New offer made to RMT by Rail Delivery Group

[MDB1images]

Wow, reading the document was an eye opener, I row back on what I put yesterday, be amazed if the RMT leadership put it to a vote!
This is Conductor RestructingI version 2, except it's just for a low pay rise.

 

[the sniper]

But how would that happen? The only way that the number of Saturday rest days goes down is either through an increase in service requirements, a reduction in establishment or someone else getting more Saturday rest days.

More turns/spares on a Saturday, particularly if some places are going to see a reduction of work in the week, combined with a 'natural' reduction in establishments? I can't see them cutting the Saturday service.

 

[pt_mad]

But you are only exempt if the Company can employ someone else to cover it. If they can't then you have to work:

"Where an existing employee (where Sundays is currently outside the working week without a contractual commitment to work) does not currently work any rostered Sundays then they could give 12-months’ notice to not work Sundays as an extra weekend shift providing extra weekend staff can be employed to cover. If cover cannot be provided, then the employee would be required to work their rostered Sundays (the ‘commitment to work’ stands)."



It isn't that good. The legal minimum for someone working a full time job is 28 days per year in total.

But what the document doesn't define is what is considered "a week".

At the moment my leave is defined in days - I get 30 days per year.

If "a week" is considered to be 5 days then this is an increase in 3 days overall. (5 x 5 = 25 + 8 =33). However I could loose 2 of those each year because of the new arrangements for Christmas Day and Boxing Day.

However a separate section of the documeont (in respect of spare turns) says "the principle that three days’ work constitutes a week’s work." If that is the case then 3 x 5 = 15 + 8 = 23 days, which is 7 days less than now. This would be below the legal minimum of 28 days, however that is based around a 5 day week. The Gov.uk website says that someone who only works a 3 day week is only legally entitled to 16.8 days leave a year.






I am open minded to modernisation and change, and was hopeful that this new proposal could lead to and end to this dispute, and that I would be able to vote yes.

When I saw the headline bullet points yesterday I considered that - being selfish - not many of the proposed changes affected me that much so would therefore be acceptable. I already have Committed Sundays for example, so there is no change there.

However the devil is in the detail. And there is plenty of detail now which I do not like.

Take Spares. The document says that TOCS *MUST* produce rosters with full weeks of spares. It also says that if you have a full week of spare then you have unlimited movement and can be given any duty no matter what time it is. That means you could be moved from earlies to lates and all over the place. Even worse is that they can change your rest days at a weeks notice. So if you thought your days off would be Wednesday and Thursday a week before they can unilaterally change them to be Friday and Saturday, for example. This makes it absolutely impossible to plan anything outside work at all. A family meal? Going to a Wedding? Going to a concert or event which you need to buy tickets for? Well you can't book the day as leave to guarantee you can attend as you are on rest day so aren't in work in the first place.... until a week before when they move your rest day to a different day.

Can someone point me to other jobs where your manager can just move your weekend days off at a weeks notice and you can't do anything about it? How on earth do you plan anything at all?

It also implies that when spare changes can be made on the day of the duty subject to you being given notice. Currently I have 72 hours posted notice - i.e. they cannot alter my hours of duty and booking on times less than 72 hours before the day. This document says this reduces to 48 hours from the start of the actual shift (not the actual day concerned) but that also "Further changes can occur up to and including on the day because of service requirements with adequate notice to staff affected.". So I am meant to start work at 1200 tomorrow for a 7 hour duty finishing at 1900. I get a phone call or email in the morning saying I must now turn up at 1500 instead for a 10 hour duty not finishing till 0100? (as they can also extend your day by up to 3 hours now) This might affect out of work commitments, travel arrangements, childcare etc etc.

See also my comments about Annual Leave above, as there is no clarity on the exact numbers of days etc. The way annual leave MUST be allocated is also significantly less flexible than my current arrangements
There is no stipulation for minimum number of rest days (in fact the document expressly says that TOCS can't have a minimum number of rest days) and also states that Sunday coverage should include spares etc like any other day. There is no stipulation for a maximum turn length.
There is no stipulation for a length of spare turn (other than that it must be flexible and based around the average turn length at the depot).
For all the above it just says that the company decides. (The document elsewhere states that the RMT can not dispute or fail to agree anything implemented as a result of this agreement being accepted).
The combination of the above means (assuming the timetable stays the same and the current diagrams remain broadly similar) I could go from doing a 4 day week with 1 committed Sunday every 3 weeks (so 13 days in work every 3 weeks) to a 5 day week with 2 committed Sundays every 3 weeks (so 17 days in work every 3 weeks). So I could loose 4 days off every 3 weeks - that could involve me working an extra 60+ days per year for little to no extra money save for some extra overtime payments for the extra committed Sundays.


The stuff in regards attendance management, sickness arrangements, etc; the type of work you can do; training principles and methods; new technology; and other such things I am not that bothered about (if anything I have often thought lots of them are a bit too generous). I could even cope with the extended range of movement on spare duties i.e +/- 3 hours with a 3 hour increase in length of day (so you could finish 6 hours later than planned for example).

However my days off are my days off. I like to plan my life, go on day trips or short breaks, go out for meals, go to events. The fact that my days off can be changed at a weeks notice making planning anything like that almost impossible for much of the year is a big no no. Much like the RMT red line on DOO - this is my red line.
For example - In April this year I've been invited to a friend's wedding. By coincidence it is on a Saturday when I am rest day. So I can go. So I will book a hotel, make travel arrangements etc. But come the new rostering arrangements I may find out a week before the wedding that the Saturday is not my rest day after all, they may move my rest day to Wednesday instead. So suddenly, at a weeks notice, I can't go. Great. Sorry, no. That is unacceptable.

I'd rather take no pay rise and just stay as I am thank you.

It also doesn't take into account the threat of redundancy.
There's no point accepting a pay deal with 5 years worth pay rises etc, if in December 2024 we can be made redundant and forced to sign up to the lower salary (if we want to say on the railway).

Just one of many significant potential changes casually included in Appendix 5:



A life changing, fundamental change to the job for many which would probably make the job untenable for a good few I know, just one line in a 22 page document...

An almost funny thing is, after all the fuss about walking time, it's one of the few things that according to this probably wouldn't change either much or at all. I guess they realised it was necessary after all.

What proportion could actually happily (willingly vote for) any arrangement where potentially they could be given any different rest days on a said rostered week without being able to plan well ahead?
Aside from planning leisure, what about appointments such as opticians, dentists, childcare, tradespeople in your home and numerous other things?

And want a fortnight off for a holiday somewhere and you have to work potentially both Sundays either side. Goodbye the traditional family holidays of old. It wouldn't even be a proper fortnight away, because if you went on a Monday after your Sunday worked, you'd have to be back at the latest a week on Saturday to work the Sunday at the end!

And according to @Solent&Wessex if you were spare, they could even change the rest days you thought you may have had with some notice.

Knowing your actual rest days well in advance is one of the few things which make the railway shift patterns tolerable imo.
Essentially it appears to read like Relief type staff arrangements for all?

 

[g492p]

This is the new station grading structure for anyone that’s interested. Once a public consultation is finished on a ticket office and the TOC decides to proceed with plans to close it, all existing station staff would then align, harmonise and move onto the new grading system of CSA Level 1-5. The new multi skilled station grade salary range will be from £20,000 to £29,750.

Where does it give the salaries? Read both documents but couldnt see that. Would be very poor wages indeed given I started out on gate line with a salary of more than 20k and that was nearly 14 years ago.

 

[Mainsideman]

Interesting. So for budgeting / accounting purposes, are they classed as retail or operations? Or is no distinction made?

It makes more sense (to me at least) to have ticket office staff also work the gateline rather than carrying out safety-critical duties like dispatch.

Just seen on the deal there is a small print saying that if tocs want to keep dispatch staff there own grade they can do so!

 

[g492p]

But you are only exempt if the Company can employ someone else to cover it. If they can't then you have to work:

"Where an existing employee (where Sundays is currently outside the working week without a contractual commitment to work) does not currently work any rostered Sundays then they could give 12-months’ notice to not work Sundays as an extra weekend shift providing extra weekend staff can be employed to cover. If cover cannot be provided, then the employee would be required to work their rostered Sundays (the ‘commitment to work’ stands)."



It isn't that good. The legal minimum for someone working a full time job is 28 days per year in total.

But what the document doesn't define is what is considered "a week".

At the moment my leave is defined in days - I get 30 days per year.

If "a week" is considered to be 5 days then this is an increase in 3 days overall. (5 x 5 = 25 + 8 =33). However I could loose 2 of those each year because of the new arrangements for Christmas Day and Boxing Day.

However a separate section of the documeont (in respect of spare turns) says "the principle that three days’ work constitutes a week’s work." If that is the case then 3 x 5 = 15 + 8 = 23 days, which is 7 days less than now. This would be below the legal minimum of 28 days, however that is based around a 5 day week. The Gov.uk website says that someone who only works a 3 day week is only legally entitled to 16.8 days leave a year.






I am open minded to modernisation and change, and was hopeful that this new proposal could lead to and end to this dispute, and that I would be able to vote yes.

When I saw the headline bullet points yesterday I considered that - being selfish - not many of the proposed changes affected me that much so would therefore be acceptable. I already have Committed Sundays for example, so there is no change there.

However the devil is in the detail. And there is plenty of detail now which I do not like.

Take Spares. The document says that TOCS *MUST* produce rosters with full weeks of spares. It also says that if you have a full week of spare then you have unlimited movement and can be given any duty no matter what time it is. That means you could be moved from earlies to lates and all over the place. Even worse is that they can change your rest days at a weeks notice. So if you thought your days off would be Wednesday and Thursday a week before they can unilaterally change them to be Friday and Saturday, for example. This makes it absolutely impossible to plan anything outside work at all. A family meal? Going to a Wedding? Going to a concert or event which you need to buy tickets for? Well you can't book the day as leave to guarantee you can attend as you are on rest day so aren't in work in the first place.... until a week before when they move your rest day to a different day.

Can someone point me to other jobs where your manager can just move your weekend days off at a weeks notice and you can't do anything about it? How on earth do you plan anything at all?

It also implies that when spare changes can be made on the day of the duty subject to you being given notice. Currently I have 72 hours posted notice - i.e. they cannot alter my hours of duty and booking on times less than 72 hours before the day. This document says this reduces to 48 hours from the start of the actual shift (not the actual day concerned) but that also "Further changes can occur up to and including on the day because of service requirements with adequate notice to staff affected.". So I am meant to start work at 1200 tomorrow for a 7 hour duty finishing at 1900. I get a phone call or email in the morning saying I must now turn up at 1500 instead for a 10 hour duty not finishing till 0100? (as they can also extend your day by up to 3 hours now) This might affect out of work commitments, travel arrangements, childcare etc etc.

See also my comments about Annual Leave above, as there is no clarity on the exact numbers of days etc. The way annual leave MUST be allocated is also significantly less flexible than my current arrangements
There is no stipulation for minimum number of rest days (in fact the document expressly says that TOCS can't have a minimum number of rest days) and also states that Sunday coverage should include spares etc like any other day. There is no stipulation for a maximum turn length.
There is no stipulation for a length of spare turn (other than that it must be flexible and based around the average turn length at the depot).
For all the above it just says that the company decides. (The document elsewhere states that the RMT can not dispute or fail to agree anything implemented as a result of this agreement being accepted).
The combination of the above means (assuming the timetable stays the same and the current diagrams remain broadly similar) I could go from doing a 4 day week with 1 committed Sunday every 3 weeks (so 13 days in work every 3 weeks) to a 5 day week with 2 committed Sundays every 3 weeks (so 17 days in work every 3 weeks). So I could loose 4 days off every 3 weeks - that could involve me working an extra 60+ days per year for little to no extra money save for some extra overtime payments for the extra committed Sundays.


The stuff in regards attendance management, sickness arrangements, etc; the type of work you can do; training principles and methods; new technology; and other such things I am not that bothered about (if anything I have often thought lots of them are a bit too generous). I could even cope with the extended range of movement on spare duties i.e +/- 3 hours with a 3 hour increase in length of day (so you could finish 6 hours later than planned for example).

However my days off are my days off. I like to plan my life, go on day trips or short breaks, go out for meals, go to events. The fact that my days off can be changed at a weeks notice making planning anything like that almost impossible for much of the year is a big no no. Much like the RMT red line on DOO - this is my red line.
For example - In April this year I've been invited to a friend's wedding. By coincidence it is on a Saturday when I am rest day. So I can go. So I will book a hotel, make travel arrangements etc. But come the new rostering arrangements I may find out a week before the wedding that the Saturday is not my rest day after all, they may move my rest day to Wednesday instead. So suddenly, at a weeks notice, I can't go. Great. Sorry, no. That is unacceptable.

I'd rather take no pay rise and just stay as I am thank you.

If they propose that they can move RDs like that then I would definitely have to vote against. The idea that they can just take your weekends off away from you is mad.

 

[RJ]

The "or £1750 whichever is higher" is a new addition. For lower paid staff eg. for someone on 20k this will put them up to £22620 which is 13.1% increase if I've done my maths right, helping those on lower salaries a bit more.



Anyone on a salary below 35k would benefit from the £1750 making it a higher than 5% increase for those on under 35k for 2022.

It would be an enormous percentage increase for me, until my grade is consigned to history that is

 

[pt_mad]

If they propose that they can move RDs like that then I would definitely have to vote against. The idea that they can just take your weekends off away from you is mad.

Well going by what @the sniper quoted, there could be no requirement for fixed rest day patterns anyway.

So how someone could plan ahead to have a week off that is actually a guaranteed 7 days off as opposed to 6, or a Saturday to Saturday (8 days as per the old traditional holiday) when you don't know which weekends you will have off in advance, is anyone's guess?

Doesn't exactly give much scope for booking a full weeks accomodation anywhere or telling family which days they need to book off work to go with you. Or planning anything well in advance on any weekend quite frankly.

 

[g492p]

Well going by what @the sniper quoted, there could be no requirement for fixed rest day patterns anyway.

So how someone could plan ahead to have a week off that is actually a guaranteed 7 days off as opposed to 6, or a Saturday to Saturday (8 days as per the old traditional holiday) when you don't know which weekends you will have off in advance, is anyone's guess?

Doesn't exactly give much scope for booking a full weeks accomodation anywhere or telling family which days they need to book off work to go with you.

Shocking stuff. Would really put a torch to our work life balance.

 

[the sniper]

Well going by what @the sniper quoted, there could be no requirement for fixed rest day patterns anyway.

I imagine that O L Leigh's interpretation is correct, as there is at least precedent for that, but given the extent of the changes proposed, I wouldn't entirely bank on it. For the 'spare week' though, however many you might get in your link, it seems clear that you could get anything.

 

[pt_mad]

Shocking stuff. Would really put a torch to our work life balance.

And it's taken 8 months to get to an offer like this which the Government actually think is good?

 

[CE142]

That offer is, a lot of swear words.
Far too vague in lots of parts and downright unworkable in others.

 

[Frankfurt]

It's an insult to label this an offer, it's nothing more than an all out attack on T&C's and pay.

 

[Annetts key]

Why was it not possible to announce the correct information in that case?

I don’t know. What I do know is that the CIS screens were still showing the old information long after the staff had informed the passengers. I presume it was a last minute change.

Ok clearly your grievances go well beyond this issue; I suggest you create a new thread and feel free to propose a solution there.

No human has a good answer, which is why I’m surprised people still believe Conservative politicians…
As this is increasing off-topic, I will leave it there.

You have no answer and instead resort to a false equivalence fallacy argument on completely different topics.

All safety critical engineering systems need certain checks, inspections, measurements, tests, etc. to confirm that they meet the requirements and standards. With motor vehicles for example, the manufacturer sets out a service schedule. Plus the government has various requirements under the MOT legislation. A driver will get in trouble if a motor vehicle is found not to comply with the law.
Aircraft manufacturers and countries have similar requirements for aircraft. An aircraft operator (airline) will get in trouble if found to ignore the manufacturer or the requirements of any country it flys over.

It’s no different on the railways. Except that in a lot of areas, with the railways, it’s the railway itself that decides on what the requirements are. Hence, they can choose to do less maintenance, less frequent inspections, etc. But if there is less maintenance, less frequent inspections, items that are potentially out of tolerance or out of specification may continue in service for longer before the problem is discovered. Hence the overall risk of either a train delaying fault (or cancellation) is increased. But also the overall risk of of something worse is also increased.

But it’s also the little things. So let’s take a practical example. Network Rail have reduced the frequency of maintenance visits to equipment cupboards/cubicles that contain signalling equipment. Hence as the padlocks are no longer being maintained as frequently, often they seize up due to either rust, corrosion or contamination. So now, if technical staff need to maintain the equipment, they have to spend time cutting the padlocks off (each lock costs over £35 each) and go and get replacements, which means that they can’t do as much scheduled maintenance as planned. A typical installation is two locks per cupboard, with there being two or three cupboards at most sites. So if all locks are affected, that’s £140 to £210. Or if they are attending a failure, it takes longer to diagnose the problem, and hence longer to fix the problem. Hence trains are disrupted for longer than they otherwise would be.

I agree but I thought the RMT didn't care what the public thought? If so they won't be particularly bothered if this gets them bad PR.

The job of a union is to look after its members. And unions are used to the media giving them bad PR.

As I understand it, the Union is not allowed to recommend rejection of the deal and can only adopt a neutral position or recommend to accept.

Absolute rubbish. If it’s a bad deal, a union will say so.

If we assume voting papers might be sent out at the end of next week at the earliest and then a 14-day voting period, even if it's rejected I would not expect any more strikes to be announced until the middle of February which would give potential strike dates of end of February / early March. Of course this vote is for TOC staff and is separate to the NR dispute so NR staff could still announce further action in the meantime.

What ballot papers? If the union wants the views of members, and there is already a mandate for industrial action, the union can use any method it wants. Including mass meetings of representatives, computer/electronic referendums or other means.

I’d expect any referendum to be open much longer than the last one was for NR. I’d also expect strike dates to be announced concurrently.

A longer time period for a referendum is unlikely to make any significant difference. The vast majority of members voted within the first five days. And most of the later votes were due to problems with email details not being correct, hence why they could not vote earlier.

It's an insult to label this an offer, it's nothing more than an all out attack on T&C's and pay.

A bit like the ‘offer’ that Network Rail wants infrastructure maintenance (including CAPEX and works delivery) staff to accept.

The government wants railway staff to be more flexible than an Access Credit Card…

 

[BrummieBobby]

Never see the Govt pick a fight like this with doctors or civil servants do we. Why don't they have to work 7 days a week?

A number of Civil Service jobs are 24/7 positions; certainly mine was before I joined the railway.

 

[12LDA28C]

What ballot papers? If the union wants the views of members, and there is already a mandate for industrial action, the union can use any method it wants. Including mass meetings of representatives, computer/electronic referendums or other means.

If this 'offer' gets put to members for a ballot I'm fairly sure it will be an old-fashioned postal ballot. That's certainly the way ASLEF operates, do you know for a fact that it's different for the RMT?

 

[Facing Back]

A number of Civil Service jobs are 24/7 positions; certainly mine was before I joined the railway.

If you take the broad definition of civil servant to be anyone employed by the state who is in a 24/7 role then you can include the armed forces, nurses, a huge number of local authority employees, police, ambulance drivers. highways agency staff - the list goes on. I haven't counted but I'm guessing at a million.

 

[Annetts key]

If this 'offer' gets put to members for a ballot I'm fairly sure it will be an old-fashioned postal ballot. That's certainly the way ASLEF operates, do you know for a fact that it's different for the RMT?

I don’t know how the RMT will get feedback from TOC members. But in the recent RMT Network Rail referendum, it was done electronically as I described in my post above.

 

[Facing Back]

If this 'offer' gets put to members for a ballot I'm fairly sure it will be an old-fashioned postal ballot. That's certainly the way ASLEF operates, do you know for a fact that it's different for the RMT?

I'm interested to hear the answer to this. Technically its not a ballot surely? They are only for a mandate for strike action. The union can accept or reject the offer as it chooses and if it "puts it to the members" then it is a referendum - which is non-binding and can be conducted in any way and time frame the union chooses. Of course that can be subject to legal appeal if it is manifestly unfair - I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[43066]

Appendix 5 makes for ugly reading for train crew grades, with the potential for a staggering number of changes to current practices possible to be made freely by the TOCs.

Thanks, and apologies. I’ll admit, before I wrote my last post, I had only skimmed the main document without checking the appendices!

I was chatting to my guard earlier about this - apparently the “week spare” is a concept she recognises from circa. 25 years ago. You could be “red inked” for an entire week to cover someone’s AL, including different rest days. The way she described it it used to be discretionary, however. You could choose to accept the alternative week to stick with your rostered spare - clearly that isn’t what’s envisaged now.

So much for “old fashioned” BR arrangements being removed - sounds like they’re being retreaded and brought back where it suits .

I’ll also revise my earlier opinion; it’s overall pretty shocking. I wonder whether the RMT will accept (I think if I were in the RMT I’d be inclined to vote against, based on the proposed rostering changes). I hope ASLEF push back strongly against this if it crops up in the equivalent offer, as I’m sure it will.

 

[12LDA28C]

I'm interested to hear the answer to this. Technically its not a ballot surely? They are only for a mandate for strike action. The union can accept or reject the offer as it chooses and if it "puts it to the members" then it is a referendum - which is non-binding and can be conducted in any way and time frame the union chooses. Of course that can be subject to legal appeal if it is manifestly unfair - I'm happy to be corrected.

Ok, then a referendum, yes.

The union decides whether it will put the offer to the members which it is under no obligation to do. If it goes to a referendum then the union can recommend which way the members vote, but it should still be each individual member's vote to use as they see fit.

 

[railfan99]

The union decides whether it will put the offer to the members which it is under no obligation to do. If it goes to a referendum then the union can recommend which way the members vote, but it should still be each individual member's vote to use as they see fit.

Given the damage these continual strikes are doing to the UK's reputation, it's about time the union membership and its leaders accepted the offer.

Or do staff want to be locked in a wage-price spiral where inflation will only worsen, and eventually the government of the day embarks upon wholesale closures of many rail lines to passenger traffic and replacement with road coaches/buses to save money?

The latter occurred in my state of Victoria, Australia in the late 1970s to save money and in NSW somewhat later. It may be harder to implement in the UK given your much greater population (in England), but could still occur.

 

[blackpoolsouth]

Wow, station staff stitched up on this big style

Sunday's in your week, how does that work. We have one in two so a 35 hr week one week, 43 the next.

If I'm on leave or sick I don't get paid for Sundays currently

Will I on these new arrangements?

Will the Sundays form part of my week in which case I lose 26 Sundays which had I worked them as rostered overtime is worth £4k pa. Will I now have a weekly roster of 39 hours

I currently earn £33k prior to Sundays as I can do any station role. A true multi skilled person on the new framework gets £29k.

Is this pay structure the same across all companies? You get the same money if you work at a 2 platform station or Birmingham New St. Who has the busier workload?

What am I doing on a day to day basis, where do I work, how should I dress for work if I might be selling tickets, then stuck on a gateline then moved across to dispatch

I'm more bothered that the RMT worked on these changes and the only win is the mandatory requirement for DOO.

I'm aware that there needs to be changes and in all for the principle of the right people being in the right place at the right time. We don't have the commuter demand as much, we need more people later in the week and a better provision for Saturdays.

If I was in two minds wether to stay or pursue a new career full time this has helped me decide.

 

[LowLevel]

The rostering changes sink it at the least. My fixed rest day pattern and not having spare weeks alone isn't for sale at 9% at current rates. That's without reduced break entitlements, increased spare movement, minimum turn lengths etc. New starters will lose over £10,000 over our existing arrangement and we have only recently agreed new contracts for them.

 

[the sniper]

Given the damage these continual strikes are doing to the UK's reputation, it's about time the union membership and its leaders accepted the offer.

Or do staff want to be locked in a wage-price spiral where inflation will only worsen, and eventually the government of the day embarks upon wholesale closures of many rail lines to passenger traffic and replacement with road coaches/buses to save money?

The latter occurred in my state of Victoria, Australia in the late 1970s to save money and in NSW somewhat later. It may be harder to implement in the UK given your much greater population (in England), but could still occur.

With the greatest of respect, have you read this thread? People aren't even complaining about the percentage being offered, it's the T&Cs bonfire they're pushing with it that is pretty flabbergasting and objectionable. I'm not sure what that has to do with wage-price spiral. In life are you personally a push over because you don't like to be a bother to anyone offering you a terrible deal?

 

[Jurg]

It just blows my mind that the Government can say with a straight face that these changes to T&Cs are "modernisations". In all other sectors I'm aware of the movement is towards better work-life balance. Certainly in my (non-rail) job a regular subject in meetings with management is how we can make the job more attractive, pay aside, to attract and retain the best talent.

Some years ago, before I started a family, I applied for and got very far in the selection process for a CSA job with a TOC. I'm 100% sure now I dodged a bullet. How could anyone plan for childcare, transport for kids to activities and social events, etc with their shifts and rest days being buggered around with like that outside their control? Madness.

 

[Monty]

I appreciate some places have it, but if you've always had the fixed pattern, it's a significant change. Combined with the 'Spare weeks', where you can inherit any line of work, there are people who are going to struggle to arrange their lives around that.

Spare weeks, as mentioned by @Solent&Wessex, from Appendix 5:

We technically already have this at my TOC where in theory they can create a roster where people are spare for the week and can be moved to a line to cover adhoc leave. However its practically unworkable and the company have yet to find a way to implement it. I think it's one of those things that looks good on paper but in the real world simply doesn't work and the truth of the matter is most railway management do not have a real grasp on the dark art that is railway rostering and are happy for the local reps to sort it out so long as all jobs are covered.

 

[g492p]

Given the damage these continual strikes are doing to the UK's reputation, it's about time the union membership and its leaders accepted the offer.

Or do staff want to be locked in a wage-price spiral where inflation will only worsen, and eventually the government of the day embarks upon wholesale closures of many rail lines to passenger traffic and replacement with road coaches/buses to save money?

The latter occurred in my state of Victoria, Australia in the late 1970s to save money and in NSW somewhat later. It may be harder to implement in the UK given your much greater population (in England), but could still occur.

With respect, staff don’t want their weekends taken from them at a whim, and to see their work life balance trashed. I don’t really care about the UK’s “reputation”, whatever that means. Spending time with my family on my weekends off is rather higher a priority. Also, what wage price spiral? That would require wages rising faster then inflation. 9% is still a real terms pay cut. So far we have yet to see wage driven inflation.

 

[GN Boy]

Having your rest days and rostered hours mucked about like that is appalling. I wouldn’t accept such a condition, no matter how much of a ‘pay rise’ they offered.

 

[irish_rail]

Given the damage these continual strikes are doing to the UK's reputation, it's about time the union membership and its leaders accepted the offer.

Or do staff want to be locked in a wage-price spiral where inflation will only worsen, and eventually the government of the day embarks upon wholesale closures of many rail lines to passenger traffic and replacement with road coaches/buses to save money?

The latter occurred in my state of Victoria, Australia in the late 1970s to save money and in NSW somewhat later. It may be harder to implement in the UK given your much greater population (in England), but could still occur.

Or even better, call a general election and get a new government in place, a fresh start with a governemnt who actually want to resolve this, as opposed to the current lot who are merely kicking the can down the road and hoping the small remaining support they have will continue to be enraged by rail staff.