ATW Drivers Strike

[northwichcat]

Could well be its the grade/grades involved, most of the wibble ive seen on here is very ANTI Guard. Very rare on here do you see anything positive about any other role other then driver. Everyone it seems wants to be one and will not even think another member of railway staff actually exists.

I personally get the impression the RMT and some guards feel the guard's role is at risk so go a bit over the top in defending that well paid role and as a consequence of that people actually care less about the guard's role than they would otherwise do.

On the other hand I imagine no-one wants a self-driving high speed train at especially not one without a fully qualified back up driver who can take over the controls if the computer plays up.

 

[plymothian]

I personally get the impression the RMT and some guards feel the guard's role is at risk so go a bit over the top in defending that well paid role and as a consequence of that people actually care less about the guard's role than they would otherwise do.

On the other hand I imagine no-one wants a self-driving high speed train at especially not one without a fully qualified back up driver who can take over the controls if the computer plays up.

Exactly.

Yes ... the guards' role is threatened
Yes ... a train can run DOO

So therefore the only person you need is a driver [currently] to run a train, so why should people give a **** about anyone else?

Hell, why should people care about signallers, or NR staff too really? All they want is a train to go from A to B when they want, and as far as they're concerned, it only needs a driver.

 

[313103]

I personally get the impression the RMT and some guards feel the guard's role is at risk so go a bit over the top in defending that well paid role and as a consequence of that people actually care less about the guard's role than they would otherwise do.

On the other hand I imagine no-one wants a self-driving high speed train at especially not one without a fully qualified back up driver who can take over the controls if the computer plays up.

It is not an impression that the Guards role is at risk, it is a matter of FACT! London Overground got rid of theirs, Trans Pennine Express, Northern Rail, Merseyrail & First Great Western all plan to get rid of theirs. Scotrail plan to expand DOO.

So would your position be that Guards and the Guards union do nothing and just let the rot continue without saying or doing anything about it?

How over the top did the union go over at London Overground? A two day strike over the Notting Hill carnival in 2013 and that was it. Announced in July in by November. I would say that was a rather quick and fairly painless (unless you was one of them, like me!) experience.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Exactly.

Yes ... the guards' role is threatened
Yes ... a train can run DOO

So therefore the only person you need is a driver [currently] to run a train, so why should people give a **** about anyone else?

Hell, why should people care about signallers, or NR staff too really? All they want is a train to go from A to B when they want, and as far as they're concerned, it only needs a driver.

That just sums up peoples attitude in this modern world created in the 1980s 'No such thing as us, it is all about me'.

If you sold to the public that if you ran the train without a driver and it would save you money on your ticket, watch the clamour to get it in.

All about perception.

 

[plymothian]

If you sold to the public that if you ran the train without a driver and it would save you money on your ticket, watch the clamour to get it in.

They already have, and the public already do (although more in relation to strike action than fares at the moment) - London Underground.

 

[ComUtoR]

They already have, and the public already do (although more in relation to strike action than fares at the moment) - London Underground.

How many who travel on the tube or even the DLR are aware that the person up the front isn't driving ?

I was talking to my kids on the train not that long ago and we were talking about the DLR and the looks I got from passengers when I was telling them it didn't have a "driver" was, to me, amusing. One lady pulled me aside and asked if I was joking with them.

 

[Mike395]

I've deleted a couple of entirely off-topic posts regarding DOO (realise there are elements elsewhere in the thread but to clear every mention up would take a year or two :P ) - this isn't the place to discuss DOO's pros and cons (again)

 

[highdyke]

It's arguable people are not so upset about or anti-certain roles, rather they care about rising travel costs (when they are often not getting pay rises) or in the case of enthusiasts the sustainability of the network. That's not selfish at all.

The railway's industrial relations seem stuck in a past era, you only have to read the union newsletters for that. Despite everyone in the industry never having it so good (from top to bottom) and more regulation and government control than most other private sectors, there seems to be more industrial unrest than any other sector and constant calls for nationalisation.

Perhaps some grades have made themselves more visible in their disputes? Whether it drivers not booking on for Sundays or Guards filling this forum with complaints of cut backs, yet the signalling grade remain largely silent despite the biggest set of job cuts possibly ever for them.

In the case of ATW, it's likely that it's not affecting the London commuter market, where there is little alternative to rail.

 

[ComUtoR]

It's arguable people are not so upset about or anti-certain roles, rather they care about rising travel costs (when they are often not getting pay rises) or in the case of enthusiasts the sustainability of the network. That's not selfish at all.

It is however; a total fantasy. The fares will continue to rise irrespective of how many staff are on board. They will continue to rise due to many other economic factors.

The railway's industrial relations seem stuck in a past era, you only have to read the union newsletters for that. Despite everyone in the industry never having it so good (from top to bottom) and more regulation and government control than most other private sectors, there seems to be more industrial unrest than any other sector and constant calls for nationalisation.

What is the modern way of dealing with disputes ?

I may be well paid but this is possibly one of the worse jobs I have ever had when I put it in perspective.

The government is regulating the industry not the employees. Employees are covered by employment laws.

Industrial unrest compared to other sectors ?

Teacher strikes, Taxi direct action, nurse strikes, Jr Dr strikes, Lorry driver direct action, public sector strikes 2014, It's not just the railway. Oh and wasn't there a Signaller strike too ?

 

[northwichcat]

Teacher strikes, Taxi direct action, nurse strikes, Jr Dr strikes, Lorry driver direct action, public sector strikes 2014, It's not just the railway. Oh and wasn't there a Signaller strike too ?

Different circumstances. Remember an independent body said nurses should get a pay rise as they are underpaid for what they do but the government said a pay rise was unaffordable in the current economic climate and proposed freezing their pay, then a couple of years later the same body recommends a pay rise for MPs which the Conservatives approve. If you're a nurse you might have to do a week of night shifts every month for a £21,000 salary and finish your shift 12 hours after you start (start time being when you arrive at the hospital) - very different to train crews.

How many strikes have Unite called for as retail workers as more shops have opened on Sundays (when previously shops apart from newsagents were closed) and are open later in to the evening Mon-Sat? There's a lot more retailers than train operators so presumably the figure will be significantly higher?

 

[highdyke]

It is however; a total fantasy. The fares will continue to rise irrespective of how many staff are on board. They will continue to rise due to many other economic factors.

The number of staff on board was never mentioned, now and in previous posts.

What is the modern way of dealing with disputes ?

Normally to be part of a collaborative organisation, not an old fashioned command and control one.

 

[ComUtoR]

Different circumstances. Remember an independent body said nurses should get a pay rise as they are underpaid for what they do but the government said a pay rise was unaffordable in the current economic climate and proposed freezing their pay, then a couple of years later the same body recommends a pay rise for MPs which the Conservatives approve. If you're a nurse you might have to do a week of night shifts every month for a £21,000 salary and finish your shift 12 hours after you start (start time being when you arrive at the hospital) - very different to train crews.

Its the "same" circumstances. If you are unhappy with your terms and conditions and they are being changed then you have a right to express that. They went on strike. That is no different to what ATW Drivers are going through. Just because there is a different rate of pay and different set of conditions it is still a dispute and staff/management don't agree.

FYI We have staff that do a night shift every month and are paid around the same salary. I am also allowed, and have, worked my next shift 12hrs after I booked off. (start time being when you arrive at the depot) So that is very much the same as train crews. I have also worked nights 3 weeks in a row (6 day weeks) and then told to come back in on an early shift. Which means I've worked more nights than your example and came back in 12hr later.

How many strikes have Unite called for as retail workers as more shops have opened on Sundays (when previously shops apart from newsagents were closed) and are open later in to the evening Mon-Sat? There's a lot more retailers than train operators so presumably the figure will be significantly higher?

That's because retail has a flexible workforce and hire part time and specific sunday/bank holiday staff. The retail industry staffing arrangements are insane and they have huge turnover issues. They also employ zero hour contracts, part time, full time and hour based contracts. I would also state that part of the reasons why there isn't a mass strike in the retail sector is because staff are not generally in a Union and staff work according to their needs. There isn't often a major change of contract. I was involved in a change of contract when my then company went to Sunday and flexible working arrangements. I can assure you that what we did as management was disgraceful. What happened to the employees should never be allowed to happen. One of my reasons to join the Union and why I support them so much is because of what I was involved in from management side.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The number of staff on board was never mentioned, now and in previous posts.

Even so, staff costs are % of the ticket price. Staff costs are usually out of the TOC costs and affect their profit. To lower fares or slow down the rise in the fare you need to look at the whole picture. Using fare rises as an example is a deliberate attempt to sway argument. It is little more than "spin"

Normally to be part of a collaborative organisation, not an old fashioned command and control one.

What, like a Union ?

 

[ScouserGirl]

While some people wish they didn't ASLEF do make public salaries and benefits of their members. ATW drivers earn £43,868.00, they have 100% Pensionable Pay, a 4 day week, 28 days leave, free travel on other Arriva/DB services: http://www.aslef.org.uk/information/102222/102225/102366/arriva_trains_wales/

Merseyrail drivers get similar conditions and earn £43,412, while Northern, GWR and LM drivers earn more but some of the latter two are obviously London based where living costs are much higher than in Wales.

That's true about living costs! But I can see ATW having more strikes in the near future

 

[highdyke]

Even so, staff costs are % of the ticket price. Staff costs are usually out of the TOC costs and affect their profit. To lower fares or slow down the rise in the fare you need to look at the whole picture. Using fare rises as an example is a deliberate attempt to sway argument. It is little more than "spin"



What, like a Union ?

No a Union is nothing to to with collaborative organisations as such.

Staff costs are part of the cost of the ticket yes. One way to maintain jobs and salaries and costs down is productivity, or redundancies by natural wastage. This is being done with the signalling grade.

Other grades seems stuck in the past bolstered by union socialist propaganda (some of which has merit, some is plain bonkers) the result of which - as you have admitted staff costs are part of ticket costs - pushes up the prices of tickets, although that's just one of many factors.

Either way, the public and policy makers are pretty tired of it, and the railway needs to modernise its industrial relations and way it manages itself.

 

[ComUtoR]

No a Union is nothing to to with collaborative organisations as such.

So please enlighten me to who and what collaborative organisations are and how they manage employee terms and conditions etc.

Either way, the public and policy makers are pretty tired of it, and the railway needs to modernise its industrial relations and way it manages itself.

I used to believe this was the case but listening to those on the ground and who those strikes affect its pretty balanced and that the "public" may not support the strikes and are understandably upset and angry that they are affected but they generally agree with the employees.

What is clear is that there is a general dislike for rail strikes and mostly because they have such a major impact. Sometimes it can be quite vitriolic.

What I find upsetting is that too many people forget about the employees in these cases (not just rail strikes) The media and political spin gets in the way.

I have friends (shockingly) that are in non unionised employment and they constantly complain about their remuneration and conditions etc. I also have friends (different ones...) that are in unionised employment but their unions are not as proactive as mine and they also complain about their conditions.

We have a Union and staff who are prepared to fight for what they believe in and fight for a better place to work. Why is that so wrong ?

If there is another way then please enlighten us all because I don't see it. I don't like strikes but I can understand them and I know that they are the last resort when all else has failed.

 

[highdyke]

So please enlighten me to who and what collaborative organisations are and how they manage employee terms and conditions etc.

That's something you need to look into in your own time. Suffice to say command and control as a management method is considered outdated. We don't hear about strikes from web developers, or civil engineers, or many, many other sectors of the economy.

I used to believe this was the case but listening to those on the ground and who those strikes affect its pretty balanced and that the "public" may not support the strikes and are understandably upset and angry that they are affected but they generally agree with the employees.

What is clear is that there is a general dislike for rail strikes and mostly because they have such a major impact. Sometimes it can be quite vitriolic.

What I find upsetting is that too many people forget about the employees in these cases (not just rail strikes) The media and political spin gets in the way.

I have friends (shockingly) that are in non unionised employment and they constantly complain about their remuneration and conditions etc. I also have friends (different ones...) that are in unionised employment but their unions are not as proactive as mine and they also complain about their conditions.

We have a Union and staff who are prepared to fight for what they believe in and fight for a better place to work. Why is that so wrong ?

If there is another way then please enlighten us all because I don't see it. I don't like strikes but I can understand them and I know that they are the last resort when all else has failed.

The normal state of affairs is if you don't like your employer, you get a job somewhere else. Even if this means reskilling or upskilling. Yes, some employers and jobs are utter crap. Others are brilliant, public and private sector. Generally if you want to earn more, you become worth more per hour.

It is acknowledged parts of the railway are far too centralised and mobility is restricted. This in itself causes issues and probably accounts for high union membership on its own. Other issue is one grade doesn't understand the job of another. That's down to poor training and management to. It's worrying that many railway employees seem managers as another species, this isn't the case elsewhere, especially in SMEs. So, the finger isn't pointed all at the rather politicised unions, rather than an overall problem that does beset the industry. What factors creates a situation where employees feel like this? This needs looking into.

 

[FordFocus]

Either way, the public and policy makers are pretty tired of it, and the railway needs to modernise its industrial relations and way it manages itself.

By forcibly making drivers work overtime instead of their booked and agreed contracted rostered hours as what's happening here with ATW to cover a shortage of drivers because the management lack the competence to recruit to save on cash?

 

[BestWestern]

So please enlighten me to who and what collaborative organisations are and how they manage employee terms and conditions etc.




I used to believe this was the case but listening to those on the ground and who those strikes affect its pretty balanced and that the "public" may not support the strikes and are understandably upset and angry that they are affected but they generally agree with the employees.

What is clear is that there is a general dislike for rail strikes and mostly because they have such a major impact. Sometimes it can be quite vitriolic.

What I find upsetting is that too many people forget about the employees in these cases (not just rail strikes) The media and political spin gets in the way.

I have friends (shockingly) that are in non unionised employment and they constantly complain about their remuneration and conditions etc. I also have friends (different ones...) that are in unionised employment but their unions are not as proactive as mine and they also complain about their conditions.

We have a Union and staff who are prepared to fight for what they believe in and fight for a better place to work. Why is that so wrong ?

If there is another way then please enlighten us all because I don't see it. I don't like strikes but I can understand them and I know that they are the last resort when all else has failed.

A big part of the problem is that, for the vast majority, you simply go to work and tolerate whatever your employer demands of you. You may well be dissatisfied with your pay or conditions, but frankly it's tough. Where unions do exist, they often act more in a sort of 'official observer' capacity, simply keeping an eye on things rather than having any real input into developments. And so the very concept of a workforce actually standing up for themselves, and if need be going as far as withdrawing their labour, is completely foreign to most. They see it as radical, something that they can't quite comprehend. And of course there is a degree of jealousy. Railway staff are well paid, many others are not.

None of this means that industrial action is wrong, and thankfully (and by necessity), the unions do not base their actions on public opinion. If they did, we'd be in the same sorry state as most other workforces; expected to simply be grateful that we have a job at all and keep any concerns to ourselves.

 

[highdyke]

A big part of the problem is that, for the vast majority, you simply go to work and tolerate whatever your employer demands of you. You may well be dissatisfied with your pay or conditions, but frankly it's tough. Where unions do exist, they often act more in a sort of 'official observer' capacity, simply keeping an eye on things rather than having any real input into developments. And so the very concept of a workforce actually standing up for themselves, and if need be going as far as withdrawing their labour, is completely foreign to most. They see it as radical, something that they can't quite comprehend. And of course there is a degree of jealousy. Railway staff are well paid, many others are not.

None of this means that industrial action is wrong, and thankfully (and by necessity), the unions do not base their actions on public opinion. If they did, we'd be in the same sorry state as most other workforces; expected to simply be grateful that we have a job at all and keep any concerns to ourselves.

Most good employers won't just make demands if you have any reasonable skillset because you would just go and find another job, talented employees with a decent skillset are very sort after and that's not what most employers want. On the railway train crew grades have sort alternative employment to their advantage (for example London Midland leaving to go to Cross Country).

Unions are not generally needed if you are high skilled and mobile, and don't have a monopoly employer. The unions want nationalisation, if that was a BR model we'd have the network brought to a stand on a regular basis.

The jealousy thing is overrated. Most see railway (operating) work as mundane, with difficult unsocial hours, dealing with difficult members of the public, where even a small mistake can cost you your job (or worse). A job where weekends are worked (less time for family) and there's no drugs or alcohol anywhere near the shift. Add the backward industrial relations, near robotic style of working where there is little creative freedom for some jobs, it's actually not that attractive. In BR days, when wages were a lot less, great difficulty was had in staff recruitment. Only hardcore enthusiasts see it as romantic. Decent wages have made up for some of this since, and that's a good thing, but much of that is the competition between TOCs for jobs, coupled with a limited pool of ready-trained staff. Ironically again, if the Unions got what they want, and you had a monopoly employer, that advantage would disappear.

 

[BestWestern]

What you seem to be suggesting is that most of the population don't need Union representation, because if they don't like it they'll just jack it in and go somewhere else.

I think most of the population would disagree with that view.

Jealous may be the wrong word, but certainly a good many people begrudge railway staff earning what they do, which of course colours their views of the validity of industrial action.

 

[highdyke]

They don't seem to be voting with their feet, there are currently 6.4 million people in trade unions, down from the peak in the last 1970s. They tend to mainly exist in the public sector where there are monopoly employers and collective bargaining, usually education, health, social work, public admin. In the private sector it's mainly transport and energy supply. 38% of trade union members statistically more likely to be located in old industrial areas such as South Wales.

99.3% of private sector business are SMEs and are almost all non-union, the remaining big ones (like the big supermarkets, retail chains) have mixed union membership.

It's a good option for some people but doesn't work for others at all. Especially if they are highly skilled and work for SMEs.

Anyway, that's not the point. Regardless of political views and union membership, there's ongoing industrial relations issues in the rail industry. This has been a the case for a long time, whether under nationalisation or under the private companies. The complaints always seem the same, and the solutions never there. If you check out both the RMT and ASLEF sites they are full of socialist propaganda and anti-Tory and anti-management speak. It's not to say that all points are not credible, but winding employees up at every opportunity seems counter-productive to outsiders looking in.

 

[A-driver]

They don't seem to be voting with their feet, there are currently 6.4 million people in trade unions, down from the peak in the last 1970s. They tend to mainly exist in the public sector where there are monopoly employers and collective bargaining, usually education, health, social work, public admin. In the private sector it's mainly transport and energy supply. 38% of trade union members statistically more likely to be located in old industrial areas such as South Wales.

99.3% of private sector business are SMEs and are almost all non-union, the remaining big ones (like the big supermarkets, retail chains) have mixed union membership.

It's a good option for some people but doesn't work for others at all. Especially if they are highly skilled and work for SMEs.

Anyway, that's not the point. Regardless of political views and union membership, there's ongoing industrial relations issues in the rail industry. This has been a the case for a long time, whether under nationalisation or under the private companies. The complaints always seem the same, and the solutions never there. If you check out both the RMT and ASLEF sites they are full of socialist propaganda and anti-Tory and anti-management speak. It's not to say that all points are not credible, but winding employees up at every opportunity seems counter-productive to outsiders looking in.

Quite simply, considering the amount of battles rail unions have fought and won over recent years, if rail unions didn't exist staff would have far less than they do. I would say the rail industry would run on 0hours contacts without unions-from a management POV they are perfect for the cost effective flexibility they need. Pay would be on a par with minimum wage, working to the maximum allowed for safety critical staff by law and H&S would be virtually non existant with staff who report H&S issues and delay trains due to them being removed from their jobs.

Personally I'd prefer a union to keep what we have-I've no idea how you can honestly say we don't need unions anymore.

 

[highdyke]

That's a very extreme view, people wouldn't travel on a railway that had big issues with accidents and health and safety, nor would they work for it on the minimum wage on shiftwork taking some pretty big responsibilities. BR had this problem in the 60s and 70s, wages were just not keeping up with other industries, so many left to work in car factories or road haulage.

The airline industry is nothing like as unionised as the railway industry, yet don't seem to have the industrial relations issues. Nor does road haulage or even the bus industry, where wages are a lot less.

It's not that unions are a bad thing or they are not relevant, but where people have lots of employment opportunities, they are less relevant.

Historically unions have been a force for good, capitalism needs regulation.

Whether the brinkmanship that goes on within the rail industry is a bad thing for the employees is debatable, but historically it's not been good for users of the railway, freight and passenger. Reform is needed to control costs and solve some of these long standing industrial relations problems.

 

[GadgetMan]

The airline industry is nothing like as unionised as the railway industry, yet don't seem to have the industrial relations issues. Nor does road haulage or even the bus industry, where wages are a lot less.

Having watched recent documentaries on accidents and near misses, I wouldn't use the Airline Industry as a good example. The drive to lower fares and cut costs has already cost many lives. Low Pilot wages in small American airlines means the Pilots can't afford to live close to their workplace or afford hotels. They commute mega distances and then kip in the rest rooms before booking on already tired, then go on to f**k up in the skies.

Making trainees pay for their own training putting them into over £100K worth of debt and then paying them peanuts after they've qualified.

Air traffic controllers left on their own over night falling asleep in the tower with aircrafts unable to get a response over the radio instead of having an extra controller on duty at the same time to help each other stay alert.

Cutting back on Aircraft inspections/maintenance until there's a disaster and it comes back to bite them.

Putting pressure on Pilots to land the Aircraft on the first attempt even when they feel they should abandon the landing and attempt a go around.

The list goes on.....

The above all goes on in so called developed countries with 'high regards' to safety, I'd hate to think what happens in airlines based in poorer countries.

That's the price we are paying in exchange for ridiculously low fares for flying. I'd rather pay a higher fare than have them play Russian Roulette with my life.

Be careful what you wish for. The Unions are the reason our Railway is probably the (or one of the) safest in the world.

 

[A-driver]

That's a very extreme view, people wouldn't travel on a railway that had big issues with accidents and health and safety, nor would they work for it on the minimum wage on shiftwork taking some pretty big responsibilities. BR had this problem in the 60s and 70s, wages were just not keeping up with other industries, so many left to work in car factories or road haulage.

The airline industry is nothing like as unionised as the railway industry, yet don't seem to have the industrial relations issues. Nor does road haulage or even the bus industry, where wages are a lot less.

It's not that unions are a bad thing or they are not relevant, but where people have lots of employment opportunities, they are less relevant.

Historically unions have been a force for good, capitalism needs regulation.

Whether the brinkmanship that goes on within the rail industry is a bad thing for the employees is debatable, but historically it's not been good for users of the railway, freight and passenger. Reform is needed to control costs and solve some of these long standing industrial relations problems.

Airlines are incredibly unionised. Even more so in other countries. How often do you get air chaos due to air traffic controller or baggage handler strikes? Far more than on the railway!

I didn't say it would lead to more rail accidents either, I'm talking H&S as an employee-staffs H&S, not that of the public. Mess facilities, safe walking routes, safe staff procedures etc and roster/shift based health issues. These are constantly being attacked by management with only the union ensuring that staff H&S is taken seriously.

 

[notadriver]

Nor does road haulage or even the bus industry, where wages are a lot less.

I don't know why you think the road and bus industries have less problems with industrial relations. As a bus and coach driver I can tell you they certainly do but striking is rarely effective as 1) it needs a relatively high turnout and 2) Scab drivers desperate for cash can easily be brought in from elsewhere. The unions have comparatively little power in the road transport and bus industries.

I can still work on a 'day' rate when I do coaches. That means I can do 13 hours for £70. I'm told because only half that time is driving that it's fair and if I don't like it then there's the door.

 

[TDK]

I thought this thread was about the ATW drivers strike. I personally cannot relate it to the airline industry or any other industry. If web designers, staff from a supermarket, lorry drivers, taxi's, tree surgeons, metal workers, and many other workers went on strike the impact would never have the same effect as if train drivers went on strike as it would never be noticed enough for anyone to do anything about it.

The union I belong no matter what their political views (and I do not support most of them) are there for the protection of their members and also to ensure their pay and working conditions are to the standard that merits the working conditions and responsibility of the job, the subs for ASLEF at the moment are £28 per month so to be fair ASLEF have a duty to support their workers if any terms and conditions, pay or draconian management affects any of their members.

You folks can harp on as much as you like about this thread without knowing the true facts regarding the strike action and reasons for it and slating the grade and unions but in reality many posts on this thread are just inaccurate.

 

[PHILIPE]

Agree. The Mods have already hinted about deleting off topic posts.

 

[Greenback]

Any further posts that aren't about this particular strike will be deleted when spotted or reported.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

When are decisions likely to be made by the TOC in negotiations that may cause the union to decide upon further strike action and if so, will it be another one-day strike or will the matter of a two or three day strike be one mode of future action, in order to convince the TOC concerned of the seriousness that the union attaches to the strongly held views of its membership concerning the issues that union members have made so very clear upon this thread.

 

[Greenback]

I would hope that there won't be any more strikes of any duration, because the matters will be settled without any further action, which would be in the best interests of everyone involved.

That's what I hope anyway, I think I could be hoping in vain, though.