ScotRail Industrial Relations issues (including conductor strike action)

[LowLevel]

Comparing to the airlines is comparing apples and oranges, it is a different scenario entirely.
Saying they’ve been kind to ‘us’ just because there’s been no furloughs strikes me bizarre. Are you at ScotRail and are you a ticket examiner or a conductor?

I am a conductor and a generally union minded person. I consider my pay claim for the moment to be well settled by the shifts I've spent at home spare or in doing 3 hours instead of a 9 hr 15 day over the last 18 months, or sat in the back cab venturing out to do the doors for several months and nothing else. It was, for quite a while, nothing short of a paid holiday camp. Subsidy for the moment has far better uses than settling a pay claim.

 

[maradona10]

I am of the same stance. Of course I'd like a payrise (who doesn't), but can see that actually the railway has had very favourable terms these past 18 months. Lots of people are displeased and I'm no fan of a "race to the bottom" but there needs to be at least some understanding of the drastic realities of railway finances which have basically be hidden from the view of most railway staff. Unfortunately some do not have this (still) and have been used to above inflation pay-rises year after year.

Frankly 2.2% is likely the best offer going anywhere in the UK right now on the railway and comparatively high compared to many sectors (unless you've got an HGV licence!).

The issue, I suspect, isn’t the 2.2% but the association of cuts alongside it

 

[JamesT]

The issue, I suspect, isn’t the 2.2% but the association of cuts alongside it

Isn't that just reality? As it seems unlikely there will be cash thrown at Scotrail to fund a payrise, it's going to have to be funded at least in part by cuts elsewhere. If they don't agree the two together, what are they supposed to do when the bill for the payrise turns up?

 

[the sniper]

I’d say making a 2.2% pay offer *is* reckless - in the context of being a reckless use of public money !

Given it was linked to booking office closures, what's to say it wasn't a better deal for the tax payer in the long run? I would guess from how they're playing this situation that it would have been self funding, at least. Also pretty clear the RMT wouldn't accept it. Fun and games.

 

[Starmill]

The issue, I suspect, isn’t the 2.2% but the association of cuts alongside it

So 0.0% and a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies would have been a good offer instead?

 

[maradona10]

It’s not a different scenario - one is a transport industry that has been fully supported through Covid by the Government as it’s revenue collapsed, the other is a transport industry that hasn’t.

I’m not at ScotRail, and you will clearly know the strength of feeling in the grade better than I do - I completely respect that.

But, and I can’t stress this enough, these are very tough times for the industry, and that means all of us have a part to play. It will be a smaller railway in future - at least in terms of passenger numbers and numbers of services (see the ScotRail or SWR consultations; these won’t be the last). There is a limit to how much money Government(s) will be willing to fund a railway with fewer passengers. A lot of people will be leaving the industry - some have already left. The more expensive we make ourselves, the more people will need to leave. It’s that simple.

I’m afraid it is a different scenario because they’re different sectors which are run differently and have been affected differently by the pandemic. Passengers use one service to go on holidays or long distance which was severely prohibited while another sees mostly local travel with people attending places such as their work. The railways had to keep moving as a public service, airlines were severely restricted with travel restrictions and altered demand. I have sympathy for the airlines and workers but it’s a different scenario entirely.

I do appreciate the Rail sector isn’t invincible and there has been reduced income, but there’s a feeling amongst workers in ScotRail that they have been treated with contempt since the start of the pandemic. There’s also a feeling that the company, due to lose the franchise, has done the bare minimum and continues to do the bare minimum to take revenue.

Furlough is a dud argument, many workers would have taken it over having to work front line during a pandemic without even adequate PPE and the company taking pops at the grade left right and centre. I personally wouldn’t have minded furlough so that I could have worked a second job like most of the people I know who were furloughed.

This could still be done, in order to fund a pay rise. But you're unhappy with that too?

I don't agree with that, and I don't agree with Grant Shapps on just about everything.

You don’t agree with me or with Shapps?

Isn't that just reality? As it seems unlikely there will be cash thrown at Scotrail to fund a payrise, it's going to have to be funded at least in part by cuts elsewhere. If they don't agree the two together, what are they supposed to do when the bill for the payrise turns up?

I don’t know if it’s reality, they seem to want to close booking offices regardless and so one might argue this tactic is slightly underhand

I am a conductor and a generally union minded person. I consider my pay claim for the moment to be well settled by the shifts I've spent at home spare or in doing 3 hours instead of a 9 hr 15 day over the last 18 months, or sat in the back cab venturing out to do the doors for several months and nothing else. It was, for quite a while, nothing short of a paid holiday camp. Subsidy for the moment has far better uses than settling a pay claim.

That’s fair enough, are you at ScotRail or another Toc?

I don’t see it as a paid holiday personally, I see it as showing up to your work and doing what you’re told to do. It’s certainly not felt like a holiday for me.

 

[snookertam]

The argument that people should just be grateful to have jobs and should accept whatever cuts come there way, is how we end up with the continued erosion of working conditions and employment rights.

The paper by professor Iain Docherty gave the game away. They just want to cut staff numbers. It’s the same as with the banks, many of which are also closing.

The budget provided to transport Scotland by the Scottish Government is solely the responsibility of government, not any group of workers seeking a better pay deal or to even preserve the conditions they had two years ago.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I would like to disagree with the view that it will be a smaller railway in future. It will only shrink if the railway deliberately shrinks itself. From what many have observed and I admit this is not universal across the board but from the observations of quite a number on this board and elsewhere, passenger demand is returning and returning with some strength. Ok so some clothes and roots and timings are going to be different in the short medium or long term but the only way the railway will shrink is if it puts passengers off in the way that ScotRail is doing at the moment and we'll do more of next year with its new TT

 

[Starmill]

You don’t agree with me or with Shapps?

Exactly. Nobody is lucky to have a job - they pay for that job security through having a less competitive salary as a result.

The budget provided to transport Scotland by the Scottish Government is solely the responsibility of government, not any group of workers seeking a better pay deal or to even preserve the conditions they had two years ago.

Quite correct. No matter what happens the budget isn't going to be increased without sign off from Kate Forbes and Nicola Sturgeon. In practice they're severely restricted from borrowing against public assets or on the open market, so again, it won't increase without sign off from Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson.

 

[snookertam]

You really shouldn’t need to offer an enhanced payment to staff already widely recognised as relatively well rewarded just to preform their normal duties , minimum wage hospitality cleaning & security roles etc yes by all means do .

It wasn’t to do their existing roles. It was in return for an agreement to work additional overtime during the event. It was also well deserved, because they were worked into the ground for those 10 days and stories of staff getting only 1 day off during the entire event were common.

Exactly. Nobody is lucky to have a job - they pay for that job security through having a less competitive salary as a result.


Quite correct. No matter what happens the budget isn't going to be increased without sign off from Kate Forbes and Nicola Sturgeon. In practice they're severely restricted from borrowing against public assets or on the open market, so again, it won't increase without sign off from Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson.

None of this is, or should be the concern of any group of workers seeking to defend their pay and conditions. That’s the politicians’ problem.

 

[43066]

I am a conductor and a generally union minded person. I consider my pay claim for the moment to be well settled by the shifts I've spent at home spare or in doing 3 hours instead of a 9 hr 15 day over the last 18 months, or sat in the back cab venturing out to do the doors for several months and nothing else. It was, for quite a while, nothing short of a paid holiday camp. Subsidy for the moment has far better uses than settling a pay claim.

I think most of our operational colleagues would fully agree with that. I’m not so sure about the threatened job cuts being bundled in with the pay deal, though. That just isn’t cricket…

 

[Starmill]

None of this is, or should be the concern of any group of workers seeking to defend their pay and conditions. That’s the politicians’ problem.

How is government policy not the concern of the workers?

 

[snookertam]

How is government policy not the concern of the workers?

That’s for government to deal with. It’s got nothing to do with whether their demands are justified.

 

[Starmill]

That’s for government to deal with. It’s got nothing to do with whether their demands are justified.

So what's your point? That you dislike the government? Because if so I couldn't agree more with you. But then I didn't vote for them.

 

[Bald Rick]

I’m afraid it is a different scenario because they’re different sectors which are run differently and have been affected differently by the pandemic. Passengers use one service to go on holidays or long distance which was severely prohibited while another sees mostly local travel with people attending places such as their work. The railways had to keep moving as a public service, airlines were severely restricted with travel restrictions and altered demand. I have sympathy for the airlines and workers but it’s a different scenario entirely.

Whilst I accept that the air and rail industry are different, it is not A different scenario entirely - We’ll have to disagree on this. A not insignificant portion of the U.K. airline industry workforce is supported by domestic travel, which to all intents and purposes is the same market as the long distance rail sector. And they have not been supported by Governement at all, save for certain links to the islands.

I would like to disagree with the view that it will be a smaller railway in future. It will only shrink if the railway deliberately shrinks itself. From what many have observed and I admit this is not universal across the board but from the observations of quite a number on this board and elsewhere, passenger demand is returning and returning with some strength.

Oh it’s returning all right. This week had been the best since lockdown, as any regular rail user will tell you. But revenue is still nowhere near Pre covid levels, and the sectors performing the worst are long distance premium business and long distance commuting. They are way, way down. All the research done* (and there’s been lots) shows this will not come back to anywhere near pre covid levels. And, unfortunately, these market segments provided by far the most yield, and were profitable.

*The research done so far has been reasonably accurate.

 

[Horizon22]

Oh it’s returning all right. This week had been the best since lockdown, as any regular rail user will tell you. But revenue is still nowhere near Pre covid levels, and the sectors performing the worst are long distance premium business and long distance commuting. They are way, way down. All the research done* (and there’s been lots) shows this will not come back to anywhere near pre covid levels. And, unfortunately, these market segments provided by far the most yield, and were profitable.

*The research done so far has been reasonably accurate.

It's also returning in some cases a bit more than some TOCs are quite ready for. Many companies continue to lag behind with crew training as a hangover from all the Covid restrictions whilst maintenance regimes, stock allocations and service timetables don't always align with passenger demand so there's a lot of "catching up" going on at the moment. It's not really any specific fault and even despite some clear failings and a limited advertising camapign (the TV advert wasn't too bad), passengers are returning. But as you say, they're not the high yield passengers and the recovery is fragile - you start upping fares too quickly and you kill the leisure market which is recovering well.

As I said before, anything to-do with staff T&Cs / pay will be inexplicably linked to the overall financial health of the rail industry most of which staff can do absolutely nothing about (like commuting patterns).

 

[320320]

Scotrail are currently advertising the fact that they’re investing £4bn in Scotland’s railway.

A tremendous amount of money to spend for a company that claims to be so hard up they can’t afford to pay a tiny fraction of that sum to fund staff pay rises.

 

[Watershed]

Scotrail are currently advertising the fact that they’re investing £4bn in Scotland’s railway.

A tremendous amount of money to spend for a company that claims to be so hard up they can’t afford to pay a tiny fraction of that sum to fund staff pay rises.

Opex vs capex. Apples and oranges.

Even a 2% payrise will have significant implications for future costs.

 

[Starmill]

Scotrail are currently advertising the fact that they’re investing £4bn in Scotland’s railway.

A tremendous amount of money to spend for a company that claims to be so hard up they can’t afford to pay a tiny fraction of that sum to fund staff pay rises.

It's a five year settlement to cover the maintenance and enhancement of a whole country's worth of infrastructure. In other words really not that much.

 

[320320]

It's a five year settlement to cover the maintenance and enhancement of a whole country's worth of infrastructure. In other words really not that much.

Plenty to fund a pay rise.

 

[Kite159]

Regarding ticket offices, there are probably some within the Glasgow area which pre Covid were very quiet at times of the day and could probably do with being reviewed to avoid having someone sitting in an office serving one or two passengers per hour with simple "returns to Glasgow" [ones which could easily be sold from a TVM].

I would like to disagree with the view that it will be a smaller railway in future. It will only shrink if the railway deliberately shrinks itself. From what many have observed and I admit this is not universal across the board but from the observations of quite a number on this board and elsewhere, passenger demand is returning and returning with some strength. Ok so some clothes and roots and timings are going to be different in the short medium or long term but the only way the railway will shrink is if it puts passengers off in the way that ScotRail is doing at the moment and we'll do more of next year with its new TT

How many passengers were lost to the railways over the last couple months when someone living in say Edinburgh wanting to get away for a long weekend in the highlands who in previous years would have used the train to travel, instead either drove or used the coach service due to the lack of trains on Sundays. How many of those passengers will return to using the train next year if they have another long weekend away

 

[Highlandspring]

Scotrail are currently advertising the fact that they’re investing £4bn in Scotland’s railway.

A tremendous amount of money to spend for a company that claims to be so hard up they can’t afford to pay a tiny fraction of that sum to fund staff pay rises.

It’s also a bit disingenuous of them to claim it as their investment since it’s actually Network Rail splashing the cash, though it’s being promoted with the joint Scotland’s Railway branding.

 

[Starmill]

Plenty to fund a pay rise.

OK so that's non-consolidated 2021 pay then of how many percentage points? For how many staff and costing how much? And which renewals do you defer or enhancements do you cancel in order to pay for it? And what do you do next year when the money is gone?

It’s also a bit disingenuous of them to claim it as their investment since it’s actually Network Rail splashing the cash, though it’s being promoted with the joint Scotland’s Railway branding.

The money is public money being spent on a public asset, for the benefit of a (very generously) publicly funded service. What's so disengenous?

 

[320320]

OK so that's non-consolidated 2021 pay then of how many percentage points? For how many staff and costing how much? And which renewals do you defer or enhancements do you cancel in order to pay for it? And what do you do next year when the money is gone?


The money is public money being spent on a public asset, for the benefit of a (very generously) publicly funded service. What's so disengenous?

We get the fact that you, along with many others, don’t want railway staff to get a pay rise but we don’t care. Abellio and the Scottish government will work out how to fund it eventually because it’s only going to get worse if they continue to pass the buck to each other.

 

[Highlandspring]

The money is public money being spent on a public asset, for the benefit of a (very generously) publicly funded service. What's so disengenous?

That a company which isn’t actually spending £4Bil is claiming that it is. It’s like British Airways claiming it is paying have the runways at Heathrow relaid.

 

[Starmill]

We get the fact that you, along with many others, don’t want railway staff to get a pay rise but we don’t care.

You seem terribly touchy. Has something made you feel uncomfortable?

Abellio and the Scottish government will work out how to fund it eventually because it’s only going to get worse if they continue to pass the buck to each other.

Abellio will soon be out of the picture entirely, and they haven't really been in any significant control for some time now anyway.

 

[320320]

You seem terribly touchy. Has something made you feel uncomfortable?


Abellio will soon be out of the picture entirely, and they haven't really been in any significant control for some time now anyway.

Uncomfortable

We know TS are calling the shots but at this point Abellio are still an invaluable shield for hiding their incompetence.

 

[maradona10]

I take it that most of the people who don’t want ScotRail staff to get payrises don’t actually work for ScotRail and so don’t really have that much of a vested interest themselves, other than what seems to be some sort of bitterness to staff fighting paycuts? I wouldn’t dream of coming on here to argue that the lowest paid staff at any toc (or company or industry) should accept paycuts and just be happy to have a job, it’s an attitude I can’t understand.

 

[320320]

I take it that most of the people who don’t want ScotRail staff to get payrises don’t actually work for ScotRail and so don’t really have that much of a vested interest themselves, other than what seems to be some sort of bitterness to staff fighting paycuts? I wouldn’t dream of coming on here to argue that the lowest paid staff at any toc (or company or industry) should accept paycuts and just be happy to have a job, it’s an attitude I can’t understand.

Mate, there’s plenty of people on this thread that would have us on zero hour contracts if they could get away with it.
It’s weird behaviour and comes across as plain old jealousy from people that can’t get a job on the railway.

 

[Starmill]

As much as people will experience heated emotions in conversations like this, unfortunately this is the real truth:

There is a limit to how much money Government(s) will be willing to fund a railway with fewer passengers. A lot of people will be leaving the industry - some have already left. The more expensive we make ourselves, the more people will need to leave. It’s that simple.

Probably everyone in the country would love a 4-5% pay increase, and I would be considerably happier myself if nearly all workers got one. However, what Bald Rick says is the simple truth now, regardless of what anyone might think about how they personally are exceptional to that, or that there's no shortage of resources and the fat cats in Abellio (or whoever) are keeping it all for themselves.