RMT dispute on Merseyrail

[Clip]

From what I gather many Drivers are now duel RMT / Aslef and due to this are not in breech of T&Cs. Merseyrail are yet to put their DOO proposal officially to Aslef, now that will be one to watch. With that in mind sacking of drivers can not be a serious consideration, the dispute would go nuclear with Aslef all out too.

This doesn't sound right at all as the ballot was only 200 + wasn't it? doesn't sound many for drivers and guards and also something ive never heard of anyone actually doing before

 

[danbarnstall]

They joined after the ballot but are still protected. The law is different between crossing picket lines of your own union and that of another union. It's happening, my brother in law works at BC.

 

[Andrew32]

RDW ban imposed on the guards by RMT, no ballot required.

 

[M28361M]

RMT have confirmed a further 24-hour strike on 8th November. Northern guards will strike the same day, and there is a 48 hour strike on Southern, Greater Anglia and SWR.

 

[Kite159]

Only a 24 hour strike this time?

Getting ever so closer to the RMT's dream of a nationwide strike, one step closer to the Tory's dream of harsher anti-strike legalisation to protect the travelling public (i.e. changing railway workers to class them as "essential" and being unable to take strike action, which is the way I suspect things will end up)

 

[gavin]

Wonder what the odd's are of strikes on December 23rd and 24th to cause maximum disruption to the Christmas getaway

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wonder what the odd's are of strikes on December 23rd and 24th to cause maximum disruption to the Christmas getaway

If they do they will lose any sympathy any of the travelling public ever had.

If the public start calling for DOO, their case is in bits.

 

[313103]

Only a 24 hour strike this time?

Getting ever so closer to the RMT's dream of a nationwide strike, one step closer to the Tory's dream of harsher anti-strike legalisation to protect the travelling public (i.e. changing railway workers to class them as "essential" and being unable to take strike action, which is the way I suspect things will end up)

Damned if we do, damned if we dont. No one has given me a answer to this question when i have posted it before so i will ask it again.
What do you think the RMT should do?

Besides the companies want to move these staff from 'Essential' roles to 'Non Essential' roles anyway. Someone sitting a customer service office is non essential to the running of the railway, a OBS or whatever your going to call these non roles are not essential to the running of the railway. So a no strike deal will only affect Drivers and to a lesser degree signallers, everyone else is regarded as NON essential. When they take away my essentialness part of my role it will be time to move on.

 

[313103]

Wonder what the odd's are of strikes on December 23rd and 24th to cause maximum disruption to the Christmas getaway

Anyone who is thinking of getting away by train on Sunday the 24th would be very fool hardy to say the least. Railway companies are not going to run additional trains on this particular day. Plus i believe staff in these companies have Sundays outside the working week.

If i was a betting man i will give you odds that NO staff will be on strike on Sunday the 24th December.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What do you think the RMT should do?

Deal only with the job security and future of their CURRENT members. That is, seek to ensure those who wish to remain in the employ of the railway on the same money and T&C can do so, even if their role (of guard) is redundant.

Given that there is natural turnover and the plan is to introduce the new stock fairly slowly, all they need to do in my book is to offer a quality (genuinely) voluntary/early retirement package and cease recruitment / recruit on fixed term contracts[1] as necessary to allow the number of guards to be run down to zero when the final FLIRT comes into service.

Now, of course, if the drivers object to driving DOO there is a slightly different issue - but again, there is no grounds to object to all new drivers having DOO in their contracts - again, if you don't like the job don't apply for it. If of course nobody applies for DOO driver jobs then they will have to rethink.

That is what the RMT should be arguing for. Not fighting a DOO implementation (this specific one) that in my book makes absolute sense and I am in full support of it.

[1] Fixed term contracts which were clearly stated as such when the job was accepted do not guarantee future employment and fighting this when the company is being honest about them is ludicrous. If you don't want a fixed term contract, don't apply for one. It's not as if this is being done on the sly.

 

[Robertj21a]

Deal only with the job security and future of their CURRENT members. That is, seek to ensure those who wish to remain in the employ of the railway on the same money and T&C can do so, even if their role (of guard) is redundant.

Given that there is natural turnover and the plan is to introduce the new stock fairly slowly, all they need to do in my book is to offer a quality (genuinely) voluntary/early retirement package and cease recruitment / recruit on fixed term contracts[1] as necessary to allow the number of guards to be run down to zero when the final FLIRT comes into service.

Now, of course, if the drivers object to driving DOO there is a slightly different issue - but again, there is no grounds to object to all new drivers having DOO in their contracts - again, if you don't like the job don't apply for it. If of course nobody applies for DOO driver jobs then they will have to rethink.

That is what the RMT should be arguing for. Not fighting a DOO implementation (this specific one) that in my book makes absolute sense and I am in full support of it.

[1] Fixed term contracts which were clearly stated as such when the job was accepted do not guarantee future employment and fighting this when the company is being honest about them is ludicrous. If you don't want a fixed term contract, don't apply for one. It's not as if this is being done on the sly.

Well said, utterly sensible.

 

[nedchester]

Anyone who is thinking of getting away by train on Sunday the 24th would be very fool hardy to say the least. Railway companies are not going to run additional trains on this particular day. Plus i believe staff in these companies have Sundays outside the working week.

If i was a betting man i will give you odds that NO staff will be on strike on Sunday the 24th December.

Yes they'll all not be available for the Sunday (same with NYE)

 

[313103]

Yes they'll all not be available for the Sunday (same with NYE)

Which is there choice is it not?
Unless it is in there contract to work.

 

[313103]

Deal only with the job security and future of their CURRENT members. That is, seek to ensure those who wish to remain in the employ of the railway on the same money and T&C can do so, even if their role (of guard) is redundant.

Given that there is natural turnover and the plan is to introduce the new stock fairly slowly, all they need to do in my book is to offer a quality (genuinely) voluntary/early retirement package and cease recruitment / recruit on fixed term contracts[1] as necessary to allow the number of guards to be run down to zero when the final FLIRT comes into service.

Now, of course, if the drivers object to driving DOO there is a slightly different issue - but again, there is no grounds to object to all new drivers having DOO in their contracts - again, if you don't like the job don't apply for it. If of course nobody applies for DOO driver jobs then they will have to rethink.

That is what the RMT should be arguing for. Not fighting a DOO implementation (this specific one) that in my book makes absolute sense and I am in full support of it.

[1] Fixed term contracts which were clearly stated as such when the job was accepted do not guarantee future employment and fighting this when the company is being honest about them is ludicrous. If you don't want a fixed term contract, don't apply for one. It's not as if this is being done on the sly.

There is one major failing on your first point, you cannot deal with job security and future of their current members if ALL want to stay in the same employ of the railway on the same money and T&Cs. The whole idea is to reduce the headcount and save money and there is only one to do that and to put it bluntly and that is to get rid. There is never a nice way no matter how much its dressed up to say tat tah we dont want or need you anymore.

Today most people dont go into the drivers grade because its doo or not, they go in there because the financial reward and job security is great, and for some a sense of power, nothing more nothing less. Not many apply for a Guards role anymore because it doesn't give a future, even fewer will join the railway and work in a booking office or worse a gateline, its bad enough being a dispatcher i dont expect my role will last long once all the IEPs are in, but i must have something to cling on in the small hope they

I am happy for you that you think DOO is the future.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is one major failing on your first point, you cannot deal with job security and future of their current members if ALL want to stay in the same employ of the railway on the same money and T&Cs. The whole idea is to reduce the headcount and save money and there is only one to do that and to put it bluntly and that is to get rid. There is never a nice way no matter how much its dressed up to say tat tah we dont want or need you anymore.

In practice, though, that won't happen:
- Some will be due to retire over the next few years and will, depending when it is, be replaced either with someone on a short term contract or, if the FLIRTs have started arriving, not be replaced.
- Some will choose to apply to become drivers as the same natural attrition occurs there (most Merseyrail drivers are former guards, I believe)
- Some will choose to apply to become drivers or guards at Northern, VTWC, son-of-LM etc. Northern will not be 100% DOO for a long time if at all - converting 15x is not viable, and that is the mainstay of the fleet - if there is any DOO on Northern it will be the new stock only.
- Some will see the big change coming and decide that's the time for them to have a career change or early retirement if the voluntary packages are good enough
- Some will be happy to become platform staff or whatever other staff are being added to replace some of the role

Exactly how many that leaves over is an interesting question, of course, and how those can be deployed while they wish to continue in the railway's employment. And that specifically (plus the packages for retirement/voluntary redundancy) is what I believe the unions should be primarily concerning themselves with.

I am happy for you that you think DOO is the future.

On Merseyrail I believe it is, yes, just as it is on the Metropolitan Line. There really is very little difference...well, there is one...Merseyrail will be level boarding, no gap and wheelchair accessible at most stations (a few of the stations aren't accessible at all e.g. Aughton Park), so no ramp needed and nobody needing to get it out.

FWIW, I also think DOO will mean more dispatchers in places...

 

[313103]

Exactly how many that leaves over is an interesting question, of course, and how those can be deployed while they wish to continue in the railway's employment. And that specifically (plus the packages for retirement/voluntary redundancy) is what I believe the unions should be primarily concerning themselves with.

Ah yes but surely it is not the unions role to negotiate a scheme that means they lose members is it? Otherwise what would be the point of the union in the first place.

Of course what severance package they will offer to staff depends if these staff know they can a get another job inside or outside the railway straight after leaving. I took the decision to leave but only after making sure i had another job to go to, if that wasn't the case, i would of had to stay in a organisation that didn't want me, well certainly some of the staff who felt i didn't do enough.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ah yes but surely it is not the unions role to negotiate a scheme that means they lose members is it? Otherwise what would be the point of the union in the first place.

To represent those who are members, not those who aren't any more because they are no longer staff, and not those who might be in the future. Of course it doesn't want to lose members, but that is no reason for strike action.

 

[nedchester]

Which is there choice is it not?
Unless it is in there contract to work.

Indeed it is their choice. An industry which operates 24/7 really should not rely on volunteers to operate a service. That really needs to change.

But my cynicism makes me think that both Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve will be seen as an opportunity for both drivers and guards to make themselves unavailable for work resulting in effectively another strike day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed it is their choice. An industry which operates 24/7 really should not rely on volunteers to operate a service. That really needs to change.

I agree, and my view has been for a long time that all new staff should have Sunday, Christmas Eve etc as part of the working week, and it will eventually filter through. Again, they know what they are signing up for when they take the job, and that avoids any present member of staff being forced to work those days (if they want to I'm sure the new contracts could be offered voluntarily). Yes it means less lucrative overtime, but overtime is not and never should be guaranteed, it is offered when it is necessary to the company to do so, and that is the only basis on which it should ever be offered in any company.

Overtime is by and large a bad thing - it reduces the number of posts on offer, it causes people to work when more tired than if they work their proper working week e.g. by not taking their rest days, and so on. It should be used to cover unexpected emergencies only in any industry (e.g. unexpected high levels of sickness), it should not be planned to cover the normal working week, which on the railway is in any practical sense Monday-Sunday, 363 days a year.

 

[nedchester]

I agree, and my view has been for a long time that all new staff should have Sunday, Christmas Eve etc as part of the working week, and it will eventually filter through. Again, they know what they are signing up for when they take the job, and that avoids any present member of staff being forced to work those days (if they want to I'm sure the new contracts could be offered voluntarily). Yes it means less lucrative overtime, but overtime is not and never should be guaranteed, it is offered when it is necessary to the company to do so, and that is the only basis on which it should ever be offered in any company.

Overtime is by and large a bad thing - it reduces the number of posts on offer, it causes people to work when more tired than if they work their proper working week e.g. by not taking their rest days, and so on. It should be used to cover unexpected emergencies only in any industry (e.g. unexpected high levels of sickness), it should not be planned to cover the normal working week, which on the railway is in any practical sense Monday-Sunday, 363 days a year.

Agreed.

 

[Goldfish62]

Anyone who is thinking of getting away by train on Sunday the 24th would be very fool hardy to say the least. Railway companies are not going to run additional trains on this particular day. Plus i believe staff in these companies have Sundays outside the working week.

If i was a betting man i will give you odds that NO staff will be on strike on Sunday the 24th December.

Sundays are part of the working week on SWR.

 

[pemma]

Overtime is by and large a bad thing - it reduces the number of posts on offer, it causes people to work when more tired than if they work their proper working week e.g. by not taking their rest days, and so on. It should be used to cover unexpected emergencies only in any industry (e.g. unexpected high levels of sickness), it should not be planned to cover the normal working week, which on the railway is in any practical sense Monday-Sunday, 363 days a year.

Indeed. Overtime shouldn't be required under normal circumstances. It's one thing providing extra services for an event using staff working overtime but using staff on overtime to provide regular services on an ongoing basis is poor business management.

 

[313103]

Indeed it is their choice. An industry which operates 24/7 really should not rely on volunteers to operate a service. That really needs to change.

But my cynicism makes me think that both Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve will be seen as an opportunity for both drivers and guards to make themselves unavailable for work resulting in effectively another strike day.

Do you work in a industry that is effectively a 24/365 industry?

If your industry that you work in decided to bring in unsocial hours, Sunday work, to work all bank holidays, not have Easter or Christmas off would you stay or would you leave and with all of this not increase your salary? I believe in what is good for the Goose is good for the Gander.

Yes it does need to change, and change should be led from the top not the bottom, if i have a problem with my pay i cant get an answer on a Saturday, Sunday or after 20:00 hrs and most certainly not on a bank holiday which to me are normal days of work.

Like you have cynicism for the staff to be unavailable on these days, i am the cynic who believes the Guards are being shafted. It will always depend on your own personal viewpoint.

 

[Clip]

Yes it does need to change, and change should be led from the top not the bottom, if i have a problem with my pay i cant get an answer on a Saturday, Sunday or after 20:00 hrs and most certainly not on a bank holiday which to me are normal days of work.

.

With the rail industry being paid 4 weekly and the day varying and never being paid on a Saturday or Sunday let alone a bank holiday Monday then I struggle to understand your point as you would obviously query your pay on the day it falls on not a couple of days later.

If you want to make a decent and fair point its probably not best to bring in fantasy what if scenarios

 

[Darandio]

Yes it does need to change, and change should be led from the top not the bottom, if i have a problem with my pay i cant get an answer on a Saturday, Sunday or after 20:00 hrs and most certainly not on a bank holiday which to me are normal days of work.

There is more progress in this post last night than there has been for years in negotiations.

If everyone else works it, you will, all sorted!

 

[313103]

I agree, and my view has been for a long time that all new staff should have Sunday, Christmas Eve etc as part of the working week, and it will eventually filter through. Again, they know what they are signing up for when they take the job, and that avoids any present member of staff being forced to work those days (if they want to I'm sure the new contracts could be offered voluntarily). Yes it means less lucrative overtime, but overtime is not and never should be guaranteed, it is offered when it is necessary to the company to do so, and that is the only basis on which it should ever be offered in any company.

Overtime is by and large a bad thing - it reduces the number of posts on offer, it causes people to work when more tired than if they work their proper working week e.g. by not taking their rest days, and so on. It should be used to cover unexpected emergencies only in any industry (e.g. unexpected high levels of sickness), it should not be planned to cover the normal working week, which on the railway is in any practical sense Monday-Sunday, 363 days a year.

You cannot eliminate overtime as a standard, do you realise how many more staff will be needed and bearing in mind we are still a country in Austerity how much that will cost. Overtime is used as a cheaper option by companies to keep wage bill actually down, imagine having a industry where overtime is not a standard, all these additional members of staff required, to include provision of uniforms (not cheap, a full uniform for a individual is in the region of £1,500), wages for those staff, pension contributions, bigger and more space required to provide for those staff, additional people required in payroll, the list is endless. So overtime is used.

With regard Sundays being part of the week, this will increase depot and link establishments which means more people in these areas, it is not as simple as you seem to think, Drivers and Guards work to strict link structures putting additional spare turns in so you will have more people sitting around spare.

I think the way many staff look at overtime is this, What is the point of working one day of overtime every couple of months i wont even see this in my wages so i cant be bothered doing it, but if you said look there is three days of overtime this month would be prepared to work them the answer in most circumstances would be a yes. Staff only do overtime if they see the benefits in their wages. Then the only way the company could get round this is enforce overtime until complete and full staffing is installed, something which is only a dream. The only grades that will ever get anywhere full establishment is drivers, no one wants to work on the barriers of a station so that area will always require staff to work regular overtime.

 

[pemma]

You cannot eliminate overtime as a standard, do you realise how many more staff will be needed and bearing in mind we are still a country in Austerity how much that will cost. Overtime is used as a cheaper option by companies to keep wage bill actually down, imagine having a industry where overtime is not a standard, all these additional members of staff required, to include provision of uniforms (not cheap, a full uniform for a individual is in the region of £1,500), wages for those staff, pension contributions, bigger and more space required to provide for those staff, additional people required in payroll, the list is endless. So overtime is used.

I'm pretty sure First North Western tried to after a union imposed an overtime ban and the TOC and union reached a deadlock but it took a long time to get the extra staff trained and ready to plug the gaps left by the overtime ban.

Full uniform £1500?! I know of places which use John Lewis as a uniform supplier and a full set costs under £200.

What's the cost of a long list of cancellations when there's a flu bug going around and the TOC can't even provide a 80% service even when many of the available staff are going overtime in addition to their required hours?

 

[HH]

Full uniform £1500?! I know of places which use John Lewis as a uniform supplier and a full set costs under £200.

It's more like £300 for TOCs (possibly have more kit per person), but nowhere near £1500 normally.

 

[Bromley boy]

What's the cost of a long list of cancellations when there's a flu bug going around and the TOC can't even provide a 80% service even when many of the available staff are going overtime in addition to their required hours?

Of course this does happen occasionally but is minimised by yet more overtime being offered and by altering jobs/splitting jobs between depots etc. Emails fly around offering sweeteners such as paying the minimum shift length of just under six hours to complete two trips of one hour each - obviously works out cheaper than cancelling the trains or it wouldnt be done. The current working week is well within Hidden and there will always be some willing to work seven or eight days on the trot to maximise earnings.

Overall it still works out cheaper to rely on overtime and it is notable that TOCs are generally far more in favour of overtime than the unions are (unions wanting maximum employment for maximum membership).

 

[313103]

It's more like £300 for TOCs (possibly have more kit per person), but nowhere near £1500 normally.

That quote of £1500 came about as a result of me being part of group of staff to discuss uniform matters on London Overground of which the MD of the time was in attendance. The costs include sourcing the fabric needed, the design the company wanted, the cost of manufacturing the material, the costs of delivery, then the cost of providing staff the following 6 shirts, 3 pairs of trousers, 2 Jackets, 2 breast jackets, 1 winter coat, safety footware, 2 ties, belt, hats, gloves, bags. That is just the initial outlay, obviously costs will come down as staff will not need a full reissue and just get the stuff on a as and when required.