New offer made to RMT by Rail Delivery Group

[Starmill]

Labour being in power won't necessarily resolve the disputes TBH

It absolutely wouldn't mean they'd be resolved just like that no. But by definition they'd be taking a very, very different policy approach to public services and as a result these disputes wouldn't be being stored up over time in the same way.

 

[12LDA28C]

It's a little unseemly to make multiple posts simply complaining that people are posting things you happen to disagree with. If someone posts something you are concerned is against the forum's rules you always have the option to report the post and deal with the matter privately. If you don't think it has broken the rules it's a central tenet of public debate that you can engage with the disagreement on its merits. I haven't noticed anyone else trying to suggest that other people are wrong for giving their views on the situation.

Not as unseemly as recommending that railway staff of whom there are clearly a good number on this forum, get back to work, be thankful for what they've got and put up with whatever erosion of work/life balance and Ts & Cs the Government foists upon them.

Would those same people hold a similar view if they worked in the industry and it was they who were affected? I would have sympathy for staff in any industry who were facing the same challenges, whether I am directly affected or not.

 

[Facing Back]

Forgive me, I hadn’t realised I was able to mark homework, books and assessments, reply to emails, plan lessons and teach a class at the same time. Thank you for clearing that up.

slacker

 

[Starmill]

Not as unseemly as recommending that railway staff of whom there are clearly a good number on this forum, get back to work, be thankful for what they've got and put up with whatever erosion of work/life balance and Ts & Cs the Government foists upon them.

Would those same people hold a similar view if they worked in the industry and it was they who were affected?

I think what I don't understand is why it's obviously necessary for some people to take such a tribal view on these lines. Why is there a need for instinctual loyalty based on someone working in a very specifically defined area? Can't people analyse the facts for themselves and come to their own conclusions based on them, rather than having to take the position that everyone else in their "in group" takes?

I could appreciate it if people were blaming the 2019 Conservative voters for the mess, because although they're little culpable for what's currently happening they'd be far more sensible targets of anger. But that's not what comes across, people just want have a go at anyone they perceive as "not in the industry" (though they usually fail to define that - or define it in an astonishingly narrow way). Really it's immature - Sharon Graham to take an example isn't handling it at all like that.

 

[ar10642]

Labour being in power won't necessarily resolve the disputes TBH

I think there is more chance of it, they aren't going to want all this going on during their honeymoon period, they'll want it sorted.

 

[Annetts key]

I do slightly disagree that no union wants to go on strike, the RMT have the highest strike record of any of the transport unions and that was before the current dispute and this is not the only disputes they're involved in.

Rather ironically, due to privatisation and the chopping up of the various parts of what was once BR, the result is many more disputes. Some don’t make it to industrial action, being settled by negotiation. But unfortunately some do. And these, if they have a significant affect on services are noticed by passengers and the media.

Because the RMT represents a wide variety of members across the railway (and has members in bus companies and other transportation and maritime companies), it’s always likely that it will appear that there are more industrial disputes.

The RMT and it’s members would much rather there be a negotiated settlement. The dilemma is how to best protect the members T&Cs, working practices and get a reasonable pay rise. Especially if the employer is insisting that there has to be changes to members T&Cs and/or working practices.

 

[ar10642]

Would those same people hold a similar view if they worked in the industry and it was they who were affected? I would have sympathy for staff in any industry who were facing the same challenges, whether I am directly affected or not.

The majority of people in the country have only one choice when changes are proposed that they don't like, accept it or leave.

 

[Starmill]

I think there is more chance of it, they aren't going to want all this going on during their honeymoon period, they'll want it sorted.

It would certainly make a genuine meaningful improvement. That doesn't mean that there wouldn't be any disputes. Regardless, though, any General Election isn't likely for some time yet.

 

[dk1]

Would those same people hold a similar view if they worked in the industry and it was they who were affected? I would have sympathy for staff in any industry who were facing the same challenges, whether I am directly affected or not.

You would like to think so but there are some bitter examples on this forum and there always has been. You just have to take them with the contempt they deserve & dismiss. It’s not difficult to do.

 

[Starmill]

The majority of people in the country have only one choice when changes are proposed that they don't like, accept it or leave.

People can always hold out and wait to be dismissed, then asses if there's any Tribunal claim. However if the employer does handle everything correctly and is meticulous in their observation of the law this is likely. It's still two options of course.

 

[dk1]

The majority of people in the country have only one choice when changes are proposed that they don't like, accept it or leave.

The railways however breaks the mold on this & always has done hence the interest in our T&Cs in threads like this.

 

[ar10642]

It would certainly make a genuine meaningful improvement. That doesn't mean that there wouldn't be any disputes. Regardless, though, any General Election isn't likely for some time yet.

Agh I didn't realise they could drag it out until 2025. I thought it was 2024 for some reason.

 

[Thirteen]

I think what I don't understand is why it's obviously necessary for some people to take such a tribal view on these lines. Why is there a need for instinctual loyalty based on someone working in a very specifically defined area? Can't people analyse the facts for themselves and come to their own conclusions based on them, rather than having to take the position that everyone else in their "in group" takes?

I could appreciate it if people were blaming the 2019 Conservative voters for the mess, because although they're little culpable for what's currently happening they'd be far more sensible targets of anger. But that's not what comes across, people just want have a go at anyone they perceive as "not in the industry" (though they usually fail to define that - or define it in an astonishingly narrow way). Really it's immature - Sharon Graham to take an example isn't handling it at all like that.

Sharon Graham I have a lot of respect for because she gets on with it and pick the right battles whereas others do seem to do a lot of showboating to the media.

Rather ironically, due to privatisation and the chopping up of the various parts of what was once BR, the result is many more disputes. Some don’t make it to industrial action, being settled by negotiation. But unfortunately some do. And these, if they have a significant affect on services are noticed by passengers and the media.

Because the RMT represents a wide variety of members across the railway (and has members in bus companies and other transportation and maritime companies), it’s always likely that it will appear that there are more industrial disputes.

The RMT and it’s members would much rather there be a negotiated settlement. The dilemma is how to best protect the members T&Cs, working practices and get a reasonable pay rise. Especially if the employer is insisting that there has to be changes to members T&Cs and/or working practices.

Being a Londoner, I have noticed that if the Tube network has strike action, it's usually the RMT that is involved in the dispute and as I've mentioned, I don't think there has ever been a year aside from 2020 where there wasn't a strike or industrial action on the Tube and TfL aren't controlled by the DfT so you'd think relations would be better although TBF the number of strikes on the Underground was only a handful in 2022.

 

[12LDA28C]

The majority of people in the country have only one choice when changes are proposed that they don't like, accept it or leave.

So rail staff should do the same then yes?

I'll say again for the record that I believe some of the changes to Ts & Cs for TOC staff are not only ill-advised and unfair but will lead to increased fatigue at work and quite possibly to an increase in incidents related to that fatigue. But no doubt that is an acceptable risk to take, in your opinion.

 

[ar10642]

So rail staff should do the same then yes?

I'll say again for the record that I believe some of the changes to Ts & Cs for TOC staff are not only ill-advised and unfair but will lead to increased fatigue at work and quite possibly to an increase in incidents related to that fatigue. But no doubt that is an acceptable risk to take, in your opinion.

This was in response to a suggestion that people from outside the industry couldn't possibly understand what it was like to have T&Cs changed.

 

[Starmill]

Agh I didn't realise they could drag it out until 2025. I thought it was 2024 for some reason.

They could choose to hold it on the same date as the pre-detefmined local elections across England, 2 May 2024, it would save a little bit of money to do so and of course it would strongly encourage participation in the areas which are electing locally. However they do not have to.

 

[Thirteen]

They could choose to hold it on the same date as the pre-detefmined local elections across England, 2 May 2024, it would save a little bit of money to do so and of course it would strongly encourage participation in the areas which are electing locally. However they do not have to.

The latest they can hold a General Election is 24th January 2025 but I doubt they want to hold a Winter Election again, May or June 2024 IMO is more likely.

 

[ar10642]

The latest they can hold a General Election is 24th January 2025 but I doubt they want to hold a Winter Election again, May or June 2024 IMO is more likely.

Let's just hope this dispute is not still dragging on then...

 

[12LDA28C]

This was in response to a suggestion that people from outside the industry couldn't possibly understand what it was like to have T&Cs changed.

I'm sure they can and may well have experienced similar themselves. If they were unfortunate enough to have no union representation in that situation then that's too bad - maybe a more favourable outcome may have been reached if things were different.

 

[Facing Back]

So rail staff should do the same then yes?

I'll say again for the record that I believe some of the changes to Ts & Cs for TOC staff are not only ill-advised and unfair but will lead to increased fatigue at work and quite possibly to an increase in incidents related to that fatigue. But no doubt that is an acceptable risk to take, in your opinion.

Then perhaps the RMT could go back to the table as say "we see what you are trying to achieve but we have concerns around fatigue. Here are some suggestions which will get you the same results but mitigate that risk".

 

[12LDA28C]

Then perhaps the RMT could go back to the table as say "we see what you are trying to achieve but we have concerns around fatigue. Here are some suggestions which will get you the same results but mitigate that risk".

That would be a very sensible approach, although I'm not entirely sure exactly what results are expected from some of the proposals in the document as they seem utterly unworkable. But hey, if it goes to a referendum later this week as seems likely, the members will have the final say.

 

[Facing Back]

That would be a very sensible approach, although I'm not entirely sure exactly what results are expected from some of the proposals in the document as they seem utterly unworkable. But hey, if it goes to a referendum later this week as seems likely, the members will have the final say.

I suppose at the abstract the same principle would apply - work to make them workable or we go back to the table where they try again in isolation to make them more workable and we go round the circle with further pain to all and an increasing risk that the wrong solution may be imposed when sensible tweaks could make all of the difference.

And I'm sure that there are working groups trying to do exactly that in the background. Both sides are maintaining a position and I really hope that much of that is a public facade.

The members should have the final say on the proposal - do you think the RMT will put it to them this time or go round the loop one more time? If there is polishing which can be done to get it to a likely yes then I would say go round one more time.

If the members say no then the next move is with the TOCS of course.

 

[the sniper]

The members should have the final say on the proposal - do you think the RMT will put it to them this time or go round the loop one more time? If there is polishing which can be done to get it to a likely yes then I would say go round one more time.

You can't polish a turd. Particularly a pile of the stuff.

 

[Facing Back]

You can't polish a turd. Particularly a pile of the stuff.

You can cover it with glitter

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jan 2023 ==

You can't polish a turd. Particularly a pile of the stuff.

We’ve recently adopted a puppy from a rescue home. He is lovely but I know much much more about turds than a man my age ever needs to.

 

[Mag_seven]

OK I think we all need to cool off a bit now.

Lets see what the RMT have say later today about what they are going to do next in this dispute.