Rail strikes discussion

[Nicholas Lewis]

Additional borrowing!

We already spend £80bn/yr on servicing that debt. The magic money printing trick has been traduced.

What this govt have been utterly daft about is why they didn't intervene in teh energy market to ensure the price cap didn't go up and thus stopped CPI increasing by so much. Yes would have gone on govt borrowing but at least it would have held down CPI to a lower level but of course BoJo wanted to be seen to be wafting cash to the poor and more disadvantaged to our society. Later this week we have new inflation figures which will be up 1-2% on last month moving the bar even higher for the unions to take aim at.

This won't end well the Tories will be happy to lose next GE and leave the problem to Labour.

 

[Kite159]

What this govt have been utterly daft about is why they didn't intervene in teh energy market to ensure the price cap didn't go up and thus stopped CPI increasing by so much. Yes would have gone on govt borrowing but at least it would have held down CPI to a lower level but of course BoJo wanted to be seen to be wafting cash to the poor and more disadvantaged to our society. Later this week we have new inflation figures which will be up 1-2% on last month moving the bar even higher for the unions to take aim at.

This won't end well the Tories will be happy to lose next GE and leave the problem to Labour.

If they didn't allow the price cap to rise, chances are more suppliers would have gone bust.

It wouldn't surprise me if some within the Tory party have already written off the next election in 2024 and will focus on the following election after 5 years of Labour dishing out poorly written PFI contracts and tax rises for anyone daring to want a better life.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Can I ask what your background is in healthcare please?

30 years in clinical front line and manager roles

 

[HL7]

I wouldn’t be surprised if for drivers the offer is for Sundays inside but as an extra day, no extra money, and we go to a five day week instead. So effectively a 25% pay cut. Either that or redundancy.

Yeah true. We don’t. You’ll probably have fire and rehire instead to end up on the same.

Even Grant Shapps himself would be too embarrassed to come up with an offer like that.

Would that be enough to make you want to go on strike?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

If they didn't allow the price cap to rise, chances are more suppliers would have gone bust.

Not if central govt covered the difference which is what several European countries have done already to ensure headline inflation was kept down.

 

[jayah]

What this govt have been utterly daft about is why they didn't intervene in teh energy market to ensure the price cap didn't go up and thus stopped CPI increasing by so much. Yes would have gone on govt borrowing but at least it would have held down CPI to a lower level but of course BoJo wanted to be seen to be wafting cash to the poor and more disadvantaged to our society. Later this week we have new inflation figures which will be up 1-2% on last month moving the bar even higher for the unions to take aim at.

This won't end well the Tories will be happy to lose next GE and leave the problem to Labour.

The reason there is no money is because they printed all the money and spent it to fund lockdowns, furlough and net zero.

These policies were fantastically popular before their flaws became obvious.

Nobody was complaining while they were eating the food. Then the bill arrives.

 

[Gems]

What frustrates me more than anything is the number of my colleagues who voted for this shower. Why on earth do people vote for a government that had basically declared war on them in their election manifesto.

The public are stupid and would rather eat their own.

 

[jayah]

Not if central govt covered the difference which is what several European countries have done already to ensure headline inflation was kept down.

Central government. In other words the taxpayer.

So we'll print another £10bn to to pay ourselves to pay our gas bills. That will make them free!

The inventor of the three card trick will be green with envy.

 

[winks]

Having read the document having a Retirement Age of 62 increasing to 65 surely isn’t unreasonable. It’s happened in almost all other sectors. Some people may want to work till 65. The ticket office closures will be a sad day I must admit.

The section on Pay I’m guessing can be adjusted (Telegraph saying up to 5pc May be on offer ) can’t see the rest of the document being amended imho !

 

[Kite159]

Not if central govt covered the difference which is what several European countries have done already to ensure headline inflation was kept down.

The French, which now the elections are over and done with will no doubt be hiking up the cost.

Of course, remember Labour didn't want the energy cap to exist, I believe they even voted against it. Imagine how much the average bill will be now without that cap which was never designed for nearly everybody to be on it.

 

[Gems]

The French, which now the elections are over and done with will no doubt be hiking up the cost.

Of course, remember Labour didn't want the energy cap to exist, I believe they even voted against it. Imagine how much the average bill will be now without that cap which was never designed for nearly everybody to be on it.

Nonsense. The Tories stole the idea from the Labour party.

 

[jayah]

The French, which now the elections are over and done with will no doubt be hiking up the cost.

Of course, remember Labour didn't want the energy cap to exist, I believe they even voted against it. Imagine how much the average bill will be now without that cap which was never designed for nearly everybody to be on it.

What nobody can explain is how water companies with no competition have price controls yet manage to gift 20% of the bills as dividends to almost exclusively private equity owners.

Fuel prices have actually risen, thanks to the stop start economy of lockdowns and having a government beholden to the doomsday cult of net zero, which is still very popular it seems.

 

[HST274]

Having read the document having a Retirement Age of 62 increasing to 65 surely isn’t unreasonable. It’s happened in almost all other sectors. Some people may want to work till 65. The ticket office closures will be a sad day I must admit.

The section on Pay I’m guessing can be adjusted (Telegraph saying up to 5pc May be on offer ) can’t see the rest of the document being amended imho !

I think no deal will be agreeded, no matter the pay, unless 'no compulsory redundancies' is guaranteed as the absolute minimum (with 'good' pay increase). As for the rest it is very sad and hopefully avoidable. Pay will obviously have to be negotiated up, while other things like the time for ticket offices to close (3-18 months supposedly) may go up to a number in the years. I'm not sure what the rmt would actually be willing to keep from that document, if anything.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Not if central govt covered the difference which is what several European countries have done already to ensure headline inflation was kept down.

Central Government doesn’t have a magic money tree….

 

[Gems]

Having read the document having a Retirement Age of 62 increasing to 65 surely isn’t unreasonable. It’s happened in almost all other sectors. Some people may want to work till 65. The ticket office closures will be a sad day I must admit.

The section on Pay I’m guessing can be adjusted (Telegraph saying up to 5pc May be on offer ) can’t see the rest of the document being amended imho !

Yeah we all want to pay into a pension pot for a additional 3 years for no benefit. What planet do you live on? How about making you pay your mortgage for an additional 3 years and donating the money to help the poor bankers with their bonuses.

 

[theking]

Central Government doesn’t have a magic money tree….

They did when they were dishing out funds when covid arrived.

 

[winks]

There is £30bn available as “fiscal headroom” this could - in theory - be wiped out by inflation but for example; paying 8% to all. NHS staff would cost £10bn

The last 3 year deal under Theresa May cost £3bn I believe.

 

[Mintona]

Even Grant Shapps himself would be too embarrassed to come up with an offer like that.

Would that be enough to make you want to go on strike?

No, nothing at all would be enough to make me want to go on strike. I’ll just leave instead.

 

[winks]

Yeah we all want to pay into a pension pot for a additional 3 years for no benefit. What planet do you live on? How about making you pay your mortgage for an additional 3 years and donating the money to help the poor bankers with their bonuses.

You will benefit for additional 3 years of contributions !

 

[HL7]

No, nothing at all would be enough to make me want to go on strike. I’ll just leave instead.

So you’d leave your job rather than fight against a 25% pay cut?

 

[Gems]

You will benefit for additional 3 years of contributions !

Why, Are you going to be guaranteed to live 3 years longer into the bargain.

 

[windingroad]

Central Government doesn’t have a magic money tree….

It's a snappy phrase, but not at all useful. In practice the government has access to several different magic money trees.

 

[Gems]

No, nothing at all would be enough to make me want to go on strike. I’ll just leave instead.

Honestly. I think this post here could be considered the most ridiculous statement I have ever read. It's beyond belief to be honest. I think there might be a job kissing Grant Shapps backside, would you like to apply for it?

 

[dctraindriver]

No, nothing at all would be enough to make me want to go on strike. I’ll just leave instead.

I guess you’ve got the skills and qualifications to walk into one of the many advertised jobs at 62K straight away?

 

[ComUtoR]

I don't agree that the professional decision is to say no when you are 1 minute over your time,

Some of the questions asked in an interview is about time. When was your last break, what time did you book on, how many hours have you had off. I remember when a friend had an incident and they were told that if they took the additional 5 minutes they were entitled to for their break instead of working through it and trying to keep their train on time, they would not have had the incident. This is the industry we work in. An industry where every single minute of your day is tracked. Booking on 11h 59mins between shifts will break Hidden. It just isn't allowed.

I don't really agree that you should discriminate against someone you don't like - but if a resource manager is all take and no give, then I can see why you would want to give less freely.

The problem that this discussion has revolved around is that when it becomes discrimination and when it is just normal human behaviour' also where your rights as an employee are. Most of my resource managers are good as gold. A few I will always go above and beyond because I have a good relationship with them. A few are outright incompetent, vindictive, and nasty. Why should I do a 'favour' for them ? If Bill is a mate of mine and has covered my shifts on a regular basis I'll happily swap with them. Should I swap with someone who never helps me out, and is a backstabbing !"£! ? If there was a letter that got sent around saying 'don't help' Jack. That would be discriminatory. I read the case where there was discrimination based on being 'ostracised' and there was a clear case of being specifically ignored and where their computer access was deliberately removed. It was very different to just not doing Jack a favour.

As I stated, by its very nature. Doing someone a favour' is discriminatory. You make a choice to swap or choice to help out. The alternative is to refuse every request the resource managers ask. That single minute I'll help out with will never happen again.

When is it 'discrimination' Its difficult to distinguish helping a mate out vs refusing to help someone else. This is where 'professionalism' comes in. If you are doing your job 100% to the letter then nobody can complain. If I single out someone in a negative way, send an email to 'all drivers' but edit out their name, then yes, that would be discrimination. If I specifically went hard on their assessment, yes, it would be discrimination. If I was doing an interview and scored them lower because I didn't like them, gave someone else a job because I didn't like someone then yep, all discrimination.

I hate swapping shifts but there are specific people I tend to swap with to help them out. Is that discrimination ?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Central Government doesn’t have a magic money tree….

Well its borrowing an extra 37B to fund energy support payments to households who will then pay it back to energy companies but if it had paid energy companies direct it would have suppressed impact on CPI which is what unions are focussed on in pay negotiations.

 

[HL7]

Honestly. I think this post here could be considered the most ridiculous statement I have ever read. It's beyond belief to be honest. I think there might be a job kissing Grant Shapps backside, would you like to apply for it?

I guess you’ve got the skills and qualifications to walk into one of the many advertised jobs at 62K straight away?

He‘s at it. It’s a poor attempt at trolling, IMO.

 

[ClivePadd]

May I correct a few points

* Network Rail salary staff can either be paid for over time or given a lieu day, different parts of the business operate different rules for working a Saturday night or weekend shift for salary staff. Working weekends is optional, you can say no and TSSA have supported this and the company have backed down when trying to force staff to work weekends for a lieu day. HR have admitted no one is mandated to work a weekend who is on salary (called role clarity).

* Network Rail salary staff can refuse to work more than their core hours provided they have meet ‘all business needs’. It’s not uncommon for management to pressure staff to work beyond 35 hours as most salary staff do over 40 hours as that is what is required to do the job. However, staff can refuse and it’s difficult for senior managers to demonstrate the staffs role can not be carried out within 35 as that’s the whole idea of a 35 hour week.

* people on salary at network rail do not record the actual hours they are working, this is a widespread problem TSSA are aware of and have raised with the company. For example, I am working on a piece of track at the moment and last week I did 3x 9 hour days but only recorded 7 hours for each day as I am only allowed to record what hours have been budgeted against the job. If I put in my true hours the line manager rejects the time sheet and asks me to resubmit it only showing 35 hours. They only have so many hours available for each project (job).

* Network Rail senior management do not understand the workforce. There are thousands who want to take voluntary severance. The company have only allowed staff from the corporate support team (Milton Keynes office) and major projects to leave. Unsurprisingly, a large portion of those staff who took voluntary severance are now back as contractors or through agencies such as Jacobs earning far more money doing the same job.
If they offered voluntary severance across the board they would severely damage the unions support as you would see thousands of staff leaving. If Network Rail stated you can have voluntary severance provided you don’t strike and you may have to wait a year or two to get it but you are guaranteed it by April 24 (this is the latest start date we have been given for Great British Railways) you would instantly damage the unions strength.

* a lot of the changes Network Rail senior managers are proposing are as a result of their own decision to ban red zone working.
Red zone working was a perfectly safe way of working with very few safety instances.
Network Rail senior management banning of red zone working have forced the workforce to work nights and weekends to carry out their jobs.
The risk from working red zone where very low, staff worked during the day, they where a happy workforce. Now our staff are rostered on maximum nights and maximum weekend nights, which is 9 in 13 weeks of nights. The company encourages the staff to go on permanent nights if they volunteer. As part of ‘modernisation’ Network Rail senior managers want both hourly staff to be on nights as a default including Saturday night but also want salary staff (managers) to do the same for no extra pay.
Extensive night working is proven to be seriously damaging to physical health, mental health, relationships and social mobility.


My summary is the company wants to make drastic changes with a pay cut thrown in for good measure.
Anyone still at Network Rail will be considerably poorer in a number of ways.
The right thing to do and the best way to limit the strikes is to offer staff a way out via voluntary severance to limit compulsory redundancies.

What has really hurt the workforce is the lack of detail Network Rail senior leaders have communicated to staff about the changes they want to make.
We are only finding out information from union reps and the press.
Network Rail senior managers on multiple conference calls with staff refuse to give details of what their version of modernisation looks like, they provide no detail.
Network Rail senior management are part of the problem

Clive.

 

[Mintona]

So you’d leave your job rather than fight against a 25% pay cut?

It’s a fight that isn’t going to be won, and I can’t be dealing with the stresses of the fight. I’ve not been balloted yet and I’m having sleepless nights worrying about it. So yes, I’d rather just leave and not have that anymore.

I guess you’ve got the skills and qualifications to walk into one of the many advertised jobs at 62K straight away?

Yes, I know a Freighliner manager, he asked me to come and drive for him before. I might take him up on it.

 

[cactustwirly]

Cabin Crew are not starting on £15,000 a year lol. More like £33,000+

No the starting salary is just above minimum wage for new starters
It's nowhere near £33k that would be more experienced cabin crew.