London bus driver strike over pay?

[Deerfold]

Many people who rely on the bus (and declaring my interest including myself) and there are no other public transport alternatives. I am unable walk another few miles again to get to work (for reasons I wont mention publicly) :-x

Yes. You mentioned this last time as well as it being fairly obvious.

It's unfortunate, but presumably the point of a strike is to cause inconvenience - or it won't have any effect.

 

[Robertj21a]

Yes. You mentioned this last time as well as it being fairly obvious.

It's unfortunate, but presumably the point of a strike is to cause inconvenience - or it won't have any effect.

Quite - the Union want the public to realise/suffer.

[Before anybody jumps down my throat..........yes, I'm sure that the Union 'regrets any inconvenience............only as a last resort........unreasonable management.......blah, blah, blah....'.]

 

[Deerfold]

Quite - the Union want the public to realise/suffer.

[Before anybody jumps down my throat..........yes, I'm sure that the Union 'regrets any inconvenience............only as a last resort........unreasonable management.......blah, blah, blah....'.]

Or more immediately - cost their employers money.

That last sentence looks designed to get people who might not have otherwise thought of it jumping down your throat.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Quite - the Union want the public to realise/suffer.

No, they don't want anyone to "suffer", but they just want their employer to pay them fairly. Withdrawing labour is sometimes the only way to achieve that aim.

It's amazing how the anti-union halfwits tie themselves in knots about this. The bus drivers don't deserve to be paid more because "anyone could do their job, if they don't like it get another one", yet when they go on strike it turns out they're "essential public servants" who are "causing misery to millions". It can't be both, can it?

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

No, they don't want anyone to "suffer", but they just want their employer to pay them fairly. Withdrawing labour is sometimes the only way to achieve that aim.

It's amazing how the anti-union halfwits tie themselves in knots about this. The bus drivers don't deserve to be paid more because "anyone could do their job, if they don't like it get another one", yet when they go on strike it turns out they're "essential public servants" who are "causing misery to millions". It can't be both, can it?

well bus drivers are forever being told they are "professionals" and yet are paid anything upwards from minimum wage up to about £12- £14... I wonder how many doctors, lawyers, barristers, MP's etc would be willing to be so lowly paid? I vote that MP's should only be paid the minimum wage... that way we will all be on £30 an hour within the week!

 

[Robertj21a]

No, they don't want anyone to "suffer", but they just want their employer to pay them fairly. Withdrawing labour is sometimes the only way to achieve that aim.

It's amazing how the anti-union halfwits tie themselves in knots about this. The bus drivers don't deserve to be paid more because "anyone could do their job, if they don't like it get another one", yet when they go on strike it turns out they're "essential public servants" who are "causing misery to millions". It can't be both, can it?

Sorry, can't really agree.

My point about all the current strikes is that the individual operators can't really do anything about resolving the issue. Their pay rates are also tied in with different T's and C's, to give a total remuneration package unique to that company. They can't really alter anything substantial unless TfL re-negotiate the tenders which they awarded many months/years ago.

So, what does the union really expect to achieve (other than encouraging their members to lose pay) ?

As far as I'm concerned, bus drivers all over the UK are poorly paid and all of them deserve better pay and conditions. Unfortunately, to my mind, the Union has picked on a situation in London that can't be resolved by the companies that employ their members.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Sorry, can't really agree.

My point about all the current strikes is that the individual operators can't really do anything about resolving the issue. Their pay rates are also tied in with different T's and C's, to give a total remuneration package unique to that company. They can't really alter anything substantial unless TfL re-negotiate the tenders which they awarded many months/years ago.

So, what does the union really expect to achieve (other than encouraging their members to lose pay) ?

As far as I'm concerned, bus drivers all over the UK are poorly paid and all of them deserve better pay and conditions. Unfortunately, to my mind, the Union has picked on a situation in London that can't be resolved by the companies that employ their members.

Surely any competent company would put in a margin for expected and unexpected cost increases during the lifetime of the contract? Trouble is, as with all businesses over the last few years, there has been a lot of bleating that there are no funds for improving wages whilst same people award themselves huge pay increases. At the end of the day do we want to be in the same position as we were 15 years ago whereby wages were so low that no-one could survive on them which led to huge problems with staffing levels as drivers left the industry in droves?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Unfortunately, to my mind, the Union has picked on a situation in London that can't be resolved by the companies that employ their members.

TfL can set any clause that they want in their tenders. They can set a minimum pay clause in the tenders if they so wish.

Indvidual operators can choose to increase their pay rates at any time they wish. They can't agree them all in unison- that would be a cartel- but they can look at the highest-paying operator and agree to match that pay. Sector benchmarking in pay is not exactly uncommon. I've had pay rises before by pointing out that a direct competitor would pay me more money.

The issue is that TfL and the operators are both flapping around saying "it's not our problem". The purpose of strike action is to make it their problem.

 

[Deerfold]

TfL can set any clause that they want in their tenders. They can set a minimum pay clause in the tenders if they so wish.

And if they did that today, it'd be 7.5 years before some drivers were covered.

Do you think that would end the dispute?

 

[Tetchytyke]

And if they did that today, it'd be 7.5 years before some drivers were covered.

Do you think that would end the dispute?

TfL can amend tenders if they want to too, they've managed it enough with Boris' Vanity Bus.

It doesn't look as though the strike has been that well supported, though. The routes I normally use seemed to be pretty much on a normal timetable today, far more buses were out than last time.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

TfL can amend tenders if they want to too, they've managed it enough with Boris' Vanity Bus.

It doesn't look as though the strike has been that well supported, though. The routes I normally use seemed to be pretty much on a normal timetable today, far more buses were out than last time.

Fair enough comments. One question - how much extra money would TfL need to find if the drivers' pay was matched to the highest paying business?

 

[Robertj21a]

TfL can amend tenders if they want to too, they've managed it enough with Boris' Vanity Bus.

It doesn't look as though the strike has been that well supported, though. The routes I normally use seemed to be pretty much on a normal timetable today, far more buses were out than last time.

Seems that about 30% of buses are actually operating today - obviously spread per route from nothing at all to full pvr.

 

[Busaholic]

Fair enough comments. One question - how much extra money would TfL need to find if the drivers' pay was matched to the highest paying business?

Head bus honcho Leon Daniels implied it would be around £100 million (annually?) while being careful to say it was a matter between individual companies and their drivers. From the list of routes affected I've seen it's still the same ones which have little or no service compared to the previous strike day while there are more with a full or near-full service. The one glaring exception is the 109, whose operation changed hands from Arriva to Abellio last weekend and which is running a full service. The central/inner London areas particularly well blessed are, once again, Kings Road/Sloane Square with full service on the 19,22,137 and 211 and most 11s too, also Vauxhall with full 44,77,88 and 170 and quite a lot on some other routes plus Streatham Hill with full 59,159 and the aforementioned 109 and 137.

Just realised the 44 doesn't quite make Vauxhall these days, but add it to the 11,211,170 and C1 making an almost complete service outside Victoria Coach Station.

Nice 'lazy' pics on the BBC London website showing crowds of passengers trying to get into Victoria underground station, such a change from the usual situation!

 

[Deerfold]

TfL can amend tenders if they want to too, they've managed it enough with Boris' Vanity Bus.

Of course they can. And it costs them extra every time they do (unless it's a change in favour of the operator in which case they might get away without paying). There were a handful of routes where this was done for the Borisbus before they reverted to most of them happening at contract changes. Now try doing it for 700 routes for a change which will cost many operators money.

It doesn't look as though the strike has been that well supported, though. The routes I normally use seemed to be pretty much on a normal timetable today, far more buses were out than last time.

There's been a handful more buses out than last time. As last time, it's varied a lot between companies and routes.

 

[telstarbox]

I can see the arguments on both sides.

For a large company such as Tesco where all staff are employes, does every cashier in Greater London get paid the same rate for the same job or are there different rates and allowances for Zone 1, night work, Sunday work, petrol station and so on?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Head bus honcho Leon Daniels implied it would be around £100 million (annually?) while being careful to say it was a matter between individual companies and their drivers.

Think that it's an annual figure. A bit of research and some fag packet maths...

Approximately 25000 drivers so say 95% are not paid the max = 22,500 drivers affected. The difference in pay can be up to £8000 pa but in reality the difference will be smaller so £3.5k per driver so...

22500 x £3.5k x 1.18 (employment cost e.g. NI, Pension etc) = £93m

Where's that money gonna come from?

 

[infobleep]

Of course they can. And it costs them extra every time they do (unless it's a change in favour of the operator in which case they might get away without paying). There were a handful of routes where this was done for the Borisbus before they reverted to most of them happening at contract changes. Now try doing it for 700 routes for a change which will cost many operators money.



There's been a handful more buses out than last time. As last time, it's varied a lot between companies and routes.

One could argue they shouldn't have made any borisbus changes outside a contract change at all, less it incur extra costs.

 

[Daz28]

As some routes are running 100% service today, I assume some bus companies are unaffected by the strike? If so, which companies are they, and why are they not affected? Are they the ones that are already well paid, or are different unions involved?

 

[infobleep]

This morning there seemed to be buses around Surbiton and tonight the same. It felt like more 71s were running. However I think it all depends on when one turns up at a bus stops as there were probably some extended gaps in places and I'm not arriving or leaving work at the same time each day.

After not being able to board a bus this morning due to not spotting it standing behind another and it then being to full at the next bus stop, I decided to walk. I also walked this evening just to be safe, as wouldn't want to have hit a gap and missed my train. The latter is possible even without bus strikes.

 

[notadriver]

Those that weren't affected werent apparently part of unite whose arguement is tfl pays London tube staff the same rate and since tfl runs the buses and specifies everything about them (except pay it seems) that bus driver pay should, like tube workers be identical across the board.

 

[Busaholic]

As some routes are running 100% service today, I assume some bus companies are unaffected by the strike? If so, which companies are they, and why are they not affected? Are they the ones that are already well paid, or are different unions involved?

The bus companies unaffected are all operating in outer London and. in most cases, the companies themselves are based outside Greater London. They vary a great deal in their make-up, however, from (almost) a small family firm like Sullivan Buses to subsidiaries of giants, like Arriva Kent and Thameside. The least affected of the ones where some industrial action has taken place appears to be Abellio: difficult to say which has been the most affected over the two days so far, because some garages within a group have been solidly on strike and others mostly working. I do have some idea which are which but I'm reading it from afar and wouldn't comment any further without doing my own scouting around.

 

[Deerfold]

As some routes are running 100% service today, I assume some bus companies are unaffected by the strike? If so, which companies are they, and why are they not affected? Are they the ones that are already well paid, or are different unions involved?

As the strike involves lots of companies there has had to be a ballot at each company. The union has then called a strike for each bus company on the same day.

The numbers of drivers who support the strike has varied between companies. Where drivers ran more than one route companies have then priotised where to put them out. Quality Line are one company where there is no strike. The numbers of buses running at other companies will vary, from say 20% to 60%.

 

[infobleep]

So does it mean Quality Liine pay better rates; their staff have no interest in unions; both or something else?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Where's that money gonna come from?

Same place the money for the Boris EgoMaster came from?

Unite released a nice infographic showing what their point is:

Metroline pay £3 an hour more than Arriva London. Now ComfortDelGro are not a charity doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, they're clearly making lots of lovely moolah, so why can they pay almost one-third more than Arriva? And why is this acceptable?

You wouldn't have Deutsche Bahn treating their German staff like this.

 

[90sWereBetter]

That poster's wrong by the way - Abellio run the C2, not Tower Transit.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Same place the money for the Boris EgoMaster came from?

Unite released a nice infographic showing what their point is:

Metroline pay £3 an hour more than Arriva London. Now ComfortDelGro are not a charity doing this out of the goodness of their hearts, they're clearly making lots of lovely moolah, so why can they pay almost one-third more than Arriva? And why is this acceptable?

You wouldn't have Deutsche Bahn treating their German staff like this.

First of all, I'm no fan of the Borismaster and I've said before. It's a vanity project and solves a problem that no one knew existed. However, look at the sums involved...

The additional capital cost of the Borismaster is approx £60k per vehicle (so 600 vehicles over a 15 year life) this equates to about £2.2m a year. However, this is partially offset by them being bought by TfL so leasing costs are removed. The total figure for additional staff was estimated at £37m per year but that's for all 600. As we now know, many will instead operate as OPO anyway so that figure will be much reduced. Whichever way you slice it, it's a long way away from the £100m to bring parity to driver wages. So does the money come from an increase on fares?

Why is this acceptable? Well, it depends. Firstly, the cost of living (especially accommodation) varies across the capital. Secondly, these are headline figures on rates of pay.... what else is paid to represent take home pay? Surely if a driver is getting paid £3 per hour less then surely there would be an issue with retention? Why do you think Arriva can pay £9.30 and get staff if they can work elsewhere and get £3 an hour more?

My late father was both a TGWU shop steward and a bus driver. He worked at a depot where drivers got paid a lower rate than others in the same company. He'd have loved to have been paid more but he was realistic enough to know that, had that happened, the depot (which was predominantly rural operation with a reasonable amount of tendered work) would've been rendered uneconomic and would've closed.

Lastly, to compare with Deutsche Bahn is to fail to understand the complexities of German employment legislation. I work for a German business too, yet in the UK, we pay different rates of pay at different sites for essentially the same work.

To my mind, the scourge of retailers (and others) employing people of zero hours contracts is a more pressing priority.

 

[Tetchytyke]

My late father was both a TGWU shop steward and a bus driver. He worked at a depot where drivers got paid a lower rate than others in the same company. He'd have loved to have been paid more but he was realistic enough to know that, had that happened, the depot (which was predominantly rural operation with a reasonable amount of tendered work) would've been rendered uneconomic and would've closed.

I don't think the same can be said to apply to Arriva's London operations, though. The Arriva London depots are not exactly piddly little rural backwaters, and they cover the same market as Metroline who can pay an awful lot more. If we were comparing Metroline with Arriva The Shires at Garston, for instance, you may have more of a point.

As for retention, Arriva are always advertising for drivers and Metroline are not. I suspect that Arriva do have issues with retention; I've overheard enough bus driver conversations to think that. Presumably the cost of training new drivers is less than the cost of paying the existing drivers at Metroline wage rates.

I do understand German employment legislation, at least to a small level, and that was precisely my point. The German government wouldn't let Deutsche Bahn treat their staff like that.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I don't think the same can be said to apply to Arriva's London operations, though. The Arriva London depots are not exactly piddly little rural backwaters, and they cover the same market as Metroline who can pay an awful lot more. If we were comparing Metroline with Arriva The Shires at Garston, for instance, you may have more of a point.

As for retention, Arriva are always advertising for drivers and Metroline are not. I suspect that Arriva do have issues with retention; I've overheard enough bus driver conversations to think that. Presumably the cost of training new drivers is less than the cost of paying the existing drivers at Metroline wage rates.

I do understand German employment legislation, at least to a small level, and that was precisely my point. The German government wouldn't let Deutsche Bahn treat their staff like that.

I'm sorry but you can't pick and choose your principles. Why not a nationwide driver pay rate, even if it is a "piddly rural backwater"? After all, they're all doing the same job, aren't they, even Garston drivers and they're in arguably a more expensive place to live and they're operating on TfL work?

Of course, why stop there? Why not standard rates of pay for shop workers? After all, there's more of them and they're all just doing the same job.

And I did notice that you've not answered the single most important question - where's the money coming from? Are you suggesting the farebox?

 

[Tetchytyke]

They money can come from Arriva London. If Metroline can make plenty of profit whilst paying their staff almost a third more than Arriva, it shows that the money is simply being lifted out of drivers' pockets and sent back to Germany. It's strange how, at management level, "sector benchmarking" is seen as a good thing, but on the shop floor it's something that can't possibly ever be achieved. What would the shareholders say?

A nationwide pay rate is too wide a comparator group, the costs of living are much higher in the south east and most employers will pay London Weighting. However it is completely disgraceful that a bloke driving a big red TfL bus in London can see their wages differ by up to £100 a week depending on which contractor they end up working for- and when the routes change, TUPE doesn't protect them as much as people seem to think.

TfL manage to pay their tube drivers the same regardless of which route they work on. I really don't think the bus drivers are being unreasonable in asking for the same.

"Shop workers" are not doing the same job. They may be doing similar jobs, but not the same.

 

[Deerfold]

They money can come from Arriva London.

So Arriva drivers could have a strike asking Arriva to pay more.

But they're asking all the bus companies to come together and agree - or TfL to set pay rates.

If TfL pay more for drivers to get an increase I think they'll have more problems with their directly employed staff who are not getting increases at the moment.