RMT dispute on Merseyrail

[urbophile]

Yes, but Strike Action is absence and it's not permitted absence (leave). Why would any company treat it in any other way?

"Oh you were absent 25 times, but because they were strikes we're still going to pay you your attendance bonus". Let's get serious.

Fair enough, but what Merseyrail are threatening is the effective sacking (or at least, unwillingness to re-employ) staff who have been on strike. It's one thing (and accepted) not to pay them for such absence; this is vindictive penalising it seems to me.

 

[Camden]

If you're convinced the strike action will save the guards jobs, then surely there would be no need to worry about re-employment prospects.

However if I was to believe that the action is entirely futile and pointless, then yes I suppose I would consider whether I wanted to be able to apply for a driver's job.

 

[Goldfish62]

You appear to be confusing the "leave" in AWOL, where it means permission, with the "leave" in annual leave, which means time off work.

With the greatest of respect, it is you who are confusing things. Leave covers anything in an organisation's policies where you are granted permission not to be in work. It covers holidays, sickness, emergencies, bereavement and a whole host of other stuff, with or without pay. However, not strike action. This is absence without leave, unauthorised absence or whatever other terminology you want to give it, but not leave.

 

[gavin]

Strike called off following Manchester bombing

 

[Bletchleyite]

Again, per the other thread this is a good call on the part of the union.

 

[trainophile]

If they must have another strike, they could do the people of Southport a favour and have it on 12th July. The town is out of bounds for a lot of folk that day due to the Orange marchers taking it over.

 

[gavin]

Strikes confirmed for July 8, 10 and 23

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Strikes confirmed for July 8, 10 and 23

Perhaps they will next target the Southport Flower Show, held in mid-August, for the following methodology of disrupting notable events on Merseyside.

 

[northwichcat]

Strikes confirmed for July 8, 10 and 23

July 23 is the Open Golf Championship - wonder why they chose that date?

I imagine Merseyrail will run a shuttle to get people between the city centre and the golf and completely suspend services on all other routes, like they did for the Grand National.

 

[8A Rail]

July 23 is the Open Golf Championship - wonder why they chose that date?
I imagine Merseyrail will run a shuttle to get people between the city centre and the golf and completely suspend services on all other routes, like they did for the Grand National.

The 23rd in the final day of the championship as it starts on the 16th July.

 

[shakey1961]

I'm sorry, but from a starting position of supporting the guards 100% my personal support has totally gone.

They hit the Grand National, now the Open Golf. Conveniently I notice they don't strike on 12 July, the day they bring the Orangemen to Southport.

Merseyrail are trying their best to bring it to a resolution but the union's just don't want to negotiate.

Stop hitting the major events, then you might get some public support back.

They've lost mine, and won't be getting it back till they start talking and willing to compromise. They're losing public support.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What compromise can there be?

There will be DOO on Merseyrail. The union will not change that.

They are fighting for the wrong thing.

 

[DarloRich]

To suggest a strike shouldn't take place at the worst possible time for the employer shows no understanding of the tactics of industrial dispute. You withdraw your labour at exactly the best possible time to cause pain or embarrassment to the employer and to ensure column inches & quotes in the media.

That said OF COURSE people should be meeting and trying to thrash out a deal to stop the strikes. That should be obvious to even the most muddle headed!

 

[DarloRich]

What compromise can there be?

There will be DOO on Merseyrail. The union will not change that.

They are fighting for the wrong thing.

once again that is very easy for you to say when you are not the one facing the sack. Your view imho ( and the view of others here) is that unions should meekly accept change that impacts on their members and ask, awfully nicely, if the employer might toss them a few crumbs as comfort.

 

[Bletchleyite]

once again that is very easy for you to say when you are not the one facing the sack. Your view imho ( and the view of others here) is that unions should meekly accept change that impacts on their members and ask, awfully nicely, if the employer might toss them a few crumbs as comfort.

You make my point.

What they should be campaigning for is to ensure not that Guards remain, but that nobody faces the sack. They should be fighting for the Guards to remain in Merseyrail's employment in a different role but on the same pay and T&Cs and the same progression opportunities, with reductions only by natural wasteage.

That's what they can reasonably achieve, not preventing DOO.

Change is a reality of business; it cannot be prevented in the long term. Change can also create jobs - look at the entire IT industry that in about 60 years has grown from nothing.

 

[northwichcat]

once again that is very easy for you to say when you are not the one facing the sack. Your view imho ( and the view of others here) is that unions should meekly accept change that impacts on their members and ask, awfully nicely, if the employer might toss them a few crumbs as comfort.

Since when has anyone at Merseyrail or Northern 'been facing the sack'? Northern have confirmed all guards will remain on guard salaries with the usual annual increases. Merseyrail have confirmed all guards will be offered alternative roles including trainee driver roles. The RMT is so insistent that every service will continue to have a guard that they are refusing to talk to Merseyrail about what the alternative options are.

7 years of guaranteed employment and annual pay rises sounds like an excellent deal for Northern guards. A lot of people don't know for certain if they'll have a job in 6 months time, never mind a job and guaranteed pay rise in 2025!

 

[northwichcat]

To suggest a strike shouldn't take place at the worst possible time for the employer shows no understanding of the tactics of industrial dispute. You withdraw your labour at exactly the best possible time to cause pain or embarrassment to the employer and to ensure column inches & quotes in the media.

When big events are on like the Grand National and the Open Golf many people using the trains will not be regular passengers. If the services run and people get a good impression of them they'll likely use the train more. More passengers = more services (eventually) = more jobs. If the trains don't run you don't attract the extra passengers and start losing existing passengers (who find alternative methods of travel), which could result in service reductions and reductions in staffing levels.

Even my dad, who was a life long union member, saw that there were times when calling a strike would make matters worse not better.

 

[313103]

Since when has anyone at Merseyrail or Northern 'been facing the sack'? Northern have confirmed all guards will remain on guard salaries with the usual annual increases. Merseyrail have confirmed all guards will be offered alternative roles including trainee driver roles. The RMT is so insistent that every service will continue to have a guard that they are refusing to talk to Merseyrail about what the alternative options are.

7 years of guaranteed employment and annual pay rises sounds like an excellent deal for Northern guards. A lot of people don't know for certain if they'll have a job in 6 months time, never mind a job and guaranteed pay rise in 2025!

Actually you are not correct, all these supposed new positions are not guaranteed, they are all subject to passing relevant tests, its not as you say. Not all Guards will remain either, so that is also wrong to assume. Every single Guard could be offered a trainee driver position doesnt mean every single one is suitable, doesnt mean every one will past the test, and could mean that ALL of them could fail which leaves them where?

The RMT will not speak to Merseyrail on the issue because Mersyrail want to reduce the total headcount, Merseyrail have given no guarantee that every current Guard will have a future with said company. Infact they have basically said the reverse that staff numbers need to reduce significantly to make it a worthwhile exercise. You mixing the Northern Rail and Merseyrail disputes does not help clear the muddy waters, they are two separate disputes.

I suppose facing the sack is not the correct terminology, a more better way of describing it would be staff being made surplus to requirements.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The question is how many would be by natural wasteage (including ending short-term contracts).

If all of them can be, there is no problem.

 

[DarloRich]

Since when has anyone at Merseyrail or Northern 'been facing the sack'? Northern have confirmed all guards will remain on guard salaries with the usual annual increases. Merseyrail have confirmed all guards will be offered alternative roles including trainee driver roles. The RMT is so insistent that every service will continue to have a guard that they are refusing to talk to Merseyrail about what the alternative options are.

7 years of guaranteed employment and annual pay rises sounds like an excellent deal for Northern guards. A lot of people don't know for certain if they'll have a job in 6 months time, never mind a job and guaranteed pay rise in 2025!

The issue isnt the rate of pay but often the new t&c expected as part of the transfer.

There is also a large trust & credibility issue in these circumstances. Many people simply do not trust what they are told. I am very suspicious of any "promises" made by managers. Having being screwed once before you tend to get cynical. You may not have been in that position before. I have. The reality turned out to be somewhat different than the promised future!

When big events are on like the Grand National and the Open Golf many people using the trains will not be regular passengers. If the services run and people get a good impression of them they'll likely use the train more. More passengers = more services (eventually) = more jobs. If the trains don't run you don't attract the extra passengers and start losing existing passengers (who find alternative methods of travel), which could result in service reductions and reductions in staffing levels.

Even my dad, who was a life long union member, saw that there were times when calling a strike would make matters worse not better.

I haven't said I agree with the timing of any strike - rather I understand the tactics in use. However the argument about offering a positive image is sightly specious. That image could be destroyed by the first fatality or rail break............

 

[313103]

When big events are on like the Grand National and the Open Golf many people using the trains will not be regular passengers. If the services run and people get a good impression of them they'll likely use the train more. More passengers = more services (eventually) = more jobs. If the trains don't run you don't attract the extra passengers and start losing existing passengers (who find alternative methods of travel), which could result in service reductions and reductions in staffing levels.

Even my dad, who was a life long union member, saw that there were times when calling a strike would make matters worse not better.

Not strictly true, and there is no evidence to suggest it either. Many people who go to such events will probably only use the train on that one occasion. They could be treated like royality, they still wont return and travel regular on the railway. They do it because they are not allowed to drink and drive, there use of the train is to treat it like a toilet, have you seen the state of some of these people coming from these big events?

Reductions in staffing levels is happening anyway, the idea that DOO means that more staff will be on the station is a misleading notion, the whole idea to make trains DOO is as a repeat myself for the umpteenth time to reduce the total headcount and to reduce the wage bill.

 

[northwichcat]

Actually you are not correct, all these supposed new positions are not guaranteed, they are all subject to passing relevant tests, its not as you say. Not all Guards will remain either, so that is also wrong to assume. Every single Guard could be offered a trainee driver position doesnt mean every single one is suitable, doesnt mean every one will past the test, and could mean that ALL of them could fail which leaves them where?

The RMT will not speak to Merseyrail on the issue because Mersyrail want to reduce the total headcount, Merseyrail have given no guarantee that every current Guard will have a future with said company. Infact they have basically said the reverse that staff numbers need to reduce significantly to make it a worthwhile exercise. You mixing the Northern Rail and Merseyrail disputes does not help clear the muddy waters, they are two separate disputes.

I suppose facing the sack is not the correct terminology, a more better way of describing it would be staff being made surplus to requirements.

I would imagine now Merseyrail guards know the long term future of Merseyrail is expected to be DOO, that if they want to remain in a guard's role they will apply for vacancies advertised by other operators.

I do agree they are very different disputes. A lot of the passengers interviewed want a visible staff presence which is something the Merseyrail plan won't give on most services but the Northern plan (if implemented according to the franchise spec) will.

 

[Tetchytyke]

What they should be campaigning for is to ensure not that Guards remain, but that nobody faces the sack.

Merseyrail have said they can only afford the new trains if they "make efficiency savings".

If you have the same number of staff on the same wage, where exactly are these "efficiency savings"?

You save money by reducing headcount and reducing wages. Nothing else saves money. It really is very basic economics.

Merseyrail have confirmed all guards will be offered alternative roles including trainee driver roles.

Merseyrail's Head of HR wrote to everyone saying that any guard who takes strike action will be treated as AWOL, and that anyone who has AWOL on their record is not eligible to apply to become a trainee driver role.

Maybe I'm cynical, but that sounds suspiciously like a threat to me.

A guarantee from senior managers who are prepared to threaten their staff is, quite frankly, not worth the paper it is written on.

 

[DarloRich]

I do agree they are very different disputes. A lot of the passengers interviewed want a visible staff presence which is something the Merseyrail plan won't give on most services but the Northern plan (if implemented according to the franchise spec) will.

Agreed - but there is a difference between a fully trained guard and some kind of customer service agent on an outsourced contract, perhaps of the type Northern have employed in the past. That is the fear of many - water down the guards role, reduced union representation, water down t&c, seek to replace with cheaper outsourced labour at some point in the future aka the thin edge of the wedge.

I have great sympathy with that view based on my previous employment experience.

Merseyrail's Head of HR wrote to everyone saying that any guard who takes strike action will be treated as AWOL, and that anyone who has AWOL on their record is not eligible to apply to become a trainee driver role.

Maybe I'm cynical, but that sounds suspiciously like a threat to me.

A guarantee from senior managers who are prepared to threaten their staff is, quite frankly, not worth the paper it is written on.

quite - however there are many trusting souls on this board....................

 

[northwichcat]

Not strictly true, and there is no evidence to suggest it either. Many people who go to such events will probably only use the train on that one occasion. They could be treated like royality, they still wont return and travel regular on the railway. They do it because they are not allowed to drink and drive, there use of the train is to treat it like a toilet, have you seen the state of some of these people coming from these big events?

With some people who have cars there's a lack of awareness of what public transport exists. However, due to road congestion/lack of parking/wanting to drink at the event they find out what public transport exists by using it. Then they might realise, for instance, using Merseyrail is cheaper than paying the Mersey tunnel tolls.

Reductions in staffing levels is happening anyway, the idea that DOO means that more staff will be on the station is a misleading notion, the whole idea to make trains DOO is as a repeat myself for the umpteenth time to reduce the total headcount and to reduce the wage bill.

That might be the long term plan but it doesn't automatically mean a considerable number of existing staff are going be forced out.

I suppose facing the sack is not the correct terminology, a more better way of describing it would be staff being made surplus to requirements.

Technically being sacked means the role remains but the employer has decided you aren't suitable to continue to carry it out. Being made redundant means you are capable of doing a good job but there isn't still a role for you to do.

 

[northwichcat]

Merseyrail have said they can only afford the new trains if they "make efficiency savings".

You mean Merseytravel.

Merseyrail's Head of HR wrote to everyone saying that any guard who takes strike action will be treated as AWOL, and that anyone who has AWOL on their record is not eligible to apply to become a trainee driver role.

Maybe I'm cynical, but that sounds suspiciously like a threat to me.

A guarantee from senior managers who are prepared to threaten their staff is, quite frankly, not worth the paper it is written on.

I wasn't aware of that and if RMT reps said that to the media, rather than trying to blame the Dutch government or play the terrorism card then they'd probably get more public support.

There are ways of making agreements legally binding and the union should know how to go about that.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I wasn't aware of that

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2994269&postcount=1019

There are ways of making agreements legally binding and the union should know how to go about that.

There is no way of making an agreement remain legally binding in perpetuity.

They can promise to redeploy, they can promise to keep the redeployment in place for a period of time, but all employment agreements can be revoked, from either side. Even TUPE protections are time-limited.

"Business changes" covers a multitude of sins.

 

[shakey1961]

The only way people will be getting anywhere near the Open is either by car with Park and Ride, or much easier by Train.

Hillside station will be packed for the whole event and there will be thousands of customers coming from there. You could run a 5 minute service all day and still they'd keep coming. I've seen it in the past as I pass that station everyday!

To strike on the final day when it will be the most popular day will not help their cause one bit.

Work with the management instead of going against them and you can get a better deal. Work against them and you'll come away potentially worse off.

Get a grip RMT.

:roll:

 

[Bletchleyite]

quite - however there are many trusting souls on this board....................

Some of us recognise the realities of business and that the "truth" is usually somewhere between both "sides".

 

[HowardGWR]

the whole idea to make trains DOO is as a repeat myself for the umpteenth time to reduce the total headcount and to reduce the wage bill.

and? If it can be done, why not?