to talk politics you are more than welcome to do so just not on this thread when it is clearly off-topic. So I would suggest having a look at the several threads currently running in General Discussion.

When there is more detail please feel free to report this post and the Forum Staff will look at re-opening it to allow comment what is actually proposed.

 

[ainsworth74]

And is if by magic there is now some detail thanks to the Queen's Speech which I will paste below. However first let me set some ground rules. This thread is not to discuss wider political issues. I.e. Brexit, the outcome of the recent election, the trustworthyness or otherwise of Boris, the problems or otherwise with Corbyn. Those topics are all suitable for discussion within the General Discussion section of the Forum. This thread is only concerned with the forthcoming legislation regarding minimum service levels. Any posts not related to that are liable for deltion. I would ask all members to keep that in mind. If you see a post which you think is off-topic rather than replying to it please report it. Replying to off-topic posts increases our workload and makes it harder for us to deal with problems as they arise.

Thank you

And now, the main event:

Railways minimum service levels legislation

“To ensure people can depend on the transport network, measures will be developed to provide for minimum levels of service during transport strikes.”

The purpose of the legislation is to:
● Reduce the disruption caused to the public during rail strikes, while preserving rail workers’ right to strike.
● Allow railway companies to plan services more effectively, well in advance.

The main benefit of the legislation would be:
● Maintaining a level of service that ensures the public is not disproportionately affected by strike action and can conduct their personal and/or family lives, and to access healthcare, education or employment.
● Mitigating against the overall economic cost of disrupted travel to passengers.

The main elements of the legislation are that:
● Minimum Service Agreements will set out the minimum service pattern to be provided during rail strikes, and the minimum number and nature of staff who shall work to provide that service.
● Any strike against a rail employer shall be unlawful unless a Minimum Service Agreement is in place. If the Minimum Service Agreement is not honoured, the strike shall be unlawful and injunctions or damages may be sought against the union in the normal way.
● We will consult on how best to implement this in a proportionate way, including ensuring that sanctions are not directed at individual workers, and how this would interact with the wider industrial relations framework.

Key facts
● Almost 200 days of rail strikes have taken place, or are in progress, since 2016.
● Transport workers went on strike over three times more than the UK average last year, causing significant disruption to passengers and the public.
● The Trade Union Act 2016 increased the thresholds required for strike action on essential public services.

Territorial extent and application
● The legislation’s provisions would extend and apply to England, Wales and Scotland. Employment and trade union law is reserved in Scotland and Wales, but devolved to Northern Ireland.

Source (pdf warning)

 

[Robertj21a]

The proposals actually seem very sensible, and should receive widespread support from most passengers.

 

[talltim]

There still remains the question asked earlier, will the minimum defined level be higher than Northern and TPE manage when there are no strikes?

 

[Robertj21a]

There still remains the question asked earlier, will the minimum defined level be higher than Northern and TPE manage when there are no strikes?

What figures are you using for Northern and TPE ?

 

[mpthomson]

It's been reported over some news channels today that nurses over in northern Ireland are on strike over pay inconsistencies with those in Britain. Guessing the future legislation is only aimed towards railway staff?

In this instance the nurses had to ensure that there was adequate cover for wards etc, it wasn’t an all out strike. A nurse’s professional registration would be under threat if their omission of care (ie being on strike) resulted in harm to a patient. So that mechanism already exists but via different means.

This is also the one of the major reasons that the Doctor’s strikes fizzled out a couple of years ago, grown ups had a word and made it clear that any harm to patients could lead to referrals to the GMC.

 

[mpthomson]

Police officers have been banned from joining a union since 1919, following strikes in 1918 & 1919. The current law stems from the Police Act 1996.

The Police Federations are exempted from those provisions of the 1996 Act, but the government effectively controls how Police Federations operate (via the Police Federation Regulations 1969).

Armed Forces can’t strike either.

 

[sheff1]

There still remains the question asked earlier, will the minimum defined level be higher than Northern and TPE manage when there are no strikes?

If the minimum levels are in line with those I encountered in France both TPE & Northern would struggle to meet them on some routes if they continued with their current number of cancellations.

In such circumstances its would seem appropriate to replace "union" with "TOC" in the following - "If the Minimum Service Agreement is not honoured ........ injunctions or damages may be sought against the union in the normal way."

 

[PR1Berske]

Union leaders, particularly in the RMT, need to think very carefully how they respond to this and come up with a sensible plan to undermine it. Sadly I think they lack the mental agility to do so.



I suspect this is the nub of the issue with this poster:

I am poorly paid despite being a decent chap who works hard so am a bit envious of people doing what I think is an easy job getting paid loads more than me despite in my view not working as hard as I have to THEN Having the gall to try to ensure they are not treated as badly as I am. Therefore rather than try to improve my situation I want to pull others down to my level.

It is exactly the kind of messaging the Tories have been planting for years and it is sad to see it lapped up and regurgitated so openly.

You've suggested that I've said things that I actually haven't said.

 

[mrcheek]

If the minimum levels are in line with those I encountered in France both TPE & Northern would struggle to meet them on some routes if they continued with their current number of cancellations.

In such circumstances its would seem appropriate to replace "union" with "TOC" in the following - "If the Minimum Service Agreement is not honoured ........ injunctions or damages may be sought against the union in the normal way."

TOCs already pay a penalty for all cancelled services

 

[sheff1]

TOCs already pay a penalty for all cancelled services

Which is something completely different.

 

[pt_mad]

Question: If a union were instructed to ensure X number of train crew (who were due to work under normal circumstances) report for duty on a strike day, and the train operator decided to utilise contingency train crew on top, could the impact of the strike result in very little difference to service?
In which case would industrial action have much bargaining power anymore?