RMT vote 4 to 1 to strike over NR pay

[ADRboy]

That's a good point. What makes NR staff different from any other government employee who has had a salary increase cap?

They're not willing to sit back and accept paltry pay rises and a risk in job security.

 

[Tetchytyke]

That's a good point. What makes NR staff different from any other government employee who has had a salary increase cap?

They have some backbone and they're prepared to stand up for themselves.

 

[LAX54]

Was it 2 or 3%? I can't recall. I do know they were offered 0% or a slim (something like 1%) with removal of terms and conditions. Bit bizarre really. Especially given that the PM himself said that Britain deserves a Pay rise.

FROM RMT website:
Rates of Pay & Conditions of Service 2015- Network Rail

Publication Date: 18-Dec-14

Circular No: Circular No IR/336/14

Our Ref BR4/0001 & BR5/0001



Circular No IR/336/14



18th December 2014



TO ALL BRANCHES, REGIONAL COUNCIL AND REGIONAL OFFICES



Dear Colleagues



RATES OF PAY AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE 2015 – NETWORK RAIL (Maintenance, Operations, Customer Services and Role Clarity Bands 5 to 8)



I write to advise branches that myself and our National Operations Council and National Maintenance Council representatives met with Network Rail today to discuss the 2015 pay claims. The company has now tabled the following four year offers:-



Maintenance



2015



An increase of "up to 2%” on basis of discussions and agreement on the following productivity issues:-



Annual leave to be booked in hours rather than days



S&T teams to be sized by task. Minimum 3 person team levels to be removed.



Removing the guaranteed day free from duty to attend a medical.



Ending the Stood Off arrangements.



2016,2017,2018



A CPI level of inflation increase to basic rates of pay over a three year period. RPI will not be used to calculate inflation as in previous pay deals.



Operations



2015



An increase of "up to 2%" on basis of discussions and agreement on the following productivity issues:-



A review of the National Rostering Principles on the following issues by April 2015:-



Removal of 12 hour shifts

Clarification of the Additional Hour provision

Change to the 48 hour notice period for Relief and Flexible Signallers

Annual Leave to be booked in hours rather than days



A Review and Harmonisation of Overtime Rates
Removing the guaranteed day free from duty to attend a medical.
Ending the Stood Off arrangements.



2016, 2017, 2018



A CPI level of inflation increase to basic rates of pay over a three year period. RPI will not be used to calculate inflation as in previous pay deals.



Network rail did confirm that they did not propose to extend the No Compulsory redundancy agreement which currently applies for all grades in Maintenance, Operations, Customer Services and Bands 5 to 8 would not be extended however the existing arrangement will continue to apply for the duration of the pay talks. Network Rail has not yet responded to a number of the items in our formal pay submissions but we expect full and detailed proposals in the very near future.



Our Position



We advised Management that we are totally opposed to any changes to members terms and conditions as we do not agree that productively should form part of your pay award, we also advised them that we did not accept the change to CPI (Consumer Price Index) from PRI (Retail Price Index) this being a cynical way of lessening the award. As you would expect we also asked for a clear unambiguous guarantee on job security.



We obviously need to give proper consideration to our position and discuss the offer with our second stage representatives, both operations and Maintenance, and I am arranging for a meeting to be held at this office on Monday 12th January to discuss the proposals. Having taken into account the views of the representatives we will then have a further meeting with Network Rail on Wednesday 21st January. I will of course keep you advised of developments.



Yours sincerely



Mick Cash

General Secretary


After the first NO vote that was revised to offer a 0% rise in 2015. RPI plus 0% rather than CP!, a £500 one off payment and No 'compulsary' redundancy for 2015/16, I think the rest remained the same , it was this second and final offer that triggered the vote

 

[chris11256]

Update on the BBC article.
We're certainly a step closer to the first national rail strike in two decades.

And the fact that the RMT look after signal workers means any strike action would freeze the whole network.

But there's still a way to go before commuters face any chaos.

My understanding is that there is not an insurmountable gap between the unions and Network Rail. The sticking point isn't the whole pay deal, just this year's £500 lump sum offer, coupled with a guarantee about forced redundancies.

Both sides also say they are prepared to keep talking.

We may see strikes announced, possibly over the bank holiday.

But there is a decent chance (not definite, mind) that they will reach a new deal and call them off.

 

[Searle]

I can see why strikes frustrate the travelling public but phrases like 'so they can have more money' are misguided at best. How did the general population get turned against people fighting for good terms and conditions? When did people start just 'accepting' what they're given rather than try themselves for something better, then go on the attack at those who are still 'fighting' for those terms everyone else threw away?

Probably when the RMT leaders started making ridiculous claims, criticizing NWR whenever they did anything at all, and when they started to seem to be striking every other week. I agree that strikes should be allowed, but I'd imagine that in the past few years, a lot of people have started thinking that there are way too many.

 

[LAX54]

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Surely as Network Rail is under European directive a state organisation Pay should be capped at a max of 1% in line with other public asector workers nurses, teachers etc?

think if they had offered 1% we would not be in this position. the current "offer" is 0%

 

[ADRboy]

Probably when the RMT leaders started making ridiculous claims, criticizing NWR whenever they did anything at all, and when they started to seem to be striking every other week. I agree that strikes should be allowed, but I'd imagine that in the past few years, a lot of people have started thinking that there are way too many.

When were they striking every other week?

 

[LAX54]

Probably when the RMT leaders started making ridiculous claims, criticizing NWR whenever they did anything at all, and when they started to seem to be striking every other week. I agree that strikes should be allowed, but I'd imagine that in the past few years, a lot of people have started thinking that there are way too many.

Last Railway Operations Strike......1992/94

 

[northwichcat]

think if they had offered 1% we would not be in this position. the current "offer" is 0%

Current offer also includes no compulsory redundancies for 12 months. Would employees prefer a small 1% rise and the redundancies condition removed?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Last Railway Operations Strike......1992/94

But TOCs have been on strike in probably ever area since. Joe Public gets disrupted whether it's signalers, drivers or conductors (except on DOO routes) on strike.

 

[LAX54]

Current offer also includes no compulsory redundancies for 12 months. Would employees prefer a small 1% rise and the redundancies condition removed?

In my view No Compulsary redundancies these days is a very difficult thing to carry on with, even more so as jobs go, vastly different to the 1970's even into the 90's, but what I think Network Rail do need to sort out, is the internal vacancy application system, It seems (to me and others) that current vacancies are pro- NON Rail Staff, than for actual people who are already mostly trained for the job! or maybe that is just the way the world is these days ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Current offer also includes no compulsory redundancies for 12 months. Would employees prefer a small 1% rise and the redundancies condition removed?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


But TOCs have been on strike in probably ever area since. Joe Public gets disrupted whether it's signalers, drivers or conductors (except on DOO routes) on strike.

I can see what you are saying, but TOC's are nothing to do with Network Rail, Signallers, S&T, MOM's etc, those staff (except Maintainence) have not had a strike since 1994, not sure TOC's have had that many either!
(and Maintainance was over safety, and not pay, as well)

 

[chris11256]

When do people think the strike might be(weekday/weekend or bank holiday)? If I was a union man I'd want to cause as much chaos as possible to get maximum impact, so would do it on a weekday.

 

[AM9]

When do people think the strike might be(weekday/weekend or bank holiday)? If I was a union man I'd want to cause as much chaos as possible to get maximum impact, so would do it on a weekday.

Surely you would want to embarass those who are behind the current offer and who as such the only ones who can change them, i.e. the (new) government. Their election honeymoon would end very quickly if the travelling population's bank holiday was spoilt.

 

[carriageline]

Ok I've bitten.

Originally the offer was 2% with a useless railcard, and taking away a lot of T&Cs. This was then changed to a 500 lump sum which meant nothing in the scheme of things.

No one wants to strike, but instead just want NR to realise how unhappy we are with how we are being treated, and to give us a fair negotiation.

I agree, strike action does affect customers. But that isn't my problem. We are balloting for a FAIR pay rise, like Cameron says the whole country deserves. If the company are unwilling to negotiate a fair deal, then that is on their heads. Heck, all the majority of us have asked for is this 500£ lump sum into our wages.

As usual, we will get the "you earn enough money" "I'm self employed and haven't had a pay rise in 20 years" "the rest of the country isn't getting rises" which are all untrue. Our beloved leaders received 5 digit bonuses, and one got a 14% pay rise on an already massive salary. The company made 1.2 billion pounds profit last year, due to the hard work our staff do, day in day out. Most of us are working harder than ever before, and receiving no more for it. A happy employee gives more to the company, in good will and help.

Therefore I'm unhappy and frankly insulted to be told by our NEW ops director "Come on chaps, nurses are not getting payrises, you have had good payrises the last few years. Times are hard!" whilst taking 14% himself! He's only been in the job under a year.

Question for you all:
how would you passengers feel if we did an overtime ban instead of striking? Seeing as the OT ban would be more random, more disruptive and harder to cover?

I believe plans are afoot to strike, but not directly affect commuters and the like.

As far as I'm away too, we are not a public sector company, at least not like the NHS.

What the public will fail to realise is, this is more than just a pay rise. With all the changes afoot, this could possibly change the way we will be treated in the next few years.

 

[Train2Win]

It's not worth them going on strike because now the Conservatives are in ; the huge spending cuts will be happening over the next few years . Cutting down on public sectors job's .

This could lead to thousands of cuts to staff on trains, including guards and catering staff, in stations, in ticket offices and in safety-critical operations like signalling and maintenance, as the following figures from the McNulty Review suggest:

Job type Numbers at risk
Ticket office staff 2,000
Station staff 5,500
Non-driver on-train staff 6,800
NR maintenance, signalling and operations 6,300
Total 20,800.

 

[carriageline]

Right, because there is enough maintenance and ops staff even when they are fully staffed... Not. Watch the delays explode if that was ever to happen!

 

[GatwickDepress]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32702585

Newly appointed Business Secretary Sajid Javid has said there will be "significant changes" to strike laws under the new Conservative government.
A strike affecting essential public services will need the backing of 40% of eligible union members under government plans, he said.
Currently, a strike is valid if backed by a majority of those balloted.
Unions said the plans "will make legal strikes close to impossible".

Mr Javid told the BBC's Today programme: "We've already made clear, in terms of strike laws, that there will be some significant changes... it will be a priority of ours.

"We need to update our strike laws. We've never hidden away the changes we want to make. I think it's essential to make these changes," he added.

A strike affecting health, transport, fire services or schools will need to be backed by 40% of eligible union members.

There will also need to be a minimum 50% turnout in strike ballots.

The government will also lift restrictions on the use of agency staff to replace striking workers, he said.

The changes to the law are to be announced in the Queen's Speech, he added, which will take place later this month.

....[story continues, but this is the main gist]

I can see unions being vary wary of this.

 

[Hellfire]

I love the line in the RMT response as stated in the document above "we do not believe that productivety (sic) should form part of a pay award. Why shouldn't it?

 

[northwichcat]

I can see unions being vary wary of this.

Conservative manifesto included it and as the Conservatives got a majority it can be made law if no rebel Conservatives vote against it. A national rail strike might get it pushed through immediately opposed to a couple of years down the line.

 

[The Planner]

Surely it doesnt matter in this case as that threshold has been met? 60% response with 80% saying yes? Makes 48% of the eligible total???

 

[GB]

Still astounds me that a rather large percentage couldn't be bothered to vote in the first place. Muppets!

 

[ainsworth74]

Still astounds me that a rather large percentage couldn't be bothered to vote in the first place. Muppets!

Would be interesting to see if those who didn't vote in this case also didn't vote in the General Election last week.

 

[northwichcat]

Surely it doesnt matter in this case as that threshold has been met? 60% response with 80% saying yes? Makes 48% of the eligible total???

Yes. So the government can reject the following as nonsense using a recent ballot result from the RMT as evidence:

Unions said the plans "will make legal strikes close to impossible"

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The RMT demands are as follows:

• 2015 – A £500 non-consolidated lump sum payment.
• 2016, 2017, 2018 - An RPI level of inflation increase in pay would be applied for each year.
• The “No Compulsory Redundancy” commitment would be extended until 31st December 2016.

 

[Bodiddly]

When Cameron came out with that drivel about 'The whole country needs a pay rise' were we not running up to an election? Now the Tories have a majority government able to push through their sick and disgusting policies unchallenged, I will expect to see a fresh attack on the unions. This is very relevant here. Railway workers as opposed to other employees have benefited from a strong union and a threatened strike does send out a serious warning to the country. Expect Dave and his chums to work tirelessly to erode any power the unions have. To be offered what is affectively a 0% pay rise and a further stripping back of T&C's is quite frankly just insulting. To the ' but your stopping me getting to work' and 'you get paid enough' brigade, you are just pawns in a political game of chess, always have been always will be so get over it. NR want to decimate their workforce and Mark Carne has publicly shown his full support for slashing staff numbers with his digital rail concept.

Each and every year and during every pay negotiation the workers terms and conditions get slowly erased. Very soon the rail companies will have the employees they have tirelessly striven for, workers like robots who are terrified to speak up for their rights for fear of repercussions. I challenge any 'normal' to sit staring at IECC screens for 8-12 hours a day without getting dizzy in the first 5 minutes or attend a failure, chase a complex S&T drawing of a points circuit while having the mobile going off every 30 seconds asking what the hell is going on. The big difference between railway workers and an office worker is quite clear to see. If you make a mistake in an office, you don't potentially kill hundreds of people or bring an economy to a standstill. That's why railway workers are specialists in what they do and should be paid as so. I'm not saying nurses or teachers should be paid any more or any less, that's not the argument here and is like comparing apples and oranges. Everybody should be paid for their particular responsibility they bring to the job and it's up to each and every one of us as workers to stand up for our rights and it IS our right. Rail strikes hit hard and with not much of an alternative, there's no doubt they hit harder than if Asda staff were to strike. You would have sympathy with them but would cross the road and go to Tesco for your shopping. I remember back to the fuel blockades and the truly nasty things that were being banded about by the MSM about the tanker drivers simply because it affected so many people. Expect the same if a national rail strike is to take place.

Union bashing is very easy to the ignorant but tell me this. Are you seriously trying to tell me that if your office manager was to come to you with a bona fide pay offer which you asked for and he offered you 0% and made your job that little bit more fragile, you would be happy with this and your productivity would soar? Probably the opposite and your toilet and coffee breaks would get that little bit longer. As railway, we can't do that. I can't decide that because a manager has ****ed me off that I won't change the worn brake pads on a train or not put fuel in it. I wouldn't and couldn't get away with that. We are professionals and must be professional in what we do 24/7, that's how the railway runs safely in this country with the workers at the coalface and the managers behind, (literally) pushing us on. I will fight for my rights as an employee until my retirement/death (the latter probably being correct due to another Tory policy) and this is the same for anyone else.

NR need to take a step back, as do the union and come to an agreement that will suit everyone.

 

[carriageline]

That's not what the union wants, that is what was offered.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes. So the government can reject the following as nonsense using a recent ballot result from the RMT as evidence:




--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The RMT demands are as follows:

That's not what the union wants, that is what was offered.

 

[embers25]

I'm sure this will be the first of many strikes as the unions vent their anger at the British public democratically voting against their party. If Labour had won there would have been no extra money and yet there would have been no strike as even the unions aren't stupid enough to strike (usually) right after a Labour win.

That being said and despite me being totally opposed to unions, the offer, if it's what is being reported, is not exactly amazing so it's no wonder staff feel so aggrieved. Compared to many of the ridiculous union strike ballots this one does seem to have some merit.

 

[northwichcat]

Are you seriously trying to tell me that if your office manager was to come to you with a bona fide pay offer which you asked for and he offered you 0% and made your job that little bit more fragile, you would be happy with this and your productivity would soar?

Actually that's a common scenario in office environments for struggling companies.

I can't do a flow chart on here but a typical chain of events would be:
1. Company suffers 10% cut in workload
2. Company makes 20% of employees redundant and freezes pay for the rest or even ask people to take a pay cut
3. Existing employees finish up doing additional work and find it impossible to do it within their contracted hours so finish up doing additional unpaid hours because they fear losing their job if they don't.

Then when things begin to pick up new employee(s) join at market rate salaries despite existing employees being below market rate due to pay freezes but the budget for additional staffing costs gets concentrated on much needed extra staff opposed to much needed pay rises for existing staff.

So yes productivity does increase with pay freezes because the least productive employees get made redundant and remaining employees fear they'll be next to do if they don't go the extra mile.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's not what the union wants, that is what was offered.

Ah yes. That was the improved offer Network Rail made.

 

[GB]

I'm sure this will be the first of many strikes as the unions vent their anger at the British public democratically voting against their party. If Labour had won there would have been no extra money and yet there would have been no strike as even the unions aren't stupid enough to strike (usually) right after a Labour win.

That being said and despite me being totally opposed to unions, the offer, if it's what is being reported, is not exactly amazing so it's no wonder staff feel so aggrieved. Compared to many of the ridiculous union strike ballots this one does seem to have some merit.

I'm sure the vast amount of NR employess couldn't give a toss who is in power when it came to voting on this matter.

 

[Bodiddly]

Actually that's a common scenario in office environments for struggling companies.

I can't do a flow chart on here but a typical chain of events would be:
1. Company suffers 10% cut in workload
2. Company makes 20% of employees redundant and freezes pay for the rest or even ask people to take a pay cut
3. Existing employees finish up doing additional work and find it impossible to do it within their contracted hours so finish up doing additional unpaid hours because they fear losing their job if they don't.

Then when things begin to pick up new employee(s) join at market rate salaries despite existing employees being below market rate due to pay freezes but the budget for additional staffing costs gets concentrated on much needed extra staff opposed to much needed pay rises for existing staff.

So yes productivity does increase with pay freezes because the least productive employees get made redundant and remaining employees fear they'll be next to do if they don't go the extra mile.
.

I know that's what would happen, it happened to me. Doesn't make it ok though. I didn't have a union to back me up at the time and felt so strongly about it I went out and found another job. Not an option for most people who need an income and I genuinely feel for people in that predicament. Surely though, all it does is create a resentful workforce who are not giving the job 100%?

 

[ADRboy]

I'm sure this will be the first of many strikes as the unions vent their anger at the British public democratically voting against their party. If Labour had won there would have been no extra money and yet there would have been no strike as even the unions aren't stupid enough to strike (usually) right after a Labour win.

That being said and despite me being totally opposed to unions, the offer, if it's what is being reported, is not exactly amazing so it's no wonder staff feel so aggrieved. Compared to many of the ridiculous union strike ballots this one does seem to have some merit.

Apart from the ballot being out before the election. And the RMT not funding the Labour party.

 

[route:oxford]

Still astounds me that a rather large percentage couldn't be bothered to vote in the first place. Muppets!

Don't be astounded. If RMT are as good at record keeping as Unite - then their records* will be awful.

I thought my own Union record was finally fully accurate after a considerable effort on my part, then some mail arrived asking me to vote on a matter at a company I haven't worked for for 5 years detailing me as working in an office that I haven't worked in for nearly 20 years.

Hopeless.



*Oddly enough, they've never had a problem with collecting payment...