RMT Extends Strike Action on Network Rail to Dec 24-27

[XIX7007177]

They are one of the tocs that have just got a new strike mandate. They are being offered 6.5%

Interesting. Any strings attached?

 

[baz962]

Interesting. Any strings attached?

There were though minimal. I heard yesterday that the strings have been removed and they only affected one depot anyhow. They have to go to digital payslips as they get paper currently. Also the west Anglia have a different pay date to classic and the company wants one date for all.

 

[HSTEd]

What do people think the final resolution will be in regards to the TOCs dispute?

I expect it will probably be more likely to get a larger pay rise than an abandonment of the demand for DOO.

DOO is such a huge prize that the government will pay more in cash now to get it - after all it would be pretty much the last renegotiation with RMT-backed guards ever.

There would be a flood of DOO schemes in the pipeline and that would be that.
Not sure about compulsory redundancies - in all likelihood that is also worth far less than DOO, so that would probably get jettisoned.

But I don't see the government giving up the DOO requirement, ever.

How long do they have to go before they can impose the agreement?

 

[Bantamzen]

To those who suggest that wages should not rise with inflation because it might lead to a wage inflation spiral, the RPI figure has been used as a benchmark for pay negotiations for years.
That was deemed acceptable during many of the privatised years pre-covid and when inflation was running below 2 percent etc.
The minimum wage had targets to go up above inflation particularly during the Cameron years.

Why did this all not lead to a permanent wage inflation spiral going up and up every year leading up to before Covid? Because wages chase inflation not the other way around.
Any other conclusion would mean workers in society must get poorer and poorer year on year in real terms until either something drastic changes or we reach the minimum wage and then just track that.

Actually in more recent times some negotiations have been based on CPI.

But regardless you've kind of answered your own question. The RPI/CPI rate is not a fixed line in the sand when pay rises are negotiated / agreed, although they are often the starting point for the unions. But it doesn't guarantee that these will relate to a pay rise. Other factors such as the rate of inflation, allocated budgets, profit margins, productivity etc will come into play. And in 2022 they are all doing so for most of the public sector, and some parts of the private. For example my department has been given a fixed increase in next year's budget, and its nothing like the rate of inflation. So if they are to agree a 10% rate, savings will have to be found elsewhere. In some years this might be achievable, but in 2022 in the midst of rampant inflation, soaring energy prices, and a hole in the budget bigger than the Titanic's its clear to a lot of us that an inflation matching pay rise is all but a pipe dream, even though by a slim margin the membership has voted to strike.

This is also why the DfT are dragging their heels with the rail union demands. A 10% pay rise across the public sector & publicly funded private industry is going to cost a lot, and will lead the government to dig for deeper cuts and more returns (read tax).

 

[Towers]

But I was replying to a poster who was referring to the class 80X fleet, ie Hitachi IET, all my replies clearly state 80X fleet.

The driver does not have to go on to TMS to open doors when they are operating the trains.

The only exception is I’m out of course situations, ie a Azuma may be stopped in platform at Biggleswade during disruption, as the TMS won’t have the train calling there, driver has to manually select the station in TmS select which doors to release, then release doors in the normal way, where as if when setting up tms at start of journey Biggleswade was included as a call, they wouldn’t need to go onto tms, they would just release doors.

I'm happy to be corrected, but my understanding is that on the GWR fleet - which is easily the most complex operation of 80x trains - upon arrival the train identifies the station, however it then necessary for the driver to confirm this and select which platform the train is standing in, to ensure that any SDO operates correctly. So, very much a need to touch the TMS!

 

[Bletchleyite]

5%+5%

Close booking offices, but protection against redundancy until 2025. No change to other working terms and conditions. This myth of needing to improve productivity, but only on the railway, for any chance of deserving a pay rise needs to be put in the bin asap.

That’ll be close to as good as it’s going to get.

That's near enough what has been accepted in Scotland and Wales (minus the booking office thing, but it's inevitable anyway and the RMT know that) so I'd expect it to be accepted in England too.

Indeed I wonder if the offer as-is would have at least been put to a vote if the Government hadn't poisoned it last minute with DOO. That's a battle for another day once they've decided what operating method they actually want - no point having a fight about single-manned trains if you're going to keep a safety trained second member of staff who just isn't doing the doors.

 

[800001]

I'm happy to be corrected, but my understanding is that on the GWR fleet - which is easily the most complex operation of 80x trains - upon arrival the train identifies the station, however it then necessary for the driver to confirm this and select which platform the train is standing in, to ensure that any SDO operates correctly. So, very much a need to touch the TMS!

Why is it the most complex of the 80x trains? What is so different from all the others variations?

And if your example above is true, then that poor of Gwr when track balises at the stations would allow the drivers just to press ‘door release’ like LNER has at all stations and platforms they call at.

That is the TMS job. The Headcode they input knows where the train is calling, goes over the balises, tells the train it is at Peterborough plat 4 for example, TMS knows all doors can be released and so driver is able to just press door release.

If gwr drivers have to do as you say at each station they call, then it’s seems to me they are not using the trains TMS to its full advantage, and are wasting vital time at each station.

 

[Wychwood93]

Why is it the most complex of the 80x trains? What is so different from all the others variations?

And if your example above is true, then that poor of Gwr when track balises at the stations would allow the drivers just to press ‘door release’ like LNER has at all stations and platforms they call at.

That is the TMS job. The Headcode they input knows where the train is calling, goes over the balises, tells the train it is at Peterborough plat 4 for example, TMS knows all doors can be released and so driver is able to just press door release.

If gwr drivers have to do as you say at each station they call, then it’s seems to me they are not using the trains TMS to its full advantage, and are wasting vital time at each station.

My own experience of GWR door release would indicate that less than 5 seconds is normal. Quite how some of this relates to the post in general is a bit of a mystery.

 

[800001]

My own experience of GWR door release would indicate that less than 5 seconds is normal. Quite how some of this relates to the post in general is a bit of a mystery.

Same! I’ve had doors releases the minute the train stops, which if doing what poster implies would mean them fiddling with TMs which is on right hand side of cab, whilst train is potentially approaching a red signal, which to be would be right when driver should 100% be concentrating on driving.

Happy to be proved wrong, any GWR drivers on here?

 

[43066]

But I was replying to a poster who was referring to the class 80X fleet, ie Hitachi IET, all my replies clearly state 80X fleet.

Sorry missed the context there.

This is also why the DfT are dragging their heels with the rail union demands.

The size of the offer isn’t the issue here. They’re dragging their heels because they want to try and get a wish list of demands through. Hence the pages and pages of discussion of the finer points of DOO etc.

They probably also want headline friendly news stories about unions/rail staff to distract from their own mess, but that’s a distant second.

 

[class ep-09]

Same! I’ve had doors releases the minute the train stops, which if doing what poster implies would mean them fiddling with TMs which is on right hand side of cab, whilst train is potentially approaching a red signal, which to be would be right when driver should 100% be concentrating on driving.

Happy to be proved wrong, any GWR drivers on here?

Most of GWR stations have no balises and TMS / train “knows” , where it is through GPS .
At vast majority of stations driver does not need to fiddle with TMS at all .

There are some stations ,where input in to TMS is required due to different platform lengths for different train formations .

There also few stations that TMS requires confirmation “ where “ it is due to GPS signal being weak or not correctly calibrated with train position (? - that’s my guess ).

The 5sec delay that was mentioned before doors are released may be due to defensive driving , when driver takes his / hers time to make sure that correct doors are released at correct side , at correct station .
Of course coming to stand against red signal requires also setting DRA , applying full brakes , setting neutral on directional controller etc .

 

[Thirteen]

There were though minimal. I heard yesterday that the strings have been removed and they only affected one depot anyhow. They have to go to digital payslips as they get paper currently. Also the west Anglia have a different pay date to classic and the company wants one date for all.

I'm surprised paper payslips are still a thing, I haven't had one in years. Changing the paydate to be the same across the board seem fair enough and easier to manage from a payroll perpective.

 

[pt_mad]

I expect it will probably be more likely to get a larger pay rise than an abandonment of the demand for DOO.

DOO is such a huge prize that the government will pay more in cash now to get it - after all it would be pretty much the last renegotiation with RMT-backed guards ever.

That above being the case, imo an offer in that case would never be accepted by RMT members. The bulk of them on the TOC side I believe are guards. Couldn't even imagine them agreeing to unlimited DOO rollout even if the rise was say 30 percent. Once any requirement for the absolute necessity for their safety competence has gone, the whole landscape changes. Further restructuring could come including for example job loses, further regrading, or even worse terms where industrial action would have a minimal effect. I would imagine most guards know that their main value is their safety critical requirement as it stands.

Actually in more recent times some negotiations have been based on CPI.

This is also why the DfT are dragging their heels with the rail union demands. A 10% pay rise across the public sector & publicly funded private industry is going to cost a lot, and will lead the government to dig for deeper cuts and more returns (read tax).

They appear to already have offered 4 + 4% and 5 + 4%(if that's the correct way around) in the two offers. Even if that was accepted, that's likely to be the minimum the rest of the public sector would go on to expect. After all, if it was accepted, any reduction in T&C's would likely be well off the news agenda from then on. The rest of the public sector would simply say the railways were given x so we want it too, otherwise it's double standards.

Indeed I wonder if the offer as-is would have at least been put to a vote if the Government hadn't poisoned it last minute with DOO. That's a battle for another day once they've decided what operating method they actually want - no point having a fight about single-manned trains if you're going to keep a safety trained second member of staff who just isn't doing the doors.

Mick Lynch already said in circulars early on in the dispute that the RMT would never agree to a lot of that. His strike mandate was based in no detrimental changes to terms and conditions unless by agreement. His members are obviously going to expect them to hold their word. Straight out agreeing to the widespread closure of booking offices is hardly going to keep their station membership content for the future.

Even the stuff about new annual leave and sick pay arrangements, flexible working contracts, working and rosters, new attendance management scheme. Who is going to accept what could be any number of detrimental changes regarding those things, with the caveat at the top of the deal that if accepted, 'That all Workforce Changes are accepted without reservation or industrial action'.

What use would local collective bargaining later in the process even have, if the deal was signed based on the first point That all Workforce Changes are accepted without reservation or industrial action?

 

[ComUtoR]

What is the current percentage of current applicants who fall into that stated capacity?

The initial sift is anybody's guess but we have around 3k applicants and that will get whittled down to around 100 and those will get sent to the next stage.

Between 85-90% fail the psychometric testing with a few more that fail the structured interview.

Of those that pass, they still need to get through a DMI (driver manager interview) and to put those numbers in perspective, we had 8 interviews recently at my depot and only 2 passed. Two people cancelled.

Our recent courses up the training school (classes around 8). Lost 2

And our latest Trainee Driver also failed their final assessment. They weren't the only one at my TOC either.

Granted this is for Driver recruitment but it's similar for other operational grades. The failure rate is obscene and the entire application process is quite ruthless.

We only do around 12 rules courses a year so those who constantly quote how the railway is overflowing with applicants really do need to think success rates and proper manpower planning.

 

[Bantamzen]

Sorry missed the context there.



The size of the offer isn’t the issue here. They’re dragging their heels because they want to try and get a wish list of demands through. Hence the pages and pages of discussion of the finer points of DOO etc.

They probably also want headline friendly news stories about unions/rail staff to distract from their own mess, but that’s a distant second.

Maybe not in actual pounds and pence, but if the government are involved in funding then all over sectors also funded by them will also want the same, as is happening. So now the actual cost is a lot more. It is all ideological and political, as we know. But that's the you-kmow-what-show that is the publicly funded world.

They appear to already have offered 4 + 4% and 5 + 4%(if that's the correct way around) in the two offers. Even if that was accepted, that's likely to be the minimum the rest of the public sector would go on to expect. After all, if it was accepted, any reduction in T&C's would likely be well off the news agenda from then on. The rest of the public sector would simply say the railways were given x so we want it too, otherwise it's double standards.

Exactly, give one part of the playground jam, everyone else will want jam and more.

 

[pt_mad]

Exactly, give one part of the playground jam, everyone else will want jam and more.

But they've offered it now. They can't roll back on having done that. The rest of the public sector will be watching and noting that those percentages have been offered as an opening.
So if the strategy was not to show their hand on money at all because there is none and everyone else will want some, then they already appear to have failed.

In essence, now they've shown what can be funded, they may as well drop all the changes to terms and offer the deal as a settler to end the dispute quickly. Many have already concluded that any savings would be well down the line with the exception of the ticket offices, if full co-operation was received and the right people wanted to go voluntarily. If the deal wasn't agreed and action went on, the savings would become less and less obviously.

 

[Philip]

I expect it will probably be more likely to get a larger pay rise than an abandonment of the demand for DOO.

DOO is such a huge prize that the government will pay more in cash now to get it - after all it would be pretty much the last renegotiation with RMT-backed guards ever.

There would be a flood of DOO schemes in the pipeline and that would be that.
Not sure about compulsory redundancies - in all likelihood that is also worth far less than DOO, so that would probably get jettisoned.

But I don't see the government giving up the DOO requirement, ever.

How long do they have to go before they can impose the agreement?

Why are the government so keen to push DOO through though? If they guarantee no compulsory redundancies then they aren't really saving that much money if the guard was to remain on the train but without operating the doors.

 

[Bantamzen]

But they've offered it now. They can't roll back on having done that. The rest of the public sector will be watching and noting that those percentages have been offered as an opening.
So if the strategy was not to show their hand on money at all because there is none and everyone else will want some, then they already appear to have failed.

It is very rare that all parts of the public sector get the same, unless its sod all of course. So yes they've shown their hand, but that is no guarantee that 5+5 is going to be widespread. They may even use it to as a reason to offer less elsewhere, "sorry but we gave all the money to the other union".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why are the government so keen to push DOO through though? If they guarantee no compulsory redundancies then they aren't really saving that much money if the guard was to remain on the train but without operating the doors.

Because if the second person was a non-mandatory OBS, then they'd have no leverage at all if they striked as the trains would still run, just without them. This is all about breaking the Unions, not saving money, particularly now I know it came from the Government and not the TOCs.

I don't think Merseyrail guards wanted to obsessively tap a keyfob for the enjoyment of it, interrupting their reading of the Daily Mirror (though no doubt some do genuinely get enjoyment from the physical control of the train that provides). That was all about making sure they still had that leverage and couldn't just be quietly laid off later.

 

[pt_mad]

It is very rare that all parts of the public sector get the same, unless its sod all of course. So yes they've shown their hand, but that is no guarantee that 5+5 is going to be widespread. They may even use it to as a reason to offer less elsewhere, "sorry but we gave all the money to the other union".

They're hardly going to be able to tell the NHS staff it's 3% or whatever now are they?
They (govt) appear to have spent months avoiding the discussion with the suggestion of union barons, presumably so that other industries don't see fair rises and follow suit. So they've taken 7 months to come up with a percentage and show their desired new terms, which has done nothing but inconvenience the public in the mean time.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Dec 2022 ==

Why are the government so keen to push DOO through though? If they guarantee no compulsory redundancies then they aren't really saving that much money if the guard was to remain on the train but without operating the doors.

But the guarantee offered only lasts until April 2024. So a year and 4 months if that. How quick will that time pass, and then in theory I presume there would be no absolute requirement to keep the guard, where train stock allows DOO and has an agreement with drivers.

 

[Bantamzen]

They're hardly going to be able to tell the NHS staff it's 3% or whatever now are they?
They (govt) appear to have spent months avoiding the discussion with the suggestion of union barons, presumably so that other industries don't see fair rises and follow suit. So they've taken 7 months to come up with a percentage and show their desired new terms, which has done nothing but inconvenience the public in the mean time.

You'd be surprised. If part of their agenda was to have a swing at the unions, what better way to do so than setting one against another? And remember they are preparing more anti-union laws as we speak. Guess what they'll use as justification for any they try to get through?

 

[HSTEd]

Why are the government so keen to push DOO through though? If they guarantee no compulsory redundancies then they aren't really saving that much money if the guard was to remain on the train but without operating the doors.

Attrition, especially with repeated rounds of voluntary redundancies, would rapidly reduce headcount - especially as very few, if any, new OBS would be recruited.

Especially as the staff would have very little leverage to disrupt the service by striking. Staff morale would likely be rock bottom after they lost their primary raison d'etre.

Compulsory redundancies are unlikely to be required.

 

[pt_mad]

You'd be surprised. If part of their agenda was to have a swing at the unions, what better way to do so than setting one against another? And remember they are preparing more anti-union laws as we speak. Guess what they'll use as justification for any they try to get through?

I don't think members of other unions would fall for a strategy like that. Nearly all members of a union I believe want better terms, conditions and pay for all workers in society. They'd simply blame the government further. We should credit them more than thinking they might start to blame the railway workers for their lack of a cost of living pay rise.

 

[Bantamzen]

I don't think members of other unions would fall for a strategy like that. Nearly all members of a union I believe want better terms, conditions and pay for all workers in society. They'd simply blame the government further. We should credit them more than thinking they might start to blame the railway workers for their lack of a cost of living pay rise.

Well they do, I've seen it happen. People are people, and people get jealous of what other people have I'm afraid.

 

[pt_mad]

Well they do, I've seen it happen. People are people, and people get jealous of what other people have I'm afraid.

And that captures the theme of the dispute with regards to what appeared to be a minority of low paid workers at the start who argued that they had had a poor rise. I think we will all probably admit that the proportion of people with that opinion has declined massively since the dispute started, the action spread to other industries, and the government kept messing up and appearing to be hypocritical.

It has suited much of the media to push this line, turn worker against worker in the name of their associated major corporations. If low paid workers developed too much of a voice in society, they might have to pay them what they need to meet the cost of living and their profits, dividends and director wages might be affected. Instead they'd rather some people stick to universal credit top ups, visit food banks or just plain struggle and be cold.

 

[CFRAIL]

5%+5%

Close booking offices, but protection against redundancy until 2025. No change to other working terms and conditions. This myth of needing to improve productivity, but only on the railway, for any chance of deserving a pay rise needs to be put in the bin asap.

That’ll be close to as good as it’s going to get.

I think this may be the "final" offer. When can wr expect it to be made?

On a separate note (and at risk of going off topic), could the railway look to introduce cheaper T&C's for new entrants? Surely this would deliver significant savings?

 

[Thirteen]

And that captures the theme of the dispute with regards to what appeared to be a minority of low paid workers at the start who argued that they had had a poor rise. I think we will all probably admit that the proportion of people with that opinion has declined massively since the dispute started, the action spread to other industries, and the government kept messing up and appearing to be hypocritical.

It has suited much of the media to push this line, turn worker against worker in the name of their associated major corporations. If low paid workers developed too much of a voice in society, they might have to pay then what they need to meet the cost of living and their profits, dividends and director wages night be affected.

I know some union leaders have called for a general strike or more co-ordinated action but I do think there is a risk that they could fall foul of the law if that were to happen because the various companies could say that they were taking solitary action even if they weren't.

 

[dk1]

On a separate note (and at risk of going off topic), could the railway look to introduce cheaper T&C's for new entrants? Surely this would deliver significant savings?

That is a lot more difficult at most TOCs especially with drivers due to depot agreements. There are some exceptions but on the whole ASLEF would not tolerate it. Would be guaranteed to cause even more unrest.

 

[pt_mad]

Minimum wage rates for 2023

This letter and short report sets out the Low Pay Commission's recommendations on National Minimum Wage rates for April 2023.

www.gov.uk

�

Rate from April 2023	Annual increase (£)	Annual increase (per cent)
National Living Wage	£10.42	0.92	9.7

Not sure if the point has already been made that the minimum wage is to increase by 9.7% in April. Rose 6.6% in April 2022.

That's good news, but it doesn't back up the government's own arguement that if rises are anywhere near the rate in inflation, this will lead to a wage price inflation spiral.

Another factor would be that there are I believe for example some station staff (some working safety critical roles) that are on only a few more pounds or so than the new minimum wage (April 2023) per hour. These workers have obviously been edging ever closer to minimum wage all the time. Unless a rise in line with inflation was repeatedly given, for what is well skilled work requiring a good level of aptitude on often anti social shift patterns, they would eventually get closer and closer if that rate is to rise at the rate it currently is.

 

[800001]

Rmt have just tweeted, link included below:-

https://twitter.com/rmtunion/status/1600565455919398921?s=46&t=7LFgECq3GeqoEk3n6yu2zg