Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Without trawling through hundreds of posts on various threads can someone simply explain to me why the above two operators are not part of the current wave of Industrial Action ?
What deal did they accept and has a comparable offer been made to the largely English Operators Employees ?
If so why is the Government not using the acceptance by Scottish and Welsh Workers as a yardstick to beat the English Staff with ?
Hence the Welsh Assembly had the funds for this pay offer (lifted from Aslef)
"The four-year TfW offer is for 8.9%, backdated to 1 April, taking drivers to £63,200. With another 7.9% on 1 April 2024 taking drivers to £68,300. A further 4.1% in December 2024 taking drivers to £71,000. And a further increase on 1 April 2025 of RPI [as it stands in February 2025]."
Strikes by highly paid fleet street printers paid a big part in gaining public support for Thatchers union laws and it is the low paid who then suffer most.
Meanwhile my daughter is unable to get to college today and a lot of low paid workers on a fraction of what drivers get (who can't work at home) will lose a days pay or get sacked for not turning up.
train driver make an average of £26,406 / year in United Kingdom, or £13.54 / hr. Try Talent.com's salary tool and search thousands of salaries in your industry.
It's worth noting that the Welsh Government is in budget trouble on all fronts and has ordered cuts in all areas - including at TfW.
How they go about it is up to Cardiff Bay, but it would be unwise to think Welsh rail isn't under the same budget cosh as Westminster.
TfW has said it is reviewing the commitments it made when it took over the rail operation from KeolisAmey.
They also have their own "HS2" problem with the South Wales Metro going well over budget, but too far advanced to cut back.
That might impact other WG plans for rail investment.
So far they have managed to stay on the right side of the unions, though some TfW services are impacted by strikes in "English" TOCs (eg to Manchester and Birmingham).
Would it be fair to say that although ASLEF seem to be dead against the privatisation of the Railways this very measure was responsible for a significant increase in their salaries?
Is this apparent dichotomy acknowledged by the Unions ?
Hence the Welsh Assembly had the funds for this pay offer (lifted from Aslef)
"The four-year TfW offer is for 8.9%, backdated to 1 April, taking drivers to £63,200. With another 7.9% on 1 April 2024 taking drivers to £68,300. A further 4.1% in December 2024 taking drivers to £71,000. And a further increase on 1 April 2025 of RPI [as it stands in February 2025]."
They have accepted the below in Scotland.
"The one-year ScotRail offer is for 5% taking our drivers from £55,264 to £58,027."
In England the offer is 4%.
Strikes by highly paid fleet street printers paid a big part in gaining public support for Thatchers union laws and it is the low paid who then suffer most.
Meanwhile my daughter is unable to get to college today and a lot of low paid workers on a fraction of what drivers get (who can't work at home) will lose a days pay or get sacked for not turning up.
I always thought the public spending figures reflected a broad range of spending and that the differences in figures between Scotland, Wales and England reflected a whole range of factors. Obviously I was wrong, the extra money was just sitting there ready to pay to train staff.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
To answer the op's question. I suppose the simple answer is because they did a deal with the unions.
Speaking to my fellow rail staff, it seems the vast majority of us would have settled for 3/4% with no major changes. Makes you wonder why that deal hasn't been done for dft tocs
That's would assume that the Conservatives want a deal with the staff at the 14 operators they're in control of though - the evidence it's really there that they do. The strikes give them a great talking point and save money for them. At everyone else's expense.
Somehow people still choose to vote for them.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Can't really be summed up in one sentence. London drivers at LNER, SWR and Avanti West Coast would be at one end of the scale, but Northern, non-London at Southeastern, c2c and WMT very much lower.
I think Tyne & Wear Metro drivers also accepted a deal?
Would it be fair to say that although ASLEF seem to be dead against the privatisation of the Railways this very measure was responsible for a significant increase in their salaries?
Is this apparent dichotomy acknowledged by the Unions ?
Very much so. As a driver since privatisation I have always been in favour of privatisation. Those that were not can now remind themselves of being careful what they wish for.
Would it be fair to say that although ASLEF seem to be dead against the privatisation of the Railways this very measure was responsible for a significant increase in their salaries?
Exactly. Without changes to T&C’s this all could have been done and dusted. Would have been cheaper for the taxpayer also. Government belligerence has dragged this out.
Would it be fair to say that although ASLEF seem to be dead against the privatisation of the Railways this very measure was responsible for a significant increase in their salaries?
Is this apparent dichotomy acknowledged by the Unions ?
I’ve no idea but I don’t see why it has to be. The role the union is to secure the best possible deal for its members and to represent its members collectively and individually. Anything else is a side issue.
I’ve no idea but I don’t see why it has to be. The role the union is to secure the best possible deal for its members and to represent its members collectively and individually. Anything else is a side issue.
Without trawling through hundreds of posts on various threads can someone simply explain to me why the above two operators are not part of the current wave of Industrial Action ?
What deal did they accept and has a comparable offer been made to the largely English Operators Employees ?
If so why is the Government not using the acceptance by Scottish and Welsh Workers as a yardstick to beat the English Staff with ?
In short, you looking at this from the wrong angle.
What you should be asking, is why it's not only Transport for Wales and Scotrail, but also at all Open Access Operators, all freight operators, London Overground, and Elizabeth Line, where deals have been negotiated?
And then coming up with the answer that both the union and the employer in each of those instances negotiated and came to an agreement in the middle.
Contrast with the DfT controlled TOCs who refused to talk about pay for the whole of 2022, because, "The Department for Transport won't let us."
Then two offers, the second worse than the first, and the first made before any talks took place (despite the union asking for talks for over a year).
Deals can be done, and have - with exception of TfW and Elizabeth Line, ALL the deals that have been done have been at below RPI. (E.g. Hull Trains no strings 5% April 2022, 5% April 2023, when RPI was above 11% in both of those months).
TfW was a fairly large rise over I think it was two and a half years, although I'm not sure if it matches inflation. There were a number of productivity improvements and changes to Sunday working, bringing Sundays into the working week instead of overtime.
Elizabeth Line had RPI in 2022, but below RPI in 2023 (around a 5% rise versus double figures RPI).
ASLEF can negotiate and settle on pay (even if the rise isn't that good), and can negotiate on productivity as demonstrated in Wales.
In England, the government has choosen to deliberately stall talks, make the first offer via the media (where of course only the percentages were talked about, not the conditions attached!) before any talks, and make a worse second offer after talks actually took place and looked like they were progressing.
Edited to add: I forgot to mention Merseyrail as another employer who was free to negotiate and came to a settlement both last year and this year.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
South Western Railway and C2C had multi-year deals agreed before COVID which included 2022. When they reached their pay anniversary in 2023, they became part of the national dispute as the Rail Delivery Group includes them in year two of its offer.
In short, you looking at this from the wrong angle.
What you should be asking, is why it's not only Transport for Wales and Scotrail, but also at all Open Access Operators, all freight operators, London Overground, and Elizabeth Line, where deals have been negotiated?
And then coming up with the answer that both the union and the employer in each of those instances negotiated and came to an agreement in the middle.
Contrast with the DfT controlled TOCs who refused to talk about pay for the whole of 2022, because, "The Department for Transport won't let us."
Then two offers, the second worse than the first, and the first made before any talks took place (despite the union asking for talks for over a year).
Deals can be done, and have - with exception of TfW and Elizabeth Line, ALL the deals that have been done have been at below RPI. (E.g. Hull Trains no strings 5% April 2022, 5% April 2023, when RPI was above 11% in both of those months).
TfW was a fairly large rise over I think it was two and a half years, although I'm not sure if it matches inflation. There were a number of productivity improvements and changes to Sunday working, bringing Sundays into the working week instead of overtime.
Elizabeth Line had RPI in 2022, but below RPI in 2023 (around a 5% rise versus double figures RPI).
ASLEF can negotiate and settle on pay (even if the rise isn't that good), and can negotiate on productivity as demonstrated in Wales.
In England, the government has choosen to deliberately stall talks, make the first offer via the media (where of course only the percentages were talked about, not the conditions attached!) before any talks, and make a worse second offer after talks actually took place and looked like they were progressing.
Edited to add: I forgot to mention Merseyrail as another employer who was free to negotiate and came to a settlement both last year and this year.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
South Western Railway and C2C had multi-year deals agreed before COVID which included 2022. When they reached their pay anniversary in 2023, they became part of the national dispute as the Rail Delivery Group includes them in year two of its offer.
In short, you looking at this from the wrong angle.
What you should be asking, is why it's not only Transport for Wales and Scotrail, but also at all Open Access Operators, all freight operators, London Overground, and Elizabeth Line, where deals have been negotiated?
And then coming up with the answer that both the union and the employer in each of those instances negotiated and came to an agreement in the middle.
It's not that difficult to understand.
The DfT is the market leader and sets the pace in the industry for everybody, Scotrail/TfW included, which are small fry by comparison.
The non-DfT bodies have to fund their settlements and it is plainly hurting at TfW if not elsewhere.
Once the industry settles the main deal with DfT, including the T&C disputes, the others will fall into line.
That's not to condone DfT methods over the present negotiation.
But once all the TOCs are nationalised and get public-sector annual rises everybody will be happy, won't they?
train driver make an average of £26,406 / year in United Kingdom, or £13.54 / hr. Try Talent.com's salary tool and search thousands of salaries in your industry.
The i quoted an average figure based on a jobs board. It seems their figure was distorted because someone made a submission that they were an LNER driver paid get £30,000. Maybe someone who forgot to add they were part time?
The i quoted an average figure based on a jobs board. It seems their figure was distorted because someone made a submission that they were an LNER driver paid get £30,000. Maybe someone who forgot to add they were part time?
Without trawling through hundreds of posts on various threads can someone simply explain to me why the above two operators are not part of the current wave of Industrial Action ?
What deal did they accept and has a comparable offer been made to the largely English Operators Employees ?
If so why is the Government not using the acceptance by Scottish and Welsh Workers as a yardstick to beat the English Staff with ?
Every non-DfT TOC (Scotrail, TfW, Merseyrail, London Overground, Crossrail, and the OAOs), and apparently the FOCs, have come to a deal - the key thing appears to be that at these TOCs good-faith negotiation happened between the unions and employers, and deals involving both pay, and for some of them, conditions were reached. Whereas at the DfT-TOCs, first the government prevented talks happening at all, and then varrious rather extreme changes to conditions would have to be accepted. As an outsider, it certainly looks like the DfT doesn't want any kind of deal with the unions, and instead wants the strikes to continue.
Every non-DfT TOC (Scotrail, TfW, Merseyrail, London Overground, Crossrail, and the OAOs), and apparently the FOCs, have come to a deal - the key thing appears to be that at these TOCs good-faith negotiation happened between the unions and employers, and deals involving both pay, and for some of them, conditions were reached. Whereas at the DfT-TOCs, first the government prevented talks happening at all, and then varrious rather extreme changes to TOC would have to be accepted. As an outsider, it certainly looks like the DfT doesn't want any kind of deal with the unions, and instead wants the strikes to continue.
Would it be fair to say that although ASLEF seem to be dead against the privatisation of the Railways this very measure was responsible for a significant increase in their salaries?
Is this apparent dichotomy acknowledged by the Unions ?
Would it be fair to say that although ASLEF seem to be dead against the privatisation of the Railways this very measure was responsible for a significant increase in their salaries?
Is this apparent dichotomy acknowledged by the Unions ?
Although it is also fair to note that a continued arms-length BR would have likely delivered more reopenings and a higher service frequency, meaning more members for ASLEF at the very least.
Plus you'd probably see higher salaries due to the non-existence of the ROSCOs and franchisees, which siphoned off profit during the traditional franchise period of privatisation.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
