Rail industry preparing for national strikes

[DarloRich]

I find this country an utterly depressing prospect at the moment, and the rail situation is simply one of many symptoms of all this.

I don’t believe we have a government who are serious about actually attempting to deal with any of the many issues going on. I struggle to think of positive things this government has achieved.

Nail on the head! The unserious nature of Johnson and his gang is maddening.

 

[Wolfie]

And yet the government are deciding it is exactly the right time to force through NR cuts, raid pension pots and then attack the guard grade on a national scale rather than one per TOC basis....

Of course there needs to be a balance of risk/rewards, but currently he future is bleak for the industry from a DfT perspective. We're (TOC) running 80% service and are consistently at 77-79% for both revenue and passenger numbers. Any numbers in excess of that is growth of pre-covid levels! The railway isn't failing in the way the government are putting forward.

Therefore in my eyes, the risk of not striking now is far greater than the risk of doing nothing

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 May 2022 ==


I was previously in an industry with next to no unions, I'm well aware the difference they make and we are starting to see new unions pop up to deal with new industries such as Amazon and Starbucks in the US. I hope that follows over here.

I can't comment on maritime, but bus industry includes far more operators and is far harder to deliver substantial hits due to this. You have cities live London where many operators operate Tfl, then you have cities with monopolies like NE in Birmingham which would be far easier and a bigger impact. But these cities have excellent rail networks that are already used extensively by the majority who have a choice. Where I live now there are next to no buses, mostly hourly at best so any industrial action would barely be noticed by the vast majority of local people.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 May 2022 ==


Do you think a 10% rise would pay for that to be incorporated? After 3 years of no rises so already out of pocket?

That wouldn't even buy the Sundays being included in the working week! Removing of any t&C's rightly need buying off grades.

I'm all for bringing the railway into the future, but doo/automation is merely a pipedream.

Re your last three paras you really haven't dealt with HMT.... In one Govt department new contracts were offered - a not particularly generous payrise in exchange for significant T&C changes. Some people refused the new contracts. Twelve years later they have had zero payrise - only those on new contracts get rises....

 

[bramling]

Nail on the head! The unserious nature of Johnson and his gang is maddening.

Exactly.

I can’t recall any government in my lifetime which has lacked seriousness in this way. All they have done has been to cause problems.

 

[muz379]

There's families with a household income of under £50,000 who aren't struggling to meet living costs - fact. I never said all railway workers were able to manage, I said some will earn enough to be able to support a family on their own salary alone. Presumably you're aware of the married tax allowance? If you don't like it because it's not convenient then tough, you're not in the same category as train cleaners, who maybe on the minimum wage relying on food banks, so don't you dare even pretend that you are in a position to use that to justify getting a nice big juicy pay rise for yourself. If you do you're worse than some of the Tory party donors. Like I said putting very well paid drivers in to the same dispute as low paid railway employees is a PR disaster.

Families cut their cloth accordingly , my household income as a railway worker is under 50k , but I cut my cloth differently to before I was a railway worker and I was single so my household income was about 15k otherwise what would have been the point in looking for higher paid work . This logic of there are people on less supporting a family is the same logic of the people saying "you can feed yourself for 30p a meal" just because something is possible doesn't mean that we should be encouraging or celegrating it . At the end of the day someone cutting their cloth according to their household income still has the potential to be impacted by rising costs of living . Yes they might be more insulated from it or it might take a bigger inflation rate for it to hit them but unless you are extremely wealthy you will not be totally immune .

I think conflating drivers and train cleaners is wrong anyway , aside from a small minority outside of the underground the majority of train drivers are in a different union to cleaners .

As I have said previously this is happening at a time when much of the country is feeling the squeeze, and where a lot of us will be lucky to see any kind of pay rise. Like it or not the rail unions are going to need the support of the travelling public, and I'm afraid having large scale industrial action which is going to prove highly disruptive to many workers and businesses when things are already tight ain't going to achieve that. Without that support the industry will be full on exposed to the whim of the government, and right now they are looking for deep cuts in spending and these kind of demands shove rail workers right into the gaze of ministers.

And let's not forget the financial assistance that the industry received during the covid measures, and the fact that much of the industry is now publicly owned. This gives the public more of a vested interest, so rail unions demanding better increases than other publicly funded areas isn't going to go down well and will be a powerful weapon for this cynical government to wield. But don't take my word for it, just watch what happens should lots of strikes take place, and remember the phrase "now is not the time".

I remember people on this forum professing their view that the Northern guards wouldn't get public support and they would really need it during the DOO dispute otherwise it would just be imposed , and yet since then and them laying down in the region of 50 strike days not a single route has gone DOO . I also remember earlier in this thread when plenty of peole said that the railway is only relevant to 5% of the county (I dont totally disagree) and yet now we are being told that industrial action on the railway is going to be highly disrptive to many workers and businesses .

The Tory government via the DFT are already imposing a pay freeze on railway workers at a time of massive inflation , if they just lie down and take that then who knows where they will go next , jobs / pensions . It seems inevitable anyway but I think many railway workers are ready and would rather fight than take the attack lying down .

 

[northwichcat]

What percentage of the passenger market do you think rail has? At present, Buxton has one train an hour towards Manchester but a bus every 30 mins (change at Stockport at the same bus stop onto a bus every 5 mins).

The buses wouldn't even notice if they picked up 100% of rail passengers.

I've never really seen busy Buxton train services except at peak times and on Saturdays. I never understood why Northern prioritised it for a half-hourly off-peak service ahead of other lines.

The Buxton route is rare though, in having a bus service which duplicates the rail service and is competitive with train timings.

They would of they suddenly had train loads of passengers wanting to go long distance. Buses are full of people doing short hops (i'm one of them).

Some of the peak district routes are long distance routes and carry passengers a long way. I think it's the same with parts of rural Wales.

More expensive than the train, and, because it's run by High Peak, doesn't turn up half the time.

While Northern cancel a lot of trains due to staffing shortages.

Fare comparison for Buxton to Stockport:

High Peak -
Single £5.60
Day ticket £7.50
Week ticket £30
Month ticket: £95

Northern -
Single £11.20-£11.30
Return £11.30-£17.10
7 Day Season: £75
Monthly Season: £288

I'm not sure where you get the idea the bus costs more? Maybe if you're travelling Off-Peak and are two people travelling together so you buy a Duo and you want to go to Manchester, not Stockport?

 

[Starmill]

As operational rail staff are waged rather than salaried (i.e. paid per hour rather than a fixed annual salary regardless of overtime worked), that isn't going to make a huge difference other than in terms of pension contributions if the member of staff still worked the same number of hours.

If on the other hand they "staffed up" so overtime was no longer offered, then yes, you'd get paid less, but you'd work less too. If that was a problem it'd be worth looking for a part time job in addition, my (non railway) mate does that.

As it happens, there can be some genuine efficiencies from having a small number of permanent part time positions in among a larger number of roles. It can give you more cover when things go wrong, it can broaden your pool for recruitment and it can make it slightly easier to hire the best candidates. In addition if you have a formal part time roster you can usually increase retention as those who are looking to retire might work an extra few years if you have proper part time vacancies. Permanent part time bus driver roles are being tried at a few places to try and increase flexibility and ease shortages. Obviously having a part time roster would be significantly more complex for train crews and would only be feasible at large depots, but I do wonder if anyone has tried it? It needs to be a proper part time roster though, as opposed to merely an accommodation for individuals.

 

[greyman42]

Exactly.

I can’t recall any government in my lifetime which has lacked seriousness in this way. All they have done has been to cause problems.

Such as?

 

[jkkne]

If anything this is opening my eyes to how utterly dysfunctional and inefficient the current arrangements are in the rail industry, no other organisation could operate or even function like this. It’s crazy.

 

[northwichcat]

my household income as a railway worker is under 50k , but I cut my cloth differently to before I was a railway worker and I was single so my household income was about 15k otherwise what would have been the point in looking for higher paid work . This logic of there are people on less supporting a family is the same logic of the people saying "you can feed yourself for 30p a meal" just because something is possible doesn't mean that we should be encouraging or celegrating it . At the end of the day someone cutting their cloth according to their household income still has the potential to be impacted by rising costs of living .

I never suggested all train drivers would be fine, even if they are raising a family on a single income. I said some people are managing on a family income of £50k. Obviously, there's individual differences like variation in rent or monthly mortgage repayments. No-one should automatically say my outgoings have increased by x%, I want my income to increase by x%. Loyalty to a specific shop or provider doesn't justify a pay rise, if that business jacks up its prices more than competitors, use a competitor instead. Don't get ripped off and then ask for more money because you're being ripped off. But I understand there's limits to that. I don't live near a Tescos so if someone tells me I can save money by buying the same items there, I might not save, as I have to get to another town to be able to shop at Tesco.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What I really want is to continue earning at least £35k, I'm not really bothered about the detail

Having them in the week isn't worth the loss of effectively guaranteed extra pay to me.

Similarly as a passenger I want to see quality, fully resourced Sunday services such that withdrawal of labour is treated the same as withdrawal of labour on a weekday (i.e. requiring a ballot and appropriate notice). I don't overly mind what precise employment structure is behind that.

 

[northwichcat]

As it happens, there can be some genuine efficiencies from having a small number of permanent part time positions in among a larger number of roles. It can give you more cover when things go wrong, it can broaden your pool for recruitment and it can make it slightly easier to hire the best candidates. In addition if you have a formal part time roster you can usually increase retention as those who are looking to retire might work an extra few years if you have proper part time vacancies. Permanent part time bus driver roles are being tried at a few places to try and increase flexibility and ease shortages. Obviously having a part time roster would be significantly more complex for train crews and would only be feasible at large depots, but I do wonder if anyone has tried it? It needs to be a proper part time roster though, as opposed to merely an accommodation for individuals.

Note some part time workers are classed as underemployed, they want full time work and they will be applying for other vacancies. There is an obvious benefit to having 2 x part time jobs, making up a full time equivalent role but it can be difficult to find 2 roles which can be combined to achieve that.

Some parents doing part time work will want to stay part time long term, but may want to do more hours within their part time role as their children get older.

Other people want part time work as they aren't medically fit enough to do full time work, so they could also want to remain part time long term.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Exactly.

I can’t recall any government in my lifetime which has lacked seriousness in this way. All they have done has been to cause problems.

Totally agreed. Even Thatcher, despite my strong dislike for most of what she stood for, formed a serious Government that actually, you know, governed.

 

[XIX7007177]

Make overtime tax free, watch productivity fly everywhere.

 

[DarloRich]

Totally agreed. Even Thatcher, despite my strong dislike for most of what she stood for, formed a serious Government that actually, you know, governed.

AND took governing seriously.

 

[northwichcat]

Similarly as a passenger I want to see quality, fully resourced Sunday services such that withdrawal of labour is treated the same as withdrawal of labour on a weekday (i.e. requiring a ballot and appropriate notice). I don't overly mind what precise employment structure is behind that.

As a passenger I would say it's the train operator's responsibility to sort out staffing and it doesn't really matter what reason is given for a delay or cancellation, it inconveniences me as a passenger if there's a shortage of usable rolling stock or if there's no crews to take out the rolling stock. Both are unacceptable.

Make overtime tax free, watch productivity fly everywhere.

Or watch everyone get part time contracts so they earn £12,500 as a basic salary and everything else is overtime, to avoid paying income tax at all. Sounds great until overtime becomes unavailable and you depend on it.

 

[muz379]

I never suggested all train drivers would be fine, even if they are raising a family on a single income. I said some people are managing on a family income of £50k. Obviously, there's individual differences like variation in rent or monthly mortgage repayments. No-one should automatically say my outgoings have increased by x%, I want my income to increase by x%. Loyalty to a specific shop or provider doesn't justify a pay rise, if that business jacks up its prices more than competitors, use a competitor instead. Don't get ripped off and then ask for more money because you're being ripped off. But I understand there's limits to that. I don't live near a Tescos so if someone tells me I can save money by buying the same items there, I might not save, as I have to get to another town to be able to shop at Tesco.

I am not sure why you(or much of this forum) place such emphasis on train drivers and their salaries to be honest .

As for automatically saying my outgoings have increased by x% so I want my income to increase by x% . If you do not get a payrise in line with inflation then your pay has in real terms been cut , that is you can buy less with your pay than you could last year for example . Why should we be doing the same work for less ?

Similarly as a passenger I want to see quality, fully resourced Sunday services such that withdrawal of labour is treated the same as withdrawal of labour on a weekday (i.e. requiring a ballot and appropriate notice). I don't overly mind what precise employment structure is behind that.

The majority of staff and their unions are also in favour of this .

I wonder how much of the sunday shortages is caused by withdrawal of labour and how much is caused by insufficient cover though .

Note some part time workers are classed as underemployed, they want full time work and they will be applying for other vacancies. There is an obvious benefit to having 2 x part time jobs, making up a full time equivalent role but it can be difficult to find 2 roles which can be combined to achieve that.

There are plenty of disadvantages to having 2 part time jobs though as well .

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or watch everyone get part time contracts so they earn £12,500 as a basic salary and everything else is overtime, to avoid paying income tax at all.

Yer wot? Income tax is payable on all income above the threshold, not just basic. If you earn £30K as basic or £15K basic and £15K overtime you pay the same amount of tax and NI. The only difference is the basis of pension calculations (and whether you're guaranteed it or not).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2022 ==

I wonder how much of the sunday shortages is caused by withdrawal of labour and how much is caused by insufficient cover though .

Bit of both I suspect, plus a lower willingness to volunteer if staff feel treated badly. Though those "no service" "BBQ days" you occasionally get when there is a known disagreement going on are fairly obviously "unofficial industrial action" even if not legally that (though you also get them on occasions for big sporting events unrelated to any disagreement).

 

[43066]

Of course my Sundays aren’t inside but I’d happily work them for a day off in the week (for no extra pay). The point is that an industry that is 24/7 needs to not rely on volunteers.

Of course your Sundays aren’t inside, indeed. You’ve also admitted you’ve never worked traincrew shifts yourself.

The point (which you’re still missing) is that employing enough staff to cover a full roster on Sundays will cost more money, so it’s unlikely to happen.

DOO has been a recognised method of working since 1982 and now with many more safety features now than back then (not just a crap mirror at the end of the platform). Plenty of train drivers operate trains that way even if you don’t like it.

Oh do they? Thanks for telling me. It’s not as if I was a DOO train myself driver for several years. Once again, please don’t presume to tell me anything about this job. I don’t tell you about being a roster clerk.

People say they’ll “leave it” but how many will be able to get a similar wage to that they currently earn. I know when I was dissatisfied in a previous career it was a hard choice to leave a secure well paid job to a less secure and less well paid job.

Going from being a teacher to being a roster clerk is hardly that risky, and presumably you knew what the pay was. How would you feel if your employer decides fire and re hire you on a few thousand less to save some cash? Presumably you’d accept that unquestioningly on the basis that some nurses get paid less than you?

As a passenger I would say it's the train operator's responsibility to sort out staffing and it doesn't really matter what reason is given for a delay or cancellation, it inconveniences me as a passenger if there's a shortage of usable rolling stock or if there's no crews to take out the rolling stock. Both are unacceptable.

Indeed. Which is why it’s misguided to blame the unions who are there to represent their members, not to win popularity contests with passengers.

 

[WelshBluebird]

No-one should automatically say my outgoings have increased by x%, I want my income to increase by x%

Literally everyone should be saying that. If you don't get a pay rise that is matching inflation then you are getting a pay cut. If inflation was zero but your boss said right next year we are going to pay you say 9% less than last year, you wouldn't accept that so easily would you? So why do you expect people to accept below inflation pay increases (or in many cases pay freezes) when inflation is running at 9%?

 

[northwichcat]

Yer wot? Income tax is payable on all income above the threshold, not just basic. If you earn £30K as basic or £15K basic and £15K overtime you pay the same amount of tax and NI. The only difference is the basis of pension calculations (and whether you're guaranteed it or not).

That was in response to @XIX7007177 who suggested overtime should be made tax free. I'm well aware of the current arrangement

 

[66701GBRF]

Yer wot? Income tax is payable on all income above the threshold, not just basic. If you earn £30K as basic or £15K basic and £15K overtime you pay the same amount of tax and NI. The only difference is the basis of pension calculations (and whether you're guaranteed it or not).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 May 2022 ==

They were replying to the suggestion of making all over time tax free.

 

[northwichcat]

Literally everyone should be saying that. If you don't get a pay rise that is matching inflation then you are getting a pay cut. If inflation was zero but your boss said right next year we are going to pay you say 9% less than last year, you wouldn't accept that so easily would you? So why do you expect people to accept below inflation pay increases (or in many cases pay freezes) when inflation is running at 9%?

I was adding a caveat to that. If you have a TV & broadband deal from Sky for £30/month and they put it up to £40/month, while Virgin Media are offering you £35 for a similar package, you should switch and say your outgoings have increased by £5, not let Sky rip you off for retaining your loyalty and in turn let Sky indirectly rip off your employer.

 

[66701GBRF]

I was adding a caveat to that. If you have a TV & broadband deal from Sky for £30/month and they put it up to £40/month, while Virgin Media are offering you £35 for a similar package, you should switch and say your outgoings have increased by £5, not let Sky rip you off for retaining your loyalty and in turn let Sky indirectly rip off your employer.

That is all well and good, not so much if every company is putting their prices up or you are still within contract.

 

[muz379]

Bit of both I suspect, plus a lower willingness to volunteer if staff feel treated badly. Though those "no service" "BBQ days" you occasionally get when there is a known disagreement going on are fairly obviously "unofficial industrial action" even if not legally that (though you also get them on occasions for big sporting events unrelated to any disagreement).

My perception and personal take is that apetite for additional working largely fluctuates but that any "unoffical industrial action" is not union sanctioned or organised (even unofficially ) in my experience reps are actually quite careful not to tell people what to do with their sunday availablility for the obvious legal reason . I have never known any sunday coverage issues that could even remotely be described as "unofficial industrial action" but seen plenty of sporting events or major events on the network putting people off wanting to come in when they are not obliged . Ive also seen a few Sunday 27th Decembers which have required an incentive payment to get people in . Maybe incentive payments should be considered more often to get the jobs covered especially during summer and big events .

 

[Bletchleyite]

That was in response to @XIX7007177 who suggested overtime should be made tax free. I'm well aware of the current arrangement

Ah, sorry.

Overtime absolutely should not be tax free, it would lay the system open to massive abuse by pretty much every single employer paying the minimum wage as a salary then everything else as overtime.

 

[XIX7007177]

Ah, sorry.

Overtime absolutely should not be tax free, it would lay the system open to massive abuse by pretty much every single employer paying the minimum wage as a salary then everything else as overtime.

Tax free for the employee not the employer. NI contribution etc for employer remain so no benefit for them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tax free for the employee not the employer. NI contribution etc for employer remain so no benefit for them.

Overtime should not be tax free for either. There is no reason why any type of pay should be treated differently from any other type of pay. It's income tax, not base salary tax.

 

[muz379]

Tax free for the employee not the employer. NI contribution etc for employer remain so no benefit for them.

There would still be a benefit for them in that they could pay a very low salary and make up with overtime , but theyd have to pay less in overtime to provide their employees with the same take home pay .

 

[43066]

Tax free for the employee not the employer. NI contribution etc for employer remain so no benefit for them.

Lots of employers pay a premium to incentivise people to volunteer for overtime, whether that’s a “booking on fee”, time and a half etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lots of employers pay a premium to incentivise people to volunteer for overtime, whether that’s a “booking on fee”, time and a half etc.

And that's up to them, but it is (and should be) all taxable income.