RDG response to RMT's recent "road map" proposal.

[yorksrob]

I have always leaned Conservative. This is a very insightful post. I was sure in 1997 with Prescott given a big role, railways were really going to benefit and there would be a rolling programme of electrification etc. I was bitterly disappointed like you. Any available cash is NOT going to the railways under Labour. It might be unpalatable to some but that is the way it is. You can actually make the case (apart from the last 5 years or so) that railways have done better under the Conservatives.


Exactly.

Anything before the last five years is ancient history. I endured a year of bad industrial relations before the pandemic and am being forced to endure more than a year of chaos now. Sadly this wipes out any gains made during the McLaughlin years.

The Blair/Brown government was disappointing for the railway, but nowhere near as chaotic as this. Right now I'd gladly take New Labour style disappointment

 

[HSTEd]

To be fair to Blair, with the exception of the meltdown resulting from sold-off Railtrack, he largely kept the trains running and didn't court continual industrial action.

He did try to sell off the tube and had to backtrack when it turned into a disaster.

 

[43096]

Dont know how Steve Montgomery is allowed that post considering he’s also a senior manager in FirstGroup, total conflict of interest. He should resign.

Letter sent on behalf of the employer group is signed by director of one of those employers is not a conflict of interest. Do you know what the term actually means?

 

[yorksrob]

He did try to sell off the tube and had to backtrack when it turned into a disaster.

At least he backtracked. Can you imagine this lot doing so ?

 

[Goldfish62]

He did try to sell off the tube and had to backtrack when it turned into a disaster.

Not quite. It went ahead when the court case against the government launched by TfL and the Mayor failed. It eventually collapsed due to unsustainability and TfL acquired the remnants.

 

[island]

The strikes are just a protest now. Does anyone taking part seriously think that they are going to achieve anything apart from displaying anger with the government/RDG?

Don't get me wrong, if I was affected I'd still be striking, but I'd be under no illusion that it's achieving anything.

I would go as far as saying the goal, or at least the primary goal, has always been to give the Conservative government a black-eye.

 

[Facing Back]

I would go as far as saying the goal, or at least the primary goal, has always been to give the Conservative government a black-eye.

Do you think that they are achieving that?

 

[northwichcat]

Ultimately this is the Government failing to compromise.

In January

Train operators have made a fresh offer to the RMT union of a 9% rise over two years for onboard crew and station staff, raising hopes of a breakthrough in the long-running pay dispute.
...
The RDG said it had made a “best and final offer” including a pay rise of 4% from this January and 5% (or a minimum £1,750 rise) backdated to January 2022.
...
The RMT accused the government of sabotaging the prospective deal by demanding more driver-only operation of trains (DOO), regarded as a red line by the union.

As well as offering slightly higher pay, the new package has withdrawn the critical DOO demand.

However, the deal stipulates mandatory Sunday working when rostered, more flexible working, the ability to move staff between nearby stations when needed, and paves the way for other reforms that the union has strongly resisted – not least, the potential wholesale closure of ticket offices.

RMT has received new pay offer from train operators, union says

Companies have made a ‘final offer’ to union including pay rise of 9% over two years

www.theguardian.com

To me it sounds like the RMT's red line demand has been met, and they've been offered improved pay offers more than once. So, as much as I hate the current government, they are compromising.

 

[Robertj21a]

I think you probably have to hold that card back in case of an attempt to force the changes through or a fire and rehire exercise.

The RMT members who are still trying to live on their 2019 salaries in 2023 evidently think it’s still worth fighting.

All out strike - a joke perhaps?

There's nothing the government would like more - how to show the RMT in an even worse light for the benefit of their numerous (car owning) voters.
.

 

[Andyh82]

I get the feeling the strikes will continue until the election, Labour will offer a very small compromise, nowhere near what the RMT are wanting, and then they will settle.

I do wonder what the RMT would then do, as previously when they used to strike one operator at a time, but if you settle a national dispute, what do they do then?

 

[northwichcat]

It appears that the RMT are more than happy to continue with their campaign in the hope that Starmer etc will make a big change - he won't.
Not only is it, say, 15 months away but Labour won't give Rail much priority and, in any event, they won't have more money available.

Yes, any new party to enter 10 Downing Street will say the country's broke thanks to COVID, the war in Ukraine and Liz Truss winning the world record for worst PM.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Sep 2023 ==

I get the feeling the strikes will continue until the election, Labour will offer a very small compromise, nowhere near what the RMT are wanting, and then they will settle.

I do wonder what the RMT would then do, as previously when they used to strike one operator at a time, but if you settle a national dispute, what do they do then?

I imagine it'll be a priority for the Conservatives to start the process of awarding new franchises before the next election.

 

[brad465]

Do you think that they are achieving that?

They are not, but given how far behind they're polling it's possible they think they are, even though there are plenty of other causes for the Government's poor ratings.

I think if Labour form the next Government they're going to be in a "damned if they do/don't" situation, given the press' general hostility towards them. If they settle they'll be accused of pandering to unions (they've already tried and failed to call them "Labour's strikes"), but if they let the dispute rumble on, they'll be attacked for the economic costs and disruption.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, any new party to enter 10 Downing Street will say the country's broke thanks to COVID, the war in Ukraine and Liz Truss winning the world record for worst PM.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Sep 2023 ==



I imagine it'll be a priority for the Conservatives to start the process of awarding new franchises before the next election.

They should offer what has been accepted in Scotland, on Merseyrail and elsewhere. Then we'll see if they accept it.

 

[Merle Haggard]

I have always leaned Conservative. This is a very insightful post. I was sure in 1997 with Prescott given a big role, railways were really going to benefit and there would be a rolling programme of electrification etc. I was bitterly disappointed like you. Any available cash is NOT going to the railways under Labour. It might be unpalatable to some but that is the way it is. You can actually make the case (apart from the last 5 years or so) that railways have done better under the Conservatives.


Exactly.

Well I have a certain bitterness about 1997. The Conservatives, for I thought good reasons, did not privatise the Channel Tunnel freight business (I was there) - the logic being it was still developing. But the Labour government just sold it to Wisconsin Central immediately they got in (no open sale). Mr Blair, when challenged, said 'ownership isn't important'. That simple statement would be a good 'discuss' question, particularly for those who thought the labour party might have any even mildly Socialist leanings under Blair.
And W-C didn't understand the International business, just wanted to get the set.
But the (compulsory) redundancy terms were wonderful

 

[Dan G]

No doubt I'll be unpopular for saying this but the letter seems fairly ok to me. The response explains what has been done to date and re-confirms that the key issues remain.
If the Union just continues - without any significant changes to their current approach - we'll be in much the same situation in 12-24 months time.

Yeah I agree. RMT should at least put it to members with neutral language.

PS I think we will have a general election in May. Gives them half a chance of not losing to Kahn in London (if Kahn wins it's goodnight for the Tories). Sunak just wants to get his green card back and return to California.

 

[Facing Back]

Well I have a certain bitterness about 1997. The Conservatives, for I thought good reasons, did not privatise the Channel Tunnel freight business (I was there) - the logic being it was still developing. But the Labour government just sold it to Wisconsin Central immediately they got in (no open sale). Mr Blair, when challenged, said 'ownership isn't important'. That simple statement would be a good 'discuss' question, particularly for those who thought the labour party might have any even mildly Socialist leanings under Blair.
And W-C didn't understand the International business, just wanted to get the set.
But the (compulsory) redundancy terms were wonderful

That was a case study when I was in business school shortly afterwards. Is was seen as a poor example of socialism - as in the national ownership of core assets but as Tony wasn't a socialist it was more importantly seen as a piss poor negotiation and an valuable asset sold off for buttons.

 

[Merle Haggard]

That was a case study when I was in business school shortly afterwards. Is was seen as a poor example of socialism - as in the national ownership of core assets but as Tony wasn't a socialist it was more importantly seen as a piss poor negotiation and an valuable asset sold off for buttons.

I am not sure whether, even now, I should place this in the public domain.

1) Mrs T. stated, when the C.T. was authorised, that 'no public money' was to be spent on it,

2) Someone high above RfD agreed tunnel toll charges for freight at a high level that meant that no traffic could be moved profitably at the market rate, but which presumably ensured that, if traffic was actually conveyed at those charges, the Tunnel would be profitable as far as rail freight went and require no state intervention..

3) Cost figures presented by RfD were required to be segregated between rail and tunnel. Because traffic was carried at, as far as the Tunnel element went, prices below cost the latter required Government subsidy but the former broke even (there was a large proportion of trainload - cars and boxes).

4) RfD was interrogated about the results for the rail element as regards profitability by those high above via the Board, but that same party seemed to accept underwriting the Tunnel costs without question.

I had a view that all these statements have a common link, but maybe I'm a cynic about politics? (answer - YES!).

 

[Goldfish62]

I imagine it'll be a priority for the Conservatives to start the process of awarding new franchises before the next election.

That's not happening. Franchising is dead and buried.

If they win the next GE they'll start inviting bids for Passenger Service Contracts, but whether they'll get anyone bidding is quite another matter.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

That's not happening. Franchising is dead and buried.

If they win the next GE they'll start inviting bids for Passenger Service Contracts, but whether they'll get anyone bidding is quite another matter.

Although interestingly yesterday’s transport select heading hints at moving some of the risk and reward back to the private companies going forward so whilst it’s passenger service contracts they may well behave slightly more like a franchise.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Dont know how Steve Montgomery is allowed that post considering he’s also a senior manager in FirstGroup, total conflict of interest. He should resign.

There is no conflict of interest. RDG is effectively a Government controlled body and that statement will have had huge input and final approval from the DfT.

It is always chaired by a current senior exec from the industry but it isn’t ATOC, which was seen as too independent by the DfT. So RDG was set up to be a subtly different body.

As TOCs are now effectively Government entities, loaned out to the Owning Groups to manage on the DfT’s behalf, independent decision making and dissenting public statements have all but gone. With 60%-70% of the TOC contract performance management fee relating to items other than running trains, if you want to pocket those fees and satisfy your shareholders (which as any Director you are obliged to do), then you tow the line.

Quite obviously, the DfT continue to want the staff to give away their right to dispute whilst the terms and conditions are drastically altered, in some cases negating the effect of any pay rise because, at the end of the day, any pay rise has to be self funding. There still seems to be no new money on the table.

RDG has no powers of its own. It is controlled by its members - the TOCs. However since COVID the majority TOCs are contracted by DfT so the latter can effectively direct the show, but it does so only by directing the behaviours of the TOCs. So when 'RDG' takes a position it is because the TOCs have been directed what to do and effectively RDG has to reflect that. As a membership body, the chair has to be drawn from the members so as noted above, there is no 'conflict of interest' as constituted.

The ATOC>RDG migration had nothing to do with independence from the DfT but arose out of the 2011 McNulty report. This highlighted the fragmented nature of the industry but instead of tackling it instead glued a new body - RDG - on top of everything, peopled supposedly by the top people from all the bits on the basis that they would somehow play nicely and co-ordinate things. It had absolutely no direct functions and didn't make much difference so eventually was merged into ATOC as the latter sat on the commercial and legal machinery of TOC decision making.

Against this background it's worth noting that in a similar way Ticket Office proposals may be vocalised by RDG but they are not drafted by RDG. The TOCs were instructed by DfT to put the plans out to consultation, RDG is expected to support the process but does not have the power to direct any of it. Basically, in the current structure, RDG is the fall guy organisation for anything being imposed on the industry because, until there is legislation to untangle the 1993 Railways Act structure, it remains the only point at which the TOCs are legally bound together.

 

[Clarence Yard]

A defining moment came early in their existence when the TOC members wanted to put out a statement which wasn’t exactly DfT friendly. The NR people said everyone had to be co-operative now and they couldn’t agree to anything unless the DfT agreed to it. That rather set the tone for what followed.

I asked DfT colleagues about whether they intended RDG to have the same independent outlook as ATOC. They replied, “Of course not, why do you think it was in McNulty?!” They knew what was going to happen, even before COVID accelerated their direct control over TOCs.

 

[thelongestroad]

I reckon they (the current government) will settle the dispute a few months before the next general election and use it as a "we solved it" vote gaining tatic.

 

[Russel]

I reckon they (the current government) will settle the dispute a few months before the next general election and use it as a "we solved it" vote gaining tatic.

There is certainly a possibility of this happening.

The Govt must be well aware of how much disruption the unions will cause during the run up to a general election if it's not sorted by then, so it would be in their interest...

 

[whoosh]

I reckon they (the current government) will settle the dispute a few months before the next general election and use it as a "we solved it" vote gaining tatic.

I think there'll be more disingenuous provocation to make the railway unions go on strike, so the government can prove it's Minimum Service Bill works and therefore the Conservative Government are wonderful and should be voted for again.

Remember this all started with the unions not even being spoken to - no talks - for months on end. Talks didn't take place until well after several months of strikes. The government never wanted this sorted out amicably, or in the best interests of the passengers.

 

[Snow1964]

The Govt must be well aware of how much disruption the unions will cause during the run up to a general election if it's not sorted by then, so it would be in their interest...

That's what some Labour voters don't realise, the Conservative Government will use the we are tough on inflation and cost of living

Then will then talk about bad days of unions disrupting everything and how Labour will support the bad unions with the aim of getting the middle swing vote back on Conservative side.

Tactic is bound to make Labour and unions seem bad because the work together to disrupt people's lives. Bound to be way is presented.

 

[yorksrob]

The country will never improve all the while it's run by rich motorists in London.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Sep 2023 ==

That's what some Labour voters don't realise, the Conservative Government will use the we are tough on inflation and cost of living

Then will then talk about bad days of unions disrupting everything and how Labour will support the bad unions with the aim of getting the middle swing vote back on Conservative side.

Tactic is bound to make Labour and unions seem bad because the work together to disrupt people's lives. Bound to be way is presented.

That might work if they were taking action to make the railway affordable (like many of our Continental neighbours are doing), but they're not, so such messaging will be seen through by all but their core supporters who would have voted for them anyway.

 

[Blindtraveler]

On the face of it, the rdg proposal does seem reasonable in terms of putting an end to the current situation, equally I can see why there will be a slice of the membership of unions who wouldn't trust it as far as they could throw it as their concerns might be the the negotiating position promised them would then be gone back on once the deal was agreed and through and the immediate threat of more industrial unrest stopped.

On the flipside however and I'm speaking purely as a passenger, do the various unions not realize that the pay rises their demanding are not going to be met in terms of actually funding them unless we can get passenger revenue back to what it was and make it better from that position? I hardly think in the final part of 2023 that we can any longer blames the pandemic for the collapse in rail revenue, okay so are there are a lot of lines whose timetable service is a pale shadow of what it was but we've had a busy year on the network and with the reports of many trains and roots being hilariously over subscribed I'm sure that if there wasn't the ever present threat of industrial action which made those of us wanting to make and keep firm plans look elsewhere for our travel needs, to the benefits of the coach air and motoring industries primarily that revenue would be back to normal and indeed exceeding normal for stop even with inflationary cost pressures faced by operators such as maintenance and fuel and cleaning plus the costs of ancillary and back office functions I still remain convinced that the current prolonged period of action regardless of which part of the country you are in has had a significant impact on revenue. Case in point, my aunt and uncle are travelling to Scotland at the end of the month and much to their reluctance have chosen to drive over three days rather than risk the train because they're sick of having plans put on hold


Something needs to be found that will simply break the deadlock and get people back round the negotiating table

 

[Falcon1200]

The offer wasn't put to the membership for a full referendum on, but it was put to the branches to provide their views on and those branches had meetings where the membership had a say on it going forward. So they have had a say on it, just not in the way rdg/dft want

But what proportion of RMT members actually attended those meetings?

The RMT will continue to strike, the Government will continue to ignore them and the financial situation of the railway will continue to deteriorate.

Sadly I agree, to the detriment of the rail industry, its staff and its customers.

They should offer what has been accepted in Scotland

The only problem being that Scotland now has to find the money to pay for that deal, along with all the Scottish Government's other plans! And I think I know where they are planning to get the cash.....

IMHO the RMT should put the deal to a membership vote, with three options; 1. Refuse the offer, 2. Accept the whole offer, 3. Accept the pay increase but refuse the changes to T&Cs. I know that 3. would not be accepted by the TOCs/DfT,Government, but it would enable the Union to take the moral high ground by saying this is not about money but the severe disruption to our members' lives.

 

[yorksrob]

The only problem being that Scotland now has to find the money to pay for that deal, along with all the Scottish Government's other plans! And I think I know where they are planning to get the cash.....

IMHO the RMT should put the deal to a membership vote, with three options; 1. Refuse the offer, 2. Accept the whole offer, 3. Accept the pay increase but refuse the changes to T&Cs. I know that 3. would not be accepted by the TOCs/DfT,Government, but it would enable the Union to take the moral high ground by saying this is not about money but the severe disruption to our members' lives.

My understanding is that Scotland hasn't offered the moon on a stick. Merely similar pay without the silly T's & C's.

Anyhow, your suggestion does sound like a decent tactical move to ratchet up pressure on the Government.

 

[Krokodil]

get people back round the negotiating table

What makes you think that they aren't around the negotiating table? I had a chat with an Avanti RMT rep the other day who was on his way back from a meeting in London. Management could offer nothing at all, their hands are tied.