RMT turns down Network Rail Pay Offer

[1Q18]

Nobody is being punished

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

 

[MalaiseForever]

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.

If NR has £100 and they spend £50 on staff costs and £50 on renewals/maintenance, what happens if they spend £55 or £60 on staff costs?

More pressure on the renewals and maintenance budgets! I know because I’m involved in setting the budgets. It’s zero sum, the overall budget doesn’t change. So we have to reduce spending elsewhere to fund higher wages.

 

[1Q18]

If NR has £100 and they spend £50 on staff costs and £50 on renewals/maintenance, what happens if they spend £55 or £60 on staff costs?

More pressure on the renewals and maintenance budgets! I know because I’m involved in setting the budgets. It’s zero sum, the overall budget doesn’t change. So we have to reduce spending elsewhere to fund higher wages.

Surely the argument can always be made for any public sector organisation to skimp on pay because ‘there’s only so much money and we can better spend it on x, y and z’. Network Rail isn’t special. Classic ‘race to the bottom’ mentality.

If the company genuinely cannot afford to pay another penny in salaries (as they always claim) they should at least look to offer something else of value instead such as extending the no compulsory redundancies agreement.

 

[MalaiseForever]

Surely the argument can always be made for any public sector organisation to skimp on pay because ‘there’s only so much money and we can better spend it on x, y and z’. Network Rail isn’t special. Classic ‘race to the bottom’ mentality.

If the company genuinely cannot afford to pay another penny in salaries (as they always claim) they should at least look to offer something else of value instead such as extending the no compulsory redundancies agreement.

There’s no race to the bottom - if funding is fixed staff need to be become more productive to justify higher pay. It’s not rocket science.

 

[mac]

There’s no race to the bottom - if funding is fixed staff need to be become more productive to justify higher pay. It’s not rocket science.

How would you increase productivity in a signaller who can only signal the trains he has?

 

[ComUtoR]

How would you increase productivity in a signaller who can only signal the trains he has?

Reduce break times and increase working day

 

[The Planner]

Reduce break times and increase working day

You can only take that so far in terms of law though.

 

[LAX54]

Reduce break times and increase working day

Which in ROCs and PSB's would lead to more incidents.

 

[High Dyke]

Reduce break times and increase working day

What are these break times? Fine for a multi-staffed location with a defined meal relief on duty. However, single staffed locations rely on natural gaps in traffic. Not too bad on a line that has 2-6 trains an hour, but not so easy to achieve in a location, on a 12-hour shift pattern, dealing with considerably more trains per hour. How do I know this? I work those types of locations.

Someone posted earlier, asking why it takes so long to sort out these talks. The cynic in me would suggest that they only meet to discuss which type of biscuit to have at the following meeting. Though, that is far away from the reality.

One thing that came back from Network Rail during these talks were that they waited until all three unions involved had made their submissions before they would meet to respond. That makes sense, but it does prolong talks. Even more so if a meeting takes place to confirm that submissions have been made and all parties will then go and consider the details. So, both management and unions share responsibility for procrastinating.

I've said before, that I don't always agree with everything that comes from TU headquarters, but as a staff representative, then i have to show some degree of conformity. In the past I have voted against the wishes of the union, if I think that is the best thing.

 

[Daveydavey6028]

So possibly more industrial action to contend with for us customers, in addition to the current ASLEF actions.

So possibly more industrial action on the way, in addition to the current ASLEF actions?

 

[coppercapped]

SNIPPED

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.

I find it difficult to understand this statement and its relevance to the thread. It is a classic straw man.

Can you name any company or organisation in which the operational, as distinct from the managerial, staff have any say in determining the prices charged to the company's or organisation's customers for the supply of goods or services?

 

[james_the_xv]

I find it difficult to understand this statement and its relevance to the thread. It is a classic straw man.

It was in reference to another users argument that linked fares and NR pay talks, so with the context was very relevant if you just looked at the quoted post.

 

[coppercapped]

It was in reference to another users argument that linked fares and NR pay talks, so with the context was very relevant if you just looked at the quoted post.

The original post was:

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.

in which there was no mention of operational staff being involved with setting fares. It simply states that these continual, tedious arguments are boring to those who actually pay the fares, i.e., the passengers.

I maintain that @1Q18's post to which I replied does not align with reality. Or can you name an organisation where the operational staff have a say in setting the prices charged to the customers?

 

[1Q18]

I maintain that @1Q18's post to which I replied does not align with reality. Or can you name an organisation where the operational staff have a say in setting the prices charged to the customers?

I never claimed there was any such organisation!

Honestly..

 

[Signal_Box]

Reduce break times and increase working day

We regularly have 80 minute breaks over a 12hr day, and several base roster weeks of 60hrs.

You can only take that so far in terms of law though.

20 minutes per 12hrs isn’t it ? Our new fatigue reduction roster has several 60hr weeks.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

20 minutes per 12hrs isn’t it ? Our new fatigue reduction roster has several 60hr weeks.

Out of interest, how does that compare to the length of the working week when signallers generally worked to a 3-shift pattern (0600-1400 / 1400-2200 / 2200-0600?) I’m assuming you’re on the more modern 12hr shift patterns that were brought in a few years back.

 

[Signal_Box]

Out of interest, how does that compare to the length of the working week when signallers generally worked to a 3-shift pattern (0600-1400 / 1400-2200 / 2200-0600?) I’m assuming you’re on the more modern 12hr shift patterns that were brought in a few years back.

No idea I’m afraid, and yes.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

No idea I’m afraid, and yes.

No worries - I remember reading at the time that signallers were generally in favour of the 12hr vs 8hr arrangement and I wondered if that was still the case with the benefit of hindsight.

 

[JoeyB]

Reduce break times and increase working day

I know if people on 9 hour shifts who get no breaks due to the frequency of trains.

 

[GardenRail]

No worries - I remember reading at the time that signallers were generally in favour of the 12hr vs 8hr arrangement and I wondered if that was still the case with the benefit of hindsight.

I would hate to go back to 8 hour shifts now. Work/Life balance is loads better on 12s!

 

[godfreycomplex]

No worries - I remember reading at the time that signallers were generally in favour of the 12hr vs 8hr arrangement and I wondered if that was still the case with the benefit of hindsight.

I would hate to go back to 8 hour shifts now. Work/Life balance is loads better on 12s!

Yeah whilst the lie ins before a late turn are nice on lates it’s only the odd contrarian that, all other things being equal, genuinely prefers 8s, generally speaking

 

[Signal_Box]

No worries - I remember reading at the time that signallers were generally in favour of the 12hr vs 8hr arrangement and I wondered if that was still the case with the benefit of hindsight.

Definitely prefer 12hrs any day of the week, it’s however a long long long run of 60hrs X5 days or nights booked work.

 

[GardenRail]

Definitely prefer 12hrs any day of the week, it’s however a long long long run of 60hrs X5 days or nights booked work.

Ooof. We never do more than 4 on the bounce. Or 4 shifts per week.

 

[Signal_Box]

Ooof. We never do more than 4 on the bounce. Or 4 shifts per week.

Progress eh….fatigue compliant as well, or so they say.

 

[12LDA28C]

I know if people on 9 hour shifts who get no breaks due to the frequency of trains.

That doesn't sound legal to me.

 

[Signal_Box]

That doesn't sound legal to me.

Unfortunately it is, natural breaks in “the service” allow for breaks at single manned locations. However as anyone who is a signaller will know just because your not signaling doesn’t mean your not undertaking other tasks which prevent basic human needs.

I’ve often been hopping about needing to urinate because I can’t leave my task until a train had passed or I’m waiting on a call etc.

 

[The Planner]

Unfortunately it is, natural breaks in “the service” allow for breaks at single manned locations. However as anyone who is a signaller will know just because your not signaling doesn’t mean your not undertaking other tasks which prevent basic human needs.

I’ve often been hopping about needing to urinate because I can’t leave my task until a train had passed or I’m waiting on a call etc.

Truckers Tizer!

 

[Saj8]

As a driver, if caught short, I am quite "within my rights" to delay the train at a station while I use the facilities. I just have to let the signaller and my guard know. My TOC are quite happy to take the delay minutes as they'd rather I was concentrating fully on the task, rather than being distracted by the need to go. Does the same not apply to signallers? Signal stays on until the call of nature has been answered?

 

[dk1]

As a driver, if caught short, I am quite "within my rights" to delay the train at a station while I use the facilities. I just have to let the signaller and my guard know. My TOC are quite happy to take the delay minutes as they'd rather I was concentrating fully on the task, rather than being distracted by the need to go. Does the same not apply to signallers? Signal stays on until the call of nature has been answered?

You would surely think so. If not Network Rail are are worryingly different employer than train operators. When you’ve got to go you’ve got to go. That’s just how it is.

 

[Signal_Box]

Truckers Tizer!

LOL

As a driver, if caught short, I am quite "within my rights" to delay the train at a station while I use the facilities. I just have to let the signaller and my guard know. My TOC are quite happy to take the delay minutes as they'd rather I was concentrating fully on the task, rather than being distracted by the need to go. Does the same not apply to signallers? Signal stays on until the call of nature has been answered?

It depends on the task your doing, we’ve margins so tight for line blocks as an example you need to get them on as soon as the section is clear or they’ll be waiting longer than required.