Other forms of industrial action

[northwichcat]

Do rail unions ever consider forms of industrial action that would have an effect on the operator but less of an effect on the passengers?

No services all day due to industrial action doesn't get much passenger support in the current climate where so many people are out-of-work or had below inflation pay rises (if indeed any pay rise.)

One form of industrial action is referred to a 'go slow.' Now unhappy train drivers probably shouldn't take that form of action as it would make their shifts longer but what about for conductors? They could refuse to take fares on board but still take responsibly for the doors and train safety, which would have a negative effect on the operator but not on the passengers.

 

[Toots]

Well its not a case of it making Driver's shifts longer,a Driver cannot simply drive at a speed that suits him,he is required to drive at the permissable speed for each location,unless he was cautioned in connection with an incident or some such.As for Guard's not taking fares?,again if their Job desciption requires them to collect fares,they may be on a sticky wicket contract wise.Certain action can be taken if sanctioned by the union and a vote is taken,but whether certain tasks can simply be omitted would be on how the TOC wanted to view the matter,it could agree to that form of action or on the other hand, say they would not run trains because they couldn't collect revenue thus saving that days wages....

 

[dk1]

Do rail unions ever consider forms of industrial action that would have an effect on the operator but less of an effect on the passengers?

No services all day due to industrial action doesn't get much passenger support in the current climate where so many people are out-of-work or had below inflation pay rises (if indeed any pay rise.)

One form of industrial action is referred to a 'go slow.' Now unhappy train drivers probably shouldn't take that form of action as it would make their shifts longer but what about for conductors? They could refuse to take fares on board but still take responsibly for the doors and train safety, which would have a negative effect on the operator but not on the passengers.

Go slow has nothing to do with train speed.

 

[SS4]

I suspect they would work to rule and to basically stop doing all the extra jobs they're expected to.

 

[GB]

"Work To Rule" is an alternative to full strike action.

 

[northwichcat]

As for Guard's not taking fares?,again if their Job desciption requires them to collect fares,they may be on a sticky wicket contract wise.

If a union authorises a form of industrial action, whether it be strikes or otherwise, then surly an employee cannot be disciplined for doing it.

The 'go slow' I suggested usually means if, for instance, someone works a 8 hour day that they make 4-5 hours worth of work take 8 hours to do. Thinking about it again it might not be that a conductor taking no fares is classed the same way but if a conductor took 30 seconds to check one ticket and 4 minutes to sell one then wouldn't that be allowed?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Go slow has nothing to do with train speed.

I know but the driver would have to be less productive than usual to be on a 'go slow' and that's difficult to do without breaching too many rules.

 

[dk1]

I know but the driver would have to be less productive than usual to be on a 'go slow' and that's difficult to do without breaching too many rules.

Mainly to do with breaks & train prepping times.

Most people would be amazed at how much rail staff go out of their way to help run a good service.

 

[bluenoxid]

Well its not a case of it making Driver's shifts longer,a Driver cannot simply drive at a speed that suits him,he is required to drive at the permissable speed for each location,unless he was cautioned in connection with an incident or some such.As for Guard's not taking fares?,again if their Job desciption requires them to collect fares,they may be on a sticky wicket contract wise.Certain action can be taken if sanctioned by the union and a vote is taken,but whether certain tasks can simply be omitted would be on how the TOC wanted to view the matter,it could agree to that form of action or on the other hand, say they would not run trains because they couldn't collect revenue thus saving that days wages....

Toots is very close to the truth. I hate to say this but not taking fares is risky for guards and other fare collecting staff as fares is part of the description and therefore contract

Most effective would be an overtime ban.

 

[Greenback]

Do rail unions ever consider forms of industrial action that would have an effect on the operator but less of an effect on the passengers?

No services all day due to industrial action doesn't get much passenger support in the current climate where so many people are out-of-work or had below inflation pay rises (if indeed any pay rise.)

One form of industrial action is referred to a 'go slow.' Now unhappy train drivers probably shouldn't take that form of action as it would make their shifts longer but what about for conductors? They could refuse to take fares on board but still take responsibly for the doors and train safety, which would have a negative effect on the operator but not on the passengers.

My understanding of the term 'go slow' id that relates to doing no more than the minimum set out for your job. It's very similar, if not identical to a work to rule, where, as implied you work strictly to the rule book, and any agreements that are in place between employer and employee are strictly adhered to. Many organisations rely heavily on favours from staff to operate, whether this is in the form of unpaid ovetime, paid overtime, staff taking shorter breaks, working late and all sorts of other favours!

Working to rule has less effect on passengers than strike action, but it still has an effect. The effect on the operator is also lessened, whihc means it is far less effective in a dispute than calling a strike. Don't forget though that most employees don't like industrial action. The threat of a strike ballot, the ballot itself, or calling a strike are just part of the negotiaitons to resolve disputes, Sometimes, a company will wait to see how well a strike is supported before deciding whether new negotiations or a new approach are necessary.

So the answer to the question is yes, there are other forms of action aside from strike action, and these are used as a way to try and up the ante in negotiations. The main drawback is that such measures don't seem to work on the railway, or in my own experience in other industries.

 

[TDK]

"Work To Rule" is an alternative to full strike action.

London Midland did that with ther Sundays and the drivers got caned for it

 

[Mojo]

RMT members on London Underground are currently taking action short of a strike by not participating in the £5 minimum Oyster card top up.

 

[Oswyntail]

Has"Industrial Action" ever genuinely worked? In the final analysis, employers hold the trumps, and such action simply hardens attitudes, and is disastrous PR.. There has to be a willingness for proper negotiation on both sides, and it is the job of the union to facilitate this on the part of employees. In my experience, employers get the unions they deserve, and unions get the employers they deserve - which means, IMHO, that when it comes to a "dispute", what is really required is both sides having their heads knocked together. Rarely are "the bosses" out to shaft the workers - not really good business sense that, when they really want to shaft customers - nor are "the workers" out to overthrow their masters. I do wish the world would grow up

 

[313103]

Work to Rule went with the trade union reforms of the 1980s. The reason being is that the government of the day said 'you should be working to rule anyway.

An alternative to strike action is an 'Overtime ban' If you take my company for example an overtime ban would for all grades except Drivers include 'Sundays' So that would mean no service on the North London Line, West London Line, Gospel Oak to Barking Line, the only way a service could run would be with Managers and staff who refuse to carry out the unions mandate and on the East London between New Cross / Gate to Highbury & Islington. The reason why a DOO service would be cancelled is that stations Whitechapel to Surrey Quays is regarded as a sub surface station and the stations need to be manned whilst a train service is running.

 

[northwichcat]

My understanding of the term 'go slow' id that relates to doing no more than the minimum set out for your job. It's very similar, if not identical to a work to rule, where, as implied you work strictly to the rule book, and any agreements that are in place between employer and employee are strictly adhered to.

I thought the key difference is 'work to rule' means you've been asked to do over and above what it states in your contract e.g. they're expecting you to work during your lunch without extra pay, or are making you do jobs which are not part of your role within the company. No union representation should be required as you are following the terms of your contract, although if one employee without union representation 'works to rule and 10 don't then you can guess what may happen to the one that does.

Whereas 'go slow' could be a form of industrial action which can be taken where the employer hasn't breached the contract but refuses to renegotiate it and could mean if, for instance, the employees wanted a 5% pay rise but the employer offered a pay freeze then the employees (with union representation) could cut back their productivity by around 5%.

 

[Greenback]

I thought the key difference is 'work to rule' means you've been asked to do over and above what it states in your contract e.g. they're expecting you to work during your lunch without extra pay, or are making you do jobs which are not part of your role within the company. No union representation should be required as you are following the terms of your contract, although if one employee without union representation 'works to rule and 10 don't then you can guess what may happen to the one that does.

Whereas 'go slow' could be a form of industrial action which can be taken where the employer hasn't breached the contract but refuses to renegotiate it and could mean if, for instance, the employees wanted a 5% pay rise but the employer offered a pay freeze then the employees (with union representation) could cut back their productivity by around 5%.

As I said, it's amazing how many organisations rely on working outside the letter of the rules. Sometimes this benefits the staff as well. An example is varying breaks, start times or finish times. Another is asking people to cover work that is outside their normal range of duties. Some staff find this a benefit as they gain experience, perhaps on hgiher graded work, which might help them get promotion or a better job in the future. Other staff may say that if there is work to be covered, then temporary promotion should be given.

I admit I've never been invovled in a go slow. I always tended to work to rule in any case! I imagine it would be more effective in a factory environment. As you say, everyone would have to work at the same speed.

 

[DarloRich]

Do rail unions ever consider forms of industrial action that would have an effect on the operator but less of an effect on the passengers?

No services all day due to industrial action doesn't get much passenger support in the current climate where so many people are out-of-work or had below inflation pay rises (if indeed any pay rise.)

One form of industrial action is referred to a 'go slow.' Now unhappy train drivers probably shouldn't take that form of action as it would make their shifts longer but what about for conductors? They could refuse to take fares on board but still take responsibly for the doors and train safety, which would have a negative effect on the operator but not on the passengers.

i am being balloted with two questions:-

1 strike
2 industrial action short of a strike

doesnt give any examples of what that might be - so it must be on the agenda

 

[313103]

i am being balloted with two questions:-

1 strike
2 industrial action short of a strike

doesnt give any examples of what that might be - so it must be on the agenda

This is a ploy by the unions because of the cost of running a ballot. When a ballot is run they will ask for direct strike action and for action short of a strike. At the time they do not need to list what the action short of strike is, that will be done after a bollot has been run, and it depends on the grade that the ballot is for as to what it will be.

 

[jon0844]

What's the deal with FCC at the moment? A hell of a lot of cancellations due to driver shortages. FCC's Twitter account says many drivers have simply called in sick, but I suspect there's more to it than that.

I know it's the school holidays, but it would be bang out of order for drivers to suddenly take sickies to go on holiday with the kids. I have to therefore assume there's some other reason. Perhaps a return of the summer BBQs? I wonder if many services won't be running tomorrow (Sunday)?

 

[TDK]

I thought the key difference is 'work to rule' means you've been asked to do over and above what it states in your contract e.g. they're expecting you to work during your lunch without extra pay, or are making you do jobs which are not part of your role within the company. No union representation should be required as you are following the terms of your contract, although if one employee without union representation 'works to rule and 10 don't then you can guess what may happen to the one that does.

Whereas 'go slow' could be a form of industrial action which can be taken where the employer hasn't breached the contract but refuses to renegotiate it and could mean if, for instance, the employees wanted a 5% pay rise but the employer offered a pay freeze then the employees (with union representation) could cut back their productivity by around 5%.

Work to rule is simple work to rule which means work to your contaract and the rules and regulations, the only thing drivers can really do is not work overtime or rest days and strictly stick to the unions rostering policies, as for go slow if you actually did "go slow" you would be in breach of contract.

 

[GB]

I would imagine any employee on a "go slow" would be up for poor performance where the union probably couldn't help.

 

[9K43]

Having worked for the worst Railway Company in the world, I would not do anything for them, just do the job to the Rule Book, do not rush about in the company van.
Use your tapping time to knock out a couple of vehicles from the train for any sort of defects, and the other one is " IF ITS NOT SAFE DO NOT DO IT
If you are doing a brake test on a 65 SLU train just amble down do the test, and amble back, and make the train late.
On a 12 hrs ballast turn 2 hours driving time from home after 10 hours into the van and off you go home.
Then the duty manager will have to come out and see to the train.
So long as you go home on the dot of 12 hours, there is nowt they can do.
Also the ROGs Regulations can be invoked .
You are that tired that this may effect other safety critical workers you get yourself home.
Look at BA, to get all those young ladies to strike takes some doing by bully boy managers With "I'm gonna do what I'm going to do and no one is going to stop me. "I have seen enough of this type of management attitude to fill a train.
Do it by the Rule Book and find out that the pen is mightier than the sword.

 

[12CSVT]

Work to rule is simple work to rule which means work to your contaract and the rules and regulations, the only thing drivers can really do is not work overtime or rest days and strictly stick to the unions rostering policies, as for go slow if you actually did "go slow" you would be in breach of contract.

Working to rule may also involve sticking rigidly to any health & safety regulations (eg taking a train out of service for minor defects such as a windscreen wiper not working).

 

[tirphil]

Working to rule may also involve sticking rigidly to any health & safety regulations (eg taking a train out of service for minor defects such as a windscreen wiper not working).

A windscreen wiper not working is NOT a minor fault under any circumstances if it is on the drivers side of the leading cab.

 

[DarloRich]

This is a ploy by the unions because of the cost of running a ballot. When a ballot is run they will ask for direct strike action and for action short of a strike. At the time they do not need to list what the action short of strike is, that will be done after a bollot has been run, and it depends on the grade that the ballot is for as to what it will be.

that is fine, and i can see how it is easy to do as say a driver or a gaurd. I work in an office with regualr hours. What can i do that isnt a strike? ( and i dont really want to go on strike over the issue we are being balloted on!)

 

[jon0844]

Non-driving staff have commented many times about how it's always the drivers that get the best deals/settlements.

 

[Greenback]

that is fine, and i can see how it is easy to do as say a driver or a gaurd. I work in an office with regualr hours. What can i do that isnt a strike? ( and i dont really want to go on strike over the issue we are being balloted on!)

We had a work to rule in an office where I worked once. It was a dismal failure, but some the things we were told not to do were:

Don't stay on in work to help with any backlog
Don't do any work normally undertaken by a higher grade
Take all scheduled breaks and don't cut them short
Observe all health and safety instructions to the letter

As the majority of people did all that anyway, it had no effect at all!

 

[9K43]

Non-driving staff have commented many times about how it's always the drivers that get the best deals/settlements.

Drivers get all the best of everything as they are the people who move the trains.
It has been my experience over a few decades that ASLEF look after their members with no concern to anyone else.
They will do any thing that will get them a reward.
So long as they are ok that is all that matters.
Remember all loyalties end at 23:59 when the Sunday roster comes out.

 

[jon0844]

To be fair, that is their job to do, even it means a pay rise at the expense of others.

 

[Smudger105e]

Drivers get all the best of everything as they are the people who move the trains.
It has been my experience over a few decades that ASLEF look after their members with no concern to anyone else.
They will do any thing that will get them a reward.
So long as they are ok that is all that matters.
Remember all loyalties end at 23:59 when the Sunday roster comes out.

Drivers do have the best conditions because if they go on strike, the trains stop, if engineering staff strike, it takes quite some time before the trains come to a stand...

 

[DarloRich]

Drivers get all the best of everything as they are the people who move the trains.
It has been my experience over a few decades that ASLEF look after their members with no concern to anyone else.
They will do any thing that will get them a reward.
So long as they are ok that is all that matters.
Remember all loyalties end at 23:59 when the Sunday roster comes out.

but the drivers need the rest of us to make anythng happen - but they can cause the most "damage", quickly, through the withhdrawl of labour