Ongoing ASLEF overtime bans

[whoosh]

Put simply, as others have said, each and every offer should have been put to the members to accept or reject, whilst holding an ongoing ban on all overtime, rest day working etc.

The pitfalls of this, is that the deal could be tweeked only very slightly - a change to one string a little bit and, "Oh you should go through the rigmarole and cost of putting out that improved offer to a referendum of your members."

If it emerges training’s entirely dependent on rather flimsy union agreements that are very easily withdrawn, wouldn’t it make a strong case for more stringent legislation. Were striking teachers & lecturers ever threatening to halt exams & education entirely ? .

It's not really a union agreement... more that if you're an Instructor, then the person you are training on heavy fast-moving machinery is driving on your licence, and any incident is going on your safety of the line record.

This is very different to a classroom situation with a University Lecturer, or a School Teacher, or even a Trainer at the Training School.

If you become comfortable with having others driving on your licence, you can stand down from instructing at any time. Sounds reasonable to me.

Apologies to piggyback onto this thread but I can’t see the info regarding the MTR Elizabeth Line pay deal anywhere.

The members appear to have voted roughly 75% in favour of a recent pay offer...

It's below RPI, but sounds a pretty fair negotiated offer. I'd have voted yes.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

ASLEF members have democratically voted to take action and thats there prerogative. Its also pretty evident ASLEF aren't going to change tack and the govt certainly aren't. So its obvious this is just going to roll on week on week off or potentially an indefinite o/t ban. So DfT should be tasking all TOCs to use current establishments to deliver best service they can for passengers whilst ensuring taxpayer isn't paying for staff and resources to lie underutilised. For some TOCs this seems to be largely in place already but with others they are clearly having to instigate draconian cut backs presumably because they don't have the resources to unpick the crew diagrams quickly.

 

[Bald Rick]

i suspect the damage it is doing to the wider economy they will need to address the railways very soon possibly at PM level and make Sunak look like a hero for sorting things out.

It’s already been discussed at PM level ages ago. In the matter of current PM priorities, this barely registers, not least because the action isn’t doing damage to the wider economy.

Surely the only 'strong case' made in that case would be for TOCs to be allowed to recruit enough drivers so that they don't have to rely on overtime and RDW to run the service and any training that needs to be carried out.

That’s what TOCs are doing. It’s taking time, but there are now several TOCs in this dispute largely unaffected by the ASLEF overtime / RDW ban. It’s quite likely that by the time of the next General Election an ASLEF overtime / RDW ban will have little direct impact on service provision.

 

[JonathanH]

It’s quite likely that by the time of the next General Election an ASLEF overtime / RDW ban will have little direct impact on service provision.

Does that apply even on GTR? It seems they are a long way away from an overtime ban having little direct impact on service provision.

 

[Bald Rick]

Does that apply even on GTR? It seems they are a long way away from an overtime ban having little direct impact on service provision.

They are the worst affected, but in 18 months time they will be in a much better place. Especially if it becomes a permanent ban.

 

[Llanigraham]

The Army is to see a reduction of 3000 troops, down to 73,000, and there is to be a freeze on recruitment of MoD civil servants.

Which according to a friend who is one, means a reduction in staff as retirees, etc aren't being replaced and the remainder's work load is increasing, which will potentially result in inefficiencies, more stress and then more leavers.

 

[Carlisle]

If you become comfortable with having others driving on your licence, you can stand down from instructing at any time. Sounds reasonable to me.

Yes, as I’m sure most on here agree the best outcome for all this is a negotiated settlement ASAP
I was only replying to one post that suggested the possibility of an indefinite ban on all training activities, which the way things appear currently, could last beyond the next G.E.

 

[baz962]

It’s already been discussed at PM level ages ago. In the matter of current PM priorities, this barely registers, not least because the action isn’t doing damage to the wider economy.




That’s what TOCs are doing. It’s taking time, but there are now several TOCs in this dispute largely unaffected by the ASLEF overtime / RDW ban. It’s quite likely that by the time of the next General Election an ASLEF overtime / RDW ban will have little direct impact on service provision.

So what do you mean by not damaging the wider economy. I thought the government admitted it cost more than it would have to settle. Or is that a strike rather than just an overtime ban.

 

[Mattydo]

...whilst the union position is no change to T&Cs no resolution is possible since reducing the losses is something that any government would have to do. Making it party political is just from one side of the dispute, the problem is financial.

"Any government" that doesn't see the railway as a public service which the vast majority of other countries in Europe do. The reduction in costs, is ultimately a political decision and a party one at that. Considering it to be a one sided point of view is, I'm sorry, quite the one sided point of view too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==

Rail staff continually overlook the simple fact that only a small % of the country use trains, so any dispute isn't really going to bother the government - it's nothing like the impact of the various NHS staff, or teachers.
With a GE in apx 15-18 months this will just be allowed to drag on - whatever any Union tries. Personally, I doubt that Labour will do much different as the much bigger problem is inflation.

A small percentage that, if transferred to other transport networks such as road, would likely cause them to not be fit for purpose as well. The idea that the railway is somehow this niche transport method hardly utilised post COVID is pretty lacking in evidence. Despite the drop in usage the rail network is still busier than it was at the turn of the millennium with passenger journeys approaching 1.3 billion in the last year (down from 1.8 prior to the Pandemic), with a strong upwards trend in each quarter since pandemic restrictions ended. (If the last quarter were extrapolated forwards that figure would be near 1.5 billion) *source ORR

I appreciate that compared to the estimated 16 billion car journeys made every year in the UK this is a smaller number, but most of those car journeys are quick local ones not replicated by public transport routes reliably enough (primarily because the government also seems to think local transport should be a profit driven business rather than one in the public's interest).

If we are going to discuss the railway let's please get real about it's place as part of our mass transport network and not reflect the somewhat classist views of it expressed by the ministers of the crown we are currently encumbered with.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

"Any government" that doesn't see the railway as a public service which the vast majority of other countries in Europe do. The reduction in costs, is ultimately a political decision and a party one at that. Considering it to be a one sided is, I'm sorry, quite the one sided point of view too.

I doubt Rachel Reeves will be a pushover for increasing rail subsidies when (if?) she becomes Chancellor.
Most Finance Ministers in Europe are trying to contain the cost of their rail operations, often involving regionalising services and tendering them competitively.
Most of the state rail operations in Europe are in serious financial difficulty.
Germany has a new fares policy (€49/month Deutschlandticket) but the financial impact on federal and laender budgets is only agreed short-term (2 years).

 

[12LDA28C]

Rail staff continually overlook the simple fact that only a small % of the country use trains, so any dispute isn't really going to bother the government - it's nothing like the impact of the various NHS staff, or teachers.
With a GE in apx 15-18 months this will just be allowed to drag on - whatever any Union tries. Personally, I doubt that Labour will do much different as the much bigger problem is inflation.

I'm sure that rail staff don't give a hoot what percentage of the country use trains, but they certainly do care about proposed changes to their employment terms and conditions which will greatly affect their work/life balance and their ability to plan any kind of social life.

 

[Mattydo]

I doubt Rachel Reeves will be a pushover for increasing rail subsidies when (if?) she becomes Chancellor.
Most Finance Ministers in Europe are trying to contain the cost of their rail operations, often involving regionalising services and tendering them competitively.
Most of the state rail operations in Europe are in serious financial difficulty.
Germany has a new fares policy (€49/month Deutschlandticket) but the financial impact on federal and laender budgets is only agreed short-term (2 years).

No but I don't hold up the Starmer opposition as a poster of what I'd want from progressive government. It's just what we've got.

Containing the costs is somewhat different to trying to slash and burn them as the Sunak government seems intent on.

As I have said before reform is inevitable and needed. But the current proposition is unacceptable and ASLEF and the RMT would be derogating from their duty to membership to not be fighting the depth of those cuts to terms.

I'm British, but someone who spent most of their life living in a nearby country, and I will never, I think, understand the psyche of my fellow countrymen/women when it comes to our willingness to prop up those with much to the detriment of those with less. Workers seem to be the ones who constantly pay for the mistakes of those at the top, whilst most of the country cheers along.

Anyway. That's all getting somewhat philosophical.

Personally I think the OT ban is an excellent way to continue to express dissatisfaction, one which actually affects the TOC's financially, making them more vocal to the DfT, and one that is financially sustainable for members in what will likely be an argument that drags well into the next parliament.

 

[Dan G]

The opposite is more likely the case. The unions have overplayed their trump card to such an extent that people are now well used to working round the disruption.

This. Train strikes are normal now. The travelling public are used to it. The unions can strike as often as they want to, but the impact is nothing more than it being vaguely annoying.

 

[Mattydo]

This. Train strikes are normal now. The travelling public are used to it. The unions can strike as often as they want to, but the impact is nothing more than it being vaguely annoying.

How passengers feel Vs the impact to cost and economy are two different things.

 

[winks]

Which according to a friend who is one, means a reduction in staff as retirees, etc aren't being replaced and the remainder's work load is increasing, which will potentially result in inefficiencies, more stress and then more leavers.

The civil service recruitment ban only extends to August, I believe.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==

They are the worst affected, but in 18 months time they will be in a much better place. Especially if it becomes a permanent ban.

GTR seem to be operating a decent service this Saturday with trains running from Brighton to London Bridge into the late evening.

 

[Robertj21a]

Y

"Any government" that doesn't see the railway as a public service which the vast majority of other countries in Europe do. The reduction in costs, is ultimately a political decision and a party one at that. Considering it to be a one sided point of view is, I'm sorry, quite the one sided point of view too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==


A small percentage that, if transferred to other transport networks such as road, would likely cause them to not be fit for purpose as well. The idea that the railway is somehow this niche transport method hardly utilised post COVID is pretty lacking in evidence. Despite the drop in usage the rail network is still busier than it was at the turn of the millennium with passenger journeys approaching 1.3 billion in the last year (down from 1.8 prior to the Pandemic), with a strong upwards trend in each quarter since pandemic restrictions ended. (If the last quarter were extrapolated forwards that figure would be near 1.5 billion) *source ORR

I appreciate that compared to the estimated 16 billion car journeys made every year in the UK this is a smaller number, but most of those car journeys are quick local ones not replicated by public transport routes reliably enough (primarily because the government also seems to think local transport should be a profit driven business rather than one in the public's interest).

If we are going to discuss the railway let's please get real about it's place as part of our mass transport network and not reflect the somewhat classist views of it expressed by the ministers of the crown we are currently encumbered with.

You're confusing two issues.

Your comments will apply to the volume of passengers using trains - my comments relate to the small % of people in the country that will ever use any train (no lines nearby, don't go where needed etc). Hence, the government/News etc know that only relatively few people can possibly be affected - whatever happens on the railway.
A small overall % results in a lack of concern by most others.

 

[irish_rail]

How passengers feel Vs the impact to cost and economy are two different things.

Here here. The country is really feeling the effects of wider industrial action. The sheer number of people choosing not to travel at all costs the leisure economy massively. The argument that people are fine with strikes is laughable. They may well be fine with saving their money and not doing the weekend break away, but tell that to the hotelier, publican, taxi driver , restaraunt owner , who all face loss of income, even their livelihoods.

 

[footprints]

Here here. The country is really feeling the effects of wider industrial action. The sheer number of people choosing not to travel at all costs the leisure economy massively. The argument that people are fine with strikes is laughable. They may well be fine with saving their money and not doing the weekend break away, but tell that to the hotelier, publican, taxi driver , restaraunt owner , who all face loss of income, even their livelihoods.

Surely demand for taxis is booming during industrial action?

 

[kw12]

The RDG/Government stance is that they have made an offer to ASLEF and the union has yet to put this offer to its members, so the "ball" is currently with the union. Perhaps ASLEF could pass the "ball" firmly back to the RDG/Government by conducting an electronic ballet of members in a sample of TOCs (such as the three or four TOCs with the least drivers). Such a ballet would be far cheaper than a postal ballot of all applicable TOCs and it would be a minor cost compared to ASLEF's annual turnover of more than £7 million. Furthermore, the cost would be far less than the money drivers collectively miss out on (don't receive) from one week's overtime ban.

 

[43096]

Here here. The country is really feeling the effects of wider industrial action. The sheer number of people choosing not to travel at all costs the leisure economy massively. The argument that people are fine with strikes is laughable. They may well be fine with saving their money and not doing the weekend break away, but tell that to the hotelier, publican, taxi driver , restaraunt owner , who all face loss of income, even their livelihoods.

So you are all ok with adversely affecting people and businesses who are entirely unconnected to your dispute?

 

[MikeWM]

GTR seem to be operating a decent service this Saturday with trains running from Brighton to London Bridge into the late evening.

Try telling that to the people on the Kings Lynn branch, who get zero trains on Saturday! Or indeed myself, who is facing having to significantly cut short my Saturday trip to Cambridge because the last train back to Ely is at 1735 [1].

[1] I note that GA are offering itineries for later Cambridge-Ely travel on GA-only tickets via Stowmarket, Norwich, and the replacement bus to Ely. Which is a fairly impressive, 4 hour+ journey for a £3.10 ticket! I'm guessing I'd run into trouble trying to actually do it though.

 

[Tw99]

Here here. The country is really feeling the effects of wider industrial action. The sheer number of people choosing not to travel at all costs the leisure economy massively. The argument that people are fine with strikes is laughable. They may well be fine with saving their money and not doing the weekend break away, but tell that to the hotelier, publican, taxi driver , restaraunt owner , who all face loss of income, even their livelihoods.

I think the money is probably getting spent anyway.

For example, I've been put off from going into London for day trips this year due to the cost, restrictions on trains that can be used, and to some extent industrial action. So I've just gone somewhere else instead. So it was only the railway that lost part of my leisure spending. My daughter needs to travel this week when there's a strike, so she's getting the bus at less than half the price of the train ticket. etc.

 

[MikeWM]

I think the money is probably getting spent anyway.

For example, I've been put off from going into London for day trips this year due to the cost, restrictions on trains that can be used, and to some extent industrial action. So I've just gone somewhere else instead. So it was only the railway that lost part of my leisure spending.

My experience is similar - between the strikes, overtime bans, and the numerous closures due to Cambridge resignalling and/or Cambridge South construction, there have been precious few weekends where travelling to London was even plausible, something that pre-2020 I'd have done almost every weekend. (To the degree that I only noticed this weekend that Virgin Media wifi has (annoyingly) been turned off on the underground, which apparently happened way back in March!)

So I've spent significantly less on the railways this year, but I expect I've spent it elsewhere instead.

 

[Mattydo]

The civil service recruitment ban only extends to August, I believe.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==


GTR seem to be operating a decent service this Saturday with trains running from Brighton to London Bridge into the late evening.

But many other services curtailed earlier and metro services reduced by half. A good 50% of diagrams are cancelled at some inner depots.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==

I do enjoy the anecdotal posts that people believe extend to the whole economy whilst the government's own stats evidence a different story. But alas that is the way ths country seems to run.

 

[Robcuk]

The RDG/Government stance is that they have made an offer to ASLEF and the union has yet to put this offer to its members, so the "ball" is currently with the union. Perhaps ASLEF could pass the "ball" firmly back to the RDG/Government by conducting an electronic ballet of members in a sample of TOCs (such as the three or four TOCs with the least drivers). Such a ballet would be far cheaper than a postal ballot of all applicable TOCs and it would be a minor cost compared to ASLEF's annual turnover of more than £7 million. Furthermore, the cost would be far less than the money drivers collectively miss out on (don't receive) from one week's overtime ban.

How the "ball" is currently with the union I do not know. The members have just voted to continue with an extremely high % - don't you think the members would have voted to not continue with action if they were happy with the offer that was tabled.

 

[ar10642]

How the "ball" is currently with the union I do not know. The members have just voted to continue with an extremely high % - don't you think the members would have voted to not continue with action if they were happy with the offer that was tabled.

I just love the idea that after a year of strikes including Christmas, the first week back in January, Cheltenham and Eurovision, this overtime ban is going to be the thing that makes the government cave in. What a complete waste of everyone's time.

 

[BrokenSam]

So you are all ok with adversely affecting people and businesses who are entirely unconnected to your dispute?

That's the point of a strike. Withdrawing labor has consequences. It needs to in order to work.

 

[43096]

That's the point of a strike. Withdrawing labor has consequences. It needs to in order to work.

I’ll take it that you are quite happy to badly affect others’ jobs and livelihoods. Nice.

 

[Mattydo]

Y

You're confusing two issues.

Your comments will apply to the volume of passengers using trains - my comments relate to the small % of people in the country that will ever use any train (no lines nearby, don't go where needed etc). Hence, the government/News etc know that only relatively few people can possibly be affected - whatever happens on the railway.
A small overall % results in a lack of concern by most others.

I'm not confusing anything. Moreover you'd have to prove how tiny that percentage is with something other than an assertion. Granted geography (of the railway) means that certain parts of the country use the railway more than others but in other parts the percentage of people using public transport in general is a lot higher. Particularly dense urban areas. Like the North West and London.

When I see trains full and standing at the weekend and week day peaks this utilisation argument really makes me chuckle.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

No but I don't hold up the Starmer opposition as a poster of what I'd want from progressive government. It's just what we've got.

Containing the costs is somewhat different to trying to slash and burn them as the Sunak government seems intent on.

As I have said before reform is inevitable and needed. But the current proposition is unacceptable and ASLEF and the RMT would be derogating from their duty to membership to not be fighting the depth of those cuts to terms.

I'm British, but someone who spent most of their life living in a nearby country, and I will never, I think, understand the psyche of my fellow countrymen/women when it comes to our willingness to prop up those with much to the detriment of those with less. Workers seem to be the ones who constantly pay for the mistakes of those at the top, whilst most of the country cheers along.

Anyway. That's all getting somewhat philosophical.

Personally I think the OT ban is an excellent way to continue to express dissatisfaction, one which actually affects the TOC's financially, making them more vocal to the DfT, and one that is financially sustainable for members in what will likely be an argument that drags well into the next parliament.

It doesn't affect the TOCs they just send the bill to the DfT every month for the cost of running the operation. DfT have already acknowledged that fare revenue is being impacted and the nett cost of running the railway has gone up. Whats needed is for DfT to find an olive branch that moves this forward such that ASLEF will come back to the table and be persuaded to work with operators to at least develop new T&Cs for for new starters so there is a long term adjustment to dealing with Sundays etc.