In Network Rail, it is purely about changing the working arrangements for maintenance staff, and AIUI the dispute is now only about one part of that change. And that change is happening. And, incidentally, it simply brings maintenance staff onto the same arrangements as signallers.
Maintenance staff were restructured (including changes to terms and conditions) around the year 1999 after privatisation when they were employed by the private infrastructure companies. Then, after Network Rail took maintenance back in house, there were further changes to terms and conditions under the “2b/c” Network Rail Reorganisation agreement in 2010. Incidentally, a large number of experienced staff left as part of this reorganisation.
Since then, although Network Rail won’t admit it, some areas were cut too much. Hence over the last five years or so, the company has been consulting in brand new posts…
Already existing maintenance and CAPEX/Works Delivery staff (employed before the 2b/c agreement) can be rostered up to 28 weeks of midweek nights (Mondays to Thursdays) and up to 32 weekends (on or after 18:00 Fridays to Sundays) comprising of up to a maximum of 52 shifts.
And anyone who has had promotion or joined Network Rail since 31st March 2014 can be rostered up to 39 weeks of midweek nights (Mondays to Thursdays) and up to 39 weekends (on or after 18:00 Fridays to Sundays) comprising of up to a maximum of 65 shifts.
Some of what Network Rail want is changes to existing terms and conditions. However they describe these as working practices. Changing the definition of what a week of nights is, is not working practices. Bringing in a new term that allows a manager to change the start or finish time of any shift by up to two hours, with only a minimum of 48 hours notice is not working practices.
Yes, they also want various changes to working practices as well. They want maximum flexibility at no increased cost to the railway. In other words, they want their cake, with sprinkles on to top and to eat it. Their original list reads like a managers wish list.
Who in their right mind wants to sign up to even more nights, plus all the other changes that Network Rail want, all with no significant pay rise? Why do you think hundreds of staff are leaving the industry? Why do you think so many want to leave under the VSS scheme?
I’ll let you into a (very poorly kept) secret. It’s because an ever increasing number of the workforce now hate working for Network Rail.
In some depots there is now not enough staff to run the shift pattern. So the company are offering overtime like it’s going out of fashion and, or hiring in labour only contractors.
Apprentices often don’t stay in shift jobs very long now. They just use them as stepping stones.
If you want a well maintained and reliable railway, you need fully trained and experienced employees who know what they are doing.
nor is it about pay, if you believe the reps. (and many comments on this thread).
Of course some of this is about pay. Most railway employees have not had a pay rise for three years. Meanwhile the cost of living is increasing every week.
When you explain this to people outside maintenance, they are quite clear that they don’t understand why the RMT is in dispute. Many in maintenance don’t either. However the union tells them to vote a certain way, so they do.
Each member decides for themselves which way they vote. Just like in a general election, or indeed any other election or vote in a free and democratic country. With all due respect, you sometimes sound like you are bitter about the vast majority of RMT members being able to vote freely.
Sadly the railways have not gradually modernised their terms & conditions over the last 50 years.
For example then Sunday was a 'rest day', fewer people worked or travelled on it. Now it must be in the top 3 for passenger numbers.
Passengers deserve the same level of Sunday service from 10am as a weekday.
British Railways restructured the signal and telecommunications engineering department in 1992. As part of this, it was possible for staff to be rostered on Sundays as part of the normal working week. Since then, many, many other parts of the railways have changed terms and conditions through negotiations with the relevant unions. So maybe you should ask someone who knows rather than peddling fiction.
Sundays are unlikely to ever have the same level of service as a week day. Firstly due to engineering works. But also because there is a fraction of the level of commuting.
I'm sure we've had this discussion before, but giving everyone an inflationary payrise will only fuel further inflation.
A high rate of inflation is the economy's way of signalling that people need to cut back. It's a hard pill to swallow but that's the reality.
No one person, or group of people, in the UK caused the current high levels of inflation - it is a global issue.
But just because you haven't caused it and it's unfair, doesn't mean that you can be insulated from it.
There are many people who deserve an inflationary payrise, arguably everyone. But that doesn't mean that you can simply give everyone an inflationary payrise.
So if pay rises are always inflationary, why have the government not passed a law preventing anyone from getting a pay rise?
Inflation can be caused by many things, and indeed is an inevitable consequence of our economic system. In the vast majority of cases, employees wage rises play catch-up to already existing inflationary causes. Increasing interest rates is not the only tool that countries can use to try to control inflation. But monetary policy is a topic for another thread.