Rail strikes discussion

[43066]

Hmm some of the viceral terms like "scab", "vermin" & "parasite" would suggest otherwise - such strong words certainly imply something deep-seated and I find it very difficult that this wouldn't spill out.

It certainly is deep seated, which I think why the word visceral keeps coming up, which is no exaggeration. That’s something I didn’t really appreciate before I joined the industry so I can see why those not working here struggle to understand it. I can completely understand why people feel as they do, though.

That way of thinking sadly ends up with a breeze block through someone's windscreen

Does thinking “I don’t want to be friends with someone” lead to you committing violent criminal acts towards them, then? I agree with @thesniper you are just making ludicrous statements to smear unions and railway workers, and I cannot take your postings seriously.

I find it unlikely anything below 5% will be seen as satisfactory.

I think that’s right. The DfT must be spitting feathers at ScotGov! In other news it’s the first (and almost certainly last) time I’ve ever agreed with Nicola Sturgeon on anything.

That "pathetic and insulting offer" is in line with what has been offered to great swathes of the public sector. I for one would not pay an extra 1p in tax for you to get a bigger pay rise

Really? Last I checked taxes aren’t optional and I’ve certainly never been asked how I want my tax money spent! Perhaps that’s a perk exclusively given to civil servants? .

 

[KM1991]

That "pathetic and insulting offer" is in line with what has been offered to great swathes of the public sector. I for one would not pay an extra 1p in tax for you to get a bigger pay rise

So I’ll repeat it. It’s a pathetic and insulting offer that will be rejected every single time, as it should be. Looks like it’s time for more of the public sector to start disputes.

 

[Wolfie]

Really? Last I checked taxes aren’t optional and I’ve never been asked how I wanted my tax money spent! Perhaps that’s a perk exclusively given to civil servants? .

I wish, lol. It can and will impact on voting choices though.

So I’ll repeat it. It’s a pathetic and insulting offer that will be rejected every single time, as it should be. Looks like it’s time for more of the public sector to start disputes.

Well you can feel that way. I fear that if your views are representative we are looking at a very long dispute with HMG actively seeking to destroy RMT.

 

[windingroad]

What legislation would be needed to ‘allow’ rail workers to stop checking tickets, for example.

I might be misunderstanding, but wasn't the general view that rail workers could currently be prosecuted or sacked for not undertaking their job role to the required standard and/or withholding revenue?

It can and will impact on voting choices though.

For you personally, or in general? I doubt a "this is to pay the greedy railway workers" tax rise is likely to be forthcoming.

 

[Wolfie]

I might be misunderstanding, but wasn't the general view that rail workers could currently be prosecuted or sacked for not undertaking their job role to the required standard and/or withholding revenue?


For you personally, or in general? I doubt a "this is to pay the greedy railway workers" tax rise is likely to be forthcoming.

Most of my colleagues and friends have nothing printable to say about RMT. They are hardly right-wing types either.

 

[Horizon22]

Time for you to get real! Welcome to the world outside the railway!


In which case expect to be disappointed. HMG are digging in if you haven't noticed....

Not necessarily my view, but seems to be the general viewpoint of forum members and others I know on strike. The RMT executive would look pretty silly if they accepted an offer they knew members would roundly reject. It is also comparable to what Scotrail / ScotGov were offering.

 

[gabrielhj07]

I might be misunderstanding, but wasn't the general view that rail workers could currently be prosecuted or sacked for not undertaking their job role to the required standard and/or withholding revenue?

What about not undertaking their job at all?

I also don’t see how they can be ‘withholding revenue’, it isn’t as though they are taking it themselves.

 

[43066]

Well you can feel that way. I fear that if your views are representative we are looking at a very long dispute with HMG actively seeking to destroy RMT.

I suppose that’s one possibility. I do hope you’re wrong, though.

Another is that there will be an eventual agreement around the 5% level. As you know better than me, it’s chicken feed compared to many other areas of government spend, and the railway remains capable of generating disruption out of all proportion to costs.

As for destroying the RMT, it’s survived for nearly two centuries. I’m pretty sure even the mooted “minimum service level” legislation won’t be the magic bullet some seem to think. The government also knows it, which is why they haven’t introduced it. Otherwise they’d have done it ages ago.

As has been said previously, Boris Johnson is no Margaret Thatcher.

Most of my colleagues and friends have nothing printable to say about RMT.

So do more than a few of mine, it might surprise you to learn! I think their new approach is refreshingly different, though.

What about not undertaking their job at all?

I also don’t see how they can be ‘withholding revenue’, it isn’t as though they are taking it themselves.

Withdrawing labour is one thing. Actively destroying your employer’s business is quite another! Staff who knowingly allowed people to fare evade would be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct. Doing this would likely be a criminal act in its own right (I haven’t checked).

 

[windingroad]

Most of my colleagues and friends have nothing printable to say about RMT. They are hardly right-wing types either.

My point is that pay rise or not, you're not going to see a tax rise off the back of it, much in the same way tax doesn't suddenly increase every time the NHS gets a pay deal. So it seems odd to be antagonistic towards the strike on that basis.

What about not undertaking their job at all? I also don’t see how they can be ‘withholding revenue’, it isn’t as though they are taking it themselves.

You could well be right, and to be honest I'm only half-remembering posts I saw elsewhere in the thread. Having said that, striking is protected in law (otherwise not turning up would just be gross misconduct) and I would assume doing your job badly probably isn't. But I'm not a unionised worker so this is probably all nonsense, and I defer to those who know better.

 

[175001]

That "pathetic and insulting offer" is in line with what has been offered to great swathes of the public sector. I for one would not pay an extra 1p in tax for you to get a bigger pay rise

Oh my, eat a Snickers or something

 

[Starmill]

I think the using the word derisory can be classed as understatement of the year!
Unbelievable!

Again, is "unbelievable" and "derisory" actually helpful to the position? It's an offer slightly above the general cap. Now it's not particularly good in real terms but is it really "unbelievable"?

 

[yorksrob]

I suppose that’s one possibility. I do hope you’re wrong, though.

Another is that there will be an eventual agreement around the 5% level. As you know better than me, it’s chicken feed compared to many other areas of government spend, and the railway remains capable of generating disruption out of all proportion to costs.

As for destroying the RMT, it’s survived for nearly two centuries. I’m pretty sure even the mooted “minimum service level” legislation won’t be the magic bullet some seem to think. The government also knows it, which is why they haven’t introduced it. Otherwise they’d have done it ages ago.

As has been said previously, Boris Johnson is no Margaret Thatcher.



So do more than a few of mine, it might surprise you to learn! I think their new approach is refreshingly different, though.



Withdrawing labour is one thing. Actively destroying your employer’s business is quite another! Staff who knowingly allowed people to fare evade would be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct. Doing this would likely be a criminal act in its own right (I haven’t checked).

And striking isn't actively destroying your employer's business ?

The suggestion that staff don't collect fares temporarily as an alternative to strike action would be actively preserving the business as a whole (if it were possible).

 

[43066]

I thought the government had indicated that the public service “pay cap” was now a thing of the past.

 

[Starmill]

My point is that pay rise or not, you're not going to see a tax rise off the back of it, much in the same way tax doesn't suddenly increase every time the NHS gets a pay deal. So it seems odd to be antagonistic towards the strike on that basis.

Big tax rises are flavour of the month with the current government, of course. Despite their desperate attempts to claim the contrary.

 

[windingroad]

Again, is "unbelievable" and "derisory" actually helpful to the position? It's an offer slightly above the general cap. Now it's not particularly good in real terms but is it really "unbelievable"?

Negotiators are big boys and girls and I'm sure they will cope with some light criticism. They are well aware it's a rubbish offer!

 

[Cavan]

So much for all the speculation that the DfT would try and buy off Network Rail while ignoring the TOCs!

 

[43066]

And striking isn't actively destroying your employer's business ?

No, it’s just withdrawing labour. The employer is free to continue to conduct its businesses using contingency staff etc. Staff members allowing people to (in effect) steal their employer’s revenue is a completely different thing.

The suggestion that staff don't collect fares temporarily as an alternative to strike action would be actively preserving the business as a whole (if it were possible).

It’s never going to happen.

 

[STKKK46]

Please research the strike action by the RMT, this WILL show its not entirely about pay. There's over 2000 network rail staff being redeployed or taking redundancy, being offered a new job 100s of miles away as an alternative is the option many had, so they had to take voluntary redundancy.

The strike is a very complex one that people just think greedy drivers, the majority of drivers are not involved in the dispute at all. Only 2 small group's of aslef drivers are in dispute over pay, the vast majority are not involved in this.

People blindly belive the tories and their right wing press, which is a real shame as the more you research the dispute the more you understand the strike.

I personally had it put across to me as all about pay, as a TOC member. That’s why I was wondering.

I voted against but since the strike dates announced I will be striking due to not only standing by my colleagues but also because of coming to understand the reasoning why they are striking (from a money perspective)

I am fully aware the drivers aren’t involved and I’ll let you off on this occasion for the frankly insulting suggestion of believing the tories because you obviously weren’t aware of my situation!

 

[Starmill]

Negotiators are big boys and girls and I'm sure they will cope with some light criticism. They are well aware it's a rubbish offer!

I don't think anyone thinks it's particularly good, even Network Rail have only said it's on the basis of affordability.

 

[ComUtoR]

Bluntly by supporting defeating RMT.

Does that mean they should vote Conservative in the next general election ? How many years away is that ? I wonder what a defeated RMT would look like. Closure of the Union ?

I don't believe that political ideology should be part of this fight. The loser is the passenger. By having an ideology so entrenched in hatred towards the RMT and doing everything to see their destruction makes you blind to the reality. It makes you blind to what is fair and makes you blind to what could be done to resolve this strike and support the future of the railway.

 

[windingroad]

No, it’s just withdrawing labour. The employer is free to continue to conduct its businesses using contingency staff etc. Staff members allowing people to (in effect) steal their employer’s revenue is a completely different thing.

How can it be stealing if nothing is taken? Passengers simply wouldn't be asked for money.

 

[Bluejays]

I wonder what would have happened if this 2/3% offer had actually been made in January. Personally I think there'd have been a bit of grumbling, but it would have been accepted.

 

[wobman]

I personally had it put across to me as all about pay, as a TOC member. That’s why I was wondering.

I voted against but since the strike dates announced I will be striking due to not only standing by my colleagues but also because of coming to understand the reasoning why they are striking (from a money perspective)

I am fully aware the drivers aren’t involved and I’ll let you off on this occasion for the frankly insulting suggestion of believing the tories because you obviously weren’t aware of my situation!

Sorry I went to far with tories bit of the post, didn't realise you were involved in the dispute.

 

[43066]

How can it be stealing if nothing is taken? Passengers simply wouldn't be asked for money.

I’d suggest staff members doing this would themselves likely be guilty of inciting passengers to commit various ticketing offences.

I wonder if @tspaul26 would have a view on this point?

 

[eldomtom2]

I am fully aware the drivers aren’t involved

Aren't RMT drivers involved? How many of those are there?

 

[gabrielhj07]

Withdrawing labour is one thing. Actively destroying your employer’s business is quite another! Staff who knowingly allowed people to fare evade would be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct. Doing this would likely be a criminal act in its own right (I haven’t checked).

This can be seen as the withdrawing of their labour - they aren't doing their job!

In fact it's almost no different to strikes, except the travelling public are not disadvantaged.

 

[yorksrob]

No, it’s just withdrawing labour. The employer is free to continue to conduct its businesses using contingency staff etc. Staff members allowing people to (in effect) steal their employer’s revenue is a completely different thing.



It’s never going to happen.

I'm off the opposite opinion.

Striking is massively damaging your customer base, potentially long into the future.

Ceasing to enforce fares might involve a short term hit-and a few of the punters will take the piss and try it on. But the majority will see it as a one off bonus and happily continue to use the railway.

 

[westv]

ASLEF strike on Hull Trains 26/6 now called off.

 

[Starmill]

This can be seen as the withdrawing of their labour - they aren't doing their job!

In fact it's almost no different to strikes, except the travelling public are not disadvantaged.

Disadvantaging the company's customers is usually part of the point of taking strike action.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Striking is massively damaging your customer base, potentially long into the future.

It amazes me that the very same people who are so keen to drive a modal shift towards the railways are actively pushing people onto the roads.

This forum is very pro-railways, but so often advice on travel arrangements for next week is 'just drive, it's easier'. I can only imagine what the attitude is in the general public.

Disadvantaging the company's customers is usually part of the point of taking strike action.

Why? What are the customers going to do about pay/working conditions etc.?