Rail strikes discussion

[yorksrob]

Agreed. That's clearly just meaning "let's get in the room together and talk" rather than saying "we'll only meet if you agree to x before hand" where x could be "call the strike off" or "that there will be no job losses". It's a positive sign as far as I'm concerned from one half of the dispute. Of course I have no expectation that the Government will actually do anything as they seem quite happy for the dispute to carry on.

It is a positive move.

And if the government refuse to meet, the RMT can always offer to call off the current strike in exchange for talks with the government. That would put the ball firmly in the government's court.

 

[Bluejays]

Indeed, and the reason is because I am swinging like a pendulum. I can see so many sides to this argument it is unreal. I challenge anyone who thinks making these decisions are easy. The right of me thinks we are heading into the abyss, the left of me is very socialist and recognises that if you don't fight you lose. Then there is the middle ground that has such a distrust of the RMT it is painful.

Nice to see you admit that it's a complex issue. Unfortunately you seem to get very militant about whichever side you support at any particular time, 'waving to the picketers as I drive in ' i seem to remember. I think lots of us have a complex view of the strikes, and our own reasons for getting to our opinions. Surely it's encumbent on those in the middle to stay calm and leave the militant rubbish to the militants.

 

[StaffsPM1]

Building a better railway

Appeal to rail unions and workers to not risk the future of the rail industry by striking, but rather work with government to reform our railway.

www.gov.uk

for those who haven't read it. Speech made just now...

 

[Bantamzen]

Building a better railway

Appeal to rail unions and workers to not risk the future of the rail industry by striking, but rather work with government to reform our railway.

www.gov.uk

for those who haven't read it. Speech made just now...

Thanks for the link. I think its pretty clear that the government is squaring up for a fight, deliberately mentioning the 700s as well as driver wages is positioning ministers between the passengers and rail workers. Expect more rhetoric about driverless trains and high driver wages to help sour the public's opinions further. I know its way more complicated than that, but most of the public don't, and the Tories are clearly lining up to use that to their advantage.

It's going to get messy.

 

[nedchester]

Thanks for the link. I think its pretty clear that the government is squaring up for a fight, deliberately mentioning the 700s as well as driver wages is positioning ministers between the passengers and rail workers. Expect more rhetoric about driverless trains and high driver wages to help sour the public's opinions further. I know its way more complicated than that, but most of the public don't, and the Tories are clearly lining up to use that to their advantage.

It's going to get messy.

Yep.

Some valid comments and some nonsense but it is clear they want a fight........

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Building a better railway

Appeal to rail unions and workers to not risk the future of the rail industry by striking, but rather work with government to reform our railway.

www.gov.uk

for those who haven't read it. Speech made just now...

Wow. Powerful

 

[baz962]

Load of old claptrap.

 

[windingroad]

I'm completely in support of the strikes, as I would be of any worker in any industry fighting for fair pay and conditions. But I do also think the railway needs to modernise in a whole variety of ways. Is there a feasible way to square those two opinions or is it basically one or the other, realistically?

 

[Wolfie]

Clearly it wouldn't. The government has forced the RMT up to the top of the hill now. They ain't marching them down again without a victory package that they can sell to their members. They have overwhelming support for the strikes. The pressure is on government to sort this out - this is of their making. Stop making threats and realise this is going to cause massive disruption to a lot of people.

There is no way whatsoever that this Government will give the RMT leadership the sort of "victory package that they can sell to their members" that they will demand. At the end of the day never forget that this isn't a fair fight. One party can and will change the rules whenever it feels like it.

 

[Butts]

I'm completely in support of the strikes, as I would be of any worker in any industry fighting for fair pay and conditions. But I do also think the railway needs to modernise in a whole variety of ways. Is there a feasible way to square those two opinions or is it basically one or the other, realistically?

Shut the whole network down, sack everyone and reemploy them or others on terms and conditions that are affordable ?

 

[windingroad]

Shut the whole network down, sack everyone and reemploy them or others on terms and conditions that are affordable ?

In what possible way does that answer my question, which was how to reconcile fair pay and conditions with railway modernisation?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Shut the whole network down, sack everyone and reemploy them or others on terms and conditions that are affordable ?

That would be the nuclear option. Ticket office staff clearly need to be redeployed. 10% wage rise aint going to happen.

 

[Wolfie]

Im sure that if an adequate restructuring package is offered most people would take it up.

It won’t be forced on staff whether anybody likes it or not.

You want to bet on that?

 

[Lancy99]

That would be the nuclear option. Ticket office staff clearly need to be redeployed. 10% wage rise aint going to happen.

Redeployed? doing what?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Redeployed? doing what?

I have not a clue. I am trying to see what could be offered (no compulsory redundancy) as part of the negotiations.

 

[Starmill]

Shut the whole network down, sack everyone and reemploy them or others on terms and conditions that are affordable ?

This is really very unlikely. If a wholesale restructure were proposed the trade unions would likely recommend their members accept the revisions to contracts.

For example RMT Conductor members at Southern accepted new contracts as onboard supervisors.

 

[Lancy99]

This is really very unlikely. If a wholesale restructure were proposed the trade unions would likely recommend their members accept the revisions to contracts.

For example RMT Conductor members at Southern accepted new contracts as onboard supervisors.

And many would simply retire/find alternative employment

 

[Starmill]

Redeployed? doing what?

Onboard ticket examiner, customer host for where there's onboard retail or dining service, station host for major stations, platform duties etc there are quite a lot of options for roles where pay is at very similar levels. In my opinion the existing DHL/ Rail Gourmet etc staff could probably be brought in house too, and the at seat catering offer expanded slightly in some areas of the country. But as this thread isn't primarily about ticket offices or which routes should or shouldn't have a catering trolley, it may not be wise to go into it further.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jun 2022 ==

And many would simply retire/find alternative employment

Yes. And any restructure could be designed to allow a small number of roles to exit the business through early retirement or severance pay.

 

[Butts]

In what possible way does that answer my question, which was how to reconcile fair pay and conditions with railway modernisation?

It would seem that the two are mutually irreconcilable.

A Business that is losing money hand over fist would always look to it's biggest cost namely the wage bill.

"Fair Pay and Conditions" is a subjective observation, as things stand the objective view would be that for an operation hemorrhaging money and requiring public subsidy needs a drastic shake up.

 

[Towers]

Oh dear. I presume they won't have sorted it out at today's "talks", then

RMT fighting talk incoming...

 

[windingroad]

It would seem that the two are mutually irreconcilable.

A Business that is losing money hand over fist would always look to it's biggest cost namely the wage bill.

"Fair Pay and Conditions" is a subjective observation, as things stand the objective view would be that for an operation hemorrhaging money and requiring public subsidy needs a drastic shake up.

While I'm not saying the current situation is necessarily sustainable (although I don't think that's a given) it really drives me insane to see people repeatedly invoke "subsidy" as some kind of dirty word. The railway is a public service, not a business. Most public services do not, and should not, make a profit. The value is in the service they provide!

 

[Starmill]

It would seem that the two are mutually irreconcilable.

A Business that is losing money hand over fist would always look to it's biggest cost namely the wage bill.

"Fair Pay and Conditions" is a subjective observation, as things stand the objective view would be that for an operation hemorrhaging money and requiring public subsidy needs a drastic shake up.

The reality is the railway isn't really a business, it is a majority publicly-funded service now. Indeed the safety requirements placed on it make it very very difficult to run as anything approaching a conventional business.

The objective only needs to be to reduce the annual cost to public funds, not to eliminate it!

 

[Wolfie]

My point of view as a train conductor of over 20 years summed up is this.

I took a £7k pay cut coming into this job. I took it because I was at the time of life where the railway long term offered me a bit of security. It was a risk, but because of pay rises it was a risk that paid off. What amazed me was the relaxed regime. Yes you have rules, medicals, screenings, and abusive passengers, but you also don't have managers demanding you push a brush around the floor if you are sat spare for a shift. I have also never been in a job pre railway where you can get a three hour flyer.
What amazes me more is how people in this job very quickly seem to take these perks for granted. I take my lad once a year on the Cally sleeper as a trip out, couldn't do that without the perks my job offers. The railway overall has been good to me and my family.

Now it is time to put something back. We are in trouble, passengers numbers are falling off, revenue is dropping away. I can do one of two things. I can strike, or I can work a extra rest day to make up for the rising inflation. I'll choose the later. This is why I found Grant Shapps comments about overtime working offensive. Not all of us work rest days to make up for strikes, some of us do it to help ourselves out and to help the travelling public out. I don't like Tory governments, but just because you don't like the messenger doesn't mean the message is wrong.

I know some railway grade are not paid as well as mine, and I have sympathy with that. But neither do I care for those who are paid more than me thinking the gravy train is a ongoing journey whilst those who we take to work are struggling.

It is time to make contact with reality.

Thank you for a considered and balanced post.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jun 2022 ==

How do you think the job you want got its pay & T&Cs, yes the union negotiated this. The unions fought hard to improve h&s inside the industry, unions are portrayed as the bad guys by the media but what about all the good they fight for.
Maternity pay/ paternity pay / sick pay/ paid leave / redundancy pay and so much more.

I would never be critical of TUs overall. They serve a useful purpose and l personally was damned glad to be a member of one a few years ago.

 

[Mcc1989]

That speech looks to me like Shapps has absolutely no intention to come to the table to negotiate with the RMT. No surprise there.

Also curious how he spoke about driver pay and compared railway salaries to nurse pay - definitely playing into the hands of the Daily Mail readership there. It's already been said in this thread that the idea of saying "nurses only get this so why should anyone else have a pay rise" is a ridiculous one at best but the emotional argument does hold weight with the baying mob.

I for one voted against the strike, I'm new to the railway and joined in full acceptance of my current terms. The timing is poor and I can't see this succeeding. It doesn't seem like the strike is last resort, but I could be wrong.

That said, since the ballot was returned I see both sides and will strike alongside my colleagues in recognition of their efforts during the pandemic. They deserve a pay rise. I'm very concerned about my future job security too because of the shower we have in charge of the country, I distrust their intentions for the railway. Modernisation needs to happen but not at the expense of safety, perks and other Ts&Cs.

 

[Economist]

People in ‘spending money they earn on things they want’ shocker!

In my opinion, drivers like us shouldn't be living to our current wage, we should live to around 80% of our wage, that way over time we can build up enough capital to be able to take part in serious action defending our terms and conditions. Remember what Peter Wilkinson of the DfT said a few years ago about drivers having to pay off expensive cars etc. During my first year as a qualified driver, I budgeted as though I were still a trainee. Far too many members of our generation are interesting in living for today and showing off on social media rather than budgeting properly.

Is it not the case particularly for Drivers - "That we are all Middle Class Now"

The careers of the middle classes have, to be fair, taken a serious hit too. Military officers, police inspectors, commercial pilots (in Europe at least), IT professionals, teachers and many others have seen their T&Cs slashed, especially in real terms. Most employees/contractors who've done seriously well over the past four decades or so are those who have unique pricing power, people like management executives, top sports professionals, top entertainers, front office investment bankers, top barristers, ex-politicians peddling their influence etc.

On this subject, I think the root cause of the major recession we're about to see is the inefficiency of the corporatist, rather than capitalist system. Capitalism relies on people being paid well enough to be able to afford the products and services provided by people earning a broadly similar wage. Henry Ford realised that it was no use producing the Model T unless average workers could afford to buy one, hence he paid the workers manufacturing the car enough money to be able to afford to buy one whilst maintaining a reasonable quality of life. That's efficient capitalism. The problem with the current corporate model is that a lot of the wealth is accumulated by a small group of people and held offshore or becomes locked in values of illiquid things like residential property. That wealth doesn't circulate in local, real economies, hence a lack of demand and a further drag on T&Cs etc. The only way out will be for the forces of labour to increase their share of national wealth.

Wow. Powerful

As another poster has suggested, the unions need to offer to call off the strikes (for now) in return for direct talks and put the ball in the DfT's court. I don't know so much about the RMT's position but I believe ASLEF have got deals, or are negotiating them in good faith at TfW, ScotRail, DRS, DB Cargo, GBRF, Freightliner, Euroostar and Merseyrail. The common theme here is that at none of those operators have the DfT been able to directly influence negotiations. ASLEF need to be able to say "well, we have neogotiated deals at all of these places, the common theme is that the DfT has not been able to influence negotiations at any of them".

 

[Starmill]

The comparison with nurses is utterly bizarre. It's essentially saying to voters "my government has worked to keep entry level nurses pay well below the real living wage". An argument which is going to be especially unpopular with most people given the polling around the NHS.

 

[the sniper]

10% wage rise aint going to happen.

I'm not sure what negotiation begins with asking for nothing, but plenty of people here seem familiar with that tactic.

"Fair Pay and Conditions" is a subjective observation, as things stand the objective view would be that for an operation hemorrhaging money and requiring public subsidy needs a drastic shake up.

Which Government funded public service isn't "haemorrhaging money"?

 

[windingroad]

The comparison with nurses is utterly bizarre. It's essentially saying to voters "my government has worked to keep entry level nurses pay well below the real living wage". An argument which is going to be especially unpopular with most people given the polling around the NHS.

I think this serves to highlight just how important a strong union is. What he's really saying is that, given half the chance, he'd love to give the railway industry the same treatment. Why on earth should anyone be ashamed of getting paid a fair wage?

 

[Bletchleyite]

On this subject, I think the root cause of the major recession we're about to see is the inefficiency of the corporatist, rather than capitalist system. Capitalism relies on people being paid well enough to be able to afford the products and services provided by people earning a broadly similar wage. Henry Ford realised that it was no use producing the Model T unless average workers could afford to buy one, hence he paid the workers manufacturing the car enough money to be able to afford to buy one whilst maintaining a reasonable quality of life. That's efficient capitalism. The problem with the current corporate model is that a lot of the wealth is accumulated by a small group of people and held offshore or becomes locked in values of illiquid things like residential property. That wealth doesn't circulate in local, real economies, hence a lack of demand and a further drag on T&Cs etc. The only way out will be for the forces of labour to increase their share of national wealth.

I don't disagree with this, but rail workers are generally a long way back in the queue to have the biggest issue there. Guards, say, aren't well paid compared with drivers, but they're hardly on minimum.

 

[Wolfie]

In what possible way does that answer my question, which was how to reconcile fair pay and conditions with railway modernisation?

The four words in bold are key. I will throw a question back at you: who decides what is fair? I doubt that anyone outside of its membership would say that RMT should make the call.