Network Rail makes new offer to the RMT union

[Facing Back]

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

No it is not going to last for a long time. By definition, windfall taxes are short term. The ideal that they will fund long term changes in taxation or remuneration is fanciful at best. By all means levy them where appropriate but use the funds for one-off capital investment which will give long term benefit.

 

[Thirteen]

What were ARL offered?

6.5% was mentioned before. I assume it was accepted but nothing has been mentioned by ASLEF.

 

[al78]

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)?

There seems to be an assumption in here that giving everyone a pay rise would have little to no impact on the cost of goods and services. I think it is fantasy to believe any business having to increase its cost of labour is going to take the profit hit rather than pass on costs to consumers if they can get away with it, so there may not be very much extra disposable income if any at all. Tax cuts are also a fantasy. The government has recently thrown a ton of money at people during the pandemic to protect them from the consequences of job losses and failing businesses, and another ton of money thrown at people to aid in the soaring price of energy. That money has to come from somewhere, and there isn't an infinite supply of money to tap into with no consequence whenever convenient.

I'd say what we should do at a national level is look into why this country is such an expensive place to live and start looking into ways of addressing that.

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

No it is not going to last for a long time. By definition, windfall taxes are short term. The ideal that they will fund long term changes in taxation or remuneration is fanciful at best. By all means levy them where appropriate but use the funds for one-off capital investment which will give long term benefit.

I was thinking more along the lines of North Sea oil and gas being a finite resource that will run out or become too costly to extract in the not too distant future, combined with the fossil fuel industry likely to be dying in the coming decades when the consequences of climate change really start to ramp up.

 

[Bald Rick]

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?

March to October 2009.

Likely to happen again next year.

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

Flawed logic. Your pay deal that year was above inflation, and you were therefore better off In real terms.

Had the company stuck to the deal, you would have had your pay reduced in line with inflation, and been no worse off in real terms.

 

[43066]

The highlighted bit is the important bit. There’s no political desire for paying train drivers more. The public will never see someone earning £55-60k or more as being a more deserving case over nurses, teachers or indeed anyone else. And that is what drives the political will.

It’s largely irrelevant what the public think. There isn’t really any political desire to increase nurses’ wages either. The government’s main objective is playing to its base and distracting from the mess it’s in.

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...

It does if you understand what’s being demanded in exchange for that - focussing on the figures is to (deliberately) miss the point.

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.

The government chose to reclassify TOCs as “public sector” purely for political reasons. There are many other “publicly funded” areas where pay isn’t subject to the same restraint - GP practices for example.

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.

That isn’t “how it works”. If pay awards were really as inflationary as you seem to be suggesting there would be a law against pay rises for everybody! In any case, for about the millionth time or repeating, a below inflationary rise would be sufficient - Ts and Cs are the issue here.

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.

The fact is Ts and Cs assume far more importance in already hugely anti social shift based type employment than in most “normal” jobs. I can understand why that isn’t obvious to people who have never done it, but it’s true nonetheless.

 

[baz962]

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

That's because you are getting a huge raise anyway . Arl accepted 6.5%

 

[43066]

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.

Sorry just catching up on this from earlier. Well yes that’s probably true, but it’s clear that 15% wouldn’t be necessary. Indeed the figure already proposed is more than sufficient, it’s the strings that are causing the issue. The government *could* have offered a pay rise, say equivalent to the average private sector increase, to the entire public sector for no/few strings and that would have headed off many of the current disputes.

Yes that cost then becomes “baked in”, but it’s still a decrease in real terms cost given current inflation, which will then be further eroded over time (subject to further rises). Of course that solution wouldn’t be divisive enough for the current administration…

 

[greyman42]

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.

So drivers are working rest days for nothing. Does not sound great to me.

 

[Facing Back]

Sorry just catching up on this from earlier. Well yes that’s probably true, but it’s clear that 15% wouldn’t be necessary. Indeed the figure already proposed is more than sufficient, it’s the strings that are causing the issue. The government *could* have offered a pay rise, say equivalent to the average private sector increase, to the entire public sector for no/few strings and that would have headed off many of the current disputes.

Yes that cost then becomes “baked in”, but it’s still a decrease in real terms cost given current inflation, which will then be further eroded over time (subject to further rises). Of course that solution wouldn’t be divisive enough for the current administration…

I was responding to you saying that "no more money" is a fiction - and agreeing with that point.

I see that the strings are the issue. I have sympathy with a move to "mostly nights" being difficult and I didn't understand the way the committed sundays could be in the middle of leave and schedules not being available until a few days before but less so with some of the others - but that is by the by.

Am I right in thinking that rail workers have had above inflation pay increases for decades and we are seeing a couple of years where there is a huge funding challenge and we seeing a temporary adjustment or I am just being provocative?

By the way, without in anyway upplaying the government's competence in this dispute, where they are being divisive is splitting unions from each other. They and the RMT/ASLEF have a fundamental disagreement so by definition each side is divided - that is not the same.

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

So drivers are working rest days for nothing. Does not sound great to me.

So they are not working strike days and working rest days instead? Sounds like it nets out to me

 

[43066]

I see that the strings are the issue. I have sympathy with a move to "mostly nights" being difficult and I didn't understand the way the committed sundays could be in the middle of leave and schedules not being available until a few days before but less so with some of the others - but that is by the by.

The mostly nights thing affects maintenance teams who are represented by the RMT. The main concern for ASLEF is the proposed removal of the union’s ability to scrutinise and agree rosters. Again that is of great importance from a work life balance perspective - at the moment the work needing to be covered is still covered by the union has direct input into how this is done.

Am I right in thinking that rail workers have had above inflation pay increases for decades and we are seeing a couple of years where there is a huge funding challenge and we seeing a temporary adjustment or I am just being provocative?

Pay deals have typically only referenced inflation (obviously much easier when it was circa 2%!). The large rises have only generally been in exchange for things being sold eg taking on DOO etc. Drivers at many TOCs including my own are on the same basic as we were in 2019 so some increase is overdue just to take us back to where we were.

 

[Facing Back]

The mostly nights thing affects maintenance teams who are represented by the RMT. The main concern for ASLEF is the proposed removal of the union’s ability to scrutinise and agree rosters. Again that is of great importance from a work life balance perspective - at the moment the work needing to be covered is still covered by the union has direct input into how this is done.

Agreed but this a NR and RMT thread so that was where my focus was.

On the ASLEF/roster subject though, I get the concern. I'm not in the space where I think the union should have to set/agree rosters, it is the company's job - but generally agreed principles in work/life balance and reasonableness should apply. I recognise the gulf in trust here though and I'd want to debate it more

 

[lammergeier]

So drivers are working rest days for nothing. Does not sound great to me.

Nobody said it was. But during strike action it's better to have it available than not, unless of course the union removes it as part of the action, which hasn't happened so far.

 

[Facing Back]

Pay deals have typically only referenced inflation (obviously much easier when it was circa 2%!). The large rises have only generally been in exchange for things being sold eg taking on DOO etc. Drivers at many TOCs including my own are on the same basic as we were in 2019 so some increase is overdue just to take us back to where we were.

Understood

 

[12LDA28C]

But its use is embedded into lots of legislation, including uprating of benefits and interest on index linked government debt.

As I've already mentioned, the RPI has also been used to calculate drivers' pay increases every year (until Covid struck). So quite relevant in the current dispute.

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

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...

Wait, you missed the part about an essential transport network and a vital part of the nation's infrastructure being permanently closed down, or do you consider that acceptable?

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

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…

In think the OLR still counts as 'the Treasury getting involved' which apparently was an unwelcome development according to some people

 

[Facing Back]

As I've already mentioned, the RPI has also been used to calculate drivers' pay increases every year (until Covid struck). So quite relevant in the current dispute.

However the government has stated that it is not being used as a basis for this and future increases and the unions have accepted (for this pay round anyway). Its only relevance at the moment is for people to say how much money they are losing, which is not a factor in determining the offer

 

[12LDA28C]

However the government has stated that it is not being used as a basis for this and future increases and the unions have accepted (for this pay round anyway). Its only relevance at the moment is for people to say how much money they are losing, which is not a factor in determining the offer

Neither RPI nor CPI are being used as a basis for this increase or any other. I think we've established that beyond all doubt.

 

[Falcon1200]

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

If a meal with management is even still part of the deal, it would be with local managers, nowhere near the level at which decisions on pay and conditions are made.

TSSA is a managers union

TSSA is not a managers' only union, not by any means.

 

[baz962]

As we keep going back to the t&c's , let me bring attention to something the government/RDG want and I will explain it for the layman/ non rail staff.
We have spare turns which is where you are not booked to do a job but can get given a job to cover staff that are on leave or sick and you can be moved to cover that job. So for example you are 08.00 to 17.00 spare and a job needs covering that is 10.00 till 21.30 and you can get it and your start and end time and length of day are all changed. The movement is different at different tocs but you can usually be moved forward or backward by two to three hours. The powers that be want a twelve hour movement. So on the roster you could be spare on Thursday and day off on Friday and your Thursday spare was 08.00 and you are now moved to 20.00 and have to work until 08.00 on your day off, so effectively not really having a day off. I don't fancy that and I'm sure most people wouldn't either.

 

[Facing Back]

Neither RPI nor CPI are being used as a basis for this increase or any other. I think we've established that beyond all doubt.

Indeed. Which is why I am questioning its relevance even though it is referenced here repeatedly

 

[12LDA28C]

As we keep going back to the t&c's , let me bring attention to something the government/RDG want and I will explain it for the layman/ non rail staff.
We have spare turns which is where you are not booked to do a job but can get given a job to cover staff that are on leave or sick and you can be moved to cover that job. So for example you are 08.00 to 17.00 spare and a job needs covering that is 10.00 till 21.30 and you can get it and your start and end time and length of day are all changed. The movement is different at different tocs but you can usually be moved forward or backward by two to three hours. The powers that be want a twelve hour movement. So on the roster you could be spare on Thursday and day off on Friday and your Thursday spare was 08.00 and you are now moved to 20.00 and have to work until 08.00 on your day off, so effectively not really having a day off. I don't fancy that and I'm sure most people wouldn't either.

It's worse than that - you could be 0700-1500 Spare Monday to Friday next week with a Rest Day Saturday. You might have booked a concert or football match for your Saturday off.

They want to bring in movement to cover a week of Annual Leave so you could be moved to afternoon or evening book-ons with your Rest Day moved to, say, Wednesday and your plans for Saturday ruined. Sounds great, huh?

 

[g492p]

As we keep going back to the t&c's , let me bring attention to something the government/RDG want and I will explain it for the layman/ non rail staff.
We have spare turns which is where you are not booked to do a job but can get given a job to cover staff that are on leave or sick and you can be moved to cover that job. So for example you are 08.00 to 17.00 spare and a job needs covering that is 10.00 till 21.30 and you can get it and your start and end time and length of day are all changed. The movement is different at different tocs but you can usually be moved forward or backward by two to three hours. The powers that be want a twelve hour movement. So on the roster you could be spare on Thursday and day off on Friday and your Thursday spare was 08.00 and you are now moved to 20.00 and have to work until 08.00 on your day off, so effectively not really having a day off. I don't fancy that and I'm sure most people wouldn't either.

This is important. Is definitely a massive reason I’m not in favour of the current deal.

 

[Broucek]

Indeed. Which is why I am questioning its relevance even though it is referenced here repeatedly

We need to remember that this real terms cut in living standards is NOT being caused by "robber baron" employers dumping on the workforce or (for the most part) rapacious capitalists pushing up prices to increase profits.

99% of people and organisations are losing out from this crisis. Employees, including top executives, are getting salary increases well below inflation. And most companies and their shareholders (i.e. most folk who work/worked in the private sector and have a pension) are suffering an erosion of profit margins as their costs are shooting up and they can't pass on the full impact to their customers. And the public finances, having taken an epic hit from COVID are exposed to increased interest cost and lower economic growth.

Yes, the energy companies are doing very nicely but in general, this crisis is $h1t for everyone. Thanks, Vlad.

 

[Falcon1200]

They want to bring in movement to cover a week of Annual Leave so you could be moved to afternoon or evening book-ons with your Rest Day move to, say, Wednesday and your plans for Saturday ruined. Sounds great, huh?

Absolutely not! It's a dreadful idea, going back to my workplace in the 1980s when Relief staff had no booked Rest Days and no staff had booked Sundays, these being allocated on an equalisation basis. I would not expect any staff to accept such conditions, and it is frankly astonishing that it was proposed in the first place, clearly by someone without the first idea of the reality of railway, or indeed any, shift work.

 

[43066]

Wait, you missed the part about an essential transport network and a vital part of the nation's infrastructure being permanently closed down, or do you consider that acceptable?

Well quite. Certain posters appears to be under the impression that the “bail out” of the industry was some sort of benevolent act by the government just to keep the staff employed, and that we should all be eternally grateful and accept whatever we are given now.

It's worse than that - you could be 0700-1500 Spare Monday to Friday next week with a Rest Day Saturday. You might have booked a concert or football match for your Saturday o

They want to bring in movement to cover a week of Annual Leave so you could be moved to afternoon or evening book-ons with your Rest Day moved to, say, Wednesday and your plans for Saturday ruined. Sounds great, huh?

The spare weeks is a terrible idea and needs to be resisted.

I had an idea a three hour movement off spare was being proposed across the board (except where already more than this) which isn’t so bad. If they want 12 hours everywhere that’s also something that needs to be pushed back on.

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

We need to remember that this real terms cut in living standards is NOT being caused by "robber baron" employers dumping on the workforce or (for the most part) rapacious capitalists pushing up prices to increase profits.

99% of people and organisations are losing out from this crisis. Employees, including top executives, are getting salary increases well below inflation. And most companies and their shareholders (i.e. most folk who work/worked in the private sector and have a pension) are suffering an erosion of profit margins as their costs are shooting up and they can't pass on the full impact to their customers. And the public finances, having taken an epic hit from COVID are exposed to increased interest cost and lower economic growth.

Yes, the energy companies are doing very nicely but in general, this crisis is $h1t for everyone. Thanks, Vlad.

What does any of that have to do with the government provoking an entirely unnecessary industrial dispute and attempting to use the current “crisis” to force through changes in Ts and Cs?

 

[gazzaa2]

The members will be happy with no pay rise at all for 18 months as well as the maintenance changes being imposed?

Well ASLEF have come out and said now that they expect they may be on strike for another year or two (essentially until after the election).

'We're in it for the long haul': Rail union boss warns strikes could last for years as workers walk out again | LBC

No rail services will run in large parts of the UK as train workers stage another strike.

www.lbc.co.uk

 

[Facing Back]

Well ASLEF have come out and said now that they expect they may be on strike for another year or two (essentially until after the election).

'We're in it for the long haul': Rail union boss warns strikes could last for years as workers walk out again | LBC

No rail services will run in large parts of the UK as train workers stage another strike.

www.lbc.co.uk

indeed they did but this is a thread about the NR dispute with RMT and my comment was in that context

 

[Fred Dinenage]

Nobody said it was. But during strike action it's better to have it available than not, unless of course the union removes it as part of the action, which hasn't happened so far.

Northern drivers have had no RDW agreement for over a year. We can’t make up lost pay with overtime.

 

[lammergeier]

Northern drivers have had no RDW agreement for over a year. We can’t make up lost pay with overtime.

That was my original point. Same at TPE and XC, maybe elsewhere as well.

 

[ainsworth74]

This thread is about the RMT dispute with Network Rail. The ongoing ASLEF disputes are off-topic so I'd ask that we leave them there for this thread.

 

[ainsworth74]

Further to my previous, to be clear, this thread is for discussion of the RMT and Network Rail dispute. If we could keep to that, unless something is very directly related, that would be appreciated!