Is the RMT out of control?

[Tetchytyke]

that it is a bit too much of a coincidence that all these strikes are happening at the same time.

All the disputes are about the same thing- DOO.

It isn't a question of coincidence- these disputes are all being driven by the same issue.

The question is do we think the RMT are causing it or do we think Daft- whose senior manager is on record as saying he will destroy the guards- are causing it?

I know where my money is.

I also don't think the RMT can win this one, precisely because DafT are driving it and the government have deeper pockets than the trade union members.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

GTR Drivers. Don't know if it's just Southern only or all the GTR drivers

Why are GTR drivers going to strike...do you have a source for this?

 

[nuneatonmark]

Herein lies the age old issue of whether Unions should protect their workforce at all costs while this may be at odds with what is best for society as a whole and in some cases what has been voted for by the country. I've heard this nonsense before about MPs imposing electoral conditions on Unions that they wouldn't have themselves.They are two completely different things. In a Union vote for for strike action it's like a referendum NOT an election! It's not unreasonable to expect that the majority of members should have to vote for strike action, whether that is a majority of who vote or a majority of those that are members is open to debate but I believe the the latter is fairer. Each dispute has it's own merits and in many cases entirely reasonable. However, many union bosses, like the RMT, simply like to wield political power that their position gives them because they would never, ever get elected by the general population because of their extreme views. I do think that the RMT have a point about guards though but I also see why train companies want to see a change in what on train staff do. I think it's important to have someone else other than the driver on the train but I can't see why roles cannot change in order to meet the changing requirements of train travel either.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is it possible you might ever answer a question? I will ask it again in case you missed it:

How, therefore, should people protest about something they think is unfair in the work place.

Perception of "unfair in the work place" is not a one-sided scenario and should be viewed as having many facets to that vision. Others may well see it in a different light. No-one forces an employee to stay where they are unhappy. The employee is still the sole arbiter where he/she should ply their trade. "Big Brother" is not there to force acquiescence to the provision of work in any sector, thankfully.

Have you ever watched the original 1927 version of the Fritz Lang film film "Metropolis" which features a highly stylised futuristic city that exists above a bleak soul-less underground that is populated by whole tranches of mistreated workers?

 

[highdyke]

I'd further add it is up to workers to ensure they are equipped to resist the ravages of Schumpeter's thesis, not blame the rest of society on their inabilities to equip themselves of the skills and energies required to look after their wellbeing. Make certain career choices you get what goes with it, disruptive technology is always around the corner. Just ask the highwaymen and pirates.

 

[Richard_B]

The staff are required to run an important service that many people use. Surely this gives them a high "market value". Why should they not use their leverage to gain extra benefits? When has a board member ever used their powers to do the same !!

 

[highdyke]

Oh it's perfectly fine until you price yourself out the market.

 

[BuryBlue]

Herein lies the age old issue of whether Unions should protect their workforce at all costs while this may be at odds with what is best for society as a whole and in some cases what has been voted for by the country. I've heard this nonsense before about MPs imposing electoral conditions on Unions that they wouldn't have themselves.They are two completely different things. In a Union vote for for strike action it's like a referendum NOT an election! It's not unreasonable to expect that the majority of members should have to vote for strike action, whether that is a majority of who vote or a majority of those that are members is open to debate but I believe the the latter is fairer. Each dispute has it's own merits and in many cases entirely reasonable. However, many union bosses, like the RMT, simply like to wield political power that their position gives them because they would never, ever get elected by the general population because of their extreme views. I do think that the RMT have a point about guards though but I also see why train companies want to see a change in what on train staff do. I think it's important to have someone else other than the driver on the train but I can't see why roles cannot change in order to meet the changing requirements of train travel either.

It could be argued that the railway, transporting so many people to their work, is a key service and so should be regarded differently to, say, your local factory striking which is an isolated (relatively) action as opposed to obstructing a whole sector (potentially) of a country.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It could be argued that the railway, transporting so many people to their work, is a key service and so should be regarded differently to, say, your local factory striking which is an isolated (relatively) action as opposed to obstructing a whole sector (potentially) of a country.

There's an argument to say that.

There's also an argument to say that the Conservatives decided otherwise when they decided to run the railways according to market principles. And, as we all know, scarcity is the biggest driver in the cost of anything (executives, guards, oil, gas).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There's an argument to say that.

There's also an argument to say that the Conservatives decided otherwise when they decided to run the railways according to market principles. And, as we all know, scarcity is the biggest driver in the cost of anything (executives, guards, oil, gas).

Bless you, you always come up with the type of logic that Fred Kite, the shop steward, would have used in the 1959 film "I'm All Right Jack" in his blind acceptance of the socialist system.

 

[highdyke]

Scarcity of guards? Here's me thinking they are being made redundant.

 

[BuryBlue]

There's an argument to say that.

There's also an argument to say that the Conservatives decided otherwise when they decided to run the railways according to market principles. And, as we all know, scarcity is the biggest driver in the cost of anything (executives, guards, oil, gas).

The railways are not really run to market principles, though. Not in reality. In fact, rather the infrastructure is for all intents and purposes owned by the state which contracts private managers to run the trains over them.

If they were run to market principles Network Rail would have gone bust.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Who really needs an annual oncome of £2m? That is the wage bill of 100 bus drivers when put into perspective.

Theres a lot of mis-informed union-bashing here. Can I please just remind those individuald of those facts-

Fact 1 - Southern banned its own staff from working overtime
Fact 2 - Southern banned its own staff from rostering shift swaps
Fact 3 - Southern banned its own staff from using their trains to travel to and from work
Fact 4 - Southern banned sick pay without medical evidence
Fact 5 - Southern have not filled job vacancies as they were not retaning those roles.

And you wonder why there is a shortage of staff? Cancelled trains? Low morale and high sickness?

Doesnt take a genius to work out. Management are preventing their own staff from coming in to work!

A railway journalist friend of mine told me in a interview session he had in wales recently DfT practically admitted they were forcing this issue and they had no choice but to win. SWT and GA ftanchises are next. Bear in ming GW and VTEC the soon to be introduced SET's are built to be DOO, and TPE have just ordered some too.

 

[highdyke]

It's no secret what the plan is, you just have to look in the right places

http://www.rssb.co.uk/library/groups-and-committees/2014-09-report-key-train-requirements.pdf

Page 47 and many other titbits.

The chickens have come home too roost.

 

[HH]

Yet more confirmation that DfT is driving this. They've convinced themselves that this is what the railway needs to help justify more investment is my guess. However I remain unconvinced that they really understand the full situation, judging by what they were after on Northern.

 

[Wolfie]

Funny how ASLEF have stayed out of this dispute since GTR were awarded the injunction against them for refusing to drive the new 12-car Gatwick Express driver-operated only (DOO) trains, claiming the absence of a guard put passenger safety at risk, but they still went back to work.

Whilst I appreciate the context of this dispute is slightly different namely possible change to the guards role, isn't the drivers being responsible for door opening/closing still the same area of dispute as the Gatwick Express case. I wonder at what point GTR might then take the RMT to the high court.

Update RMT have called off Thursdays planned 5 day strike action

Methinks that you are out of touch with the news...

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...t-staff-over-southern-strikes?dorewrite=false

"The industrial action currently bringing Southern services to a standstill is set to get even worse as two further unions announced they are also carrying out ballets.

The company has been forced to cancel 341 services a day in a bid to stop widespread unpredictable cancellations on its services.

However, Aslef said that ongoing issues regarding the imposition of new rosters to facilitate the timetable constitute a breakdown in industrial relations.

It will now ballot drivers on Southern and the Gatwick Express, also owned by Southern’s parent company Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) over whether to strike, with a decision due by the end of the month."

GTR Drivers. Don't know if it's just Southern only or all the GTR drivers

If it happens ASLEF... not RMT...

 

[Tetchytyke]

If they were run to market principles Network Rail would have gone bust.

When the Tories privatised the railways Railtrack was run according to market principles. Having cut back too much maintenance too far and killed people because of it once too often, Railtrack did indeed then go bust.

The TOCs and ROSCOs also continue to be operated according to market principles, and it is the TOCs that we're really talking about here.

 

[313103]

It's no secret what the plan is, you just have to look in the right places

http://www.rssb.co.uk/library/groups-and-committees/2014-09-report-key-train-requirements.pdf

Page 47 and many other titbits.

The chickens have come home too roost.

Yes i was just having a look at this 1.3.4 says Crew to Crew communication. This must be wrong. As trains will be in DOO mode, crew to crew implies more then one member of staff on either unit, should be driver to driver then at least we know the game plan. None of this play on words nonsense, say what you men RSSB and mean what you say!

 

[Wolfie]

There needs to be balance in the world, and some collective organisation to look after the interests of the staff is obviously a good thing. In a fairly run company this may be a rather light weight organisation giving advice and a helping hand to weaker members of the staff who can not navigate the companies procedures for them selves. In a company where the management culture turns to bullying staff and trying to rule by intimidation, you need a harder organisation which can offer the threat of kicking back when the company goes too far.

In the current railway strikes I do feel the government is somewhat behind it all, perhaps not directly by pointing the company at the union and saying Kill in a firm voice. But perhaps more subtly by letting contracts that ensure the company will be financially driven to try and reduce staff costs.

I also feel that the Union have a point in keeping a second member of staff trained to deal with an emergency on trains. The driver by the nature of his job right up front as it is sometimes referred to in the crumple zone. Is perhaps the person most likely to be injured and or have his equipment damaged in an accident. A second member of staff further back in the train who can leap into action, in an emergency has to be a good idea.

Just the idea of passengers bailing out of a train that has run into an obstruction onto the line, with no-one to warn the signalman or at least have the sense to tell them to keep clear of the track and what to do makes me shiver.

Thank you for posting a measured and well considered rebutal to both extremes which have been displayed on this thread.

Seriously DarloRich. Every time someone questions union actions on here pro-unionists spout the "there are strict laws" rubbish. Union laws may be stricter than they were but they are still full of holes as we are seeing now. Sympathy strikes may be outlawed but there are ways around that and the unions know it. Just look at Southern and the tactics being employed there by the RMT. They know right now their very existence is at stake after GTR stood up to them and so they have to fight back and they figure with all the support Corbyn has that the public is ready for national strikes again. Not only is this a snapshot of how life would be under Corbyn but also right now the RMT are looking for any reason possible to strike on all TOC's. Where are the stats to show driver only is more dangerous?...Oh wait there aren't any. One of the reasons rail workers are paid so well because the work life balance isn't great but to the RMT it's a perfect cause to strike nationwide if all else fails. This is beyond a joke and the sooner strikes are banned and unions outlawed the better. I realise posting anti-union comment on here is frowned upon but yet it is totally fine for unionists to post their side. This is Railforums not RMTForums.

Hmmmmm.. I wasn't aware that there were proposals for me to live in either Nazi Germany or Stalinist USSR...

Let's just say that your truly pathetic rant would, if ever fulfilled (which it won't be!), lead to UK being in violation of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Article 8 if you must know) which we ratified in 1976.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx

 

[Tetchytyke]

Scarcity of guards? Here's me thinking they are being made redundant.

The market rate for guards is set because you can't just drag any old person in off the street to do the job.

The easy way of resolving that situation is, of course, to change things so that you don't need anyone to do the job.

It was the same market principles that saw the handloom weavers in the 1700s earn huge salaries and then, within a generation, be reduced to penury.

ETA You see similar market principles in executive salaries. David Brown doesn't get his 10% pay rise and his £2.16m bonus because he excels above everyone else, he gets his 10% pay rise and his £2.16m bonus because there can only ever be one CEO.

It's the same in the NHS. The big Trust managers get six-figure salaries because there can only be a handful of big managers. Whereas the nurses get paid crap because they are replaceable.

 

[highdyke]

They've convinced themselves that this is what the railway needs to help justify more investment is my guess.

Rail has well and truly priced itself out the market compared to roads, busways, LTR, buses for most projects that's the reason, it's all in reports that are freely publicly available - look at Ivanhoe etc. They have to consider all the options and be seen to spend tax payers money wisely. It's their duty as civil servants.

 

[BuryBlue]

Yet more confirmation that DfT is driving this. They've convinced themselves that this is what the railway needs to help justify more investment is my guess. However I remain unconvinced that they really understand the full situation, judging by what they were after on Northern.

They don't, that's the short answer.

Unfortunately stations are simply too far apart to copy what the Underground has done with resiting staff to stations, away from trains.

It's a double whammy, since by striking and disrupting average people's day it makes people think that they don't deserve their job, and increasing people's favour of driverless trains where this can't happen. Being classed as an essential service would probably improve the railway's reputation in this regard - people generally only have an impression of the railway's bad days, not the good ones.

 

[highdyke]

The market rate for guards is set because you can't just drag any old person in off the street to do the job.

The easy way of resolving that situation is, of course, to change things so that you don't need anyone to do the job.

It was the same market principles that saw the handloom weavers in the 1700s earn huge salaries and then, within a generation, be reduced to penury.

You can't just drag any chief executive off the street either. There's no shortages of people that want to be guards or can do the job.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Rail has well and truly priced itself out the market compared to roads, busways, LTR, buses for most projects that's the reason

No disagreement there.

And we're back to the economic argument that scarcity drives inflation. There are only a handful of contractors who can do what is needed, thanks to the destruction of the rail construction and engineering industry in the 90s, so consequently they can charge whatever the hell they want.

They have to consider all the options and be seen to spend tax payers money wisely. It's their duty as civil servants.

So why don't they attack the areas where there is real cost inflation- contractors' fees and executive salaries?

I wonder

However I remain unconvinced that they really understand the full situation, judging by what they were after on Northern.

They know exactly what they are doing.

They just know that the financial penalty for killing someone is significantly smaller than the financial savings to be made by cutting corners.

First Capital Connect- now Thameslink- were fined £75,000 plus costs after what happened at Kentish Town. Network Rail were fined £4m, inclusive of costs, after what happened at Grayrigg. In neither case were senior executives held accountable for what they did- the company footed the bill, the executive gravy train just rolled on as nothing had happened.

The executives making these decisions will never be personally held liable for them. And the savings to their company will outweigh the fines dished out when something goes wrong. It's a no-brainer.

Unless and until the executives at DOO operators receive the same penalty as their staff- and Christopher McGee can tell us all just how steep that penalty is- then nothing will ever change. They know the score.

 

[Wolfie]

Whatever the situation that you describe ever so nicely above, you should always remember what Bob Dylan meant when in one of his songs, the phrase "only a pawn in the game" is one that well describes the view of the RMT by its cynical misrepresentation of the trades union members true feelings in order to further its socialist agenda.

Convince me to the otherwise.

EVERY single strike (or other industrial action) undertaken by RMT arises after a ballot of the relevant membership. If your thesis is correct all of the members, in different parts of the country, are naive fools. Alteratively your conspiracy theory views may be complete hog-wash.

I have my own views on the relative likelihood of the two options.

There are many of the more thoughtful people who saw the benefits of remaining as part of the EU and saw through the fallacies expounded by the "Leave" campaign who were unfortunate enough to suffer from those typical examples of "Nellie, in the market says..." total lack of any sort of political understanding who voted "Leave".

....and then you come out with something like this which I could have written myself...

Is it possible you might ever answer a question? I will ask it again in case you missed it:

How, therefore, should people protest about something they think is unfair in the work place.

I am sure the union has a political agenda. That is hardly surprising considering they are a political entity. Is it any different to the government pushing thier angle which is to erode workers rights to such a level that they can not complain about thier treatment or do anything to alter it.

You seem to be in support of the view that little people should know thier place, be grateful for any crumbs you deign to throw them and should not dare to ask for more! Perhaps you could confirm that point.

I must say that Paul S's past postings, which show he was a senior manager, clearly show which camp he is in. His other postings make it clear that he supports other members of "us" and sod "them". When asked to jump it appears that the only acceptable answer from "them" for Mr S is "How high?".

The bottom line is I agree with your reading of the situation.

 

[highdyke]

So why don't they attack the areas where there is real cost inflation- contractors' fees and executive salaries?

I wonder

Because lots of people can be guards and drivers and not many people can be Chief Executives. The drivers and guards salaries add-up to far more. Basic economics.

Network rail reduced the amount of signallers, without all this faff, because it was cheaper in the long run. The railway is not a job creation scheme.

 

[HH]

Brown is not a GTR employee. What's Horton getting? Probably more like a tenth of that. Wouldn't even pay for 5 Guards.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Because lots of people can be guards and drivers and not many people can be Chief Executives.

So when you said I was wrong about scarcity being the only driver of inflation?

To be perfectly honest, anyone could do Horton's job, they just don't have the correct tie and handshake.

Brown is not a GTR employee.

No, he's the big boss of GTR's big boss.

Which makes it all the worse.

 

[highdyke]

To be perfectly honest, anyone could do Horton's job, they just don't have the correct tie and handshake.
.

Jesus Christ is this really the level of debate we're at? I'm sure GTR will look forward to your application.

 

[313103]

Because lots of people can be guards and drivers and not many people can be Chief Executives. The drivers and guards salaries add-up to far more. Basic economics.

Well the future doesnt bode well for Guards, they will all be gone long before i retire. So as the numbers dwindle less and less people can be Guards. So once you have saved the money to employ Guards and other assorted employees that must obviously mean we dont need as many Chief executives.