RMT sets out talks ‘road map’ as rail services hit by fresh strike

[Xenophon PCDGS]

OK well carry on voting Tory then and see if things get any better......

Has Starmer said anything of interest in recent times how if the Labour Party were in office, how they would have dealt with the current impasse?

 

[yorksrob]

It is all just exceptionally bad and depressing for those of us who do rely on a service and don't have alternatives or friends or family to help and nothing is likely to change for a long long time (If you think a Labour Government in Jan 2025 will solve anything this will be a long long way down the list and the financial situation is dire)

At least there's an element of mystery as to what Labour will do, whereas we know for certain that the Tories will continue to run the railway into the ground if they win.

 

[RT4038]

Are you actually aware of the proposed changes to working arrangements or are you just quoting the same 'modernising' and 'efficiency' rubbish trumpeted by the DfT / RDG? Would you be happy to have your day off moved at a few days' notice, or having your shifts next week moved from earlies to lates or nights, thus ruining any plans you already had in place for an evening out with your family etc? Do you believe that rail staff should be available to their employer 24/7, 365 days a year to be used and abused as necessary, in the name of 'flexibility'?

Do you think it's appropriate to introduce huge swings in shift patterns which will clearly cause an increase in fatigue in a highly-regulated industry which relies on staff being well-rested, alert and able to concentrate for long periods of time?

If you would, then more fool you.

As I keep saying, in negotiations there is an opening position and there are negotiations to be had. Your negotiating position is no,no,no to anything, the worst case scenario is the only possibility. This is simply not sustainable.

Yes, those in the transport industry do need have to have a degree of flexibility - running the service has to be a priority and the pay needs to reflect that. Transport undertakings need commitment and compulsory flexibility - to what level and at what cost needs to be negotiated - clearly the employers are going to start from the best case scenario (for them).

Of course rail staff want to the current arrangements to continue - no problem to them if services don't run but staff sitting about (because the times don't match and flexibility is voluntary, quite apart from the ridiculous Sunday situation) - that is the employers problem for not having large quantities of spare staff sitting about for every scenario. Not sustainable for the industry : start talking the language that the employers want - cost up the options (the best case scenario for the employees) and negotiate. I expect that this will take a few rounds, but a start is needed.

 

[baz962]

As I keep saying, in negotiations there is an opening position and there are negotiations to be had. Your negotiating position is no,no,no to anything, the worst case scenario is the only possibility. This is simply not sustainable.

Yes, those in the transport industry do need have to have a degree of flexibility - running the service has to be a priority and the pay needs to reflect that. Transport undertakings need commitment and compulsory flexibility - to what level and at what cost needs to be negotiated - clearly the employers are going to start from the best case scenario (for them).

Of course rail staff want to the current arrangements to continue - no problem to them if services don't run but staff sitting about (because the times don't match and flexibility is voluntary, quite apart from the ridiculous Sunday situation) - that is the employers problem for not having large quantities of spare staff sitting about for every scenario. Not sustainable for the industry : start talking the language that the employers want - cost up the options (the best case scenario for the employees) and negotiate. I expect that this will take a few rounds, but a start is needed.

But we already have flexibility. I am spare some days and can have my start time moved by three hours forward or backward and with just three days notice. Some tocs have more movement. I have worked in a few industries and I haven't had that in any other. I'm happy with the flexibility I give and occasionally I give more if I'm not doing anything. But I won't be having more movement than I currently have , it's enough.

 

[12LDA28C]

Of course rail staff want to the current arrangements to continue - no problem to them if services don't run but staff sitting about (because the times don't match and flexibility is voluntary, quite apart from the ridiculous Sunday situation) - that is the employers problem for not having large quantities of spare staff sitting about for every scenario. Not sustainable for the industry : start talking the language that the employers want - cost up the options (the best case scenario for the employees) and negotiate. I expect that this will take a few rounds, but a start is needed.

If you think flexibility is voluntary then that just proves how little you know about rail staff's Ts & Cs. For example at many TOCs, a driver who is marked 'Spare' can be moved 3 hours either way (or more) at 72 hours' notice and have their working day extended, all within existing Ts & Cs. So on Wednesday next week they might be booked 0700-1500 Spare and then they get rostered a turn which is 1000-2000, all perfectly legal. Sounds pretty flexible to me.

None of that is in the offered agreement. You've either come to some very extreme conclusions by yourself, or have been listening uncritically to someone talking nonsense.

It's been proposed that a week of Spare shifts will have the ability to be moved to the opposite shift and a Rest Day moved at short notice, to cover Annual Leave and suchlike, in the name of 'flexibility'.
So someone could be rostered a week of AM spare next week with a RD Saturday, then a few days before, that gets changed to a week of PM shifts with a RD on Wednesday. That's what the DfT and RDG want, I haven't made it up.

 

[greyman42]

Yes, but most the losses are to hospitality businesses, which the government doesn't care about either,

Furlough would suggest otherwise.

At least there's an element of mystery as to what Labour will do, whereas we know for certain that the Tories will continue to run the railway into the ground if they win.

If the Conservatives wanted to run the railway into the ground then covid was the ideal opportunity, instead they supported the railway.

 

[nw1]

But is it? Sunak was quoted as saying he will make us wait til January 2025 for the election. So remember that when you trudge through the ice and snow and freezing cold to get to the ballot box, at least we gave Rishi an extra few months in office, I'm sure it will be worth it......sigh

Won't be that late, I'm sure. A January election would be utter madness, for all sorts of reasons (high chance of disruptive weather, Christmas campaigning period, no daylight Mon-Fri outside the working day). And completely self-defeating for Sunak, who will suffer bigger losses as people will dislike his arrogance in holding on until the last possible legal date.

October if we're unlucky, May if we're lucky. Even in the former case it's basically less than 12 months left of this government, when you factor in the summer recess and campaigning period. Of all the dates, October seems to be the most frequently suggested but we can hope it's sooner than that.

 

[yorksrob]

If the Conservatives wanted to run the railway into the ground then covid was the ideal opportunity, instead they supported the railway.

That was two prime ministers ago.

Ask yourself why they can run a passenger railway with no one travelling, but they can't with 90% of passengers back

 

[ainsworth74]

If the Conservatives wanted to run the railway into the ground then covid was the ideal opportunity, instead they supported the railway.

Given their time again there's no way they'd have been as generous as they were. It would have been a Eurostar approach and you've had have staff bobbing in and out of furlough to maintain competency whilst the service was slashed to a bare minimum. I still maintain part of the reason we're dealing with the intransigence out of the DfT (read: HMT) is that they're extracting their pound of flesh for their perceived excessive generousness through Covid.

 

[nw1]

What's a 9-5 job? I've never had working hours short enough to fit in a working week where you start at 9am and finish at 5pm each weekday.

Then there's a problem with your employer, they are working you too many hours by the sounds of it. Isn't it illegal to compel employees to work more than a 40-hour week; wasn't that one of Blair's main successes?

 

[LAX54]

Indeed, I was thinking more TOC staff. Do FOC drivers and NR staff have Christmas Day as a rostered turn of duty though, or do they pay a significantly enhanced rate and ask for volunteers?

NR Christmas, is a mixture, they will ask for staff that wish to work that day, and generally get enough, but should they fall short, then the rostered signaller will have to work
many places are 12 hr shifts, payment is 'good' 300%, but of course you would get 100% staying at home and snacking and drinking ! Boxing Day then its back to normal from 1800 (2200 if 8 hrs)

Then there's a problem with your employer, they are working you too many hours. Isn't it illegal to compel employees to work more than a 40-hour week; wasn't that one of Blair's main successes?

You cannot work more than 48 hours a week on average - normally averaged over 17 weeks. This law is sometimes called the ‘working time directive’ or ‘working time regulations’.

You can choose to work more by opting out of the 48-hour week

 

[RT4038]

If you think flexibility is voluntary then that just proves how little you know about rail staff's Ts & Cs. For example at many TOCs, a driver who is marked 'Spare' can be moved 3 hours either way (or more) at 72 hours' notice and have their working day extended, all within existing Ts & Cs. So on Wednesday next week they might be booked 0700-1500 Spare and then they get rostered a turn which is 1000-2000, all perfectly legal. Sounds pretty flexible to me.

Quite so, but in the grand scheme of things that is not much flexibility. Nothing on changing rest days, nothing on changing booked duties and I expect the spare flexibility is constrained by the booked duties on either side.

The ultimate in flexibility is the US railroad 'extra board' where staff can be allocated any duty and rest day compliant with the Federal hours of service laws (8hr between duties, 12hr max duty and I think one rest day every x days, or something). I don't think that anything near as drastic as this is being advocated, but the spare flexibility you mention is quite minor in its scope really. I realise that the sort of level of flexibility that may be found in other sectors of the transport industry would come as a shock to many rail staff. But that is where the negotiations come in.

 

[nw1]

You cannot work more than 48 hours a week on average - normally averaged over 17 weeks. This law is sometimes called the ‘working time directive’ or ‘working time regulations’.

You can choose to work more by opting out of the 48-hour week

Ah ok, it's 48 - thanks for clarifying. Too high if you ask me, 9-5 six days a week basically gives you no life. Should really be 40, but longer hours can be worked should the employee choose to.

 

[RT4038]

Ah ok, it's 48 - thanks for clarifying. Too high if you ask me, 9-5 six days a week basically gives you no life.

In that case, need to find another job?

 

[nw1]

In that case, need to find another job?

Easier said than done, I suspect!

If the Conservatives wanted to run the railway into the ground then covid was the ideal opportunity, instead they supported the railway.

Mind you the railway has pretty much been run into the ground since Covid. The service post-Covid is the worst it's been for many years, and the government are imposing spending limits on the TOCs which will only make things worse.

So while I don't think the government are deliberately trying to run down the railway, their fiscal policy is effectively running it down.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You cannot work more than 48 hours a week on average - normally averaged over 17 weeks. This law is sometimes called the ‘working time directive’ or ‘working time regulations’.

You can choose to work more by opting out of the 48-hour week

From what I was told quite a number of years ago by security officers working for a number of security companies, there were many in that industry who worked 5 x 12 hour night shifts and when given the opportunity to work only 4 x 12 hour night shifts, the vast majority chose to continue working 5 x 12 hour shifts as before, unwilling to suffer a voluntary loss 12 hours pay per week.

Earlier in the thread, someone made reference to Blair and a 40-hour working week. Can a source for that be shown on this thread.

 

[12LDA28C]

Quite so, but in the grand scheme of things that is not much flexibility. Nothing on changing rest days, nothing on changing booked duties and I expect the spare flexibility is constrained by the booked duties on either side.

The ultimate in flexibility is the US railroad 'extra board' where staff can be allocated any duty and rest day compliant with the Federal hours of service laws (8hr between duties, 12hr max duty and I think one rest day every x days, or something). I don't think that anything near as drastic as this is being advocated, but the spare flexibility you mention is quite minor in its scope really. I realise that the sort of level of flexibility that may be found in other sectors of the transport industry would come as a shock to many rail staff. But that is where the negotiations come in.

There has to be a balance between work and home life. Why should someone's day off be changed with a few days' notice? Sounds like you expect rail workers to sell their soul to the company and their families should just put up with it. I wonder if M-F office staff would be happy to be told they had to work next weekend and have Tuesday and Wednesday off instead?

Safety critical staff in the UK have Ts & Cs such as 12 hours minimum rest between duties as a result of recommendations written in reports after major incidents resulting in loss of life. These rules are in place for a reason. If you are happy for those rules to be relaxed and accept the resulting increase in safety of the line incidents then that is a dangerous route to take.

 

[Goldfish62]

There has to be a balance between work and home life. Why should someone's day off be changed with a few days' notice? Sounds like you expect rail workers to sell their soul to the company and their families should just out up with it. I wonder if M-F office staff would be happy to be told they had to work next weekend and have Tuesday and Wednesday off instead?

Surely you should be citing examples from other shift work (believe it or not it does exist outside the railways) rather than "M-F office staff", who by definition only work M-F.

But yes, I agree with what you're trying to say.

 

[nw1]

From what I was told quite a number of years ago by security officers working for a number of security companies, there were many in that industry who worked 5 x 12 hour night shifts and when given the opportunity to work only 4 x 12 hour night shifts, the vast majority chose to continue working 5 x 12 hour shifts as before, unwilling to suffer a voluntary loss 12 hours pay per week.

Earlier in the thread, someone made reference to Blair and a 40-hour working week. Can a source for that be shown on this thread.

I asked the question "Isn't it illegal..." because I thought it was a 40-hour week. I have been corrected.

 

[baz962]

Surely you should be citing examples from other shift work (believe it or not it does exist outside the railways) rather than "M-F office staff", who by definition only work M-F.

But yes, I agree with what you're trying to say.

Well my wife used to be a bus driver. Days off didn't get moved and spare shifts were the same start and finish time of the normal shift , so you didn't get moved. You either stayed spare or worked got work.

 

[northernbelle]

Surely you should be citing examples from other shift work (believe it or not it does exist outside the railways) rather than "M-F office staff", who by definition only work M-F.

Indeed. It also totally overlooks the fact that most "M-F office staff" are actually employed on open-ended contracts which include wording "contracted to work X hours per week plus any others the company requires to fulfill the role".

It's bit frustrating that people turn it into a 'them and us' type argument with clerical and management grades when the majority of those already don't have nearly as much T&Cs protection as front line grades.

 

[800001]

The RDG has invited RMT to continue discussions and explore options next week.

 

[12LDA28C]

It's bit frustrating that people turn it into a 'them and us' type argument with clerical and management grades when the majority of those already don't have nearly as much T&Cs protection as front line grades.

Those Ts & Cs come with the responsibility of the job and as previously explained have often been born out of detailed investigations into serious incidents where it turned out staff were working excessive hours without sufficient rest, cutting corners instead of following laid out procedures and so on. Clerical and Management grades are unlikely to be standing in the dock and being held responsible for the deaths of passengers caused by a driver suffering from fatigue.

 

[Bluejays]

At least there's an element of mystery as to what Labour will do, whereas we know for certain that the Tories will continue to run the railway into the ground if they win.

I feel like there would be a very easy win for the labour party here. Small rise, and do something about Sunday coverage. Enables them to have a service win at a cheap price, and really show that a lot of these problems have been caused by silly ideology from the hard right of the Tory party

 

[Thirteen]

Labour probably aren't going to bend to the will of the unions, that's not realistic. I'd imagine they get the ASLEF dispute sorted fairly quickly.

 

[Bluejays]

The RDG has invited RMT to continue discussions and explore options next week.

Good news

 

[heathrowrail]

The problem I find with the RMT is that the second things don't go there way, they are ready and waiting to go on strike. Now they've been backed into the corner by the government & RDG, Passengers are fed up, staff are fed up and the RMT realise it's not working. If they had tried harder, got the public and media on side and then after months said "sorry we've tried but striking is a final resort" then maybe the outcome would be different.

All they've done is exactly what the government hoped.

 

[Kite159]

Labour probably aren't going to bend to the will of the unions, that's not realistic. I'd imagine they get the ASLEF dispute sorted fairly quickly.

More likely to resolve ASLEF as they don't want to upset their funders

 

[Envy123]

No Thameslink services at all today. What a farce.

Good thing we moved to Peterborough, as otherwise my mother would have no way to get to her work.

 

[newtownmgr]

I don’t know ANY industry that doesn’t pay an enhancement for BH working. It may not be written explicitly but I don’t think you’ll be working for plain time only.

Bank holidays have been a normal working day on the railway for many years, with no enhancements in pay or days in lieu