Rail industry preparing for national strikes

[NI 271]

This is pure fantasy.

It's remarkable, it really is.

 

[Wolfie]

Just what happened to this country to have people start to think like this? That is the bare minimum people should be asking for, and your caveats are utterly irrelevant to that. You're free to switch to lower-cost services before you get bummed by inflation, that is a complete non-starter if you're trying to justify making the population poorer.

This country is NOT skint. The government was happy to donate tens of billions of OUR money to their friends for knowingly selling substandard PPE to the NHS during 2020/21. You'd have to be the most remarkable kind of bootlicker to watch that happen and insist those not responsible for that crooked embezzling of taxpayer money should see their quality of life annihilated in order to repay some of it.

But then that is so frequently the way here on Totally Normal Island these days. One of the richest countries in the world, and there are people hell-bent on returning our quality of life to the 1950s. Has there ever been a generation determined to ensure the following one has it worse than they did? I doubt it.

.... and you really think that it is different anywhere else in the G7? The G20?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 May 2022 ==

There is a thing called the Wage-Price Spiral, where employers pass on the increased costs of the higher wages in higher prices, which leads to further demands for increased wages to cope with the increased prices and so on. Getting into that situation helps nobody.

Absolutely. There are obviously a lot of folk on here who don't remember/know about the 1970s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 May 2022 ==

And we have been there before, in the 1970s. How do you break out of it, less easy. One solution (that I am NOT advocating) is high unemployment. As to other solutions, we tried wage and price control, but that was just like holding the pressure in, and when it was released we were no better off. Ulitimately there needs to be an adjustment in living standards, the question is how to protect the vulnerable, but everyone says "yes fine, but not me of course". Politics aside, it dosen't matter who the chancellor is or from which party, its going to be a balancing act.

Spot on. Heavily subsidised industries are really not in a good position to demand that they are an exception. Particularly when some of their TUs have been brutal with their tactics to get ahead and are consequently cordially loathed by a large part of the UK population who would welcome them being tamed - see the NUM....

 

[43066]

.... and you really think that it is different anywhere else in the G7? The G20?

People in this country seem to delight in curtain twitching and indulging in petty jealousy towards those who earn a few grand more than they do, though. When the chancellor (who is on the rich list) urges us all to not ask for pay increases because it will worsen inflation and the the Daily Mail encourages everyone to turn on each other… The U.K. is becoming a truly vile place.

It works well for the political class I suppose.

 

[Wolfie]

You can thank John Major and his conservative government for this. Before the railways started preparing for privatisation, most staff were on similar terms and conditions. But privatisation resulted in many, many different variations of many different terms and conditions as each company did its own thing. Which has been made worse by the loosing of contracts/franchises or as different staff have been moved between companies.

Even the management get confused…


The stated date range starts on 7th June. However, it’s likely that the companies will agree to further talks, so it depends on if there is any movement from the companies (and the government).

Re your first para absolutely. Be careful what you wish for though. Thatcher did similar things in the Civil Service. These are slowly being reversed, always but always by adopting the lowest common denominator T&C's.

 

[43066]

see the NUM....

The railways are not the mines: we won’t be closing down anytime soon .

 

[Wolfie]

People in this country seem to delight in curtain twitching and indulging in petty jealousy towards those who earn a few grand more than they do, though. When the chancellor (who is on the rich list) urges us all to not ask for pay increases because it will worsen inflation and the the Daily Mail encourages everyone to turn on each other… The U.K. is becoming a truly vile place.

It works well for the political class I suppose.

To you your post seems reasonable. To others it might well smack of "I'm alright Jack....."

 

[43066]

To you your post seems reasonable. To others it might well smack of "I'm alright Jack....."

I couldn’t care less because the opinions of others (especially those on here who are hardly representative and seem to think earning £50k+ makes you wealthy to premiership footballer levels) don’t fill my bank account every month.

I’m out for myself, as we all are when we get down to the brass tacks. No shame in that! If there’s a fight, it’ll be a bloody one.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The railways are not the mines: we won’t be closing down anytime soon .

Bar possibly a few branch lines (e.g. the Parliamentary ones) no, they indeed won't, but the "nuclear option" in the case of the railway that is comparable with the miners is "right, DOO it is" and wait for traincrew to be unable to afford to strike any longer.

Booking offices will be easier to close - yes, there'd be strikes, but hardly anybody would notice because hardly any tickets are sold that way now. They could even just close them with immediate effect and put the staff on gardening leave for the consultation period plus notice.

 

[Wolfie]

I couldn’t care less because the opinions of others (especially those on here who are hardly representative and seem to think earning £50k+ makes you wealthy to premiership footballer levels) don’t fill my bank account every month.

I’m out for myself, as we all are when we get down to the brass tacks. No shame in that! If there’s a fight, it’ll be a bloody one.

I hope that there isn't but agree with your last sentence if there is.

Your opponent being able to legislate to literally change the rules any time that they wish to means that any fight is hardly fair though. The lack of popularity of rail unions means that they'd get precious little support in opposing that

 

[43066]

I hope that there isn't but agree with your last sentence if there is. Your opponent being able to legislate to literally change the rules any time that they wish to means that any fight is hardly fair though.

I hope there isn’t either.

I also fervently hope the RMT don’t royalty screw it up for the rest of us by doing their usual thing of being overly belligerent and provoking a reaction that leads to the well being utterly poisoned. I doubt Johnson has the stomach for it but I’d rather not test it when, as you yourself have rightly said, he’s casting around for distractions.

Bar possibly a few branch lines (e.g. the Parliamentary ones) no, they indeed won't, but the "nuclear option" in the case of the railway that is comparable with the miners is "right, DOO it is" and wait for traincrew to be unable to afford to strike any longer.

They’ll simply buy ASLEF off for it. Everyone has their price….

 

[Goldfish62]

I couldn’t care less because the opinions of others (especially those on here who are hardly representative and seem to think earning £50k+ makes you wealthy to premiership footballer levels) don’t fill my bank account every month.

I’m out for myself, as we all are when we get down to the brass tacks. No shame in that! If there’s a fight, it’ll be a bloody one.

You should join the Tory party, if you're not already in it! You're espousing their values exactly.

 

[Wolfie]

You should join the Tory party, if you're not already in it! You're espousing their values exactly.

Ouch.....

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You should join the Tory party, if you're not already in it! You're espousing their values exactly.

Is there anything in the website rules that say contributors cannot be a member of the Conservative Party or even the Tory Party or the Whig Party for that matter.

 

[142blue]

I hope Northern rail don't strike when I start my conductor training with them in a fortnights time. Don't fancy driving to Leeds in rush hr traffic and paying for parking - Im excited about using my free rail pass for those 8 weeks

Chances are your trainer will have to go out and work trains or dispatch on strike days

 

[dk1]

Chances are your trainer will have to go out and work trains or dispatch on strike days

Yes I thought that. Any trainees will just have a ‘horsey’ day & stay at home I would imagine. They won’t expect you to struggle in.

 

[mike57]

I couldn’t care less because the opinions of others (especially those on here who are hardly representative and seem to think earning £50k+ makes you wealthy to premiership footballer levels) don’t fill my bank account every month.

I’m out for myself, as we all are when we get down to the brass tacks. No shame in that! If there’s a fight, it’ll be a bloody one.

Ulitimately everyone has to make the decisions that they feel will bring the best results for themselves and family, nothing wrong in that. However taking on an elected government with the idea of promoting a very narrow interest group (NUM, 1970's) whilst maybe successful in the short term will store up resentment at the highest levels which will be paid back in time, the whole miners showdown was planned at least 12 months in advance by Mrs Thatcher, with the idea of 'finishing off' the NUM once and for all, and because generally outside mining areas they were seen as at best dinosaurs, or at worst a force 'trying to bring the government down' public sympathy was limited.

So my view, a 'fight to the death' whilst it may eventually result in some paper gains, will also result in a smaller rail industry, from which it may never recover.

My advice: A well organised public media campaign exposing waste and unfair or archaic practices as well as highlighting the need to atract the right people with good pay and conditions for very safety significant work might do more good, get public acceptance of the need for change and improvements and half the battle is won, without a days pay lost, or a single customer inconvenienced. Also ditch any political overtones, its not Tory or Labour or LibDem, if you carry a party label you have immediately lost support from possibly half the population. I can understand the frustrations of dealing with 'puppet' TOCs where the DfT are pulling the strings because the TOCs are not able to negotiate properly because they are looking over their shoulder, so perhaps the best tactic is to try and break up the current structure.

 

[Gems]

The only way to break the wage/price inflationary spiral is increased productivity. That is something the UK is pretty miserable at achieving. Many of you clearly have no idea of life in the 70s and 80s other than what your mother's have told you.

 

[mike57]

Many of you clearly have no idea of life in the 70s and 80s other than what your mother's have told you.

I agree, I started work in 1973, rail strikes, miners strike, 3 day week, power cuts, probably the most difficult period in the UK since WW2. Then more strikes in the late 70s, a change of government and the miners strike. Interest rates north of 10% for a good bit of the period and the same with inflation. Hopefully the current inflation is a spike caused by outside factors, but heaven forbid we find ourselves in a 1973 type situation again

 

[RPI]

Maybe I'm being cynical, but my gut feeling is the government won't give us a penny in pay rises unless they get something back, ie increased productivity.

I can see it plain as day, they'll weather the strikes/work to rule then filter down restructuring in order to bring in wholescale DCO and closure of ticket offices, by which point the RMT will gladly accept it all and try to claim victory by saying that they campaigned and won a pay increase.

On a personal level I'm feeling the pinch but I'm lucky enough at present to have an open book for overtime, so a couple of worked rest days a month goes a long way, the government could get a nice easy win with guards and possibly revenue staff by just offering to pay those grades per ticket scan, instantly increased productivity and an increase in pay.

As ever the RMT aren't being clever enough and seem to be walking straight into a trap.

 

[Annetts key]

You can thank John Major and his conservative government for this. Before the railways started preparing for privatisation, most staff were on similar terms and conditions. But privatisation resulted in many, many different variations of many different terms and conditions as each company did its own thing. Which has been made worse by the loosing of contracts/franchises or as different staff have been moved between companies.

Even the management get confused…


The stated date range starts on 7th June. However, it’s likely that the companies will agree to further talks, so it depends on if there is any movement from the companies (and the government).

Re your first para absolutely. Be careful what you wish for though.

I’m not wishing for anything on a personal level. I was just saying how it is. I am well aware that if/when any changes to the T&C are proposed, they are very much likely to be worse. I know this because that is exactly what Network Rail is talking about.

 

[Philip]

Sundays inside will almost certainly become 100% the norm due to aspects such as this; its more how quickly it will happen rather than waiting for everyone in an "old" link to retire!

The question though is whether there will be an opt-out scheme in exchange for a lower salary. As well as the 'day of rest' element, Sunday is still a day of religious observation for many and so there is this aspect to consider before forcing people to work their Sundays when previously they didn't have to - or if Sunday working was optional when they first applied for the job.

 

[Falcon1200]

A question for those opposed to rail staff taking part in strike action over pay . What if any payrise do you think rail staff should be getting then ?

How does 3% sound ? The same as my pension increase which, although welcome, still leaves me, from this April, £80 worse off every month from energy and Council Tax bills alone, before anything else has been paid for. Rail staff should definitely get an increase and IMHO 5% say would be reasonable, given that people working are likely to have more outgoings than me. But to demand 9 or 10% is unrealistic.

So why do you expect people to accept below inflation pay increases (or in many cases pay freezes) when inflation is running at 9%?

Because pay rises have to paid for by someone and as yet no-one AFAIK has said where the cash to give rail staff 10% would come from, and because inflation-busting pay rises simply fuel even more inflation.

 

[nedchester]

Maybe I'm being cynical, but my gut feeling is the government won't give us a penny in pay rises unless they get something back, ie increased productivity.

I can see it plain as day, they'll weather the strikes/work to rule then filter down restructuring in order to bring in wholescale DCO and closure of ticket offices, by which point the RMT will gladly accept it all and try to claim victory by saying that they campaigned and won a pay increase.

On a personal level I'm feeling the pinch but I'm lucky enough at present to have an open book for overtime, so a couple of worked rest days a month goes a long way, the government could get a nice easy win with guards and possibly revenue staff by just offering to pay those grades per ticket scan, instantly increased productivity and an increase in pay.

As ever the RMT aren't being clever enough and seem to be walking straight into a trap.

This is something I said weeks ago and I do noticed that some on here are seeing what could well happen.

There is no doubt there needs to be changes in working practices on the railway and how the railway is structured across the board (not just within front line staff).

How this is achieved is going to be a massive challenge for all sides.

 

[baz962]

How does 3% sound ? The same as my pension increase which, although welcome, still leaves me, from this April, £80 worse off every month from energy and Council Tax bills alone, before anything else has been paid for. Rail staff should definitely get an increase and IMHO 5% say would be reasonable, given that people working are likely to have more outgoings than me. But to demand 9 or 10% is unrealistic.



Because pay rises have to paid for by someone and as yet no-one AFAIK has said where the cash to give rail staff 10% would come from, and because inflation-busting pay rises simply fuel even more inflation.

I would be happy with 3% . Plus the% they still haven't given me for last year. It's a deal.

 

[whoosh]

Questions to help me "make up my mind":

1. Am I right in thinking that (insert railway job e.g. driver, site manager, guard, signaller, planner etc) salary/benefit packages have gone up enormously adjusted for inflation until Covid hit in 2019 since:
   a. 1980?
   b. 1990?
   c. 1995?
   d. 2000?
   e. 2005?
   d. 2010?
   f. 2015?
2. If they stayed stagnant for a couple of years even with 10% inflation would the above still be the case?
3. Has there been some substantial difference in the basic difficulty of the role since then? And if so what?
4. Is it difficult to recruit for the role?
5. How many are leaving for pastures new?
6. How does the pay compare against similar roles internationally?
7. How does the pay compare against jobs of similar complexity and responsibility locally?
8. Most crucial question - how do the above questions compare to answers for other government employees such as nurses, teachers, etc

It is my understanding that the answers to the above questions are ones such that the only sensible objective response to a national rail strike by government is "bring it on" and "fire and rehire" but I equally acknowledge my understanding may be totally screwed so would be interested in what the correct answers are.

I think you may be making the common mistake of only looking at the "salary/benefits" but not looking at what improvements to productivity have taken place in order to achieve them.

Click on this link where my post explains an example, that you wouldn't be aware of because even the so-called experts never mention it.

Is Labour's Railway White Paper good government policy?

Well it's a useful fiction to compare to reality as it unfolds in the new Brexit/Covid-19 world of the future. I guess it is the result of a lot of work by left-leaning think tanks and academics, with a layer of unionism on top. It's also more detail than I ever remember Labour (or any political...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[northwichcat]

Like I said once, which I deem sufficient, you could have done all that before the recent hike in inflation. Indeed, many people do precisely that, and have done for years. I don't know why you keep repeating yourself, what you're saying doesn't become any more relevant just because you post it repeatedly. Do you think people aren't aware of it, and haven't been for many years? There's a whole industry based around switching people onto lower-cost energy/tv/phone/broadband plans, and it's been going for at least a decade. Even those sodding meerkats are at it in tv adverts over car insurance...

I wouldn't need to explain the same thing again if some people actually read posts before they reacted by clicking reply and then saying they disagree.

Case in point:

Doing a hospital shift changeover at 2am has to be the most bizarre arguments yet advanced in favour of the four day week.

I did not say it was a good or bad thing. I was referring to a system that has been in place for many years, in response to a post saying a 4 day week could decrease productivity. I was never even arguing in favour of a 4 day week in the first place. My argument was a 40 hour week doesn't always see more work get done than a 37.5 hour week, as people get tired and make mistakes, meaning workers don't always achieve more productivity, despite (on paper) having 2.5 hours more to work.

 

[Falcon1200]

You’re probably right about DOO, sadly, I’m sure we’re going to see more disputes popping up over it. Personally I think the way to save costs would be to merge companies and cut down on middle and higher management positions. Go back to something like BR’s sectorisation.

Although the railway organisation which first introduced DOO, in order to save costs, was..... BR !

Twelve hour shifts are not healthy, even if it does mean an extra rest day per week. Eight hours is a sensible length of working day to get proper levels of concentration.

IMHO a reasonable compromise, which applied where I worked, is 8 hour shifts Monday to Friday and 12 hour shifts on Saturdays and Sundays, giving us more weekends off. But I certainly would not have wanted to work 12 hours every shift !

 

[Dai Corner]

I did not say it was a good or bad thing. I was referring to a system that has been in place for many years, in response to a post saying a 4 day week could decrease productivity. I was never even arguing in favour of a 4 day week in the first place. My argument was a 40 hour week doesn't always see more work get done than a 37.5 hour week, as people get tired and make mistakes, meaning workers don't always achieve more productivity, despite (on paper) having 2.5 hours more to work.

Tell factory workers they can go home once they've made x widgets, office workers after they've completed y forms or bricklayers once they have completed y metres of wall and see how much harder they work.

 

[43066]

How does 3% sound ? The same as my pension increase which, although welcome, still leaves me, from this April, £80 worse off every month from energy and Council Tax bills alone, before anything else has been paid for. Rail staff should definitely get an increase and IMHO 5% say would be reasonable, given that people working are likely to have more outgoings than me. But to demand 9 or 10% is unrealistic.

So in other words anything much in excess of what you’ve personally received is “unrealistic”… Why is it realistic for people to have to accept a ten percent real terms pay cut?

There is no doubt there needs to be changes in working practices on the railway and how the railway is structured across the board (not just within front line staff).

There’s no doubt that’s a statement of opinion rather than fact.

 

[northwichcat]

office workers after they've completed y forms

Most office workers aren't employed as administrators. If you have a 'go home early if all your work is done' scheme it needs to be fair for all employees in all roles.

A considerable number of years ago, in my first week of work I learnt the employer didn't want something done quickly with 95% accuracy, they wanted it done with as close to 100% accuracy as possible, without spending an excessive amount of time triple checking everything.