Could someone explain why ASLEF want Sundays inside the working week?

[Moonshot]

Reading that does make you blink a bit when you read drivers elsewhere in this Forum seeking ways to keep their annual income under 100k to avoid additional tax! Perhaps the "price" is already sufficiently high............or how much higher do you think it should be?

I can absolutely assure you that no driver will be giving that away.

As far as the tax is concerned, I myself avoid paying the higher rate by simply boosting my pension

 

[43066]

I can guarantee that every TOC that doesn’t have Sundays in some way committed wants them committed. It’s not the TOCs.

You mean they want to have their cake and eat it by introducing enforced overtime. That isn’t acceptable from the union side, and also doesn’t work particularly well in practice, as GWR and Thameslink seem to be finding out.

What’s wrong with just doing it the proper way and bringing Sundays inside the working week? If that doesn’t happen we will likely carry on as we are.

Reading that does make you blink a bit when you read drivers elsewhere in this Forum seeking ways to keep their annual income under 100k to avoid additional tax! Perhaps the "price" is already sufficiently high............or how much higher do you think it should be?

In many cases that’s due to significant back pay received in one tax year, after several years with no pay rise at all. In any case, the level of the salary is irrelevant; if contractual terms are going to be varied, that needs to be paid for.

 

[Tractor2018]

The railway industry has changed and staff need to embrace the changes

Quite the opposite actually - TOCs need to embrace change.

You've not been around this forum long enough to know ASLEF want Sundays in the week?

I'm sure you're aware, you must be, that it only happens with more staff. And they won't employ enough just now. So regardless of where everybody would like to be, staff and passengers, there's no easy answer if TOCs are either pennypinching and/or inept at planning training.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Oct 2024 ==

Would this mean drivers are getting paid for turning up at the depot even if there’s no guards for the duration of their shift?

You want a driver's pay stopped because the company can't employ enough guards? What colour is the sky in your world?

 

[PLY2AYS]

I can guarantee that every TOC that doesn’t have Sundays in some way committed wants them committed. It’s not the TOCs.

Not true.

Pretty sure Chiltern don’t want Sundays inside…
During the recent industrial action, they in fact spoke to the DfT or RDG and said they were prepared to sit down and negotiate pay with their staff because they had Ts&Cs that suited them… so you’re wrong.

ASLEF want Sundays inside, drivers who want to work Sundays don’t mind Sundays inside so it becomes pensionable.

Like the many comments before this; it’s the majority of companies refusing to (or burying their heads in the sand about) hire enough drivers to continue a 4 day working week with Sundays inside.
This isn’t something we’re going to see very quickly, with the number due to retire over the next few months/years, and the amount of trainees hired to replace those alone… it’s going to take a lot longer than just one or two recruitment drives, which means that adversely, would make bringing Sundays inside; a more unreliable weekday service.

 

[Bald Rick]

You mean they want to have their cake and eat it by introducing enforced overtime.

No, they want some form of commitment for Sundays - whether that be committed Sundays as overtime or fully inside.

Not true.

That might be your opinion.

 

[PLY2AYS]

That might be your opinion.

No. It’s fact.

Stating of facts over a forum doesn’t necessarily constitute opinion… however you choose to interpret things you don’t like to hear. I’m sorry to tell you, you’re misinformed.

The burden of proof is on you. Back your claim… “ALL TOCs”.

 

[whoosh]

The railway industry has changed and staff need to embrace the changes

Perhaps now is the time to recollect that Transport for Wales came to a negotiated pay deal that placed Sundays inside the working week, and included other productivity as well. So, change was very much embraced there.

Meanwhile the DfT was busy manufacturing a dispute to strip workers rights via 'Minimum Service Levels', by proposing a wholly unserious, unnegotiated 'one size fits all' offer, that didn't even actually detail what it wanted or didn't, and was purposefully designed to be rejected.

Here we are years later with much of the the rail industry no further forward.
It could've been handled differently, but a decision was taken to deliberately not to.

TfW shows clearly that staff can embrace change, and the rhetoric of 'dinosaur unions' is a false one.

 

[BrianW]

The railway industry has changed and staff need to embrace the changes

IIUC, the Labour government was elected on a CHANGE agenda. Indeed the Chancellor introduced the Budget today with that reminder.

Andy Burnham, Labour Mayor for Gtr Manchester referred THIS morning on Radio 4 Today programme, 50,000 cancellations on Northern. That has to change. Something/ someone has to Change. Reform is expected- and not just that political party that won so many votes from the discontented. Louise Haigh is 'on notice' to deliver reform, and results.

 

[Bald Rick]

No. It’s fact.

Stating of facts over a forum doesn’t necessarily constitute opinion… however you choose to interpret things you don’t like to hear. I’m sorry to tell you, you’re misinformed.

The burden of proof is on you. Back your claim… “ALL TOCs”.

I can, but not on a public forum (for obvious reasons), sorry. I’ll guess we’ll just have to wait and see what happens.

 

[Moonshot]

IIUC, the Labour government was elected on a CHANGE agenda. Indeed the Chancellor introduced the Budget today with that reminder.

Andy Burnham, Labour Mayor for Gtr Manchester referred THIS morning on Radio 4 Today programme, 50,000 cancellations on Northern. That has to change. Something/ someone has to Change. Reform is expected- and not just that political party that won so many votes from the discontented. Louise Haigh is 'on notice' to deliver reform, and results.

Wait until you see what's going to happen this Sunday coming......it's going to be a disaster for the service on the west of Northern

 

[Red Rover]

You appear to have a poor understanding of the nature of employment. Why should any salaried employee expect not to be paid for turning up to work just because there’s no work to do?

I think it’s you who’s failing to see what I’m saying, if drivers are being paid for going in or staying at home that is an abject waste of money and so in turn the toc’s need to sort Sunday working practices out.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Nov 2024 ==

Wait until you see what's going to happen this Sunday coming......it's going to be a disaster for the service on the west of Northern

I know, they may as well give up, just pull the pin, it’s hopeless.

 

[43066]

I think it’s you who’s failing to see what I’m saying, if drivers are being paid for going in or staying at home that is an abject waste of money and so in turn the toc’s need to sort Sunday working practices out.

You asked “are drivers being paid for turning up at work when there are no trains to drive”, but that question makes no sense in the context of salaried employees who are entitled to be paid per their contract, irrespective of how little or much work they need to do; traincrew are not on zero hours contracts! Equally if there were no trains running due to (say) an engineering blockade, do you imagine traincrew booked to work that day lose a day’s pay?

The issue here in relation to Northern, as discussed many times before, appears to be a lack of appetite to either negotiate to bring Sundays into the week for relevant staff members, or to leave them outside but properly incentivise staff to attend work. It’s clear that this isn’t seen as a priority further up the chain, whether at a management or DfT level (or both) is less certain.

 

[muz379]

Another issue I have always had with committed sundays is , unless you have the same ratio of spare sundays as you have other days it will still always rely on volunteers as well because it is inevitable that from time to time people will be unable to take duty for their committed sundays , they could be off on the sick , taken off driving , finished late the previous day , dont sign the work etc etc . But if you do have the same ratio of spare , you might also be bringing people in spare, giving them no work . When they actually wanted the day off .

You asked “are drivers being paid for turning up at work when there are no trains to drive”, but that question makes no sense in the context of salaried employees who are entitled to be paid per their contract, irrespective of how little or much work they need to do; traincrew are not on zero hours contracts! Equally if there were no trains running due to (say) an engineering blockade, do you imagine traincrew booked to work that day lose a day’s pay?

The issue here in relation to Northern, as discussed many times before, appears to be a lack of appetite to either negotiate to bring Sundays into the week for relevant staff members, or to leave them outside but properly incentivise staff to attend work. It’s clear that this isn’t seen as a priority further up the chain, whether at a management or DfT level (or both) is less certain.

There is still an imbalance anyway with committed sundays . I have seen agreements at companies with committed sundays that entitle the company to cancel the sundays in advance for engineering work (think it was 14 days notice of any cancelled sunday turns ) - And of course where the sundays are committed overtime the links can also be changed with whatever the agreed posting period is and sundays removed .

But outside of this of course people should be paid , in the same way that traincrew still get paid any other day if they go into work but dont turn a wheel because on the day infastructure failure has prevented any of their work running . Of when you are spare/standby and dont turn a wheel cos everything is covered .

I remember a mate of mine working in the bus industry , and he got paid less when spare if he didnt turn a wheel . I can't imagine that going anywhere in the rail industry .

 

[Bald Rick]

I remember a mate of mine working in the bus industry , and he got paid less when spare if he didnt turn a wheel . I can't imagine that going anywhere in the rail industry .

AIUI it does happen in some TOCs, and was a fundamental part of the Ts and Cs in BR days.

 

[43066]

AIUI it does happen in some TOCs, and was a fundamental part of the Ts and Cs in BR days.

Lots of things happened in BR days that wouldn’t be generally acceptable now.

I’d be intrigued to know how you get paid less for sitting spare in any TOC these days, with “clean” salaries. Possibly if you don’t cop a longer job off your 8:45 spare once or twice, you might lose out on an overtime payment at the end of the month, but it won’t be a big amount either way.

 

[ThunderPumpkin]

At my TOC, Sundays are committed outside the working week. Not pensionable.
I would rather have a deal struck whereby the basic pensionable salary increases to an agreeable amount that brings Sundays inside.

That way we will be gaining Pensionable contributions for every Sunday worked as well as a true 4 day working week.

 

[12LDA28C]

At my TOC, Sundays are committed outside the working week. Not pensionable.
I would rather have a deal struck whereby the basic pensionable salary increases to an agreeable amount that brings Sundays inside.

That way we will be gaining Pensionable contributions for every Sunday worked as well as a true 4 day working week.

I suggest that is the viewpoint of many who currently have Sundays outside the working week, especially if committed.

 

[riceuten]

Requires more drivers = more members

Who's to say they'd be ASLEF members. More drivers overall is a very good idea

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2024 ==

"You have to provide a set of work patterns to suit the lazy Bs and a separate set to suit the greedy Cs".

Nice to see lazy industry stereotypes are alive and well

 

[12LDA28C]

Who's to say they'd be ASLEF members. More drivers overall is a very good idea

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2024 ==

Because the proportion of drivers who are not in ASLEF is negligible.

 

[riceuten]

Because the proportion of drivers who are not in ASLEF is negligible.

How awful.

So, in effect you're saying that ASLEF wants more drivers to swell ASLEF's coffers rather than provide the, er, advertised service? You do realise the closed shop ended decades ago ?

 

[12LDA28C]

How awful.

So, in effect you're saying that ASLEF wants more drivers to swell ASLEF's coffers rather than provide the, er, advertised service? You do realise the closed shop ended decades ago ?

ASLEF advocate Sundays in the week, the reason why is less important although clearly the extra drivers which will need to be employed to achieve this will mean an increase in ASLEF membership, as well as more certainty about provision of a Sunday service. A rare example of a win/win for both the Union and passengers, surely?

 

[172007]

How awful.

So, in effect you're saying that ASLEF wants more drivers to swell ASLEF's coffers rather than provide the, er, advertised service? You do realise the closed shop ended decades ago ?

It's nigh on a closed shop because free loading is a disgusting pitifull act that should not be part of any civilised society, that's why.

99% of Drivers are well educated bright individuals who are honest and have integrity hence why only the odd few are not part of Aslef

 

[Horizon22]

You do realise the closed shop ended decades ago ?

Yes but they are the registered union, with lots of expertise and knowledge of representing train drivers with well over 95% represented. Others union - such as the RMT - are available but there's also a requirement to be a recognised grade. Ultimately strength in numbers is useful here.

 

[PLY2AYS]

Nice to see lazy industry stereotypes are alive and well

This is a bite, surely?

 

[muz379]

How awful.

So, in effect you're saying that ASLEF wants more drivers to swell ASLEF's coffers rather than provide the, er, advertised service? You do realise the closed shop ended decades ago ?

It is about how that advertised service is delivered as well . Unions generally will always be in favour of full employment without reliance on grades they represent working overtime just to deliver the advertised level of service .

So when it comes to the question of Sundays , obviously unions generally would much prefer them inside the week , pensionable and without enforcing overtime on staff .


The fact that a side effect of this would be more drivers in the industry would be a consequence of that change , not the unions sole motivation for wanting that change .

 

[dk1]

This is a bite, surely?

That’s how I saw and hence dismissed it.

 

[Red Rover]

How awful.

So, in effect you're saying that ASLEF wants more drivers to swell ASLEF's coffers rather than provide the, er, advertised service? You do realise the closed shop ended decades ago ?

ASLEF is a business like other, no members no jobs. Unions reps not the FTO’s in my view tread a thin line wanting what historically what the union has always wanted since its inception (lower hours, better conditions and a higher wage) and pacifying members (and themselves as well) who couldn’t care about that and want to protect their overtime potential.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2024 ==

At my TOC, Sundays are committed outside the working week. Not pensionable.
I would rather have a deal struck whereby the basic pensionable salary increases to an agreeable amount that brings Sundays inside.

That way we will be gaining Pensionable contributions for every Sunday worked as well as a true 4 day working week.

A few are like that, to me it’s an absolute cop out by the unions, government and toc’s.
They need to be brought into the working week, the unions need to grow a set and say to members they’re here to attempt to get full employment and people NOT needing to work or rely on overtime, the toc’s need to reconfigure timetables to do this obviously and this needs to be all out on the table, northern tonight once again an absolute clown show.

 

[Stossgebet]

ASLEF is a business like other, no members no jobs. Unions reps not the FTO’s in my view tread a thin line wanting what historically what the union has always wanted since its inception (lower hours, better conditions and a higher wage) and pacifying members (and themselves as well) who couldn’t care about that and want to protect their overtime potential.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Nov 2024 ==


A few are like that, to me it’s an absolute cop out by the unions, government and toc’s.
They need to be brought into the working week, the unions need to grow a set and say to members they’re here to attempt to get full employment and people NOT needing to work or rely on overtime, the toc’s need to reconfigure timetables to do this obviously and this needs to be all out on the table, northern tonight once again an absolute clown show.

But here's a question that comes to mind, and stems from a thread about pensions.
In that thread, someone said (correctky i think) that pensionable pay can only increase by RPI+2.5% per year.

So should a productivity pay rise for getting sundays inside the working week achieve a rise beyond 2.5% above rpi (which i think it should), does that mean that the sundays in the working week won't achieve as much pensionable pay people think?

My question can be boiled down to, if i am correct. Is giving up your right to having Sundays outside the working week, worth a 2.5% pensionable pay uplift?

Or if i am totally mistaken. What have i misunderstood?

 

[Red Rover]

But here's a question that comes to mind, and stems from a thread about pensions.
In that thread, someone said (correctky i think) that pensionable pay can only increase by RPI+2.5% per year.

So should a productivity pay rise for getting sundays inside the working week achieve a rise beyond 2.5% above rpi (which i think it should), does that mean that the sundays in the working week won't achieve as much pensionable pay people think?

My question can be boiled down to, if i am correct. Is giving up your right to having Sundays outside the working week, worth a 2.5% pensionable pay uplift?

Or if i am totally mistaken. What have i misunderstood?

That’s a personal financial question only you can answer, what I’m saying is from a business, customer and forward thinking perspective Sundays should be within the working week and I say that as a railwayman.
The issue isn’t going to go away, so it needs to be addressed.
All new starters on all gov toc’s having Sundays written into the working week would be a start, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’d have to work them yet but it would show intention.
Toc’s need to employ more staff, if they can’t do that then how can they run a guaranteed service, rhetorical they can’t hence the embarrassing levels of service northern provide on a Sunday, it’s worse than 3rd world level service.

 

[PLY2AYS]

My question can be boiled down to, if i am correct. Is giving up your right to having Sundays outside the working week, worth a 2.5% pensionable pay uplift?

Or if i am totally mistaken. What have i misunderstood?

Well if Sundays are brought into the working week… it’ll still be a 4 day week.

So I can’t imagine that there would be much/any difference in pensionable contributions?

If however it comes into the working week as a 5th day, which I cannot see ASLEF agreeing to, then it becomes an issue.