RMT Strike Action Sat 26/8 and Sat 2/9

[JonathanH]

I agree the ASLEF week long overtime bans seem to be more effective and don't hurt the pay slip. I don't know why RMT seem to prefer strikes over overtime bans.

ASLEF members have somewhat more ability to cause disruption via overtime bans than RMT members.

The Saturday stuff isn't working, many operators still run a decent service using contingent staff, unless that is part of the game knowing that this action forces companies to get managers in at the weekend thereby disrupting their worklife balance too.

That is the problem for the RMT members, the number of contingent staff available, and parts of the railway (eg DOO services) where they can't cause disruption because they have limited involvement.

Surely more strike action just takes more money out of the rail industry which means pay rises and job security becomes less likely rather than more likely?

The classical idea of striking is that by withdrawing labour, and hitting revenue, the company will want to find ways to try and avoid that strike action happening.

That is unfortunately where the strike action is failing because it is like throwing stones at an impenetrable target.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Because to cease means the rail workers will accept blanket changes to T&Cs, redundancies and accept no pay rise for 4 years.

Would you accept working extra days when you don't get paid any more? If someone on a 36-hour/5 day week is now told they will be working 6 days a week for the same hours, this means they have to pay for an extra days transport costs, and see their family less.

Or their job role is changing and they either accept new T&Cs which would have a detrimental change to their pay or work/life balance.

Or their pay stays at 2018/2019 levels when the cost of everything has risen, yet other industries and sectors are accepting pay awards, or at least negotiating.

To give in, means never being able to negotiate anything again.

But the intention is to push through T&C changes anyway. I can understand the objections to this but the strikes don't change the intent.

I'm not in RMT I'm in ASLEF. I agree the ASLEF week long overtime bans seem to be more effective and don't hurt the pay slip. I don't know why RMT seem to prefer strikes over overtime bans.

But I also know we need to keep the pressure on the DfT/Government. The frustration of the travelling public needs to be targeted at their door, especially when the Rail Minister admitted it's costing more to keep funding the TOCs through the disputes than it would've done to settle the dispute. That tells everyone where the priorities are.

In the short term the Government will fund the dispute because in their view not tackling reform of Ts & Cs will cost them more in the long run. It is ironic that the private train companies so hated by the unions would have settled this dispute long ago if their revenue had been on the line, but as this is effectively about state funding it's a lot harder to see any capitulation.

The classical idea of striking is that by withdrawing labour, and hitting revenue, the company will want to find ways to try and avoid that strike action happening.

That is unfortunately where the strike action is failing because it is like throwing stones at an impenetrable target.

Absolutely - the socialist ideal of hitting the capitalists' profits to force an improvement in the conditions for the workers is completely absent here. But as things stand the strikes now are barely a footnote news item, so no sign at all of the popular pressure to force a settlement. Instead the general public just get annoyed and blame Govt and Unions in equal measure.

 

[12LDA28C]

The government is putting shedloads of money into NR and HS2, and the TOCs, but the operating railway is not delivering the revenue to match.
In any real business the cuts would have gone deep and permanent (and still might on rail).
10% pay rise but 10% cuts in services (and therefore jobs) loom.
Are the unions OK with that?

Which unions are demanding a 10% pay rise? Not the ones that have already settled for less.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Aug 2023 ==

The government is putting shedloads of money into NR and HS2, and the TOCs, but the operating railway is not delivering the revenue to match.
In any real business the cuts would have gone deep and permanent (and still might on rail).
10% pay rise but 10% cuts in services (and therefore jobs) loom.
Are the unions OK with that?

The Government is supporting the TOCs as revenue is down, entirely due to the Government's own advice to 'Stay at home' during Covid. Support does not really equal investment though, as all they want to do is cut costs, not invest to increase revenue. Take the ticket offices debacle as a case in point.

 

[ComUtoR]

Can you afford a week,

It's tricky. A single week loss is huge. How many 'days' pay have employees lost over time ? Doing this piecemeal has lessened the impact in some eyes but has proven we are resolute in others.

Any strike will always be a sacrifice and losing pay to gain less back often feels, and for any onlookers, seems counterproductive.

I'm 20yrs in and I wish I was fighting for a better pay rise years ago. The long term effect of low pay and condition changes are far reaching.
Would I want to lose a grand for a week; Christ no. Will I do it for the "greater good"; absolutely.

I also firmly believe that if a week strike was called, there would be total chaos and the government would really be in the sticky stuff and negotiations would take place and the whole thing would be almost forced into resolution.

I can't.... if it was mortgage or cross the picket line, I would be at work.......

It's hard and I'd respect your choice. Everyone's situation is different. I think that the piecemeal striking is there to allow staff to recover lost earnings and not need to take such a huge hit. I'm hearing more complaints about the rest day ban than the strike days.

The alternative is capitulation, and being trod on and getting totally screwed by this government. Some of the clauses they want to implement are horrific. I'm would be willing to make the sacrifice and I support anyone who does.

 

[1D54]

Are more ASLEF strikes imminent after the result of the Aug 8th ballot or will they being going mainly for the overtime bans?

 

[baz962]

Are more ASLEF strikes imminent after the result of the Aug 8th ballot or will they being going mainly for the overtime bans?

ASLEF haven't yet said anything.

 

[Jamesrob637]

No support from me anymore

Go to work and endure it

Sorry not sorry if that's harsh

 

[bramling]

No support from me anymore

Go to work and endure it

Sorry not sorry if that's harsh

The same argument could be directed at a proportion of the wider population since Covid.

 

[Jamesrob637]

The same argument could be directed at a proportion of the wider population since Covid.

Oh don't I know it. I mean, I was furloughed but glad to go back to work when I did! Won't willingly want to retire, though I appreciate energy levels decrease past 60-70.

 

[dk1]

Are more ASLEF strikes imminent after the result of the Aug 8th ballot or will they being going mainly for the overtime bans?

Last i heard it was the possibility of alternate Saturdays but nothing confirmed.

 

[baz962]

Last i heard it was the possibility of alternate Saturdays but nothing confirmed.

Strike or overtime ban?

 

[dk1]

Strike or overtime ban?

Strike.

 

[yorksrob]

It's tricky. A single week loss is huge. How many 'days' pay have employees lost over time ? Doing this piecemeal has lessened the impact in some eyes but has proven we are resolute in others.

Any strike will always be a sacrifice and losing pay to gain less back often feels, and for any onlookers, seems counterproductive.

I'm 20yrs in and I wish I was fighting for a better pay rise years ago. The long term effect of low pay and condition changes are far reaching.
Would I want to lose a grand for a week; Christ no. Will I do it for the "greater good"; absolutely.

I also firmly believe that if a week strike was called, there would be total chaos and the government would really be in the sticky stuff and negotiations would take place and the whole thing would be almost forced into resolution.



It's hard and I'd respect your choice. Everyone's situation is different. I think that the piecemeal striking is there to allow staff to recover lost earnings and not need to take such a huge hit. I'm hearing more complaints about the rest day ban than the strike days.

The alternative is capitulation, and being trod on and getting totally screwed by this government. Some of the clauses they want to implement are horrific. I'm would be willing to make the sacrifice and I support anyone who does.

I have every sympathy.

I'll be voting against this pack of charlatans when I get the opportunity.

 

[ainsworth74]

As with the ASLEF ballot result the other day, nothing has fundamentally changed in terms of the future of this dispute. Thank you to the OP for bringing the new dates to everyone's attention but the position otherwise remains unchanged and there is precious little to discuss as a consequence.

The thread is therefore locked.