Severance roll-out

[Horizon22]

Another thing & what would probably have been the deal breaker for me should I’d been allowed to participate. Does anyone know whether safeguarded staff travel is retained with voluntary severance? I have always understood that it’s the two Rs (Redundancy or Retirement) as long as 20 years service has been completed.

Safeguarded is yes. I saw it was also 5 years service to ensure you kept TOC specific travel too, but again think that depends on each operator’s decision.

As for non-safeguarded, your priv has to be handed back.

 

[dk1]

Safeguarded is yes. I saw it was also 5 years service to ensure you kept TOC specific travel too, but again think that depends on each operator’s decision.

As for non-safeguarded, your priv has to be handed back.

Cheers. Not seen anything about that & I ain’t going to lose those even if I could participate.

 

[Horizon22]

Cheers. Not seen anything about that & I ain’t going to lose those even if I could participate.

Surprised you haven’t. Most TOCs seem to have sent out internal emails about the scheme so there might have been some additional info in an email link or your internet etc.

 

[Mag_seven]

Another thing & what would probably have been the deal breaker for me should I’d been allowed to participate. Does anyone know whether safeguarded staff travel is retained with voluntary severance? I have always understood that it’s the two Rs (Redundancy or Retirement) as long as 20 years service has been completed.

If you are safeguarded you keep your safeguarded facilities. There used to be a clause stating a minimum age or length of service (i.e. the 20 years you mention above) at the time of being made redundant for eligibility but that seems to have been dropped.

 

[dk1]

If you are safeguarded you keep your safeguarded facilities. There used to be a clause stating a minimum age or length of service at the time of being made redundant for eligibility but that seems to have been dropped.

Yes it was always 20 years service & only for redundancy or retirement.

Surprised you haven’t. Most TOCs seem to have sent out internal emails about the scheme so there might have been some additional info in an email link or your internet etc.

Got the email but didn’t see anything regarding staff travel facilities. Will take another look. Sort of lost interest when reading not eligible for drivers.

 

[class 9]

If you are safeguarded you keep your safeguarded facilities. There used to be a clause stating a minimum age or length of service (i.e. the 20 years you mention above) at the time of being made redundant for eligibility but that seems to have been dropped.

No need for a 20 year clause now, well over 20 years since privatisation.

 

[dk1]

No need for a 20 year clause now, well over 20 years since privatisation.

Yes I think the date was 1st April 1997 so everyone would have completed their milestone over 4yrs back.

 

[800001]

Not sure if same at all TOCs, but at Lner any people accepted for Volunteary redundancy, there position can not be refilled at a later date

"As any roles that leave through the VSS cannot be replaced, we will be very cautious at LNER over the approval of colleague requests"

 

[Watershed]

Not sure if same at all TOCs, but at Lner any people accepted for Volunteary redundancy, there position can not be refilled at a later date

"As any roles that leave through the VSS cannot be replaced, we will be very cautious at LNER over the approval of colleague requests"

As far as I know, the terms are the same across all TOCs, including the fact that leavers cannot be replaced.

If the figure really is 10,000 people I wonder how that's going to work in practice. I've no doubt that there are some areas of 'dead wood' that this scheme is intended to trim, but that seems like a very ambitious target.

 

[800001]

As far as I know, the terms are the same across all TOCs, including the fact that leavers cannot be replaced.

If the figure really is 10,000 people I wonder how that's going to work in practice. I've no doubt that there are some areas of 'dead wood' that this scheme is intended to trim, but that seems like a very ambitious target.

Yeah I thought that, as surely, if they can have these people leave and not replace, why were they there in the first place?

 

[172007]

Yeah I thought that, as surely, if they can have these people leave and not replace, why were they there in the first place?

Might be that GBR centralises roles such as marketing. Means all marketing staff go at TOC's. May be other roles that could have the treatment.

 

[Starmill]

As far as I know, the terms are the same across all TOCs, including the fact that leavers cannot be replaced.

If the figure really is 10,000 people I wonder how that's going to work in practice. I've no doubt that there are some areas of 'dead wood' that this scheme is intended to trim, but that seems like a very ambitious target.

Perhaps the 10,000 includes some compulsory redundancies which as yet are undecided. Of course, it's commonplace for compulsory redundancies to be made and then as little as a year later the roles are hired out for again...

 

[Wolfie]

Not sure if same at all TOCs, but at Lner any people accepted for Volunteary redundancy, there position can not be refilled at a later date

"As any roles that leave through the VSS cannot be replaced, we will be very cautious at LNER over the approval of colleague requests"

Pretty standard in most public sector early release schemes. Note though that while they block direct replacement they don't say that they can't restructure....

 

[ainsworth74]

Might be that GBR centralises roles such as marketing. Means all marketing staff go at TOC's. May be other roles that could have the treatment.

Though we're surely doing this the wrong way round? To keep on with marketing as an example we don't actually know how many marketing staff we're going to need once GBR is up and running and whilst it will most likely be far fewer than is currently employed across the TOCs and RDG we don't actually know the number. So trimming marketing staff now is just total guesswork surely?

We need to know the future workforce structure before we starting looking for voluntary redundancies surely?!

 

[Horizon22]

Might be that GBR centralises roles such as marketing. Means all marketing staff go at TOC's. May be other roles that could have the treatment.

Certain NR managed stations certainly have a lot of station managers (TOCs and NR), all of whom might not be required. There's certainly duplication of some roles outside management here too.

 

[Zerothebrake!]

I believe it was voted in favour by the drivers

It was, but only 31% could be bothered to vote on their own future!

 

[Bletchleyite]

As far as I know, the terms are the same across all TOCs, including the fact that leavers cannot be replaced.

If the figure really is 10,000 people I wonder how that's going to work in practice. I've no doubt that there are some areas of 'dead wood' that this scheme is intended to trim, but that seems like a very ambitious target.

Having noted that traincrew are not included in this particular run, I wonder if GBR are waiting in the wings with a certain three letter operational acronym? If I were a regional guard I would be quite worried.

 

[LowLevel]

Having noted that traincrew are not included in this particular run, I wonder if GBR are waiting in the wings with a certain three letter operational acronym? If I were a regional guard I would be quite worried.

Suburban services, maybe. GWR and WMR fitting their legacy fleet with cameras in the form of the 16x and 172 can't be taken lightly. In our neck of the woods in the East Midlands BR did away with most of the remaining station staff so the guards on the largely hourly train service are your customer service, revenue protection and everything else. I'd be most surprised if the trains went to the point of actually being full DOO.

 

[the sniper]

Having noted that traincrew are not included in this particular run, I wonder if GBR are waiting in the wings with a certain three letter operational acronym? If I were a regional guard I would be quite worried.

While that wouldn't surprise me, oddly, under the recent National Rail Contracts, if anything, there seems to have been a slight step back from DCO/DOO in places. May well just be a temporary reprieve before a better orchestrated push in a few years under GBR though.

 

[OliverReed]

It seems a bit weird. If you’re keeping all operational staff. Is the industry really that bloated in head office staff and NR/RDG office bods?

The world of work is changing so are they just going to make operational staff compulsory redundant? It all seems a bit suss. Make this big media statement about redundancies but only let go a fraction of the workforce?

 

[Bald Rick]

Might be that GBR centralises roles such as marketing. Means all marketing staff go at TOC's. May be other roles that could have the treatment.

Please don’t post things like this, it just worries people unnecessarily. In BR days there were ‘marketing’ staff spread around the country in local business units (that looked very much like TOCs). I was one of them.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Please don’t post things like this, it just worries people unnecessarily. In BR days there were ‘marketing’ staff spread around the country in local business units (that looked very much like TOCs). I was one of them.

+1 ^^^^^

 

[PG]

We need to know the future workforce structure before we starting looking for voluntary redundancies surely?!

Sounds like a classic case of DfT putting the cart before the horse...

Alternatively the future workforce structure has been decided but not (yet) communicated?

 

[dk1]

Speaking with a member of catering staff today & they would be entitled to £32k if they put in for it & it was accepted. It really isn’t much at all considering they need to work for another 10 years. For that reason it’s not an option.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Speaking with a member of catering staff today & they would be entitled to £32k if they put in for it & it was accepted. It really isn’t much at all considering they need to work for another 10 years. For that reason it’s not an option.

£32K isn't a bad chunk of money, particularly if they can then get another reasonably equivalent job (hospitality has a massive shortage at the moment so there will be loads), and redundancy payments are tax-free, too, so you'd get all of it. It is not intended, and never would be intended, to allow them to stop working. I guess with catering, though, railway staff are paid rather more than elsewhere in that sector.

Edit: tax-free up to £30K, so the £2K would be taxed, not a huge difference, though.

 

[Efini92]

Login

myrailfuture.co.uk

There’s a calculator to workout how much you’d get. It’s worth looking at if you’re considering VLS.

 

[dk1]

£32K isn't a bad chunk of money, particularly if they can then get another reasonably equivalent job (hospitality has a massive shortage at the moment so there will be loads), and redundancy payments are tax-free, too, so you'd get all of it. It is not intended, and never would be intended, to allow them to stop working. I guess with catering, though, railway staff are paid rather more than elsewhere in that sector.

Edit: tax-free up to £30K, so the £2K would be taxed, not a huge difference, though.

Yes I don’t think many jobs in the hospitality sector have the pay or terms & conditions that the railway offers. No point leaving to become worse off. That lump sum will soon evaporate should nothing suitable become available out there.

Login

myrailfuture.co.uk

There’s a calculator to workout how much you’d get. It’s worth looking at if you’re considering VLS.

Thanks. Is that the one we got through internal email? I might give it a go for a laugh.

 

[Efini92]

Yes I don’t think many jobs in the hospitality sector have the pay or terms & conditions that the railway offers. No point leaving to become worse off. That lump sum will soon evaporate should nothing suitable become available out there.


Thanks. Is that the one we got through internal email? I might give it a go for a laugh.

Yes it is. For someone with your length of service you can see why it’s not open to train crew, especially if you still have your original seniority date.

 

[dk1]

Yes it is. For someone with your length of service you can see why it’s not open to train crew, especially if you still have your original seniority date.

Which I do. The catering member I’m referring to has done 29 years & we have another with 47 under the belt.

 

[Efini92]

Which I do. The catering member I’m referring to has done 29 years & we have another with 47 under the belt.

It would be a very nice sum if they were entitled to the 3 weeks per year as originally mooted. Nearly 3 years pay for 47 years service would be a lovely golden handshake.