London bus driver strike over pay?

[driver9000]

the route to becoming a bus driver is NOT an easy or simple process.

1st you have to pass your car test.. you then have to wait 2 years before you can take your bus test... which in itself is not an easy process... you then have regularly undergo retraining to retain your driver CPC. ANY company worth it's salt will then give type training, route training and ticket training before allowing a driver loose on the public on their own.

Really? I passed my PCV within 12 months of passing my car test when I was 18. I left the industry before CPC came though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Re comments about bus drivers not as skilled as train drivers...

do train drivers have to deal with awkward passengers, drunks, etc?

do train drivers have to avoid idiot cyclists who believe they have the right to share their "track" but not obey any of the rules (including observing red signals)?

do train drivers have to deal with other traffic on their track who believe their train has absolutely no right to be there?

do train drivers have to take fares, be responsible for the takings (even when mugged for those takings), give out route information, timetable information, fares information, general tourist information... all whilst still remaining on schedule?

do train drivers have to do running repairs to keep their train running?

I suspect the answer to all the above questions is a resounding "NO".

we bus drivers DO have to do these things... we do not have the luxury of sitting in our cabs with nothing to do but accelerate and brake in the right places.

Truth is, if the bus industry hadn't been broken up, deregulated and privatised then our wages would have continued rising the same way that those of train drivers did. We would be paid commensurate with our professional status and would currently be on a wage of between £18- £25 ph depending on which part of the country we work in. (that works out at 32.5-45.5k per annum) about the same as a train driver per chance?

truth is BOTH are highly skilled and highly responsible jobs in their own way... just that train drivers are paid what they are worth and bus drivers aren't!

1. Yes. We're not locked away in our cabs all the time.
2. Yes. I have seen them run across crossings when they shouldn't.
3. Yes. Again, some road users think it's fine to cross in front of trains.
4. No. However we are expected to give information to passengers or point them in the right direction of someone who does if we don't know the answer.
5. Yes. we are expected to carry out minor repairs and fault rectification. Our traction courses are much deeper than that for a bus.

The job is more involved than just "accelerating and braking in the right places". That is a very simplistic and naïve view of the job.

I agree that bus drivers should be paid a professional rate for a professional role that they carry out. One of the reasons I left the industry was the long hours, low pay and dreadful conditions. The rot is too far gone these days I feel, in my experience those who come into the bus industry don't stay long so forming meaningful industrial relations doesn't happen and staff won't stick together when many of them are gone again within 6 months. The unions are virtually powerless in many bus garages.

 

[ECML180]

the route to becoming a bus driver is NOT an easy or simple process.

1st you have to pass your car test.. you then have to wait 2 years before you can take your bus test... which in itself is not an easy process... you then have regularly undergo retraining to retain your driver CPC. ANY company worth it's salt will then give type training, route training and ticket training before allowing a driver loose on the public on their own.

I know how hard it is, I've done it.

as to "just calling it in" really? so a passenger is taken ill on the bus or , God forbid, is injured in an accident and the driver just "calls it in" and watches the passenger dying in front of his eyes?

What do you expect them to do? Suddenly remember that the extra pay makes them a paramedic?

They're supposed to drive, not administer medical treatment, same goes for train drivers. But if there is a need to evacuate a bus the drivers must stop, open the doors and instruct passengers to leave. If there is a need to evacuate a train then the crew must deal with electrified rails, applying protection to other tracks, contacting various people in various forms, as well as identifying their location(not easy in the middle of the countryside) and possibly having to trek a distance over ballast to reach the nearest access point. (I'm no expert on railway operations and I'm sure someone more in the know can confirm how complex it is).

yes there are unscrupulous operators within the bus industry that bring it into disrepute... that they continue to operate is a failure of the regulatory regime (traffic commissioners) yes there are many examples of poor and inadequate training. that is the fault of the operator concerned.

I agree that regulators should do more to deal with poorer operators, but surely if the government was concerned about the impact of bad operators they would do more to mitigate the risks posed.

to turn the argument on it's head... are you seriously telling me that there has never been an accident on the railways due to driver incompetence? are you telling me that no train driver has ever been dismissed for poor standards of professionalism? should all train drivers be judged by the standards of those that aren't up to the job?

Not at all. But there is no doubt that the 'safety culture' on the railways makes it much safer than many other modes of travel, bus included. There is typically 8 times as many deaths per billion passenger kilometres on bus compared to rail.

yes train drivers do travel faster and with more passengers... but as I stated before, if the signallers and controllers are doing their job properly, train drivers do not have to contend with every idiot sharing their track... unlike bus drivers who have to contend with driving an "invisible" vehicle.

Train drivers do have to deal with idiots, just in a different form. Trespassers on the tracks, road vehicles ignoring level crossings, and a lot more suicides too. I don't think buses are invisible either, in fact I'd say other road users are if anything more kind to buses and commercial vehicles than they are other cars.

I note you didn't reply to my main point that bus driver's wages have stagnated over the last 30 years whilst train drivers wages have continued to rise.

That is quite possibly a true fact. But then you may also find that dustmen have had their wages increase over time...hairdressers too...even groundskeepers. I'm not convinced that "he got a pay rise so I should" is a good argument.

 

[Busaholic]

Bus drivers in London were certainly of a much higher average quality than in many other parts of the country when it was all in the hands of London Transport with the Chiswick driving school and the (in)famous skidpatch. Only the committed got as far as the skidpatch, of course. I'd suggest TfL do something similar in future but AFTER drivers have passed their test and been engaged by different companies. Those companies could put forward drivers after, say, two years experience to an advanced bus driving course, which, if passed, would lead to a higher rate of pay as a 'senior' driver which would have to be recognised by all bus companies contracted to TfL work: I'd go further, and say that senior driver pay rates should be equalised within all the companies, but perhaps adopting an 'inner' and 'outer' rate depending on where their home garage is situated.

 

[Robertj21a]

Bus drivers in London were certainly of a much higher average quality than in many other parts of the country when it was all in the hands of London Transport with the Chiswick driving school and the (in)famous skidpatch. Only the committed got as far as the skidpatch, of course. I'd suggest TfL do something similar in future but AFTER drivers have passed their test and been engaged by different companies. Those companies could put forward drivers after, say, two years experience to an advanced bus driving course, which, if passed, would lead to a higher rate of pay as a 'senior' driver which would have to be recognised by all bus companies contracted to TfL work: I'd go further, and say that senior driver pay rates should be equalised within all the companies, but perhaps adopting an 'inner' and 'outer' rate depending on where their home garage is situated.

Why should individual private bus companies agree to all pay the same rates ?. Staff often move between different operators for reasons other than pay.

 

[notadriver]

I note you didn't reply to my main point that bus driver's wages have stagnated over the last 30 years whilst train drivers wages have continued to rise.

If I may venture an opinion on that one - the reason that is so is because its simpler to train up a new bus driver from the very many applicants who have a car driving licence in a short period of time (before the CPC was introduced a 5 day crash course was possible, with a usual time of two weeks using a shared vehicle).

new train drivers on the other hand can't be replaced as easily and assuming they pass the tough psychometric entry tests (only one fail allowed a second means a lifetime ban) they then must undertake a minimum of 9 to 12 months training before going solo in a train and depots with more lengthy and complex routes may require the driver to take up to 9-12 months more again for route learning.

If i could just digress slightly about the route learning - its harder than it looks. A route at night time is completely different during the day.

 

[Busaholic]

Why should individual private bus companies agree to all pay the same rates ?. Staff often move between different operators for reasons other than pay.

They'd be free to move between companies and not have to take pay into consideration. The individual bus companies would have to agree to it in exactly the same way they have to agree every other aspect of their operation with TfL, down to how much red they have to have on their buses, because,in effect, when operating on London services they are not acting as private companies. You might ask, why in that case have private companies in London? Well, I would ask the question too.

 

[Greenback]

I'd also ask the question, because I'd love to know what the answer is.

 

[notadriver]

Isn't it because they bid for routes and tfl want the best value for money ?

 

[Greenback]

I honestly don't know - either if that's the overriding reason or if it's actually true in practice!

 

[Busaholic]

Isn't it because they bid for routes and tfl want the best value for money ?

So how does one company undercut another? Either by taking a lesser profit for the company or by by paying their drivers less. The type of bus operated and the exact schedule, down to the minute, is determined by TfL, so there are no savings to be made there. If a small company makes a 'low' bid they may become unstuck later after being awarded the contract (enough examples exist from the earlier days of route tendering). It is the mirror image to (often the) same companies bidding too much for rail franchises.

This is why London bus drivers are considering strike action - wages driven (pun intended) down by the tendering process. Get rid of the middleman i.e. Arriva, Stagecoach and the rest and there'd be more money to invest in the drivers and the extra buses urgently needed in parts of the capital, which in turn would enable the recruitment of buses to run them. You don't have to be a rabid socialist to see this makes sense.

 

[LateThanNever]

They'd be free to move between companies and not have to take pay into consideration. The individual bus companies would have to agree to it in exactly the same way they have to agree every other aspect of their operation with TfL, down to how much red they have to have on their buses, because,in effect, when operating on London services they are not acting as private companies. You might ask, why in that case have private companies in London? Well, I would ask the question too.

Think the answer to that is relatively simple. When it's a monopoly and the drivers go on strike there is no bus service. If there are different companies then you still have most buses. It's otherwise known as divide and rule and I would say is effectively the Scargill/Thatcher legacy. It is not entirely desirable but nor is the alternative! When London Transport was a monopoly they were not conspicuously well run - at least not when I used them. One hour waits for buses supposed to run every 15 minutes were not uncommon. Nor was not knowing the correct route. Neither were sudden strikes. They really needed the notice at bus stops which I remember used to inform their poor passengers that they didn't "undertake to run their bus services on time or at all". Quite for what other reason they thought they existed I never discovered...
Perhaps coops and partnership models should be 'preferred' in the future?

 

[Busaholic]

Think the answer to that is relatively simple. When it's a monopoly and the drivers go on strike there is no bus service. If there are different companies then you still have most buses. It's otherwise known as divide and rule and I would say is effectively the Scargill/Thatcher legacy. It is not entirely desirable but nor is the alternative! When London Transport was a monopoly they were not conspicuously well run - at least not when I used them. One hour waits for buses supposed to run every 15 minutes were not uncommon. Nor was not knowing the correct route. Neither were sudden strikes. They really needed the notice at bus stops which I remember used to inform their poor passengers that they didn't "undertake to run their bus services on time or at all". Quite for what other reason they thought they existed I never discovered...
Perhaps coops and partnership models should be 'preferred' in the future?

The last all-London bus strike was in 1958: the folk memory of that is in the DNA of anyone who works or and cares about, the London bus industry. There are very few people who would regard it as anything other than a disaster, barring one or two diehards at either end of the political spectrum.

I could give many reasons why bus transport in the 1970s and 1980s in London was not what it should have been, both as (briefly) somebody caught up in it in a small way and, for the rest of the time, as a passenger using them for both work and social purposes. LT management were partly responsible along with politicians, local and,especially, national together with the unwarranted interference of Lord Denning in the Appeal Court, but essentially it was down to lack of funds, unsuitable busesand a demoralised workforce which hated management, often with just cause IMO.

London is now in a position where it could start running buses itself again - after all, it's having to pay for and therefore own 700 New Buses for London so why not run them themselves?

 

[Greenback]

London is now in a position where it could start running buses itself again - after all, it's having to pay for and therefore own 700 New Buses for London so why not run them themselves?

That's another question I'd dearly like to see a good answer to.

 

[LateThanNever]

The last all-London bus strike was in 1958: the folk memory of that is in the DNA of anyone who works or and cares about, the London bus industry. There are very few people who would regard it as anything other than a disaster, barring one or two diehards at either end of the political spectrum.

I could give many reasons why bus transport in the 1970s and 1980s in London was not what it should have been, both as (briefly) somebody caught up in it in a small way and, for the rest of the time, as a passenger using them for both work and social purposes. LT management were partly responsible along with politicians, local and,especially, national together with the unwarranted interference of Lord Denning in the Appeal Court, but essentially it was down to lack of funds, unsuitable busesand a demoralised workforce which hated management, often with just cause IMO.

London is now in a position where it could start running buses itself again - after all, it's having to pay for and therefore own 700 New Buses for London so why not run them themselves?

Boris would never have the courage. And for his successor the political fallout of running Boris Masters as the council/TfL and showing they cost twice as much to run as 'normal' buses would surely mean political death...

 

[Robertj21a]

They'd be free to move between companies and not have to take pay into consideration. The individual bus companies would have to agree to it in exactly the same way they have to agree every other aspect of their operation with TfL, down to how much red they have to have on their buses, because,in effect, when operating on London services they are not acting as private companies. You might ask, why in that case have private companies in London? Well, I would ask the question too.

You have, and need, private companies in a regulated London environment because competition between them is encouraged and that, in turn, promotes best practice. Wages are only a part of the costs for any operator, don't forget the premises (and how close to the route), their financial standing (interest rates payable), negotiating ability, scheduling ability etc etc

There's no point in standardising wage rates.

 

[Deerfold]

So how does one company undercut another? Either by taking a lesser profit for the company or by by paying their drivers less. The type of bus operated and the exact schedule, down to the minute, is determined by TfL, so there are no savings to be made there.

TfL specifies minimum standards for the buses used - except on up to 10% of contacts where the NBfL will be used. Bus companies write the schedules though TfL will suggest how many buses will be required based on the current schedule and and proposed changes to the route or frequency.

 

[LateThanNever]

The last all-London bus strike was in 1958: the folk memory of that is in the DNA of anyone who works or and cares about, the London bus industry. There are very few people who would regard it as anything other than a disaster, barring one or two diehards at either end of the political spectrum.

I could give many reasons why bus transport in the 1970s and 1980s in London was not what it should have been, both as (briefly) somebody caught up in it in a small way and, for the rest of the time, as a passenger using them for both work and social purposes. LT management were partly responsible along with politicians, local and,especially, national together with the unwarranted interference of Lord Denning in the Appeal Court, but essentially it was down to lack of funds, unsuitable busesand a demoralised workforce which hated management, often with just cause IMO.

London is now in a position where it could start running buses itself again - after all, it's having to pay for and therefore own 700 New Buses for London so why not run them themselves?

Please enlighten us on how the legal prophet from Hampshire mucked up!?

 

[Busaholic]

TfL specifies minimum standards for the buses used - except on up to 10% of contacts where the NBfL will be used. Bus companies write the schedules though TfL will suggest how many buses will be required based on the current schedule and and proposed changes to the route or frequency.

As I understand it, TfL set out the frequency and first/last bus times from each end of the route, so what the company has to do is to join the dots as in a kids' drawing book. Most new contracts specify new buses and, particularly with doubledeckers, hybrids, so there's little scope for cheeseparing. Of course, the larger groups may be able to get 'deals' from bus manufacturers, but nothing like TfL could get themselves if they were in charge of the purchasing.

 

[Carlisle]

Please enlighten us on how the legal prophet from Hampshire mucked up!?

Maybe referring to a House of Lords decision somewhere around 1981 that declared GLC leader Ken livingstones then plans for subsidised London transport fares illegal

 

[Greenback]

Maybe referring to a House of Lords decision somewhere around 1981 that declared GLC leader Ken livingstones then plans for subsidised London transport fares illegal

Yes, I think that's what Busaholic was talking about!

 

[Busaholic]

Yes, I think that's what Busaholic was talking about!

It was - I'm no fan of Livingstone's but Denning was at the time rewriting law without giving the recourse of an appeal to the final arbiters, the Law Lords. There was no retirement age for judges then (one was brought in as a direct result shortly after his eventual retirement) and they could only be got rid of in certain circumstances, such as being found guilty in a criminal trial. Denning may not have completely lost his marbles, but he really had lost the plot and seemed to be waging a one-man war against anything that might have been described as 'liberal' : it was because of him and his refusal to accept any criticism of individual policemen or the police in general that so many miscarriages of justice were perpetuated, as was eventually shown, hence my dislike of his legacy. Even his supporters later acknowledged he should have stepped down earlier or some 'kind' way found to get rid of him from the bench.

 

[Mojo]

In case anyone hasn't seen the news; Unite Union members for London bus operators are to strike on January 13th

 

[GodAtum]

will this be the same as the last bus strike? i had to walk 3 miles to the station which took an hour unfortunately there are no other public transport options apart from the bus.

 

[Robertj21a]

In case anyone hasn't seen the news; Unite Union members for London bus operators are to strike on January 13th

Seems rather a waste of their time if they're expecting all the different operators to ever agree to standardise pay and conditions.

 

[infobleep]

If anyone is interested detailed of the strike can be found here:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/campaign/bus-strike

Bus strike

The Unite union has announced a potential 24-hour strike on London bus services.

If the strike goes ahead, bus services will be affected between 00:01 and 23:59 on Tuesday 13 January - affecting services throughout Tuesday and night bus services into the early hours of Wednesday.

Bus services during the day on Wednesday 14 January should operate as normal.

We are working on plans to keep London moving should the strike go ahead. Customers with a Bus & Tram Pass season ticket will be able to use it on the Underground, DLR and London Overground.

The bus companies likely to be affected by the bus strike are:

Abellio (Abellio London and Abellio West London)Arriva (Arriva North and Arriva South)CT Plus (Hackney Community Transport)Go Ahead (Blue Triangle, Docklands, London General, London Central, Metrobus)London SovereignLondon UnitedMetroline (Metroline and Metroline West)Stagecoach (East London Bus & Coach Company, Selkent)Tower Transit

The following ticket acceptance arrangements will apply:

Bus & Tram Pass season tickets will be accepted on London Underground, DLR and London Overground services via reasonable routesBus & Tram Pass season tickets will not be accepted on National Rail, Emirates Airline or MBNA Thames Clipper servicesOne Day Bus & Tram Passes will not be accepted on any alternative services and refunds will not be givenBus Savers will not be accepted on any alternative services11-15 and 16+ Oyster photocards will be accepted on London Underground, DLR and London Overground via reasonable routesPAYG users will be charged the appropriate fare for the journey for the service(s) and zones used and these fares will not be refundedBus & Tram Pass season ticket holders and 11-15/16+ Oyster photocard holders wishing to travel on London Underground, DLR and London Overground should present their Oyster card to a member of staff. Where there is a valid Bus & Tram Pass or Zip Oyster photocard it will be accepted for travel. Customers should not touch in or out as they will be charged a PAYG fare, which will not be refundedThere is no change for those under 11 wishing to travel on LU, DLR or London Overground services. They should either use a 5-10 Oyster photocard, be travelling with a fare-paying adult or buy a child rate ticket

Here are some tools to help you plan your journey:

Status updatesPlan a journey*can help you plan your route by public transport, cycling or walkingNearby*uses your current location or a postcode or address of your choice and places you on a map, showing you Tube, bus, river, Overground, DLR, National Rail and Cycle Hire locations around youLive bus arrivals*shows you live arrivals an any of our bus stops, so you know when the next bus is comingFollow*@TfLBusAlerts*on TwitterSign up to our*email updates

Craig working at the official @TfLBusAlerts Twitter account gave me the link. He also said the press office didn't want the link to be announced on the front page of the TFL Web Site until tomorrow.

Does anyone know why they might want to hold off? Is their likely to be a resolution in the talks between the bus companies and union and the strike called off?

On TFL's Web Site the strike web page is shown as being a Web page off of a campaigns web page. When you click on the link to the campaigns web page though it takes you straight back to the home page. Does their Web Site ever feature other campaigns beside strikes?

Interestingly TFL list the companies affected and put the sub company (is that right?) names in brackets, where as the union in their press release don't list the parent companies, preferring to list every company individually. This way the number of companies seems greater or you could look at it that the way TFL have done is to make the list of companies seem fewer.

No doubt next Tuesday, should the strike go ahead, there will be differing reports on the percentage of buses that ran. Although as this dispute is between the unions and bus companies, perhaps TFL won't issue press release on number of buses that run, like they do during tube strikes.

 

[Busaholic]

If anyone is interested detailed of the strike can be found here:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/campaign/bus-strike



Craig working at the official @TfLBusAlerts Twitter account gave me the link. He also said the press office didn't want the link to be announced on the front page of the TFL Web Site until tomorrow.

Does anyone know why they might want to hold off? Is their likely to be a resolution in the talks between the bus companies and union and the strike called off?

On TFL's Web Site the strike web page is shown as being a Web page off of a campaigns web page. When you click on the link to the campaigns web page though it takes you straight back to the home page. Does their Web Site ever feature other campaigns beside strikes?

Interestingly TFL list the companies affected and put the sub company (is that right?) names in brackets, where as the union in their press release don't list the parent companies, preferring to list every company individually. This way the number of companies seems greater or you could look at it that the way TFL have done is to make the list of companies seem fewer.

No doubt next Tuesday, should the strike go ahead, there will be differing reports on the percentage of buses that ran. Although as this dispute is between the unions and bus companies, perhaps TFL won't issue press release on number of buses that run, like they do during tube strikes.

Interesting that RATP-owned Quality Line is not on that list.

 

[Robertj21a]

Interesting that RATP-owned Quality Line is not on that list.

No Unite members ?.

 

[GodAtum]

what do they expect people who have no alternative public transport to do and walking is too far?

 

[Robertj21a]

what do they expect people who have no alternative public transport to do and walking is too far?

Taxi, Bike, friend, train...........how far is too far to walk ?

 

[infobleep]

Interestingly during the strike action someone with a bus pass is allowed to travel for free on the tube; DLR; tram or Overground but not National Rail services. Yet during times of disruption not caused by strikes, one is usually allowed to use the services of other companies, even buses.

What is the reason for this? Some years ago I remember a late night talk show host saying a friend got fined because during a strike they boarded the train of another train company, assuming they'd be allowed to take that train because of the disruption. After all during other types of disruption one could. They were not allowed to do so though so got fined. I don't know what ticket they held but must have had a company specific tickets or perhaps one for a different line near by.