2026 Pay Award

[Horizon22]

Don't think anyone has mentioned LNER drivers have accepted a 4 year pay deal with various other changes to Ts&Cs including a 4 day week and an effective 32 hour week....

I’ve not seen this reported elsewhere, where has this come from (no need to name the actual source, just general idea).

Also I presume “effective” is doing some heavy lifting here?

 

[DoubleO]

It's been voted on through ASLEF and accepted. I'm very surprised it's not made it onto this thread yet.

I believe the 32 hour week is a reduction in productive hours as part of a 35 hour roster.

 

[officewalla]

Don't think anyone has mentioned LNER drivers have accepted a 4 year pay deal with various other changes to Ts&Cs including a 4 day week and an effective 32 hour week....

That sounds like a bit of a tease considering who runs LNER. Do you have any details?

 

[whoosh]

I've seen the circular ASLEF put out for LNER. It mentioned a change to a four day week (currently an average of a 4.25 day week). It did not mention a reduction in the working week.

In the past, as examples, South Eastern went from an average 4.5 day week down to a four day week, and TPE went from a 4.25 day week to a four day week. In both cases the weekly hours stayed at 35, and the average day length went up.

Where does it say there's a reduction in the working week at LNER?
At London Overground, some years ago now, (it was part of an additional deal to increase from 19 to 26 Sundays a year) they went from a 4.25 day week to a four day week, keeping their average running turn length - but spare turns became maximum daily hours. So on paper it was 35 hours a week still, but more like 33 in reality.
Is that the proposal at LNER?

 

[kkong]

ASLEF have not accepted though at XC?

There is a paywalled article in The Sunday Times about this.

CrossCountry train drivers turn down above-inflation pay rise

CrossCountry train drivers turn down above-inflation pay rise

Aslef union rejects ‘unacceptable’ 3.6% package from long-distance operator that was found to be the worst performer for cancellations

Oliver Gill, Deputy Business Editor

Saturday October 03 2026, 6.00pm BST, The Sunday Times

Train drivers on Britain’s worst-performing rail line have rejected an above-inflation pay rise in a row over “productivity measures" such as scrapping paper payslips.

Bosses at CrossCountry, which runs long-distance services from Edinburgh to Penzance and Cardiff to Stansted, are embroiled in a stand-off with train drivers’ union Aslef over a new pay deal.

Drivers were offered a 3.6 per cent increase, backdated to May of this year, in return for three productivity measures: switching to e-payslips; voluntary occupational health referral medicals to be conducted over the phone; and bringing the reference point for future negotiations forward to February.

Consumer prices inflation was 2.8 per cent in the 12 months to May 2026, according to the Office for National Statistics.

The union said that the conditions were submitted to leaders in writing rather than put forward during negotiations. The option of a no-strings-attached 3 per cent pay rise option was also proposed.

The government has yet to sign off the pay rise proposals. CrossCountry is operated by Arriva, one of Europe's biggest bus and train companies. It is scheduled to be brought into full public ownership — and, ultimately, part of Great British Railways — in the autumn next year. Even so, all finalised pay deals on the railways still need to be signed off by ministers.

A government source said: "We're not in the business of handing out above-inflation pay rises without benefits to passengers. This isn't money for nothing."

Dave Calfe, the general secretary of Aslef, told CrossCountry that the 2026 pay offer was not acceptable. A failure to agree a deal during October "may bring the company into dispute with Aslef", he told the company.

A spokesman for Aslef said: "It's disappointing that there have been no negotiations with the company over this offer. And there are no meetings planned to discuss this further."

But Nick Westcott, service delivery director at CrossCountry, said: "We're disappointed that Aslef has taken this position. Following a series of negotiations with representatives, we have improved our offer at each stage to reflect feedback from the trade union.

"We believe the final offer is fair for colleagues while being sustainable for the business. We remain committed to constructive dialogue and are open to further discussions."

It is understood that similar pay terms offered to CrossCountry's workforce of about 2,100 people have been accepted by the RMT and TSSA trade unions.

The rejection of the CrossCountry pay deal contrasts with the acceptance of a similar 3.6 per cent increase at west coast operator Avanti. That came alongside a 50 per cent rise in Sunday wages and a £720 flat fee for turning up to work on drivers' days off.

LNER, the east coast mainline operator, also recently struck an agreement for a 12 per cent driver pay rise over four years.

CrossCountry received the worst score in a passenger survey over the summer, with watchdog Transport Focus urging the company to improve its performance. The operator was the worst performing in terms of cancellations, according to the the Office of Rail and Road's most recent statistics, with 8 per cent of services axed between April and June this year.

 

[whoosh]

Cross Country:

"The union said that the conditions were submitted to leaders in writing rather than put forward during negotiations."

"A spokesman for Aslef said: "It's disappointing that there have been no negotiations with the company over this offer. And there are no meetings planned to discuss this further."

Looks like the issue is an offer made outside of the normal 'bargaining machinery' process. Therefore, it is unsurprising that the Executive Committe of the union have rejected the offer as full and proper negotiations have not been completed.
It is not necessarily the amount, or the strings that are being rejected, it's the way of going about making the offer that is.

 

[kkong]

I fail to see what is contentious about an employer putting an offer in writing after due consideration of what was discussed in a meeting.

But then it's just one of many things about industrial relations on the railway that baffles me.

 

[TheAnswer89]

Yeah drivers would have accepted an offer for XC, but it was rejected on union level.

 

[DoubleO]

At London Overground, some years ago now, (it was part of an additional deal to increase from 19 to 26 Sundays a year) they went from a 4.25 day week to a four day week, keeping their average running turn length - but spare turns became maximum daily hours. So on paper it was 35 hours a week still, but more like 33 in reality.
Is that the proposal at LNER?

As I understand it yes this sounds like a similar agreement

 

[whoosh]

As I understand it yes this sounds like a similar agreement

Thankyou for that. I did a bit if digging and found these two statements from ASLEF District Council meetings in June:

LNER
Agreed deal PDA review 32hr week additional rest days and cost
neutral but DFT say NO

A 32-hour week was agreed at LNER on both sides and costs neutral was blocked by
DfT, on grounds that might be wanted by other TOCS.

It would make sense for a London Overground style arrangement to have been been negotiated since, which would be a compromise. Perhaps that's what's happened?

 

[Posa]

Let's hope the daily mail doesn't get hold of the Aslef circular because Apr 29 a non driver trainer London LNER driver is going to be on £99,727.

 

[officewalla]

Cross Country:


Looks like the issue is an offer made outside of the normal 'bargaining machinery' process. Therefore, it is unsurprising that the Executive Committe of the union have rejected the offer as full and proper negotiations have not been completed.
It is not necessarily the amount, or the strings that are being rejected, it's the way of going about making the offer that is.

They need to grow up and stop throwing teddies out whenever they do not get their way. 3.6% has been a common settlement this year and as for getting upset about electronic pay slips.....the mind boggles as to which century they think that they are in!

 

[whoosh]

They need to grow up and stop throwing teddies out whenever they do not get their way. 3.6% has been a common settlement this year and as for getting upset about electronic pay slips.....the mind boggles as to which century they think that they are in!

It has been a common settlement, yes. After proper talks.

I think there's a significant danger you are being led into "that's just ridiculous!" territory by a newspaper, if you think ASLEF are against electronic pay slips.

 

[Posa]

3.6 was February rpi which a lot of tocs anniversary date is from so not as if they are offering a massive pay rise. (In b4 nurses get 30p an hour etc etc)

If the company want to change terms and conditions for their benefit then it is only right they give an incentive for it.

 

[TheAnswer89]

3.6 was February rpi which a lot of tocs anniversary date is from so not as if they are offering a massive pay rise. (In b4 nurses get 30p an hour etc etc)

If the company want to change terms and conditions for their benefit then it is only right they give an incentive for it.

How an electronic payslip benefits company more than it benefits employees? There is literally no reason to be difficult about it…

 

[NeakPed]

Let's hope the daily mail doesn't get hold of the Aslef circular because Apr 29 a non driver trainer London LNER driver is going to be on £99,727.

i’d heard it was £103,113

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Yesterday at 21:42 ==

And ive realised that the comment I replied to seems to be serious.

Anything to back this claim up ?

 

[officewalla]

It has been a common settlement, yes. After proper talks.

I think there's a significant danger you are being led into "that's just ridiculous!" territory by a newspaper, if you think ASLEF are against electronic pay slips.

Not at all. This madness that an efficiency improvement that benefits everyone equally needs a pay uplift needs to stop. The employees are not being asked to do anything onerous so why would the unions get upset about it? Proper talks means unions stamping their feet and being petty minded about a fair and reasonable pay offer that has been accepted across the industry for this pay round. Exceptions such as a 4 year deal for LNER drivers are a bit light on detail in the forum currently so are hard to discuss objectively.

 

[whoosh]

'Collective bargaining' works like this:

The workers vote people in to represent them at company level. In ASLEF, this is called 'Company Council', and it is their role to negotiate pay and conditions with the company.
To bypass this, and make an offer direct to the union's head office - however good or reasonable the offer is - does not give a chance for meaningful discussions. So quite rightly, it has been rejected by the ASLEF Executive Committee.

What's the point in voting someone in to negotiate for you, if they can just be bypassed?

Perhaps the Managing Director of Cross Country thinks it's okay to disrespect a proper negotiating process because unions are a rather bothersome annoyance that she didn't have to put up with in her previous role at (bastion of employer/employee relations) Amazon?

Of course the newspapers love it. Honing in on reasonable terms like e-payslips, and how much of a raise it is (ooh and look how much they're on already!!!), and how it's been rejected [It must be because they want even more money! But we won't actually say that, just imply.]
Look how unreasonable the trade union is!!!!!
I suppose a company not negotiating properly with the representatives the staff chose to actually represent them in pay talks, and how unreasonable that is, is no where near as good a story. Hence why it's only just hinted at and not gone into as much detail. But the rejected offer - let's put some details in!

 

[TheAnswer89]

I mean its a little bit of a grey area. Whenever pay talks happen and ASLEF decides to accept an offer without talking to drivers WHO chose them to represent them and should have a say if they are happy about the offer being accepted I don't see this kind of posts? The reality of things is that an offer should have been accepted, because nothing inside an offer was really a change in terms and conditons...

 

[whoosh]

I mean its a little bit of a grey area. Whenever pay talks happen and ASLEF decides to accept an offer without talking to drivers WHO chose them to represent them and should have a say if they are happy about the offer being accepted I don't see this kind of posts? The reality of things is that an offer should have been accepted, because nothing inside an offer was really a change in terms and conditons...

I get what you are saying - the ASLEF Executive Committee can and has accepted pay offers without running a referendum of the members. However, crucially, this is when an offer is recommended for acceptance by the Company Council, who are the representatives at the company concerned and who have taken part in the bargaining process.

 

[ValentaFan1974]

I should know this (but clearly I don't! ) - I'm guessing while ASLEF chew the fat over this XC debacle, the RMT and TSSA grades will have to wait for their increases?

 

[officewalla]

'Collective bargaining' works like this:

The workers vote people in to represent them at company level. In ASLEF, this is called 'Company Council', and it is their role to negotiate pay and conditions with the company.
To bypass this, and make an offer direct to the union's head office - however good or reasonable the offer is - does not give a chance for meaningful discussions. So quite rightly, it has been rejected by the ASLEF Executive Committee.

What's the point in voting someone in to negotiate for you, if they can just be bypassed?

Perhaps the Managing Director of Cross Country thinks it's okay to disrespect a proper negotiating process because unions are a rather bothersome annoyance that she didn't have to put up with in her previous role at (bastion of employer/employee relations) Amazon?

Of course the newspapers love it. Honing in on reasonable terms like e-payslips, and how much of a raise it is (ooh and look how much they're on already!!!), and how it's been rejected [It must be because they want even more money! But we won't actually say that, just imply.]
Look how unreasonable the trade union is!!!!!
I suppose a company not negotiating properly with the representatives the staff chose to actually represent them in pay talks, and how unreasonable that is, is no where near as good a story. Hence why it's only just hinted at and not gone into as much detail. But the rejected offer - let's put some details in!

Not quite true as union democracy only applies if the union agrees with the direction of travel in my experience. Democracy means ensuring the activists outnumber the moderates at branch meetings and therefore only activists get elected. A significant number of ASLEF members are only in the union as an insurance policy and I know of die hard activists as well as more moderate individuals who have left ASLEF in recent times because of this very fact. Can't speak for the other unions but this forum is full of stories of union opposition to things that should be business as usual with no need to seek approval from a small number of the workforce who don't ask their members at the best of times.