Network Rail makes new offer to the RMT union

[ar10642]

The effects of not paying your employees enough money is that they leave the industry. It costs considerably more to attract new staff and then have to train them up, especially if there is already a shortage of staff to carry out day to day operations, let alone instruct new staff. Plus, loss of experience reduces efficiency until the new staff gain enough experience.

I agree not paying enough causes people to leave, but we appear to have a government that only cares about reducing costs and does not appear to care very much if the service is not provided. I suspect they'll just cut services and increase fares until the numbers look how they want them to, and not care about the strikes at all, other than as a justification for bringing in anti strike measures or as a stick to attempt to beat Labour with.

 

[Confused52]

While we are on about inflation, as CPI and RPI are rates of change, rather than absolute values, can anyone give an example of the last time we had negative inflation in this country?

12 month inflation using RPI was negative in September (-1.4%) and October 2009, it was also just below 0 on CPI over 12 months.

 

[Watershed]

Not the private sector but Criminal Barristers were awarded a 15% rise back in September 2022 after prolonged strike action.

After having their pay cut in cash terms and then frozen for many years. They are still worse off with a 15% rise than they were before the 2008 financial crisis.

5+4% in the rail industry doesn't look quite so bad in that light...

a system which worked perfectly well before the Treasury started getting directly involved.

It only worked well insofar as it suited the staff quite well, and it was in the financial interest of the franchise operators to agree big pay increases, because they had no incentive to look at the wider impact of their pay deals across the industry.

That whole system no longer exists, and with the railway under public control again, any pay deal agreed on the railway sets a precedent for what other sectors can expect. The government is acting accordingly.

If the Treasury hadn't started getting involved, all TOCs would have gone bust and thousands of railway staff would have been made redundant. Biting the hand that feeds comes to mind...

 

[tony6499]

12 month inflation using RPI was negative in September (-1.4%) and October 2009, it was also just below 0 on CPI over 12 months.

And we got no pay rise for that year as IIRC it was the second year of a pay deal and it was inflation as the % of the rise. So we didn't get one, now with inflation the other way they won't pay up

 

[Annetts key]

It only worked well insofar as it suited the staff quite well, and it was in the financial interest of the franchise operators to agree big pay increases, because they had no incentive to look at the wider impact of their pay deals across the industry.

You are forgetting that the private maintenance contractors working for Railtrack and later, Network Rail also negotiated reasonable pay rises with the unions. And after (most of) the maintenance contracts were taken in house by Network Rail, this reasonable negotiation on pay continued. Right up until COVID19.

That whole system no longer exists, and with the railway under public control again, any pay deal agreed on the railway sets a precedent for what other sectors can expect. The government is acting accordingly.

So if the NHS nurses or indeed any other area of public service staff gets a reasonable pay offer, that’s what the railways can expect (with no detrimental changes to T&Cs)?

If the Treasury hadn't started getting involved, all TOCs would have gone bust and thousands of railway staff would have been made redundant. Biting the hand that feeds comes to mind...

Except that any of the TOCs you are talking about can withdraw from the franchise, so, no, the respective companies would not have gone bust. Instead the operator of last resort would have taken over the franchise. As has already happened multiple times before COVID19. And some would argue that this may have been less expensive than the current system…

 

[Trothy]

After having their pay cut in cash terms and then frozen for many years. They are still worse off with a 15% rise than they were before the 2008 financial crisis.

I agree, a shocking state of affairs. And I fully supported their action and am glad they got a resolution.

I should wait until my pay has been frozen for 15 years before I take action too I suppose?

I know I'm going to get a below inflation rise, but when we reject a pay deal, don't make changes to a non consolidated bonus awarded after decades of service and expect me to even really give it any serious consideration as a"new" deal.

 

[Facing Back]

Except that any of the TOCs you are talking about can withdraw from the franchise, so, no, the respective companies would not have gone bust. Instead the operator of last resort would have taken over the franchise. As has already happened multiple times before COVID19. And some would argue that this may have been less expensive than the current system…

The TOCs were no longer (or would very soon cease to be) going concerns. Whether the treasury funds the NRCs on the OLR is fairly moot, in either case the treasury is providing the funding which satisfies my definition of bust. Agreed that there was little realistic possibility of thousands of job losses as the treasury always were going to fund it - but without that funding, that is exactly what would have happened.

 

[6Gman]

I mean that’s about as relevant to anything that matters as union badges, really, which can be bought on eBay!

The fact something so utterly trifling has been brought into the negotiations is extraordinary, and is indeed perhaps a sign the government has sensed weakness, or at least dissension in the ranks.

Given the state of industrial relations on the railway currently I cannot imagine having a meal with management can have much appeal.

 

[Facing Back]

But that’s an argument for nobody ever getting a pay rise, and overlooks that the higher amount longer term is also reduced by inflation. The alternative is perpetually declining real incomes!

I suspect the point being made was a challenge to the statement that "settling would have been cheaper than the cost of the strikes" (I paraphrase). Impact of strikes is mostly a one off cost - 1 million people don't travel to work on Wednesday and therefore sandwich shops lose £5m in revenue for 1 day whereas the cost of a payrise is perpetual.

I know not all impacts are done and dusted in 1 day, but the bulk are short term - and the minister was not clear on duration when he made the comment (if I remember the committee correctly).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==

So “there’s no money” only applies when it’s politically convenient - hence it’s not true.

I'd mostly agree. If the government wanted to offer a 15% pay rise to railway workers - and then as they would have to, to NHS staff, teachers, police, civil servants, firefighters, social workers etc then I am sure that they could.

They would have to choose between various options including borrowing a huge amount of money, cuts to staff and services, reduced defense spending, increased taxation.

Typically I have heard them using different terminology - "the country cannot afford the impact..." etc

You can argue the toss about whether we, as the world's 6th largest economy, should be in this position - and its a good argument for the future - but we are, so none of the decisions are straighforward.

 

[fishwomp]

But that’s an argument for nobody ever getting a pay rise, and overlooks that the higher amount longer term is also reduced by inflation. The alternative is perpetually declining real incomes!

It's a statement of fact not an argument.., whether or not anyone likes it, that is how it works. If you don't understand what the other side is up to, you won't understand their willingness or motivation to fight.

The best weapon for a pay rise is ease of retention and of hiring.. When the stars align here, staff do well and the employer does well. Employers need staff, in order to make profit.. low pay means losing staff and therefore losing business.

So “there’s no money” only applies when it’s politically convenient - hence it’s not true.

There's no money for _this_... because they see _this_ as unnecessary to give (and obviously views on whether they are right differ..).

 

[Facing Back]

It only worked well insofar as it suited the staff quite well, and it was in the financial interest of the franchise operators to agree big pay increases, because they had no incentive to look at the wider impact of their pay deals across the industry.

That whole system no longer exists, and with the railway under public control again, any pay deal agreed on the railway sets a precedent for what other sectors can expect. The government is acting accordingly.

Yes, this is a good point. Generally I'm in favour of an open market driving efficiency however in this case the structure failed significantly. I'm curious to see what actually comes next and what lessons have been learned.

The cynic in me suggests "not enough" is the likely outcome. I am not in favour of close government of large, complex operations, so I do not want to see it privatised, however what we have now is the worst of both worlds with no incentive or accountability anywhare.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==

Given the state of industrial relations on the railway currently I cannot imagine having a meal with management can have much appeal.

You can slip the chef a tenner to leave some of the bones in their fish....

Surely you are allowed to take someone you actually want to spend time with to dinner?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==

I mean that’s about as relevant to anything that matters as union badges, really, which can be bought on eBay!

The fact something so utterly trifling has been brought into the negotiations is extraordinary, and is indeed perhaps a sign the government has sensed weakness, or at least dissension in the ranks.

I spoke to 2 HR people about this today - both working from home today for some reason - and they both said that long services awards done well were amongst the most cost effective tool for promoting morale and team work.

Utterly irrelevant in the context of an industrial dispute of course - it won't change the minds of many people to vote yes, so either something which was planned anyway and management didn't want 15 arguments later about it, or a tiny bit of good PR they can add as a bullet point to any briefing?

 

[delticdave]

This isn't true though in anything other than the short term.

If you earn £100 and get a 10% rise this year instead of 5% , then £110 not £105 is what all future negotiations will be based on. Effectively, that extra £5 carries on forever, until the next crisis.

So, it is not the £5 this year, where I am sure everything has probably cost the government, £10 and the employees £10... . The actual comparison is the extra £5 per year forever for the government, versus the one year of pain in this fight to change T&C's and keep that £5.


RMT + ASLEF rail members represent under 100,000 votes.

Pensioners have about 15 million votes.. they can go on strike at the ballot box, which is far more impactful than at the station..

That's a good point... I'n 75 & live in a constituency which is just a bit marginal.........

 

[lammergeier]

.

In stark contrast to the ASLEF side of the dispute where many members are frustrated that action hasn’t been ramped up…

I'm not disputing this is the case where you work, but it's quite easy for some drivers to make up any loss of pay through working rest days. Not all of us have that facility right now and I know plenty of drivers at TOCS where no RDW is possible who are extremely concerned about a large escalation and what it will mean for their income.

 

[Facing Back]

And I’m guessing that you have not been paying attention. For the vast majority of railway employees, T&Cs have changed over time. By proper negotiation. For Network Rail infrastructure workers, last time was only twelve years ago for example.

The last time (T&Cs) have changed was "only twelve years ago"?

An interesting perspective. I suspect a great number of non-rail workers are used to T&Cs being tweaked more regularly than that - in many places it is an annual process.

Generally I see that it is not only through negotiation either although many have panels or forums to discuss pros and cons before either implementation or consultation.

I see why the rail unions resist this - but it makes it slightly harder for many outsiders to understand as regular change is the norm for an increasing number of people. I don't want to enter a debate on the "race to the bottom" particularly - more often than not tweaks to T&Cs are to remove anomalies or unintended consequences, adapt to changing conditions and to integrate different businesses as well as responding to demand for things such as flexible working practices, new legislation etc.

 

[ar10642]

I spoke to 2 HR people about this today - both working from home today for some reason

Trains not running due to ASLEF strikes?

 

[Thirteen]

Based on the text you’ve quoted that isn’t exactly what he said; he has said members are in it for the “long haul”, but also clearly indicated that there is a strong desire to reach a resolution.

Equally it’s true that there’s a strong mandate for greater action amongst the membership.

I can't imagine it'd go on for three more years, I think Whelan unlike Lynch isn't interested in the political willy waving and just want this done and dusted.

I still think a deal in line with what ARL offered to their drivers would be enough to end industrial action.

 

[martin2345uk]

What were ARL offered?

 

[Jimini]

This just popped up on The Spectator’s lunchtime bulletin:

Mick Whelan has given the game away over striking railway workers

By Ross Clark



This morning, Aslef general secretary Mick Whelan was asked on ITV’s Good Morning Britain whether he thought the public should be sympathetic towards train drivers on almost £60,000 a year turning down an offer which would take their pay to nearly £65,000 a year. His reply was telling: ‘It isn’t about what we earn, it is about what other people don’t earn. I want every nurse in the country, everybody in the fire brigade, everybody in the public sector, every teacher to have what we have.’



Whelan seemed to be accepting that train drivers do, in fact, get rather a good deal. So why is he not satisfied? However, let’s leave that issue aside and try a little thought experiment: what would happen if every worker in the country was paid £60,000 – or even £65,000 – a year?



At present, the median UK salary for a full time worker is £640 per week, or £33,280 per year. Let’s now increase that to £65,000 a year and multiply it by the 24.6 million full-time workers in Britain. The result? The national wage bill would increase by £780 billion a year.



The size of the UK economy is around £1.8 trillion. Government revenue in 2021/22 was £819 billion. The money, therefore, would have to be printed. If that were to happen, and every employee in the country was given a £65,000 yearly Wage Guarantee – rather like the Energy Price Guarantee – what does Whelan think would happen?



Of course, most people would have a very pleasant surprise when they opened their next pay slip (only around 7 per cent of the working population currently earn more than £65,000). Their sense of satisfaction would rapidly fade, however, when they went shopping. With all that massive extra spending power you don’t need too much imagination to work out the extent to which prices would rocket. You can print money, but you can’t print wealth; the corrective mechanism is inflation.



I don’t think that Whelan has quite worked out the implications for train drivers. The Wage Guarantee wouldn’t give them much of an uplift in their nominal pay because they earn so much already. What the resulting rampant inflation would do, however, is eat away at their real earnings. Suddenly, their £60,000 or £65,000 a year would feel more like £33,000 does today.



What really suits train drivers is the status quo, where they are a highly privileged group of striking workers whose wages are far out of line with so much of the workforce.

 

[Facing Back]

Trains not running due to ASLEF strikes?

funnily enough...

 

[Annetts key]

The last time (T&Cs) have changed was "only twelve years ago"?

An interesting perspective. I suspect a great number of non-rail workers are used to T&Cs being tweaked more regularly than that - in many places it is an annual process.

Generally I see that it is not only through negotiation either although many have panels or forums to discuss pros and cons before either implementation or consultation.

I see why the rail unions resist this - but it makes it slightly harder for many outsiders to understand as regular change is the norm for an increasing number of people. I don't want to enter a debate on the "race to the bottom" particularly - more often than not tweaks to T&Cs are to remove anomalies or unintended consequences, adapt to changing conditions and to integrate different businesses as well as responding to demand for things such as flexible working practices, new legislation etc.

Yes, there have been “tweaks” in some areas since. But when there are collective bargaining procedures and regular meetings between the companies and the unions, issues are raised as and when they arise.

 

[Facing Back]

This just popped up on The Spectator’s lunchtime bulletin:

This isn't new really. The same was put to me by a train driver over 10 years ago.

Mick Whelan seems far from stupid and had been very effective for his members and I am sure that he knows all of this. So my apologies to Mick if I have misread him and I am being overly cynical, but the "lets pay everyone what we get" line seems to me to be just PR to spin the fact that train drivers are well paid.

Good PR is part of his job - and lets face it the other side doesn't hesitate to use it, so I am not criticising, just suggesting that this is not new news.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==

Yes, there have been “tweaks” in some areas since. But when there are collective bargaining procedures and regular meetings between the companies and the unions, issues are raises as and when they arise.

If there are regular meetings and issues are brought up when they arise - from both sides - and discussed sensibly - then great. If the union supports the direction of travel and management responds to concerns then I've seen change being slower than management want, faster than the union wants but both sides being broadly happy.

Its what happens when the gap is too big to bridge that is the problem I guess...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==

Trains not running due to ASLEF strikes?

Actually remembering back - one of them uses TPE and her comment was that "at least the service is predicable today".

 

[Annetts key]

This just popped up on The Spectator’s lunchtime bulletin:

Spectator’s lunchtime bulletin:

Mick Whelan has given the game away over striking railway workers

By Ross Clark

The size of the UK economy is around £1.8 trillion. Government revenue in 2021/22 was £819 billion. The money, therefore, would have to be printed.

Of course, most people would have a very pleasant surprise when they opened their next pay slip (only around 7 per cent of the working population currently earn more than £65,000). Their sense of satisfaction would rapidly fade, however, when they went shopping. With all that massive extra spending power you don’t need too much imagination to work out the extent to which prices would rocket. You can print money, but you can’t print wealth; the corrective mechanism is inflation.

Apparently you can print money, it’s currently called gas and oil extraction, and also, in the U.K. any electricity supplier to the national grid…

If everyone was given a substantial wage increase, tax income for the government would also increase substantially. And all that extra disposable income would substantially reduce the amount of personal debt, allow mortgages to be paid off quicker. And yes, increase spending in shops and hospitality. This last point, isn’t this what tax cuts are supposed to do? With more money to spend, would this increase economic activity? Isn’t that what we want in a recession (or on the brink of)?

Are there down sides, yes, of course. If this did ever happen, it would be interesting to see what actually did happen to inflation. Would it go to a very high level? Maybe. Would it then drop rapidly back down again? I don’t know. Not everyone would immediately go and spend, spend, spend…

 

[Facing Back]

Apparently you can print money, it’s currently called gas and oil extraction, and also, in the U.K. any electricity supplier to the national grid…

A friend of mine in the industry tells me that new extraction licenses for fields within UK waters contain an excess profits clause. You can argue too little too late. Windfall taxes on companies domiciled in the UK and paying taxes here but mining oil and gas elsewhere are more problematic.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==

If everyone was given a substantial wage increase, tax income for the government would also increase substantially. And all that extra disposable income would substantially reduce the amount of personal debt, allow mortgages to be paid off quicker. And yes, increase spending in shops and hospitality. This last point, isn’t this what tax cuts are supposed to do? With more money to spend, would this increase economic activity? Isn’t that what we want in a recession (or on the brink of)?

Are there down sides, yes, of course. If this did ever happen, it would be interesting to see what actually did happen to inflation. Would it go to a very high level? Maybe. Would it then drop rapidly back down again? I don’t know. Not everyone would immediately go and spend, spend, spend…

These scenarios are wargamed by several government departments and the Bank of England plus a fair few independents, universities and corporates. I don't what is available officially but I suspect a google search will find some unofficially posted outputs

 

[Annetts key]

Just as a comparison to what Network Rail are offering, here’s an email from the RMT today (I obviously can’t link to an email).

RMT wins free travel for 5,800 TfL cleaners

After years of campaigning, RMT has won free travel facilities for 5,800 cleaners sub-contracted by Transport for London.

Last weekend, at an RMT fringe during London Labour conference, I reiterated our union's case for the Mayor to do more for TfL's outsourced cleaners, including extending the free travel benefit, improving other employment conditions and ending the scourge of outsourcing by bringing them into direct employment.

Today, London Mayor Sadiq Khan has announced that he will extend staff free travel to all sub-contracted cleaners who work on London's transport system.

In September, the union announced that RMT had won free travel for 5,000 directly contracted cleaners, including our members at ABM.

Today's announcement extends that free travel to 800 more cleaners, including those working for FES and STM at MTR Crossrail, for Carlisle on London Overground, ISS on Docklands Light Railway and for Mace on the Cable Car.

This is a significant win for our Cleaners Are Essential campaign and it's the result of hard, patient campaigning involving the whole union, so thank you to every member who has supported our cleaning grades.

While this is a step in the right direction from the Mayor of London, it's not clear that this will apply to all security and catering sub-contractors in April. They Mayor needs to clarify this and we will not stop campaigning until this is done.

He also needs to take the next step and tackle the scourge of outsourcing in TfL, starting by bringing London's Underground cleaners in-house, which he can do now. So, we're accelerating our campaign to win the insourcing of these ABM cleaners. If you haven't already done so, please sign the petition here: https://www.megaphone.org.uk/petitions/bring-london-s-tube-cleaners-in-house

Thank you for your ongoing support for our Cleaning Grades.
Yours sincerely,


Michael Lynch
General Secretary

Edit: there is a press release that covers the above here

 

[martin2345uk]

I would happily forego a pay rise this year to get free train travel!

 

[yorksrob]

A friend of mine in the industry tells me that new extraction licenses for fields within UK waters contain an excess profits clause. You can argue too little too late. Windfall taxes on companies domiciled in the UK and paying taxes here but mining oil and gas elsewhere are more problematic.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Feb 2023 ==


These scenarios are wargamed by several government departments and the Bank of England plus a fair few independents, universities and corporates. I don't what is available officially but I suspect a google search will find some unofficially posted outputs

Thank goodness they do.

Too little, too late indeed, but also better late than never.

 

[SamYeager]

If everyone was given a substantial wage increase, tax income for the government would also increase substantially. And all that extra disposable income would substantially reduce the amount of personal debt, allow mortgages to be paid off quicker. And yes, increase spending in shops and hospitality. This last point, isn’t this what tax cuts are supposed to do? With more money to spend, would this increase economic activity? Isn’t that what we want in a recession (or on the brink of)?

Are there down sides, yes, of course. If this did ever happen, it would be interesting to see what actually did happen to inflation. Would it go to a very high level? Maybe. Would it then drop rapidly back down again? I don’t know. Not everyone would immediately go and spend, spend, spend…

Looking at the latter part of the 1970s might answer those questions. Tax cuts tend to be difficult when government expenditure is rising due to large pay rises for public sector workers. Given the imbalance between revenue and expenditure on the railways currently being made up by the government the railway workers are public sector workers in my opinion.

 

[Facing Back]

Looking at the latter part of the 1970s might answer those questions. Tax cuts tend to be difficult when government expenditure is rising due to large pay rises for public sector workers. Given the imbalance between revenue and expenditure on the railways currently being made up by the government the railway workers are public sector workers in my opinion.

At the moment, in practice if not in law, I agree with you in that rail workers are effectively public sector workers.

 

[al78]

Apparently you can print money, it’s currently called gas and oil extraction,

That is not going to work for very long even if it is true now.

 

[Some guy]

Presumably the RMT with Network Rail have been cornered by the fact the TSSA and Unite members accepted the same offer.

Unite has about a few hundred members for network rail and TSSA is a managers union they had to work strike days anyway and have got a rise on top of it so no surprise they accepted