RMT in dispute with SWR regarding ‘guardian angels’

[randyrippley]

unfortunate choice of name.......the Guardian Angels were a vigilante group in superhero uniforms who toured the New York subway "protecting" passengers, there was a London offshoot for a few years who rode the tube looking for drunks and other delinquents to beat up. Would have been around 25-30 years ago
The police had serious issues with them

 

[sheff1]

Presumably the RMT feel the same way about all the volunteers in Community Rail Partnerships who help out at stations all over the network. Or the St Johns Ambulance. Or parents who help out at their kids school.

And before anyone says ‘but this is different’ - no it isn’t.

Taking the letter at face value (which is all I can do in the absence of a SWT / DfT statement) it sounds different to me. These Guardiam Angels are apparently on 2 x 3 hour shifts at set times "funded" by DfT.

Who the hell would volunteer anyway

Probably the sort of people who like to swan around thinking they are important and telling others what to do.

 

[Swimbar]

Probably the sort of people who like to swan around thinking they are important and telling others what to do.

Wouldn't be any of those of course who are members of the RMT!

 

[Bald Rick]

Volunteering at your kid's school is very different, unless your kid's school is part of a multinational corporation with a £7.2bn revenue stream?

My kids’ school is part of a £42bn public service called the primary and secondary education system.

SWR is part of a £20bn public service called the railway system.

I don’t see the difference, if the railway is a public service, which I believe it is.

The volunteers are to fill additional, temporary positions to help passengers. Being volunteers, this is something they want to do. No one is forcing them to do it. They can walk away, without repercussion or loss, any time.

Why would anyone not want them to come and help, for the benefit of passengers? That is who we run this railway for, after all.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Why would anyone not want them to come and help, for the benefit of passengers? That is who we run this railway for, after all.

Who are getting helped by them working for free? The passengers, or First Group? If they are so essential and worthwhile then why would you not pay them?

You get volunteer train drivers and signallers on heritage railways. Shall we bring them into the Mainline railway to "help out" for free? I'm sure they'd be glad to drive a Big Train and the passengers would benefit. It'd save Network Rail a bit of cash too.

My kids’ school is part of a £42bn public service called the primary and secondary education system.

It isn't, however, a FTSE250 PLC.

As an aside, the increasing use of Classroom Assistants as teachers, and volunteers as Classroom Assistants, is causing a lot of problems in schools. It's driving down wages and putting people out of work.

What do you think will happen with these volunteer CSAs? Why would FirstGroup pay CSAs a wage when they can give some bloke off the street a hi-viz tabard and get them to work for nowt?

 

[SuperNova]

Who are getting helped by them working for free? The passengers, or First Group? If they are so essential and worthwhile then why would you not pay them?

You get volunteer train drivers and signallers on heritage railways. Shall we bring them into the Mainline railway to "help out" for free? I'm sure they'd be glad to drive a Big Train and the passengers would benefit. It'd save Network Rail a bit of cash too.



It isn't, however, a FTSE250 PLC.

As an aside, the increasing use of Classroom Assistants as teachers, and volunteers as Classroom Assistants, is causing a lot of problems in schools. It's driving down wages and putting people out of work.

What do you think will happen with these volunteer CSAs? Why would FirstGroup pay CSAs a wage when they can give some bloke off the street a hi-viz tabard and get them to work for nowt?

All train operators are under EMA's. This has nothing to do with FirstGroup - it's down to the DfT.

 

[Domh245]

One advantage of using volunteers rather than hiring people is it avoids any complications for people willing to help but who aren't allowed to get additional jobs under their normal contract whilst furloughed.

 

[Swimbar]

Why would anyone not want them to come and help, for the benefit of passengers? That is who we run this railway for, after all.

The problem appears to be that as far as the RMT is concerned there is no National emergency and the railway should continue to be run for the benefit of its members to ensure that they make the maximum amount of money possible. The lack of cooperation with SWR over recent months shows just that.
The benefit to the passengers comes second.
No doubt we will be told that this is the correct function of a union.
It is no good mr cash preaching that the public must not abuse his members, at this time, if he is not willing to work to help the general situayion for the benefit of the travelling public.

 

[Tetchytyke]

All train operators are under EMA's. This has nothing to do with FirstGroup - it's down to the DfT.

Yet no other TOC is bringing in labour off the street and paying them diddly. Hmm. I think this is on First/MTR.

allowed to get additional jobs under their normal contract whilst furloughed.

Those rules have changed and you can work whilst furloughed.

The benefit to the passengers comes second.

I'll ask you again: if the job is so important, why not pay them?

Nobody is saying that extra staff are not welcome. The RMT are questioning why the extra staff are not being paid for their work. It's a fair question.

Why not pay them?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'll ask you again: if the job is so important, why not pay them?

There's a quite reasonable chance they may already be doing so. Likely candidates are probably on furlough...

 

[Bald Rick]

Who are getting helped by them working for free? The passengers, or First Group?

The passengers, ie the people we run the railway for.

You get volunteer train drivers and signallers on heritage railways. Shall we bring them into the Mainline railway to "help out" for free? I'm sure they'd be glad to drive a Big Train and the passengers would benefit.

Indeed so. And it’s notable that the RMT isn’t kicking up a fuss about that. Or the volunteer bus drivers who transport kids to various events, no doubt doing a very worthwhile job.

What do you think will happen with these volunteer CSAs?

I’m not sure what you mean. For what it’s worth, I think they will help passengers, making their journey easier, assist staff in what is a difficult time, and make themselves feel better by doing something to help their local community, during the biggest peacetime crisis this country has had in living memory.

I do not understand what the difference is between someone volunteering to help at their local station, and someone volunteering to help at their local school, library, hospital, church, prison etc. I know several people who would be happy, nay delighted, to do this, including many recently retired railway staff, some of whom will be reading this. And they will be rather disappointed if they are going to be prevented from doing so because a handful of ideological agitators in a union are trying to throw their weight around. Again.

My opinion of course.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yet no other TOC is bringing in labour off the street and paying them diddly.

As far as you know.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Likely candidates are probably on furlough.

In that case the government is paying their employer some of their wage, and the employer passes it on.

It also still doesn't answer the question: if the job needs doing, why is it not paid?

 

[dk1]

Who the hell would volunteer anyway

That's the bit I dont get. Unless theres something really in it for them.

 

[mmh]

Tetchytyke said:
You get volunteer train drivers and signallers on heritage railways. Shall we bring them into the Mainline railway to "help out" for free? I'm sure they'd be glad to drive a Big Train and the passengers would benefit.

Indeed so. And it’s notable that the RMT isn’t kicking up a fuss about that. Or the volunteer bus drivers who transport kids to various events, no doubt doing a very worthwhile job.

It's not notable that they're not concerned about something which doesn't happen.

Who are these volunteer bus drivers, and which bus companies do they volunteer for?

That's the bit I dont get. Unless theres something really in it for them.

The lure of hi-vis is strong for many.

In that case the government is paying their employer some of their wage, and the employer passes it on.

It also still doesn't answer the question: if the job needs doing, why is it not paid?

And furlough is intended for staff whose jobs temporarily do not exist. If the staff are needed, they should not be furloughed.

 

[Tetchytyke]

And it’s notable that the RMT isn’t kicking up a fuss about that.

I think you might have missed my point. Should we parachute volunteer signallers into Milton Keynes? Shove a volunteer train driver behind the desk of a Desiro? If not, why not.

And they will be rather disappointed if they are going to be prevented from doing so

The RMT aren't "preventing" anything, they are asking why these people are not being paid for their time.

I’m not sure what you mean.

These people are bring brought in to do the job of a CSA, but without being paid the wage of a CSA.

Apologies for not being clear, my point was to ask what you think will happen to the wages of existing CSAs, and the job opportunities for casual or temporary CSAs, if volunteer CSAs become a thing.

My experience of volunteering is that it primarily undermines the value of paid work. As we see with libraries, organisations won't pay a wage if someone will work for free. Volunteer librarians are lovely, but they are the reason why councils made their paid librarians redundant.

 

[Bald Rick]

Who are these volunteer bus drivers, and which bus companies do they volunteer for?

Well I only know 2 personally, but they assure me there are thousands up and down the country. And they drive buses, mostly minibuses, provided by various organisations, some public, some charities, and some private.

 

[mmh]

My experience of volunteering is that it primarily undermines the value of paid work. As we see with libraries, organisations won't pay a wage if someone will work for free. Volunteer librarians are lovely, but they are the reason why councils made their paid librarians redundant.

Indeed, and having volunteers alongside paid staff is a sure fire way to cause resentment. Special constables and the Territorial Army spring to mind.

 

[mmh]

Well I only know 2 personally, but they assure me there are thousands up and down the country. And they drive buses, mostly minibuses, provided by various organisations, some public, some charities, and some private.

So they don't work for a bus company, and aren't bus drivers then? As I predicted.

 

[dk1]

The lure of hi-vis is strong for many.

It must be I get the games makers for the Olympics & all that but mixing with the public by choice during CV19 escapes me.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think you might have missed my point. Should we parachute volunteer signallers into Milton Keynes? Shove a volunteer train driver behind the desk of a Desiro? If not, why not.

No because 1), as you well know both those roles have a formal competence which takes a year or more to gain, where as the role that volunteers are being called for does not require any formal competence. And 2) because there are n9 signallers at Milton Keynes.

The RMT aren't "preventing" anything, they are asking why these people are not being paid for their time.

The RMT statement does not ‘ask’ anything. It is just the usual aggressive rhetoric.

These people are bring brought in to do the job of a CSA, but without being paid the wage of a CSA.

Apologies for not being clear, my point was to ask what you think will happen to the wages of existing CSAs, and the job opportunities for casual or temporary CSAs, if volunteer CSAs become a thing.

My experience of volunteering is that it primarily undermines the value of paid work. As we see with libraries, organisations won't pay a wage if someone will work for free. Volunteer librarians are lovely, but they are the reason why councils made their paid librarians redundant.

Are you sure they are coming in to do the job of a CSA? Absolutely sure? Where does it say that?

And where does it say that the volunteers will become a long term thing?

My experience of volunteering is that it is extremely beneficial to those on the receiving end, and to those doing the volunteering themselves.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Indeed, and having volunteers alongside paid staff is a sure fire way to cause resentment.

Not even resentment so much as financial issues.

I am a middle manager in a community advice charity. Our volunteers are amazing, we literally couldn't run our service without them. Our funders understand this. And so our government funders reduce their funding to us; we don't need so many staff if volunteers can carry the load, after all.

Our volunteers are brilliant and they get lots from it too. Don't get me wrong, it is hugely rewarding. I've been a trustee of a charity- by definition an unpaid role- and it was wonderful.

But this is how it always ends. The council get "community litter pickers" then fire all their groundsmen. The local school gets a few volunteer classroom assistants then don't bother replacing paid staff when they leave.

 

[northernbelle]

Clearly some people not behaving in a Professional Manner.
This is a National Emergency and requires all members of society to pull together at this time.
A typical reaction from an industry where unions pull the strings not management.

I quite agree. The use of volunteers if not unheard of in our industry - BTP use volunteer 'Specials' to provide additional support, using folk who are willing to do their good deed for the day. They usually do the role in addition to paid employment elsewhere rather than working for the railway full time.

At the present extraordinary time, I'd just be grateful for all the support we can get - assisting with social distancing, ensuring use of face masks as per guidelines etc. will only make operational staff's job safer and easier.

 

[Tetchytyke]

1), as you well know both those roles have a formal competence which takes a year or more to gain

There is no reason why volunteers couldn't be supported in getting that competence.

I also doubt that the volunteers at SWR are given a tabard and told to go do as they please. There will be training, a job role, a job description, hours they must work, attire they must wear, H&S rules to follow.

The job is described here: https://volunteeringmatters.org.uk/project/journey-makers/

Over the coming months volunteers are going to play a visible role in keeping others safe on the transport network. These Journey Makers will be offering guidance, providing friendly advice, reminding passengers about social distancing measures, preventing overcrowding and helping vulnerable passengers on their journeys.

Sounds like (most of) a CSA to me!

 

[yorkie]

But this is how it always ends. The council get "community litter pickers" then fire all their groundsmen. The local school gets a few volunteer classroom assistants then don't bother replacing paid staff when they leave.

This is not my experience; also the minimum requirements for classroom assistants are mandated and schools have to adhere to them. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd be interested to see it (but a new thread would be best).

 

[the sniper]

You get volunteer train drivers and signallers on heritage railways. Shall we bring them into the Mainline railway to "help out" for free? I'm sure they'd be glad to drive a Big Train and the passengers would benefit. It'd save Network Rail a bit of cash too.

Indeed so. And it’s notable that the RMT isn’t kicking up a fuss about that. Or the volunteer bus drivers who transport kids to various events, no doubt doing a very worthwhile job.

You're not an idiot, so I presume you were taking the p*ss here?

I’m not sure what you mean. For what it’s worth, I think they will help passengers, making their journey easier, assist staff in what is a difficult time, and make themselves feel better by doing something to help their local community, during the biggest peacetime crisis this country has had in living memory.

I do not understand what the difference is between someone volunteering to help at their local station, and someone volunteering to help at their local school, library, hospital, church, prison etc. I know several people who would be happy, nay delighted, to do this, including many recently retired railway staff, some of whom will be reading this. And they will be rather disappointed if they are going to be prevented from doing so because a handful of ideological agitators in a union are trying to throw their weight around. Again.

My opinion of course.

I appreciate you're above having to worry about these things, but if you were a CSA or similar grade, would it not concern you that a TOC would be willing and able to flood stations with unpaid volunteers to do your job? Would you not expect your Union to have something to say about that? Given how vulnerable the station grades are to getting shafted, should the RMT just ignore the precedent being set here? What's the point in the Unions having agreements over training, rostering and manning when anything goes with unpaid labour? This is ignoring the more general issue around volunteers being used to paper over holes in core provision of other public services.

 

[Carlisle]

During the 2012 London Olympics 100's of volunteers we stationed at London termini to assist people. This is no different, its a short term solution. Presumably the union didn't like that also?

Couldn’t agree more, I suspect rail unions silence during the 2012 Olympics was mostly attributable to Olympic bonuses that rail operators threw at the members of their workforce, with particular emphasis on those with potential to cause disruptive disputes during that period .

 

[Mojo]

That's the bit I dont get. Unless theres something really in it for them.

There are a number of people
over the past few days who seem to have been getting a kick out of snitching on, and complaining about, public transport customers for not wearing face masks. Given this, and redirecting customers around one way systems at major stations, is all these volunteers will be doing, I'm sure there will be no shortage of candidates.

 

[SuperNova]

Yet no other TOC is bringing in labour off the street and paying them diddly. Hmm. I think this is on First/MTR.

That's because that certain TOC pressed ahead with it. All TOC's are aware of this and were looking into it. I know Northern and TPE definitely were (LNER from memory too) - but RMT rightly raised the issue of platform safety and I guess those two TOC's have a better relationship with local reps than SWR.

But I repeat - this was an initiative from the DfT.

 

[Mathew S]

That's the bit I dont get. Unless theres something really in it for them.

As someone who has barely left the house for the past three months, I would be more than happy to volunteer a few hours a week simply for an excuse to get out and do something useful. Any form of volunteering attracts a few more 'interesting' types, but then there's plenty of them getting paid too.

My experience of volunteering is that it primarily undermines the value of paid work. As we see with libraries, organisations won't pay a wage if someone will work for free. Volunteer librarians are lovely, but they are the reason why councils made their paid librarians redundant.

And who is going to pay for all these extra paid staff? I used to volunteer - as I know at least one other person on here still does - for a very large youth organisation. One year, our head office worked out that if all of our volunteers were paid the minimum wage for the hours they gave, it would amount to a bill in the hundreds of millions of pounds a year. You can just as easily argue that they were taking paid employment away from council-funded youth workers. They weren't, of course, because the reality is that, without volunteers, those services would have not existed for a lack of funding.

In the context of the railway, I fail to see the difference between these volunteers on SWR and local 'friends' groups, for example. Picking one purely because it's local to me, Friends of Hindley Station do an amazing job maintaining their local station, and make it a delight to use. Without the help of those volunteers, does anyone really believe that any TOC would invest the time and resources needed to maintain stations to the same standard? Of course they wouldn't.

Most importantly, though, as @Bald Rick and others have said already, these are far from normal times, and demand that we all - the RMT included - do our bit. Under normal circumstances, they might have a point - might, I would still disagree - but right now, if a referrendum were held to ban unions, the actions of the RMT would make me think twice before voting against it.