Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
One of my neighbours, a former local authority accountant now retired, tells me that Birmingham Council is an extremely large public entity and have very recently made public that matter of the "black hole" in their finances in a discussion with other large local authorities where cost-cutting of any sort will not balance their budget deficit.
One of my neighbours, a former local authority accountant now retired, tells me that Birmingham Council is an extremely large public entity and have very recently made public that matter of the "black hole" in their finances in a discussion with other large local authorities where cost-cutting of any sort will not balance their budget deficit.
I am interested in hearing of the educational attainments and career progression of the said Mr Harper and the deemed suitability of his ability to perform his current role. Does he suffer from a medical condition that should have been known to those who appointed him in the role he currently holds. Of course as an MP, a rail remit would not have featured highly in his election campaign that caused the local electorate to have voted him into their Member of Parliament.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I am interested in hearing of the educational attainments and career progression of the said Mr Harper and the deemed suitability of his ability to perform his current role. Does he suffer from a medical condition that should have been known to those who appointed him in the role he currently holds. Of course as an MP, a rail remit would not have featured highly in his election campaign that caused the local electorate to have voted him into their Member of Parliament.
As I recall Harper's father was actually a labourer on the railways, and he certainly attended a bog standard comprehensive in Swindon (before the more well trodden path of Oxford and then going into accountancy). It's not exactly the stereotypical Tory ministerial background, though in fairness given his upbringing you might argue he should be doing a bit better at managing industrial relations with railway workers than he actually is!
I am interested in hearing of the educational attainments and career progression of the said Mr Harper and the deemed suitability of his ability to perform his current role. Does he suffer from a medical condition that should have been known to those who appointed him in the role he currently holds.
When he was first appointed, he was an unknown - and the hope was there that the appointment was based on an ability to run the DfT, overseeing a difficult department of govt. Nope, we got someone appointed as he's someone's mate who has demonstrated little or no interest in the success or future of the industry. As for a medical condition, being a member of this Conservative government cabinet is not (yet) a medical reason to take time off work under the reason being mad as a box of frogs, but does come close.
I've never said these roles are not justified of a payrise. I'm very much supportive of higher pay for ALL public sector roles . My issue is the government line that they can't afford a payrise for rail without (frankly ridiculous) changes to terms and conditions. I very much doubt that say, teachers have been asked to work an extra day every two weeks as a reward for their 5 percent payrise. And rightly so. But rail staff shouldn't be asked to make ridiculous compromises such as a compulsion to have to work every other Sunday on top of the working week, for a below inflation rise.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Spot on. Passengers annual fare increases have always played a part in allowing a payrise for staff as well. Why should that be different all of a sudden. Where is that 6 percent being swallowed up? Additonal management roles id suggest.
That 6% went a little way to addressing the additional £4bn a year that the railway is costing the Treasury as the result of the downturn in commuting revenue.
That 6% went a little way to addressing the additional £4bn a year that the railway is costing the Treasury as the result of the downturn in commuting revenue.
Passengers have still paid more than their fair share towards the wage settlement. The deficit is due to the Governments own restrictions imposed on, and negative publicity towards rail travel, therefore they should cough up.
As you may be aware your Union is continuing in dialogue with representatives of the Rail Delivery Group following an exchange of correspondence recently.
Both sides are considering how we may work through the current dispute and are taking account of each other's standpoints as set out in the letters.
No proposals have been made and it is likely further dialogue will take place between the parties considering the possibilities available to us.
I will inform you as soon as there are any material developments to report.
From experience, in my industry, branch meetings are generally only attended by the more militant types, for whom, nothing will ever be good enough, they will never gauge a true representation of how most average union members feel...
They are union echo chambers, I've been to a couple which almost made me come out of our union.
From experience, in my industry, branch meetings are generally only attended by the more militant types, for whom, nothing will ever be good enough, they will never gauge a true representation of how most average union members feel...
They are union echo chambers, I've been to a couple which almost made me come out of our union.
I have attended only one or two meetings over the years, and did attend the online one about the offer earlier in the year, which despite being quite well attended only had one or two people from each TOC there, as the branch covers multiple TOCS. Some grades at some TOCS weren't represented at all.
I concur that my experience of all branch meetings are like yours and do not really represent the wide variety of views held by the wider membership.
And that's the problem that people don't get. The TOCs want to offer the money and negotiate but silly Tory government has tied there hands using RDG as the pretext.
If the DfT had listened to the TOCs, a pay rise of a much lower percentage than now being talked about would have been agreed before inflation rocketed. Probably a multi-year deal that would have tied the hands of the unions when Putin invaded Ukraine. Productivity talks could’ve been held subsequently with much less pressure. This government however is not known for its pragmatism and stonewalled. So inflation spiked and the demands grew greater.
I may have missed something here, but where has it been said that the payrise can not be funded? There is an offer on the table, but like most of public sector ones there are demands on the departments that whilst funds for payrises are allocated, said departments must deliver future efficiencies. And this is nothing new for the public sector either, rarely do pay rises happen without any caveats. Obviously the situation is changing for staff in the rail industry as the government is handed back more control, but there's really very little difference in what's happening between the various sectors.
Out of curiosity, can you provide a detailed example of what another part of the public sector have had to change in order to get a below-inflation rise? If you can show us the specifics it would shed some light rather than heat.
I wonder which department funds the PM's air travel. I know that the cost of operating the Royal Train comes out of the DfT budget, but I'm not sire whether the DfT or the MoD pay for Sunak's helicopters (presumably they're RAF pilots. That'll be a cost saving.
If they dropped the ‘spare’ weeks where you could be moved to cover anything and everything with little warning or opportunity to plan childcare etc. then the deal would probably be voted through.
A few of the other rostering changes are unpalatable too. Banning fixed rest day patterns and prohibiting the reps from any involvement in drawing up base rosters. Cost savings that would result from these are the square root of sod all but they make a big difference to work/life balance.
That may be true for you and your colleagues, but for the RMT leadership it is plainly obvious there is a significant political element, or else the offer would have been put to members formally already.
Ballots have been held every six months and all have strongly supported continuing the action. If people wanted to settle, they would have voted differently. The RMT leadership doesn't get a vote in these ballots, only the affected members. It's got nothing to do with party politics.
The government's refusal to settle has certainly been a drain on the economy. I wonder if they realise that encouraging car use just sends more wealth to the Middle East, rather than it recirculating in the UK economy.
It's not just a hypothetical thing, we're seeing it in real time. Years of neglect of defence budgets across the west have emboldened Putin and lead him to believe that we were a spent force. Obviously we supported Ukraine rather more than he thought, but it was the initial impression that encouraged the invasion. That invasion is a big part of the reason why the economy is struggling now.
Like electrifying lines so that trains are cheaper to run and maintain? Yes, the government should invest some capital into that.
Resignalling to reduce manning costs? The gains are a bit more marginal, it's only worth paying if you needed to make alterations anyway. Still needs doing.
Removing passenger-facing staff? No, you won't see any expansion of DOO beyond existing routes for the foreseeable future. Disability groups have wised up to what is going on and will fight in the courts any changes that result in a reduction in accessibility. If you want to remove onboard staff you either need to make trains 100% step-free, or provide full staffing at all stations, from first to last train.
ATO? No chance. Firstly you need to resignal (see above). Once you've done that you are still left with a "Train Operator" (as per Victoria Line) sitting in the front, ready to apply the brakes in an emergency. If you want to do away wjth them you need to make sure that no hazards can fall foul of the railway. That means sorting out the fencing, cutting back vegetation, Platform Edge Doors, closing all level crossings etc. With just the resignalling the investment required would be around £1tn, now you're talking unimaginable amounts and you still need a member of staff (a "Train Captain" on the DLR) onboard to assist passengers if an evacuation is necessary. Want to get rid of them and you need evacuation catwalks which will mean reboring tunnels. TLDR: apart from the Crossrail core it'll be never be worth getting rid of staff, you won't come close to recouping the outlay.
Also a poster says 2024 prices out of 2019 wages, but if, and i don't know, but if 2019 wages were good/very good, then the inflation upto 2024 doesn't have as much effect as on someone on a lower wage in 2019, which alot were.
Some staff will have taken out mortgages based upon their income in 2019. Wages have fallen so far behind inflation, and interest rates have risen so much that the mortgage is now unaffordable. This can affect anyone, no matter what their 2019 salary was.
Merseyrail guards are possibly the only workers in the country who had a guarantee of their jobs being secured, when there was no long term job role for them other than them being a uniformed person being on the train. There's no way a government, even a Labour one, would do that nationwide.
The thing to remember about a payrise is it's guaranteed. I'd much rather see my salary go up £1000 than get a one off bonus of £1000, that may or may not be given the following year.
Well, the pay offer is 8-10% over two years (can't remember which).
Passengers have already had a fare increase of 6% last year, probably similar this year.
I'd say that passengers are already paying more than their share of the proposed wage settlement. Time for the Government to cough up it's part and get the service running.
More enlightened European countries have been cutting train fares, often by introducing cheap monthly tickets. Not this one though, they pay lip service to the environment.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
From experience, in my industry, branch meetings are generally only attended by the more militant types, for whom, nothing will ever be good enough, they will never gauge a true representation of how most average union members feel...
They are union echo chambers, I've been to a couple which almost made me come out of our union.
We've moved into the 21st Century now. WhatsApp group chats enable views to be shared without having to physically attend a meeting at a specific time (these are shift-workers, remember).
Unfortunately we've been down this road two or three times and it's all smoke and mirrors. I will believe that they want to settle this dispute when I read an offer which is fair and proportionate to both sides which up to now they haven't been able to do.
Unfortunately we've been down this road two or three times and it's all smoke and mirrors. I will believe that they want to settle this dispute when I read an offer which is fair and proportionate to both sides which up to now they haven't been able to do.
I think it's interesting that Lynch's message to the members is quite conciliatory and mentions they are still talking and considering each sides position, rather than the anti RDG/TOC/Shareholder/DfT/Govt rants that have come out at previous disappointments.
If the DfT had listened to the TOCs, a pay rise of a much lower percentage than now being talked about would have been agreed before inflation rocketed. Probably a multi-year deal that would have tied the hands of the unions when Putin invaded Ukraine. Productivity talks could’ve been held subsequently with much less pressure. This government however is not known for its pragmatism and stonewalled. So inflation spiked and the demands grew greater.
Out of curiosity, can you provide a detailed example of what another part of the public sector have had to change in order to get a below-inflation rise? If you can show us the specifics it would shed some light rather than heat.
I wonder which department funds the PM's air travel. I know that the cost of operating the Royal Train comes out of the DfT budget, but I'm not sire whether the DfT or the MoD pay for Sunak's helicopters (presumably they're RAF pilots. That'll be a cost saving.
A few of the other rostering changes are unpalatable too. Banning fixed rest day patterns and prohibiting the reps from any involvement in drawing up base rosters. Cost savings that would result from these are the square root of sod all but they make a big difference to work/life balance.
Ballots have been held every six months and all have strongly supported continuing the action. If people wanted to settle, they would have voted differently. The RMT leadership doesn't get a vote in these ballots, only the affected members. It's got nothing to do with party politics.
The government's refusal to settle has certainly been a drain on the economy. I wonder if they realise that encouraging car use just sends more wealth to the Middle East, rather than it recirculating in the UK economy.
It's not just a hypothetical thing, we're seeing it in real time. Years of neglect of defence budgets across the west have emboldened Putin and lead him to believe that we were a spent force. Obviously we supported Ukraine rather more than he thought, but it was the initial impression that encouraged the invasion. That invasion is a big part of the reason why the economy is struggling now.
Like electrifying lines so that trains are cheaper to run and maintain? Yes, the government should invest some capital into that.
Resignalling to reduce manning costs? The gains are a bit more marginal, it's only worth paying if you needed to make alterations anyway. Still needs doing.
Removing passenger-facing staff? No, you won't see any expansion of DOO beyond existing routes for the foreseeable future. Disability groups have wised up to what is going on and will fight in the courts any changes that result in a reduction in accessibility. If you want to remove onboard staff you either need to make trains 100% step-free, or provide full staffing at all stations, from first to last train.
ATO? No chance. Firstly you need to resignal (see above). Once you've done that you are still left with a "Train Operator" (as per Victoria Line) sitting in the front, ready to apply the brakes in an emergency. If you want to do away wjth them you need to make sure that no hazards can fall foul of the railway. That means sorting out the fencing, cutting back vegetation, Platform Edge Doors, closing all level crossings etc. With just the resignalling the investment required would be around £1tn, now you're talking unimaginable amounts and you still need a member of staff (a "Train Captain" on the DLR) onboard to assist passengers if an evacuation is necessary. Want to get rid of them and you need evacuation catwalks which will mean reboring tunnels. TLDR: apart from the Crossrail core it'll be never be worth getting rid of staff, you won't come close to recouping the outlay.
Some staff will have taken out mortgages based upon their income in 2019. Wages have fallen so far behind inflation, and interest rates have risen so much that the mortgage is now unaffordable. This can affect anyone, no matter what their 2019 salary was.
As above there won't be any extension of single-manning beyond its current boundaries for some time. The network is not accessible enough.
Salary rises are pensionable too, bonuses are not.
More enlightened European countries have been cutting train fares, often by introducing cheap monthly tickets. Not this one though, they pay lip service to the environment.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
We've moved into the 21st Century now. WhatsApp group chats enable views to be shared without having to physically attend a meeting at a specific time (these are shift-workers, remember).
I attended an online discussion from rmt. Many many grades attended. EVERYONE within that union were invited. The concensus was from those who did was taken. If peoplenarent happy they had a chance to voice but likely disregarded it
I attended an online discussion from rmt. Many many grades attended. EVERYONE within that union were invited. The concensus was from those who did was taken. If peoplenarent happy they had a chance to voice but likely disregarded it
We've moved into the 21st Century now. WhatsApp group chats enable views to be shared without having to physically attend a meeting at a specific time (these are shift-workers, remember).
Given the nature of railway work, no matter when an on-line meeting was held a proportion of Union members would be unable to take part due to being on shift.
From experience, in my industry, branch meetings are generally only attended by the more militant types, for whom, nothing will ever be good enough, they will never gauge a true representation of how most average union members feel...
They are union echo chambers, I've been to a couple which almost made me come out of our union.
I have attended only one or two meetings over the years, and did attend the online one about the offer earlier in the year, which despite being quite well attended only had one or two people from each TOC there, as the branch covers multiple TOCS. Some grades at some TOCS weren't represented at all.
I concur that my experience of all branch meetings are like yours and do not really represent the wide variety of views held by the wider membership.
Unfortunately we've been down this road two or three times and it's all smoke and mirrors. I will believe that they want to settle this dispute when I read an offer which is fair and proportionate to both sides which up to now they haven't been able to do.
That seems to be a common view, the union meetings are cliques of militants, and anyone openly saying anything moderate feels on a par with a Roman slave standing in middle of a coliseum expecting to be slain.
Not surprising outcome is the militant viewpoint if they are only ones who turn up, and anyone else is intimidated.
Personally I am against any intimidation in workplace, be it a bullying manager, or any official, including union officials, and if Union wants to practice it, and I was still working I would be seriously considering terminating any union membership
Well the ballots are secret ballots and they've had incredibly strong majorities so any speculation that there is a large number of union members who want to accept the offer but daren't say it is living in fairyland.
Well the ballots are secret ballots and they've had incredibly strong majorities so any speculation that there is a large number of union members who want to accept the offer but daren't say it is living in fairyland.
The RMT pulled the plug on the offer with a week to go in the last ballot, having requested members back them in the ballot to give them a strong mandate for negotiations in the next stage. In those circumstances, the turnout in the ballot can hardly be considered a referendum on the offer. Whether the RMT get anything like such support next time round, however, seems much more debatable.
I think it's interesting that Lynch's message to the members is quite conciliatory and mentions they are still talking and considering each sides position, rather than the anti RDG/TOC/Shareholder/DfT/Govt rants that have come out at previous disappointments.
They don't have many options other than that that I can see. The RDG/Government have demonstrated a level of disinterest and the RMT have refused to put the current offer to members. The tone of this message is different from past ones though which gives me hope that there is an actual negotiation that can happen. Both sides need to not be seen to back down at this point in the siege so how they finesse that will be interesting to see.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
