Northern Rail Staff To Strike ?

[reb0118]

Crowe!...........

It's Crow not Crowe.

..............and the RMT don't like the situation because there are non Northern Staff working who wouldn't end up joining his trade union and this would lessen his power base. I too don't believe this statement that only employees have dedication and training.

I know of no law to stop agency staff joining a union, even the RMT.

As a member of the travelling public, I care little for the employment of the person in the uniform as long as the standard of service is top notch!

I am sorry but the above comment shows what a sad little individual you are. To paraphrase the bible "are we not all our brother's keeper"?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Crowe and the RMT don't like the situation

He has never been the same since he starred in Gladiator. I take it that your are referring to Russell Crowe here, but I was not aware that the RMT had sent other staff in on their rest day to act as other gladiators.

 

[asylumxl]

Unlike a lot of posters on here who would mean it!

We're all monsters whom are hell-bent on making the life of rail staff everywhere as miserable and aggravated as possible ...

 

[185]

It's not very often I agree with staff making steps towards industrial action, but I feel that here, the RMT members are 100% right in standing firm against Northern's poor shoddy attempt to save a few quid by putting revenue out to some dodgy cowboy outfit using casual staff.

Where strikes happen due to pay, I'm not overly impressed; but when strikes occur on either safety or common sense issues, then it reminds me what a union is really there for.

 

[AntoniC]

I totally sympathize, agree and support all Northern Rail staff who are affected by these changes.

I`m a Civil Servant &PCS member(only 2nd grade on the ladder), and from the 1st May 2013 my terms and conditions have been negatively affected.

So unless you stand up & fight you will find your T&C` getting worse, if management get away with it.

Good luck !

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I don't think anyone has a problem with agency staff being used temporarily to fill a gap whilst an employed member of staff is hired and trained. Northern are NOT doing this, they are hiring agency staff on a long term basis and in reasonably large numbers, they have done since the franchise started and they are increasing the numbers. It might be worth pointing out that Northern don't just use G4S, they started a new contract with trainpeople last year.

The previous thread on this topic is....

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=81022&highlight=rmt+northern&page=1

 

[Hellfire]

I speak as a member of a trade union and, in the case of Northern Rail, I fully support the union action. The very fact that agency staff are saving Northern money can only be due to the fact that said agency staff will be employed on worse terms and conditions than the employed staff who used to carry out these roles. In the long term that will undermine the terms and conditions enjoyed by existing staff.

Agencies manage to undercut employed staff because they pay their staff less and often employ them on short term contracts that give them no security. Bear in mind that G4S will be making a profit from this so that' s money that is going out of the railway system.

Having said all that I do see why some posters don't take my view. Mr Crow has form in calling for industrial action at the drop of a hat and, too often, his actions seem more in pursuit of his own political views rather than the welfare of his members. Unfortunately, when there is a good case for action as there is here imho, the case is undermined in the minds of the travelling public because of his record.

 

[Goatboy]

Northern are a privately operated company who have a primary duty to maximise shareholder value. One of the ways they can do this is to reduce costs if possible. It's not a great situation really but thats what happens when you privatise a public service.

 

[MacRae13]

Oh dear, yet another "play on words" bites the dust...

Unlike a lot of posters on here who would mean it!

Yes, sometimes it can be difficult to separate the crackpots from ironists/satirists.

On the plus side, I've learned through spellcheck that seperate is an incorrect spelling I've been using for years

What effect did it have and what did you get in return out of curiosity?

New working practices that were being forced on us lasted about two days once we worked to rule. The most effective thing was taking allocated layover time at termini to inspect the vehicle for damage and lost property - because there was never enough time on running boards for journeys the inspectors just wanted you to turn the bus and go straight out again. wasn't long before services and PNBs were in chaos

For the life of me I can't remember what the changes were but it was eight years ago. Might have been something to do with the satellite location things which were installed about then, but I'm really not sure.

Btw, work to rule is fine if you're a good employee - not so good if the company would rather be rid of you. If you're in that position you better make sure you know the book inside out and apply it 100%.

 

[northwichcat]

According to Northern fulfilling the RMT demands could see the franchise (extension) terms breached.

The changes that the RMT is demanding would also potentially breach the rules governing the last 12 months of our franchise agreement.”

http://www.northernrail.org/news/7269

 

[313103]

According to Northern fulfilling the RMT demands could see the franchise (extension) terms breached.


http://www.northernrail.org/news/7269

No doubt scare tactics by the company and not entirely surprising either.

At a recent train grades conference at which I was a delegate to, the issue of outsourcing is a major concern and every company has some form of it. The concern from members and especially our colleagues on Northern Rail is where does it stop, first it was for security, then it was for station duties, then it was for doing revenue protection duties next and this was the concern is that Northern (and others are watching closely) would allow agency staff to do despatch duties and other safety critical duties as well as doing Guards duties. All done without the requisite training that a TOC employee would get.

Of course the union would not want to see anyone lose their job, in fact the union tries to integrate these staff with others and to protect them. The ultimate aim is to get the staff recognised within the company they are subcontracting to. In many areas the union has members who work for these outsourcing companies.

In my own little area contracting first appeared under the Silverlink banner with the cleaning staff, 15 or so years later and with as many different companies later we still have them. It took 6 years for a company like John Laing to even recognised that 95% of their workforce were RMT members. The other organisation is STM they were employed just like the g4s guys and girls in Northern to do security at stations now they have branched off and increased to cover stations and doing revenue despite LOROL reducing its own RPI compliment by half.

 

[455driver]

Where strikes happen due to pay, I'm not overly impressed;

Most strike votes on the railway are not about pay, despite what the newspapers might state, but about the eroding of conditions linked to the offered pay-rise.

The "Railworkers strike because 5% pay rise is not enough" usually means "Railworkers offered 5% payrise if they give up signing on time, walking time and holiday pay strike to protect their conditions" doesnt have the same ring to it!

Both headlines are factual, its just that one is more factual than the other.

 

[northwichcat]

Most strike votes on the railway are not about pay, despite what the newspapers might state, but about the eroding of conditions linked to the offered pay-rise.

The "Railworkers strike because 5% pay rise is not enough" usually means "Railworkers offered 5% payrise if they give up signing on time, walking time and holiday pay strike to protect their conditions" doesnt have the same ring to it!

Both headlines are factual, its just that one is more factual than the other.

I think between 2009 and the current day a lot of people would be very happy to get a pay rise even if it involved less favourable conditions e.g. shorter lunch break, start a bit earlier or finish later, charges being introduced for parking permits etc. Of course they'd prefer the pay rise without the extra conditions but unless you're promoted or take on extra responsibilities such pay rises are infrequent and usually very small increases.

If you recall the last Northern strike that related to benefits that had already been surrendered.

The union previously accepted that the contracts would allow 2 bank holidays (Christmas and Boxing Day) off work not 8. However, when Christmas and Boxing Day fell on a Saturday and Sunday respectively the usual Bank Holiday lieu days were given by the government on the 27th and 28th and the union claimed Northern employees were entitled to all of the 25th, 26th, 27th and 28th December off work.

While a ballot was called a lot of members didn't actually vote even though a strike was called and numerous Northern employees said at that time they weren't really bothered about what was happening with regards to working on 27th and 28th December. However, they did want clarity on what would happen when for the genuine additional bank holidays which were upcoming for the Royal Wedding and Queen's Jubilee, which they hadn't yet been given.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

I think between 2009 and the current day a lot of people would be very happy to get a pay rise even if it involved less favourable conditions e.g. shorter lunch break, start a bit earlier or finish later, charges being introduced for parking permits etc. Of course they'd prefer the pay rise without the extra conditions but unless you're promoted or take on extra responsibilities such pay rises are infrequent and usually very small increases.

If you recall the last Northern strike that related to benefits that had already been surrendered.

The union previously accepted that the contracts would allow 2 bank holidays (Christmas and Boxing Day) off work not 8. However, when Christmas and Boxing Day fell on a Saturday and Sunday respectively the usual Bank Holiday lieu days were given by the government on the 27th and 28th and the union claimed Northern employees were entitled to all of the 25th, 26th, 27th and 28th December off work.

While a ballot was called a lot of members didn't actually vote even though a strike was called and numerous Northern employees said at that time they weren't really bothered about what was happening with regards to working on 27th and 28th December. However, they did want clarity on what would happen when for the genuine additional bank holidays which were upcoming for the Royal Wedding and Queen's Jubilee, which they hadn't yet been given.

They hadn't been surrendered, thats Corporate cr*p Propaganda but thats history. This latest dispute is so much more important hence being an all grades ballot, Sadly as I have said before since Heidi Mottram left industrial relations have nosedived. Most of us had time for Heidi, she was approachable and would listen ever since she left our esteemed Head honchos have been treating their staff with contempt across all grades, now their bubble has burst. As I said before I hope it does not come down to Strike action but this time the turnout will be considerably higher as the ill feeling is running very very deep.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As I said before I hope it does not come down to Strike action but this time the turnout will be considerably higher as the ill feeling is running very very deep.

Has any time period of strike been informally discussed between RMT headquarters and local branch officials, in order that the union members concerned may budget for the loss of wages as a result of the proposed strike action ?

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Has any time period of strike been informally discussed between RMT headquarters and local branch officials, in order that the union members concerned may budget for the loss of wages as a result of the proposed strike action ?

A few rumours but nothing concrete BUT this could be more then just the odd one day strike. Like anyone I hate to lose money but as someone who has many years hopefully left in me I have to think of my future. This continuous use of Agency staff puts that in Danger and eventually maybe the passengers (I know that it is subjective but it is my opinion)

 

[mac]

Why would agency staff put anyone in danger. I think I read a couple of months ago about someone dispatching trains with no training he was just a mate standing in for someone while he was away and nobody noticed. As I have put before if the unions get pay up while working hours go down the companies will find away round it such as using agencies they are there to make money any how they can.

 

[455driver]

I think between 2009 and the current day a lot of people would be very happy to get a pay rise even if it involved less favourable conditions e.g. shorter lunch break, start a bit earlier or finish later, charges being introduced for parking permits etc. Of course they'd prefer the pay rise without the extra conditions but unless you're promoted or take on extra responsibilities such pay rises are infrequent and usually very small increases.

Drivers would still need to be at work at the same time they just wouldnt be paid for it, the same with finishing.

It would effectively mean that for some things like reading notices the drivers wouldnt be paid.

Would you be happy being at work (carrying out your legally required duties) but not being paid for it?

 

[mac]

Drivers would still need to be at work at the same time they just wouldnt be paid for it, the same with finishing.

It would effectively mean that for some things like reading notices the drivers wouldnt be paid.

Would you be happy being at work (carrying out your legally required duties) but not being paid for it?

If reading a notice is part of your work why would you come in early to read it when not being paid

 

[Solent&Wessex]

If reading a notice is part of your work why would you come in early to read it when not being paid

Because sometimes that is what is built into these new conditions which are proposed by the company at the time of the pay increase. I.e. they will give an extra 5% if you agree to.... As said earlier, that is what the issue in these disputes often is.

As far as I am aware at Northern, on the West Side for example the Guards duty finishes the minute their last train pulls into the platform. So if the train arrives at 1246, that is when you stop being paid. Never mind that you might have some passengers to assist off the train in a wheelchair and you still have your ticket machine to dispose of. So in that case you are not being paid for doing things you have to do. On the East Side, under the ex ATN conditions there is a time period at the end (15 or 20 minutes) till you actually finish your duty, meaning that when doing those essential things you are being paid. Those differences were inherited as Northern have not harmonised. When TPE harmonised that was done away with so everybody has a booking off time at the end.

 

[mac]

Then that is wrong, why was it ever agreed to?

 

[455driver]

If reading a notice is part of your work why would you come in early to read it when not being paid

Because part of the pay deal is to do away with signing on time, the driver still needs to sign on and read the notices so would have to do it on their own time.

kwrv45 has covered the rest of it.

Oh if the guard is booked off as soon as the train arrives then it is somebody elses responsibility to assist the wheelchair off the train because of insurance etc so the guard shouldnt do it, in practice we all know that the guards would.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Because sometimes that is what is built into these new conditions which are proposed by the company at the time of the pay increase. I.e. they will give an extra 5% if you agree to.... As said earlier, that is what the issue in these disputes often is.

As far as I am aware at Northern, on the West Side for example the Guards duty finishes the minute their last train pulls into the platform. So if the train arrives at 1246, that is when you stop being paid. Never mind that you might have some passengers to assist off the train in a wheelchair and you still have your ticket machine to dispose of. So in that case you are not being paid for doing things you have to do. On the East Side, under the ex ATN conditions there is a time period at the end (15 or 20 minutes) till you actually finish your duty, meaning that when doing those essential things you are being paid. Those differences were inherited as Northern have not harmonised. When TPE harmonised that was done away with so everybody has a booking off time at the end.

Pretty much spot on

 

[DarloRich]

Crowe and the RMT don't like the situation because there are non Northern Staff working who wouldn't end up joining his trade union and this would lessen his power base. I too don't believe this statement that only employees have dedication and training.

What on earth are you talking about? Any one (including contract staff) is free to join, or not join, a union.

As an aside, do try to get the name of the person you are slagging off right Alan.

As a member of the travelling public, I care little for the employment of the person in the uniform as long as the standard of service is top notch!

A new all comers record for the appearance of the "I'm all right Jack post"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Plenty of RMT Drivers about at most depots and they would be part of any strike. ASLE&F and TSSA are also "supporting" the strike action (if it does happen) (what that actually means though I have no idea)

It means my union (TSSA) will make the tea and sandwiches and hold the coats while the big boys get on with it!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It means my union (TSSA) will make the tea and sandwiches and hold the coats while the big boys get on with it!

Hey there, steady on. If those duties are not part of your agreed contract, no-one should expect you to do this...

(Posting made "tongue-in-cheek" and not a little supposed humour, but still remembering what has been said about our beloved and utterly dedicated rail staff being careful what extra tasks are "foisted" upon them)

 

[455driver]

(Posting made "tongue-in-cheek" and not a little supposed humour, but still remembering what has been said about our beloved and utterly dedicated rail staff being careful what extra tasks are "foisted" upon them)

Funnily enough most of us are quite happy to "do our bit" over and above what we get paid for (I have even been known to use a wheel chair ramp when some berk had put a wheel chair in the second coach of 12 and the pax wanted to get off at an SDO 8 station so it was quicker for me to do it than the guard have to leg it down the platform after releasing the doors), its just that some people would rather forget about it and just slag us off all the time"

Posting not made tongue in cheek!

 

[northwichcat]

A few rumours but nothing concrete BUT this could be more then just the odd one day strike.

Maybe the best solution for all sides is the union to propose an overtime ban. That would then mean the operator has to temporarily withdraw some of the quieter services because there are insufficient crews and they then have to look towards employing more Northern staff. It'd also mean disruption for some passengers but wouldn't prevent them from travelling altogether on a particular date.

Industrial action could even mean Northern increase the number of agency staff they use - when Royal Mail workers proposed walk outs close to Christmas that was what Royal Mail proposed in response. The union argued that was illegal but it seemed the illegal argument would only have been valid if the extra agency staff/temporary workers had worked only when normal workers were on strike.

Drivers would still need to be at work at the same time they just wouldnt be paid for it, the same with finishing.

It would effectively mean that for some things like reading notices the drivers wouldnt be paid.

Would you be happy being at work (carrying out your legally required duties) but not being paid for it?

While I'm not defending the companies that do it, a lot of companies are seeing increased work loads but do not want to bring in extra staff and want to get that bit extra out of the existing employees without increasing their payroll budgets.

 

[DarloRich]

While I'm not defending the companies that do it, a lot of companies are seeing increased work loads but do not want to bring in extra staff and want to get that bit extra out of the existing employees without increasing their payroll budgets.

And the issue is that those without union support or those without a strong union meekly accept this erosion either through fear or through an inability to do anything. There is nothing they can do except acquiesce. It then starts the race to the bottom and remuneration, terms and conditions are cut back to the bone.

The coupled issue is that those without strong union support then become jealous/bitter/envious/angry/embarrassed (delete as appropriate) that someone has dared stand up to higher management and won a better deal while they were unable to do so.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The RMT ballot has a closing date of 20th May, so there are two full weeks still to elapse. I wonder if any external pressure will be put on Northern Rail by a "third party" in the interim period.

 

[northwichcat]

And the issue is that those without union support or those without a strong union meekly accept this erosion either through fear or through an inability to do anything. There is nothing they can do except acquiesce. It then starts the race to the bottom and remuneration, terms and conditions are cut back to the bone.

Most obvious solution is to leave to work elsewhere if you're unhappy (subject to vacancies elsewhere) and it seems Northern are concerned about the new TPE vacancies being filled by current Northern staff.

The coupled issue is that those without strong union support then become jealous/bitter/envious/angry/embarrassed (delete as appropriate) that someone has dared stand up to higher management and won a better deal while they were unable to do so.

In most cases you don't know what a union has agreed for a company you don't work for. It's only when disputes between the union and the employer happen and industrial action is voted on that the argument comes to light.

For some people a 24hr rail strike on a working day would mean they have to take the day off work and then can't do much not at work because they live in a village and the rail service is the only local public transport and because they suffer so much inconvenience as a result of the industrial action they don't want to support the industrial action motioned even if they do support better worker's rights.