RMT turns down Network Rail Pay Offer

[68000]

What is the bonus scheme that RMT want scrapped?

Interested to know this as well, it would seem strange that the RMT is looking to scrap a bonus scheme offered to their members!

 

[AlastairFraser]

Interested to know this as well, it would seem strange that the RMT is looking to scrap a bonus scheme offered to their members!

Perhaps they're thinking practically as to what can be done to limit the costs of a pay increase in these difficult times.

 

[Royal351]

Interested to know this as well, it would seem strange that the RMT is looking to scrap a bonus scheme offered to their members!

To me the logic behind it is that if you strike during the year you don't get the bonus, plus they didnt pay the 21/22 bonus despite there were no strikes that year, as strikes didnt start till Summer 22. After the end of the tax year.
They'd rather have the money as part of the base salary instead of as a bonus

 

[Signal_Box]

The union went into the pay talks taking November's RPI which was 5.3%, as the pay award date was Jan 2024.

Plus the full deal Network Rail has come back to RMT is was rubbish.
NR response to more or less anything the union put forward was to set a torch to it and go "lol no". I can sense a fun summer ahead

There is zero appetite for strike action among operations, the strike last time was pittering out towards end.

 

[DMckduck]

Another thread yet again filled with non railway staff who haven't done their research and slating the union and/or it's subs...

 

[mrcheek]

Another thread yet again filled with non railway staff who haven't done their research and slating the union and/or it's subs...

and another thread with people parroting everything RMT says without taking into account the actual financial situation.

 

[furnessvale]

Length of the Offer: Network Rail offered a 1-year deal.
· Pay: Network Rail offered a 3.5% pay increase, saying it would be a real-term increase based on average expected inflation of 2.1-3.1% for the year ahead. It has always been the case that pay offers have been based on RPI for November of the previous year. RPI was 5.3% in November 2023. The RMT rejected this on the basis that using forecast inflation rather than the November RPI figure for negotiations is wrong.
· Minimum Uplift: The company rejected our claim for a minimum uplift.
· Bands 5-8 Pay Cap: Network Rail had previously committed to removing the cap on Bands 5-8 salaries but have removed this from their offer.
· No Compulsory Redundancies: Network Rail rejected our claim to extend the current No Compulsory Redundancy offer that is due to end on 31st January 2025
· Family Friendly Policies: Network Rail accepted our claim for an improved premature baby policy and has proposed an increase of 1-day extra leave for parents of premature babies. They have indicated they are open to discussing other family-friendly policies separately.
· Expenses: Network Rail proposed a common expenses policy with this being the current Network Rail policy with no proposed increase to any of the amounts.
· PDTA and Mileage Payments: Network Rail proposed harmonising the amounts rather than increasing them, as per the RMT claim, although they were not prepared to deal with this as part of the pay talks.
· Reduction in the Working Week: Network Rail rejected the RMT requests regarding a reduced work week although said that they would meet separately to the pay deal to discuss those who have contracts greater than 35 hours.
· Bands 5-8 Contracts: A working group will continue but will be dealt with outside of the pay talks. In the initial discussions, Network Rail offered the removal of performance-related pay for Bands 5-8 for the duration of the pay offer only to withdraw this in their pay offer.
· Travel Facilities: Network Rail rejected an improvement in the current travel facilities.
· Bonus Scheme: Network Rail rejected our claim to scrap the bonus scheme.
· London and South East Allowance: Network Rail rejected our claim for an increase in London and South East allowances as they thought that these were already fair.
· Annual Leave Increase: Network Rail rejected our claim for improvements to annual leave but proposed instead the ability to sell, buy, and bank annual leave.
· Grade 10 Signaller and Grade 11 Supervisor: Network Rail rejected our claim to raise the grading structure to Grade 10 for Signallers and Grade 11 for Supervisors. They said that they would continue discussions in the job evaluation forum. The job evaluation forum exists to regrade existing roles. This forum cannot renegotiate the grading structure.
· Pensions: Network Rail said that it would be unaffordable to improve pensions and rejected this.
· Managed Stations: A working group will continue at the National Operations Council but will be dealt with outside of the pay talks.
· Signaller General Purpose Relief Premium: Network Rail rejected our claim for an increase to the premium from 4% to 10%.
· Union Learning Representatives: Network Rail said that this is a mutual area of interest that they would like to discuss separately away from pay talks.
The offer has been formally rejected by your Union. I have written today to the company following the rejection of this offer seeking fresh negotiations and for the company to table an improved offer for your consideration.

If those are strings, most seem to have been attached by RMT rather than NR.

 

[winks]

Also I’m not really sure how much benefit FIP would offer. How many Network Rail staff would use it or indeed other TOC staff..?

 

[GardenRail]

Another thread yet again filled with non railway staff who haven't done their research and slating the union and/or it's subs...

^This^

and another thread with people parroting everything RMT says without taking into account the actual financial situation.

It's a good job that not everyone is in a race to the bottom.

Most railway staff are in a Union to achieve the best they can through-out their career, and that includes wages. Without a Union, do you think railway companies would offer a pay rise out of generosity? From the kindness of their hearts? Because they feel a bit warm and fuzzy? Never do they come first and make an offer. It always amuses me how railway staff are vilified for trying to get better. Like there's an expectation, that railway staff should bin their T&Cs, and indeed wages, to fall in line with people not as fortunate. Rather than everyone else fight for better.

I do take in to account the financial situation, as you put it. Council Tax up 5%. Utilities up. Phone bill up. Car Tax up. Petrol to get me to work, up. Train Fares, up. Shopping up. Why shouldn't people fight for better. Compared to 3 years ago, personally, I'm about £250 worse off, every month. 3.5% does not make up for that, and/or the reducing standard of living from 3 years ago. Inflation might be lower, but prices are not falling. I suspect many commentators on this subject are not rail staff, and feel, what can only be described as envious. That's fine, but everything rail staff have, has been fought for over many, many years. We do not want to lose it.

Interested to know this as well, it would seem strange that the RMT is looking to scrap a bonus scheme offered to their members!

Maybe because its not pensionable, and could help fund a proper pay rise? not sure.

 

[The Planner]

Interested to know this as well, it would seem strange that the RMT is looking to scrap a bonus scheme offered to their members!

To me the logic behind it is that if you strike during the year you don't get the bonus, plus they didnt pay the 21/22 bonus despite there were no strikes that year, as strikes didnt start till Summer 22. After the end of the tax year.
They'd rather have the money as part of the base salary instead of as a bonus

Its a performance related bonus, if all the scorecards hit their targets (good luck with that ever happening), the full amount is paid out. I am assuming that RMT want that got rid off and the bonus amount just paid into salaries regardless of performance.

 

[Elecman]

Is that within Network Rail's gift to offer? Honest question, I don't really know who regulates (for lack of a better word!) FIP and so who Network Rail would need to even speak to try an agree that?

No it isn’t as it would be upto all the RDG to unanimously agree and there are certain TOCs that won’t agree to any improvements in the NR travel scheme.

 

[GardenRail]

No it isn’t as it would be upto all the RDG to unanimously agree and there are certain TOCs that won’t agree to any improvements in the NR travel scheme.

But they could agree to try, and if it gets turned down, well its out of their hands, but they tried. Simplistic, but they'd just have to tell the RMT, well, so n so TOC declined. Book passed. Done.

 

[Elecman]

But they could agree to try, and if it gets turned down, well its out of their hands, but they tried. Simplistic, but they'd just have to tell the RMT, well, so n so TOC declined. Book passed. Done.

They have tried

 

[CaptainHaddock]

On staff travel there wasn’t much more Network Rail could offer… Leisure and Duty travel both already covered.

The sticking point for me is that non-safeguarded NR staff lose their priv travel on retirement whereas safeguarded staff keep theirs. If the RMT could secure this plus an extension of the "no compulsory redundancies" policy by another year, I'd happily accept this deal regardless of the pay offer.

 

[dk1]

The sticking point for me is that non-safeguarded NR staff lose their priv travel on retirement whereas safeguarded staff keep theirs. If the RMT could secure this plus an extension of the "no compulsory redundancies" policy by another year, I'd happily accept this deal regardless of the pay offer.

Non-safeguarded TOC staff lose their priv travel too afaik. Only exception is that some could keep the free travel for their own TOC as long as that company retained the franchise.

 

[Bald Rick]

The sticking point for me is that non-safeguarded NR staff lose their priv travel on retirement whereas safeguarded staff keep theirs. If the RMT could secure this plus an extension of the "no compulsory redundancies" policy by another year, I'd happily accept this deal regardless of the pay offer.

There are not many safeguarded staff left in NR - basically those with 28+ years service who haven’t given it up. I‘d be surprised if it’s more than 5% of the company.

 

[The Planner]

There are not many safeguarded staff left in NR - basically those with 28+ years service who haven’t given it up. I‘d be surprised if it’s more than 5% of the company.

And anyone with 28 years plus is normally hand delivering their VS applications to HR at the moment!

 

[Elecman]

And anyone with 28 years plus is normally hand delivering their VS applications to HR at the moment!

I’ve got 48 years service in and not stopping yet!!

 

[Snow1964]

If those are strings, most seem to have been attached by RMT rather than NR.

Tend to agree, that is more like a fantasy wish list from RMT than anything to do with annual pay percentage.

Not surprising that Network Rail said some of these can be be discussed but not as part of pay talks.

Perhaps I don't understand RMT terminology but things like expenses are not pay related, they are reimbursements, are they confusing the issue by talking about specific allowances.

 

[Goldfish62]

The sticking point for me is that non-safeguarded NR staff lose their priv travel on retirement whereas safeguarded staff keep theirs. If the RMT could secure this plus an extension of the "no compulsory redundancies" policy by another year, I'd happily accept this deal regardless of the pay offer.

A friend of mine recently retired from a TOC after 27 years service. He knew he wasn't safeguarded when he joined back in 1997. It's not a problem and he accepts it.

 

[Vinnym]

Length of the Offer: Network Rail offered a 1-year deal.
· Pay: Network Rail offered a 3.5% pay increase, saying it would be a real-term increase based on average expected inflation of 2.1-3.1% for the year ahead. It has always been the case that pay offers have been based on RPI for November of the previous year. RPI was 5.3% in November 2023. The RMT rejected this on the basis that using forecast inflation rather than the November RPI figure for negotiations is wrong.
· Minimum Uplift: The company rejected our claim for a minimum uplift.
· Bands 5-8 Pay Cap: Network Rail had previously committed to removing the cap on Bands 5-8 salaries but have removed this from their offer.
· No Compulsory Redundancies: Network Rail rejected our claim to extend the current No Compulsory Redundancy offer that is due to end on 31st January 2025
· Family Friendly Policies: Network Rail accepted our claim for an improved premature baby policy and has proposed an increase of 1-day extra leave for parents of premature babies. They have indicated they are open to discussing other family-friendly policies separately.
· Expenses: Network Rail proposed a common expenses policy with this being the current Network Rail policy with no proposed increase to any of the amounts.
· PDTA and Mileage Payments: Network Rail proposed harmonising the amounts rather than increasing them, as per the RMT claim, although they were not prepared to deal with this as part of the pay talks.
· Reduction in the Working Week: Network Rail rejected the RMT requests regarding a reduced work week although said that they would meet separately to the pay deal to discuss those who have contracts greater than 35 hours.
· Bands 5-8 Contracts: A working group will continue but will be dealt with outside of the pay talks. In the initial discussions, Network Rail offered the removal of performance-related pay for Bands 5-8 for the duration of the pay offer only to withdraw this in their pay offer.
· Travel Facilities: Network Rail rejected an improvement in the current travel facilities.
· Bonus Scheme: Network Rail rejected our claim to scrap the bonus scheme.
· London and South East Allowance: Network Rail rejected our claim for an increase in London and South East allowances as they thought that these were already fair.
· Annual Leave Increase: Network Rail rejected our claim for improvements to annual leave but proposed instead the ability to sell, buy, and bank annual leave.
· Grade 10 Signaller and Grade 11 Supervisor: Network Rail rejected our claim to raise the grading structure to Grade 10 for Signallers and Grade 11 for Supervisors. They said that they would continue discussions in the job evaluation forum. The job evaluation forum exists to regrade existing roles. This forum cannot renegotiate the grading structure.
· Pensions: Network Rail said that it would be unaffordable to improve pensions and rejected this.
· Managed Stations: A working group will continue at the National Operations Council but will be dealt with outside of the pay talks.
· Signaller General Purpose Relief Premium: Network Rail rejected our claim for an increase to the premium from 4% to 10%.
· Union Learning Representatives: Network Rail said that this is a mutual area of interest that they would like to discuss separately away from pay talks.
The offer has been formally rejected by your Union. I have written today to the company following the rejection of this offer seeking fresh negotiations and for the company to table an improved offer for your consideration.

 

[class442]

I received an email this week, noting that NR had put a new offer to the RMT, still 3.5% but with the addition of a minimum increase of £1275, whichever is higher. Apparently 45% of employees covered would get the £1275, so more than a 3.5% increase.

There's been no mention of it online so maybe the RMT will put it out to vote?

 

[SECR263]

Can we not just have a thread saying RMT accepts offer. Constant regurgitation of who said what, where, or when is becoming tedious, boring and counter productive to the people who pay the fares. The passengers. It would be nice to see what is offered by the gaffers in actual detail and why the workers reject it item by item.

 

[james_the_xv]

Can we not just have a thread saying RMT accepts offer. Constant regurgitation of who said what, where, or when is becoming tedious, boring and counter productive to the people who pay the fares. The passengers. It would be nice to see what is offered by the gaffers in actual detail and why the workers reject it item by item.

So those Band 5-8, signaller grades, controller grades, and others should be told to shut up and deal with a mediocre pay rise because the fares (which they don't control) have gone up?

 

[Horizon22]

With regards to the RMT press release stating that MP's "handing themselves an uplift of 5.5%" can I seek clarification of who is the body that determines increases in MP's salary or is it just the MP's who decide such matters.

It's IPSA - https://www.theipsa.org.uk/news/who-decides-mps-pay

And no MPs do not decide such matters. Arguably pay should be a lot better for MPs so that it doesn't attract people who can afford to do it with other income but that is off-topic.

 

[Townsend Hook]

I received an email this week, noting that NR had put a new offer to the RMT, still 3.5% but with the addition of a minimum increase of £1275, whichever is higher. Apparently 45% of employees covered would get the £1275, so more than a 3.5% increase.

There's been no mention of it online so maybe the RMT will put it out to vote?

The RMT are currently canvassing opinions on the revised pay offer via the local reps.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Can we not just have a thread saying RMT accepts offer. Constant regurgitation of who said what, where, or when is becoming tedious, boring and counter productive to the people who pay the fares. The passengers. It would be nice to see what is offered by the gaffers in actual detail and why the workers reject it item by item.

I can tell you exactly why the payrise is likely to be rejected. The RMT’s request was a 5.3% raise which reflects the RPI in November 2023. So that would be, in real terms, breaking even - our salaries would increase to maintain our current standard of living and nothing more. Even with the new minimum uplift only the very lowest paid are going to be getting anywhere near that 5.3%. The company’s offer is some way short of that and they are not willing to offer anything else substantial such as extending the no compulsory redundancies agreement which expires early next year.

Network Rail admin, operations and maintenance staff have precisely zero input on where rail fares are set, so I fail to see why we should be punished with below-inflation payrises as you seem to be suggesting.

 

[MalaiseForever]

I can tell you exactly why the payrise is likely to be rejected. The RMT’s request was a 5.3% raise which reflects the RPI in November 2023. So that would be, in real terms, breaking even - our salaries would increase to maintain our current standard of living and nothing more. Even with the new minimum uplift only the very lowest paid are going to be getting anywhere near that 5.3%. The company’s offer is some way short of that and they are not willing to offer anything else substantial such as extending the no compulsory redundancies agreement which expires early next year.

Network Rail admin, operations and maintenance staff have precisely zero input on where rail fares are set, so I fail to see why we should be punished with below-inflation payrises as you seem to be suggesting.

Nobody is being punished but the money to fund higher salaries will come from reduced maintenance and renewals.

So there’s a choice to make, can staff become more productive (definitely - I work for NR too) or do we accept lower maintenance and renewals budgets?

 

[JonathanH]

So there’s a choice to make, can staff become more productive (definitely - I work for NR too) or do we accept lower maintenance and renewals budgets?

Does that follow? Surely a lower maintenance and renewal budget means less work for people to do? That doesn't square with higher pay and no reduction in the workforce.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Nobody is being punished

I know - that was a specific reference to the previous poster’s comment.