Rail Strikes & General Election: what might happen ?

[Chatt3nden]

So now that there has been a general election called how likely is it that any rail strikes will be suspended until after the result of the election?

 

[JonathanH]

So now that there has been a general election called how likely is it that any rail strikes will be suspended until after the result of the election?

It depends on whether a point can be made by having strikes. That is a matter for union strategists to decide upon.

 

[Ashfordian6]

So now that there has been a general election called how likely is it that any rail strikes will be suspended until after the result of the election?

I believe the past couple of strikes were in the first few days or each month so there is an option for an early June strike as well as a strike a couple of days before the election.

Strikes happening will not look good on the current Government, especially when opposition parties use them as election ammunition.

But like the poster above said, it will depend on what the union strategists decide.

There is also the obvious solution whereby a sensible offer is made and the action is suspended pending the ballot results.

 

[manmikey]

I'm now wondering if the recent RDG approach to ASLEF for talks was only made to stall industrial action in the run up to the election.

 

[Hellboydce]

Or tories want it settled so they can say they have achieved something in the run up to the election

 

[dk1]

I'm now wondering if the recent RDG approach to ASLEF for talks was only made to stall industrial action in the run up to the election.

But it won’t. If ASLEF aren’t happy with the pace of talks then I expect action to be ramped up during the election campaign. Reports on progress though have been positive in the last few days so here’s hoping.

 

[Efini92]

I'm now wondering if the recent RDG approach to ASLEF for talks was only made to stall industrial action in the run up to the election.

It does seem rather coincidental.

 

[michael74]

Seems the DfT/Govt have been doing the same with the RMT ......

 

[JamesT]

Sunak only decided it would be the 4th of July in the last couple of days. I think suggestions that actions over the last couple of weeks have been done with an eye to a specific election date are somewhat fanciful.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm now wondering if the recent RDG approach to ASLEF for talks was only made to stall industrial action in the run up to the election.

It does seem rather coincidental.

I think your significantly over estimating how far in advance this decision was made. The furthest in advance I've heard is that Sunak met with his core advisors last week to pick a date. It seems clear that, even if a decision was made last week, the final call was made potentially as late as yesterday morning.

For instance David Cameron was supposed to be on a visit in Albania yesterday afternoon. Instead he landed in Tirana and got straight back on the plane to come home. If the decision had been made and communicated so far down the chain this the RDG knew they needed to stall there's no way Cameron gets in the flight.

I also think it may well overestimate how much importance the Government put on the railways...

 

[Topological]

I think your significantly over estimating how far in advance this decision was made. The furthest in advance I've heard is that Sunak met with his core advisors last week to pick a date. It seems clear that, even if a decision was made last week, the final call was made potentially as late as yesterday morning.

For instance David Cameron was supposed to be on a visit in Albania yesterday afternoon. Instead he landed in Tirana and got straight back on the plane to come home. If the decision had been made and communicated so far down the chain this the RDG knew they needed to stall there's no way Cameron gets in the flight.

I also think it may well overestimate how much importance the Government put on the railways...

Indeed.

It seems very unlikely that anything related to railways either entered the decision making process, or will get driven by the election.

That is not to say the strikes will not be used by the marketing campaigns on both sides, they will. The Conservatives will look to portray strikes as what happens when excess demands are placed on public finances, whilst Labour will use the strikes to say that the country needs change. Irrespective of your individual politics it must be clear that anything related to strikes will get spun by the political machine in the direction that suits.

There is an argument for more strikes to affect change, but I suspect the country is really in a period of apathy now when it comes to railways.

 

[Helvellyn]

My hunch is no strikes this side of the election. Why? Because whilst not good for the Government it puts pressure on Labour to actually come out with a postion.

"So what will you do?" is now the question every Labour Shadow Minister will be getting asked. Given most people expect a Labour Ministerial team to be in place w/c 8 July just saying "we're not the Tories" won't cut it.

So unless the Unions want to force some answers out of Labour why would they strike in the next six weeks?

 

[dk1]

Remember that the ballot results that came back only last week where overwhelmingly in favour of continuing industrial action.

 

[Ken H]

The tories could settle this now. Leave the bill for Starmer to pay. Not nice, but both main parties have a track record for such scorched earth policies.
This assumes the tories believe they will get hammered on Jul 4th.

 

[michael74]

I see Huw Merriman is the latest rat to leave the sinking ship.....

 

[Bald Rick]

The tories could settle this now.

They couldn’t.

To do so requires a ministerial decision, and there is now not enough time to get one of those confirmed before Government is effectively suspended.

 

[Ianigsy]

My hunch is no strikes this side of the election. Why? Because whilst not good for the Government it puts pressure on Labour to actually come out with a postion.

"So what will you do?" is now the question every Labour Shadow Minister will be getting asked. Given most people expect a Labour Ministerial team to be in place w/c 8 July just saying "we're not the Tories" won't cut it.

So unless the Unions want to force some answers out of Labour why would they strike in the next six weeks?

It would also be a gift to the Tories - it would be spun as out of control unions trying to disrupt the election campaign, with the implication that it’ll happen all the time under Labour. Not to mention that the unions probably want a change of government as much as anybody.

 

[irish_rail]

The first thing Labour will have to shell out for when they get into Government is the 10 billion compensation bill for the victims of the infected blood. The Tories have played a bit of a blinder here managing to hold this payment off until now, to a point it won't be them having to pay it. The concern is, how much impact could this potentially have on Labour being able to afford to settle the rail disputes? May the money for that have to be diverted to pay out blood compensation?

 

[Sly Old Fox]

Don’t know why it would get resolved. There’s no money to pay for it and neither a Conservative or Labour government have a lot to gain by finding some.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is it the case that the executive of ASLEF do not have the same deeply-held left-wing political beliefs as that of the RMT executive, who have displayed in the past by their support for a specific political party that is not the Labour Party?

 

[yorksrob]

The first thing Labour will have to shell out for when they get into Government is the 10 billion compensation bill for the victims of the infected blood. The Tories have played a bit of a blinder here managing to hold this payment off until now, to a point it won't be them having to pay it. The concern is, how much impact could this potentially have on Labour being able to afford to settle the rail disputes? May the money for that have to be diverted to pay out blood compensation?

One would hope that whatever Government gets in, would pursue the pharmaceutical companies that provided the tainted blood products for at least some of this money.

 

[Bald Rick]

Is it the case that the executive of ASLEF do not have the same deeply-held left-wing political beliefs as that of the RMT executive, who have displayed in the past by their support for a specific political party that is not the Labour Party?

ASLEF are well connected with, and very supportive of, Labour. RMT less so.

 

[The Ham]

The first thing Labour will have to shell out for when they get into Government is the 10 billion compensation bill for the victims of the infected blood. The Tories have played a bit of a blinder here managing to hold this payment off until now, to a point it won't be them having to pay it. The concern is, how much impact could this potentially have on Labour being able to afford to settle the rail disputes? May the money for that have to be diverted to pay out blood compensation?

I'm not sure it's as big an issue as some think, yes £10bn is a lot of money, but given that the government spends £1,200bn, to bring the numbers to something more manageable to understand it's the same as someone paying £167 when they have outgoings each year if £20,000. Whist that's could be a significant issue it or was ongoing, the fact it's a one off payment would be akin to (say) someone having to buy a new battery for their ICE car.

It's also likely to generate tax income for them as the money gets spent, as well as improving the economy.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Getting back to the subject of rail strikes, an incoming Labour Government can fund the pay rises from the existing rail budget by the savings it will make from taking the TOCs into OLR, OLR being a cheaper form of funding and control than the NRC arrangement with the private sector.

I suspect the dispute will get resolved rather quickly, once the new Minister gets her feet under the ministerial desk.

 

[JonathanH]

Getting back to the subject of rail strikes, an incoming Labour Government can fund the pay rises from the existing rail budget by the savings it will make from taking the TOCs into OLR, OLR being a cheaper form of funding and control than the NRC arrangement with the private sector.

I suspect the dispute will get resolved rather quickly, once the new Minister gets her feet under the ministerial desk.

That may pay for the 2022 claim. At some point the 2023 and 2024 claims are going to have to be met as well.

 

[whoosh]

All that money is currently sitting in TOC's bank accounts making them interest. Because they are paid a management fee to provide services, but have been prevented from negotiating pay by order of the DfT.

Or are we supposed to believe that Management fees (out of which operating costs such as staff costs, train leasing, energy and water costs, uniforms, cleaning contracts, etc.) would not go up in line with inflation?

 

[Thirteen]

Surely Labour can offer a 5-6% no strings and it'll be sorted? That's similar to what the likes of ARL offered to settle the strikes two year ago.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely Labour can offer a 5-6% no strings and it'll be sorted? That's similar to what the likes of ARL offered to settle the strikes two year ago.

In recent times, has anyone asked them what their party would do, if in office?

 

[JonathanH]

Surely Labour can offer a 5-6% no strings and it'll be sorted? That's similar to what the likes of ARL offered to settle the strikes two year ago.

What about the 2023 and 2024 increases?

 

[dk1]

What about the 2023 and 2024 increases?

There has been talk/rumours of 5% 4% & 4% for 2022 2023 & 2024 respectively. No idea where this has come from as nobody I’ve spoken to will divulge their source. Time will tell.