Railways lurching out of control?

[SussexSeagull]

I think the industry needs to actually count the numbers behind everyone'a anecdotes and see where demand has returned and where it hasn't and begin to have a conversation about pricing structure. The move to remote working started happening pre pandemic but has been accelerated and I think we are at a point now we can assume anyone going back to the office has already. If the commuter (peak) market is down then perhaps time to spread the cost of the railway onto off-peak fairs, especially as they actually seem to be in demand services. In exchange things like longer trains need to be used at the weekend for busy periods.

 

[XAM2175]

It’s also joke when the same government has found the money to give pensioners and benefits claimants a fat rise.

The optics of showering cash at pensioners and benefits recipients just hasn’t gone down well.

If you think people living off the state on benefits/pensions are more deserving of a rise than people who get up at 0300 to go and operate the railway, we are in fundamental disagreement.

Indeed. Especially the former though. Many of today's pensioners will have got up themselves at ungodly hours over many years to keep the economy moving. A significant percentage of claimants however probably don't even know there's two 3 o'clocks in the day (and indeed two 4/5/6/7/8 o' clocks)...

Mmmm, the bitterness really shows through here.

It's quite valid to suggest that since benefits and pensions have risen with inflation, wages for public sector employees should also rise - but comments like these would seem to indicate that fundamentally you don't believe that those rises should happen at all.

Really the government should be discharging that responsibility before subsidising people’s personal private energy bills, especially when I for one never asked for government assistance on that.

With a special mention here for "only Government policies that I support are worthwhile or necessary".

 

[Gorlash1886]

I don't think it's actually bitterness, I think it's profound disbelief that people are being denied a pay increase yet money can be paid out to others, it often feels on this forum that many posters forget railway staff also pay tax

 

[bramling]

Mmmm, the bitterness really shows through here.

It's quite valid to suggest that since benefits and pensions have risen with inflation, wages for public sector employees should also rise - but comments like these would seem to indicate that fundamentally you don't believe that those rises should happen at all.

I wouldn’t necessarily say I don’t think they should happen, however I don’t think rises for those groups should have been prioritised in the way as has happened. The rise for benefits in particular sends out a particularly bad message, and in terms of pensioners we all know why governments like to look after that particular group…

With a special mention here for "only Government policies that I support are worthwhile or necessary".

Energy bill support was never in any manifesto I don’t believe, so there’s also no mandate for it.

Given the problems it’s causing, personally I’d prefer to take my chances with higher bills, and be free to spend my money as I see fit. There is always, for example, the option to turn the heating down, or cut back on something else.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==

I don't think it's actually bitterness, I think it's profound disbelief that people are being denied a pay increase yet money can be paid out to others, it often feels on this forum that many posters forget railway staff also pay tax

I don’t think this is unique to railway staff. Everyone I know is pretty incensed at Hunt’s budget. A direct hit to the crown jewels for many, with the added feeling of a government laughing in their face.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==

Unfortunately the dire economic situation has everything to do with the massive and ludicrous levels of government borrowing in response to a minor respiratory virus. That is fundamentally what has, barring a miracle, damned the conservatives to a lengthy spell in opposition. That’s the case irrespective of leader. Sunak will likely do better than Truss who, had she continued even a few days longer, would have precipitated an immediate GE.

Oh absolutely this is all down to the Covid response. However I’ve long felt that Johnson’s weak leadership contributed to this, in particular the response dragging on. A stronger leader I suspect would have mounted a much stronger “time to take a deep breath and get back to normal, keep calm and carry on”, not flap every time Covid cases took a rise.

Meanwhile, always remember a certain other person who was quite happy to quietly build up a brand image off the back of all this.

Rather than giving out discount dinners, there might have been more focus on keeping the economy going, but encouraging people to work wouldn’t have been as populist.

 

[XAM2175]

I don't think it's actually bitterness, I think it's profound disbelief that people are being denied a pay increase yet money can be paid out to others, it often feels on this forum that many posters forget railway staff also pay tax

I wouldn’t necessarily say I don’t think they should happen, however I don’t think rises for those groups should have been prioritised in the way has happened. The rise for benefits in particular sends out a particularly bad message, and in terms of pensioners we all know why governments like to look after than group…

I agree completely that it is a very mean-spirit decision to withhold inflation-linked pay rises from certain groups of public-sector employees on ideological grounds while extending inflation-linked increases to other groups - but I disagree with the notion that those other groups, to some extent or another, don't need the increase, and I disagree vehemently with notion that "if we can't have a raise nobody else deserves a raise either" is a valid alternate position.

Energy bill support was never in any manifesto I don’t believe, so there’s also no mandate for it.

Given the problems it’s causing, personally I’d prefer to take my chances with higher bills, and be free to spend my money as I see fit. There is always, for example, the option to turn the heating down, or cut back on something else.

The lack of mandate would perhaps be a reasonable criticism had we held a general election at some point in the last few months, but I fail to understand how you think such a mandate would have been obtained otherwise? Indeed I've always understood that the people's trust in the government to respond to emergencies and other unexpected or irregular events without seeking a new and direct approval from the electorate is one of the foundation stones of representative democracy.

 

[43066]

I wouldn’t necessarily say I don’t think they should happen, however I don’t think rises for those groups should have been prioritised in the way has happened. The rise for benefits in particular sends out a particularly bad message, and in terms of pensioners we all know why governments like to look after than group…

I will abandon what I was drafting, and simply concur with this very well articulated post.

Meanwhile, always remember a certain other person who was quite happy to quietly build up a brand image off the back of all this.

Rather than giving out discount dinners, there might have been more focus on keeping the economy going, but encouraging people to work wouldn’t have been as populist.

I happen to think they holed themselves below the waterline when they got rid of Johnson, who (questionable as his motives were) at least had some popular appeal, and a demonstrable ability to win votes. I agree re. Sunak who I think has only ever wanted a shot at the top job for ego reasons. Hunt I will give some credit to as he clearly has no further leadership ambitions, and is attempting to steady the ship.

Unfortunately, as you say, he’s doing a good job of alienating everybody. The staunchest conservative voters I know now consider that the party is no different to Labour, and will either abstain or vote Reform next time around, depending on what and who they can muster up. Most of the staunchest anti Tories I know don’t dislike them any less than they ever did, and the damage Truss/Kwarteng did, whether real or perceived, is still fresh in the mind.

Whichever way you look at it, the Tories really are toast, and it’s difficult to see any way back from this that doesn’t involve a lengthy period in opposition.

 

[DanNCL]

It’s disappointing to yet again see people moan about benefits being uplifted. The standard monthly Universal Credit allowance currently is £334.91 - many on the railway are paid more than that in a week. So no, it absolutely would not be acceptable for benefits to be frozen in order to pay for this railway dispute to be resolved. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a pay rise - indeed I’ve made very clear previously that I think railway staff should be offered the same percentage increase as those on benefits, 10.1%. But a pay rise for the railway morally cannot come at the expense of those who are forced to live on benefits.

The money needs to come from the government making cuts elsewhere, and it’s quite obvious where those cuts should be - no more wasting money on bogus contracts to Tory donors. How much Taxpayer’s money was wasted on unusable PPE? And that’s just one of many examples of such wastage.

On the wider issues that the railway has, what’s needed to sort them (which sadly won’t happen) is a massive uplift in funding, and for the network to move forwards as one united industry, led by someone with a positive vision for the railway, not by civil servants or by politicians using the DFT as a step on the ministerial ladder.

 

[43066]

It’s disappointing to yet again see people moan about benefits being uplifted. The standard monthly Universal Credit allowance currently is £334.91 - many on the railway are paid more than that in a week. So no, it absolutely would not be acceptable for benefits to be frozen in order to pay for this railway dispute to be resolved.

More than that per day in many cases, but the difference is we actually work for it, rather than being handed it on a plate, and are net contributors.

Nobody has asked for benefits to be frozen to pay for railway increases, not sure why you’re suggesting it? What incenses many of us is how we are told we cannot be given any more money, yet benefit claimants can be given 10%.
And goodness knows how many other groups can also be offered a sensible pay settlement, including direct peers in Wales and Scotland.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==

But a pay rise for the railway morally cannot come at the expense of those who are forced to live on benefits.

As if it’s such an awful way to live for those of a certain mindset (who qualify). It isn’t just universal credit, it’s also living in a flat/house, guaranteed for life (in London that counts for a lot), child benefits etc. I’ve known people who choose to live on benefits and actively laugh at those who work.

Some people on benefits are genuinely in need, but not all, by any means. That’s where the irritation comes from.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Out of curiosity, which train was five vice 10? The 12:23 SWA-PAD was five car, never unpleasantly full thought nearly all seats taken from Reading.

Were trains in West Wales ever very busy? North Wales and Cardiff to Manchester are very well loaded these days.

0848 Padd to Swansea was a 5 car . 1518 back from Cardiff a coupled set.

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

So is the NHS, the care sector etc.,
Both of which dwarf the railway in terms of costs. Ultimately it’s difficult not to conclude that the railway would be in a better place if the government had simply allowed the current model to continue rather than the current disastrous medalling, albeit with a higher level of subsidy, as passenger numbers continue to grow.

The biggest difference is they in the care sector at least in my personal experience staff are empowered to make decisions and are actually encouraged to do so. A large part of this is that most staff have external qualifications either from college or university, and there courses have big sections in delegation and self management.

 

[The Ham]

Whichever way you look at it, the Tories really are toast, and it’s difficult to see any way back from this that doesn’t involve a lengthy period in opposition.

That's not necessarily the outcome, they could be the third or even forth place party and therefore not even the opposition.

The government has shown a lack of leadership.

Captions like "high wage economy" only work if as soon as industries (and it's not just public sector workers striking for more pay, as the Post Office staff have also been striking) of you understand that's going to mean having to pay more to the public sector as well.

Trickle down economics works, as long as you are holding the map the right way up and realise that those high up in the system are actual those with the least money as their spending will end up in the hands of the very wealthy (for example a lot of people paying a few pennies on their goods they order online makes a billionaire).

Does anyone on here actual believe that there has been consistent good leadership of the country for the last 18 months?

 

[zwk500]

That's not necessarily the outcome, they could be the third or even forth place party and therefore not even the opposition.

That's very unlikely. Due to FPTP, the polls will not translate directly into seats.

Does anyone on here actual believe that there has been consistent good leadership of the country for the last 18 months?

It's gone on longer than that. Since Cameron won the 2015 election, and therefore started the clock down to the referendum, we've just had increasingly bitter factionalism from the governing party.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

This is an important point - rail wages have risen below inflation for many years before the pandemic, which is a real terms wage cut. It's not just a reward for the pandemic (although it would deserve one anyway, because the rail industry was asked to deliver the near impossible overnight and rose to the challenge and then some), it's the result of a long-term drag on wages.

Is that really true?
In the 2010s recession, with public sector wages tightly constrained (1% for several years), the railway sailed through with regular increases.
This was largely because the NR CP system and the TOC franchise system locked in deals over multiple years, and rail usage was growing.
Today, we still have the CP system (but it is coming up for renewal), the franchises are dead, and passenger growth/revenue/productivity is in the toilet.
So it's not surprising that the industry is in trouble, or that public sector funding rules are being applied to the government funded railway.

 

[Iskra]

How can you blame staff for ridership decreasing and then admit that we don't have the resources to bring train numbers back up to where they were pre covid which is what you are comparing ridership against

I’m not ‘blaming staff.’ It’s possible that the resources are there, they just are stuck in a training backlog and therefore not currently operating frontline services. Until the current training backlog is resolved, it is not wise to add additional services to chase growth that might not even be there. I would also argue that network wide, we don’t need additional services, we probably just need the same amount, but run at more intelligent customer-focused times and places, rather than running the service that always ran regardless of actual demand. Running adequate trains when people want to travel, and removing them when/where they don’t could lead to growth with no further resource expenditure.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==

@Iskra I was there when Northern Rock collapsed and we went through the banking crisis and I can promise you staff still got a payrise.

Would the staff rather have not had a payrise, but the business remained solvent? I suspect so…

 

[Andrew1395]

When I worked for BR the annual reports were briefed to staff. Freight made a profit, intercity made a profit. one year Network South East made a profit. Only Provincial relied on public subsidy. No doubt there were other government funds both national and local that underpinned it all. Yet this was all described in the early years of privatisation as an industry that need reform and change as it was an organisation “managing decline”.

Now it seems it’s an industry (passenger business), requiring lots of subsidy that is declining. Maybe a total rethink turn it all back to one corporation with a John Lewis style contract between employees and the business. Regionalised consumer boards, where local authorities and customers could have a dialogue with the industries management.

 

[nedchester]

It’s disappointing to yet again see people moan about benefits being uplifted. The standard monthly Universal Credit allowance currently is £334.91 - many on the railway are paid more than that in a week. So no, it absolutely would not be acceptable for benefits to be frozen in order to pay for this railway dispute to be resolved. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a pay rise - indeed I’ve made very clear previously that I think railway staff should be offered the same percentage increase as those on benefits, 10.1%. But a pay rise for the railway morally cannot come at the expense of those who are forced to live on benefits.

The money needs to come from the government making cuts elsewhere, and it’s quite obvious where those cuts should be - no more wasting money on bogus contracts to Tory donors. How much Taxpayer’s money was wasted on unusable PPE? And that’s just one of many examples of such wastage.

On the wider issues that the railway has, what’s needed to sort them (which sadly won’t happen) is a massive uplift in funding, and for the network to move forwards as one united industry, led by someone with a positive vision for the railway, not by civil servants or by politicians using the DFT as a step on the ministerial ladder.

There does seem some who are resenting some of the poorest in our society getting 10.1% with the implications that they are scroungers.

I personally believe that rail workers do deserve a decent pay rise (look at Wakes and TfW for details) but also some working practices do need to change to reflect the modern world. Sundays in the working week is an obvious one (and yes I know that means more staff employed)

 

[irish_rail]

I don't think it's actually bitterness, I think it's profound disbelief that people are being denied a pay increase yet money can be paid out to others, it often feels on this forum that many posters forget railway staff also pay tax

Precisely. Most pensioners don't have mortgages to worry about (indeed they bought their house for 30k in the 80s.). OK a generalisation , but the way the "middle" is being squeezed is going to cost the Tories the next election (thankfully) and is also why this mess on the railway will continue for many years to come.

 

[TUC]

That’s a bit like saying as I haven’t used the health service this year I don’t think NHS staff should be paid. Ultimately the state has and has always had a responsibility to fund public-sector pay.

Really the government should be discharging that responsibility before subsidising people’s personal private energy bills, especially when I for one never asked for government assistance on that.

I, like many others, have found that the inflated direct debit from our energy provider has resulted in our account being several hundred pounds in credit, and yet this has been increased further by the government's energy support payments. How is that a good use of public money?

 

[Iskra]

Justify it to whom? And what do you mean by “performance”? The NHS has performed diabolically according to pretty much all metrics over the last couple of years, so would you suggest its front line staff should suffer a pay freeze?




My arguments for rail staff would be:

- it isn’t a pay rise, it’s a reduction in the real terms loss in wages I’ve already suffered after a pay freeze for several years;
- we were so called “key workers” who had to keep working at a time when much of the population was being paid (by government borrowing) to sit on their backsides and do nothing, by the same government that now tells us there’s no money left, despite paying exorbitant ROSCO leasing costs and handing money to benefits claimants;
- the railway has continued to provide an important service throughout the pandemic. Trains were not empty for the most part, and we are now back to heavy usage and regular overcrowding. This is an industry with an important future.
- my union will continue to cause havoc in this industry if we are not given a reasonable settlement - note an overtime ban by my union will have more effect than strike action….

The taxpayer and the fare-payers; the people the rail service is supposedly run for the benefit of.

Obviously, I appreciate it is an emotive subject for you and I’ve no wish to unnecessarily aggravate you (further) so I will reply only very simply: I find those arguments pretty weak and the constant lashing out at other sections of society doesn’t aid your argument.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==

Perhaps they should close the northern bits, and just focus on better funding the south eastern-ish bit, at least the bits that go as far up the country as South Yorks

Well, it feels like we’re already halfway there with the service up here, so why not go the full way, would save a fortune

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==

I, like many others, have found that the inflated direct debit from our energy provider has resulted in our account being several hundred pounds in credit, and yet this has been increased further by the government's energy support payments. How is that a good use of public money?

You might feel differently come March when we’ve had the really cold months. Winter hasn’t really got going yet has it?

 

[bramling]

There does seem some who are resenting some of the poorest in our society getting 10.1% with the implications that they are scroungers.

We all know there are a proportion of people on benefits simply because they can’t be bothered to work. I can’t see how anyone can make a case to say that cohort deserves 10.1%. Those who physically cannot work is another matter entirely.

 

[Iskra]

We all know there are a proportion of people on benefits simply because they can’t be bothered to work. I can’t see how anyone can make a case to say that cohort deserves 10.1%. Those who physically cannot work is another matter entirely.

10% of very little, is still very little however.

I agree however, that it is just pre-election bribery.

 

[Tetchytyke]

We all know there are a proportion of people on benefits simply because they can’t be bothered to work. I can’t see how anyone can make a case to say that cohort deserves 10.1%. Those who physically cannot work is another matter entirely.

Benefits are paid at, or usually below, subsistence levels.

Outright fraud in the benefit system is about 2%.

I used to manage a debt and benefits advice team. A tiny proportion of people were "too lazy" to work, and even these people had issues.

More commonly they were either completely lacking in the skills required to work- good luck getting work if you can't read and write- or the benefit system meant that they wouldn't get to keep any of the extra money made through work. It was depressing how often a benefit calculation would show someone to be £15/week better off working, but it would cost them £20 to get to work on the bus.

Divide and conquer is a brilliant tactic. "There's no money for wage rises due to benefits claimants/asylum seekers", said by a man worth £750m and whose wife dodges tax in the UK. And said by a government who found £200m to give to Michelle Mone.

 

[railfan99]

The thing is the demand is there from the public, trains are often packed to the rafters, it's the service that's lacking.

It's not a problem of a lack of demand.

I was in your country from 24 September to 9 October 2022 and only experienced one cancellation (TPE from Preston Lancs.) plus had minimal late running (EMR from Norwich to Peterborough the only major one - 45 minutes or so).

I observed many extremely well patronised trains, such as the 0910 hours from Penzance to Taunton GWR train (a great experience in first class) and similarly a midmorning Avanti West Coast departure from Glasgow Central to London Euston. Agree there's no lack of demand if my random trips were any guide.

 

[DanNCL]

More than that per day in many cases, but the difference is we actually work for it, rather than being handed it on a plate, and are net contributors.

Nobody has asked for benefits to be frozen to pay for railway increases, not sure why you’re suggesting it? What incenses many of us is how we are told we cannot be given any more money, yet benefit claimants can be given 10%.
And goodness knows how many other groups can also be offered a sensible pay settlement, including direct peers in Wales and Scotland.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Nov 2022 ==



As if it’s such an awful way to live for those of a certain mindset (who qualify). It isn’t just universal credit, it’s also living in a flat/house, guaranteed for life (in London that counts for a lot), child benefits etc. I’ve known people who choose to live on benefits and actively laugh at those who work.

Some people on benefits are genuinely in need, but not all, by any means. That’s where the irritation comes from.

It doesn’t get you that anymore. I had the misfortune of being unemployed and having to claim Universal Credit for a while so have first hand experience of what it’s like today. Far from being handed anything on a plate, unless you have a medical reason not to you have to spend pretty much your entire week searching for jobs and demonstrate to the DWP’s satisfaction that’s what you’re doing. You don’t get anything towards housing automatically with that either, you have to apply for that separately, it gets considered on an individual basis, and often rejected if you request help to pay rent to a private landlord as many have to these days - in my local authority area there are over 100 applicants for each council property that becomes available.

The rate on Universal Credit is even lower for under 25s, as the government seem to think under 25s get discounts on everything, and whilst there is stuff like the 16-25 railcard; groceries, electric bills etc all cost the same for an under 25 as they do for an over 25.

There’s always going to be a few who cheat the system but it’s a lot more difficult to do now than it used to be, and those who do would find a way to do so no matter what was put in place to deter them.

Does anyone on here actual believe that there has been consistent good leadership of the country for the last 18 months?

A goldfish could have provided better leadership over the last 18 months than what the Tories have provided!

There does seem some who are resenting some of the poorest in our society getting 10.1% with the implications that they are scroungers.

I personally believe that rail workers do deserve a decent pay rise (look at Wakes and TfW for details) but also some working practices do need to change to reflect the modern world. Sundays in the working week is an obvious one (and yes I know that means more staff employed)

100% agree with this.

We all know there are a proportion of people on benefits simply because they can’t be bothered to work. I can’t see how anyone can make a case to say that cohort deserves 10.1%. Those who physically cannot work is another matter entirely.

I agree, but it would be near impossible to not give the 10.1% to the minority who can’t be bothered to work without also withholding it from those who genuinely need it.

Benefits are paid at, or usually below, subsistence levels.

Outright fraud in the benefit system is about 2%.

I used to manage a debt and benefits advice team. A tiny proportion of people were "too lazy" to work, and even these people had issues.

More commonly they were either completely lacking in the skills required to work- good luck getting work if you can't read and write- or the benefit system meant that they wouldn't get to keep any of the extra money made through work. It was depressing how often a benefit calculation would show someone to be £15/week better off working, but it would cost them £20 to get to work on the bus.

Divide and conquer is a brilliant tactic. "There's no money for wage rises due to benefits claimants/asylum seekers", said by a man worth £750m and whose wife dodges tax in the UK. And said by a government who found £200m to give to Michelle Mone.

Couldn’t have put it better myself.

 

[Bletchleyite]

More commonly they were either completely lacking in the skills required to work- good luck getting work if you can't read and write- or the benefit system meant that they wouldn't get to keep any of the extra money made through work. It was depressing how often a benefit calculation would show someone to be £15/week better off working, but it would cost them £20 to get to work on the bus.

This is one key reason why Universal Basic Income has potential. You give the same base "benefits" to everyone (plus extras like child benefit), then you claw them back through tax once they earn a decent amount, so you don't get that "but I get nothing if I work" - at very low levels of pay you *do* let them keep the benefit *and* the pay.

New thread as this is nothing to do with railways lurching out of control: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/issues-with-the-benefit-system.240159/

 

[Sly Old Fox]

Some rail staff earn more than 10x what somebody on benefits does. It’s hardly comparing like for like.

I imagine the government will close down the passenger railway before it commits to a payrise for its staff.

 

[al78]

What is your evidence that this dispute has cost the economy “hundreds of millions of pounds”?

It is logical to think it has had some detrimental effect on the economy. Transport routes are the arteries of an industrialised economy and it is reasonable to think that significant disruption to some of those transport routes will have a detrimental effect. If it has turned out there has been minimal effect, that could be an argument for questioning if the rail network is disposable, and disposable items are usually discarded or neglected.

 

[dctraindriver]

Benefits are paid at, or usually below, subsistence levels.

Outright fraud in the benefit system is about 2%.

I used to manage a debt and benefits advice team. A tiny proportion of people were "too lazy" to work, and even these people had issues.

More commonly they were either completely lacking in the skills required to work- good luck getting work if you can't read and write- or the benefit system meant that they wouldn't get to keep any of the extra money made through work. It was depressing how often a benefit calculation would show someone to be £15/week better off working, but it would cost them £20 to get to work on the bus.

Divide and conquer is a brilliant tactic. "There's no money for wage rises due to benefits claimants/asylum seekers", said by a man worth £750m and whose wife dodges tax in the UK. And said by a government who found £200m to give to Michelle Mone.

Thank you for this post. For many on benefits while the rise is welcome they will still be well below the breadline.

 

[43066]

The taxpayer and the fare-payers; the people the rail service is supposedly run for the benefit of.

Obviously, I appreciate it is an emotive subject for you and I’ve no wish to unnecessarily aggravate you (further) so I will reply only very simply: I find those arguments pretty weak and the constant lashing out at other sections of society doesn’t aid your argument.

Of course you do. God forbid railway staff get a payrise, ever. Nice to know you actively want myself and my colleagues to be poorer during a cost of living crisis

I find it extraordinary (but sadly not remotely surprising) that railway staff are clearly seen as less deserving of a rise than benefits claimants on this forum. If you think I’m “lashing out” at other sections of society that is nothing compared to the hearing staff get on here, to the point where I know several who simply no longer contribute.

Ironically this is often by people who will likely either be in receipt of state handouts themselves or the beneficiaries of significant furlough payments.

You might feel differently come March when we’ve had the really cold months. Winter hasn’t really got going yet has it?

I’m hundreds in credit, too. It’s a pretty clumsy use of public money.

10% of very little, is still very little however.

I’m not sure it’s “very little” when you look at how much it costs the government.

Benefits: Who gets them and how much do they cost?

The chancellor will confirm how much benefits will go up in the Autumn Statement.

www.bbc.co.uk

The UK spends 3.9% of gross domestic product (GDP) - the total value of goods and services produced in the country - on working-age benefits, according to the latest data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

Outright fraud in the benefit system is about 2%.

As above. Still pretty significant given that working age benefits are equal to 4% of our GDP. I seem to recall fraud on Covid related support payments also ran to several billion, which the government has chosen to simply write off.

Divide and conquer is a brilliant tactic. "There's no money for wage rises due to benefits claimants/asylum seekers",

Agree with divide and conquer, more often used to good effect against railway staff and unions. Hence Truss’ scapegoating of striking railway workers in her final PMQs given the extraordinary damage she and her sidekick had just done.

whose wife dodges tax in the UK. And said by a government who found £200m to give to Michelle Mone.

To be fair most of her assets and income are overseas and, as a uk resident, she pays the annual non dom payment, which means she contributes more than the overwhelming majority of uk tax payers. If she wasn’t able to do that she likely simply wouldn’t live here and therefore wouldn’t contribute anything.

I find a lot of the vilification of Sunak for being wealthy distasteful, it has no bearing on his ability to do his job. It’s not as if KC and former head of the CPS Keir Starmer is exactly Joe Average, either!

Some rail staff earn more than 10x what somebody on benefits does. It’s hardly comparing like for like.

Benefits aren’t “earned”. This is also patently nonsense when people on £50k plus can still receive child benefit. Most frontline railway staff earn significantly below this.

I imagine the government will close down the passenger railway before it commits to a payrise for its staff.

This is wishful thinking from another poster who clearly loathes staff. Fairly safe to say that isn’t remotely likely when it was kept open throughout the pandemic and we’re now carrying huge numbers of passengers again.

 

[MikeWM]

I lost count of the number of times I was late!
Last week, the first three journeys were collectively about 1h30 late - the first London bound train on Monday was cancelled; so we just had to wait for the 0613. Ridiculous.

Well, exactly. I very much appreciate that my experiences over the last year aren't all that bad compared to others. In some respects the railway sorta-vaguely works as it should, but a lot of that seems to be because things used to work and haven't quite managed to break yet, like a really old piece of software that no-one really knows how to fix anymore but for now is mostly just keeping going. The railway *feels* like it is generally getting worse (and I've mentioned a number of reasons why, but there are others), and it also feels that there isn't much chance it will get any better anytime soon. In that the railways closely resemble much of what it feels like to live in this country in general right now.

A few people in the thread have mentioned 'managed decline' - personally I think that is rather optimistic. It feels like unmanaged, or chaotic, decline to me. And it seems that no-one has a plan to reverse it or even make it more orderly - maybe it isn't possible, but no-one seems to be even trying. There is a massive vacuum in politics.

One point on benefits - people should remember that benefits aren't just limited to the dole. For example, a carer who gets attendance/carers allowance. They are *saving* the state considerable amounts of money by undertaking the responsibility of care for another in exchange for a fairly measly amount of money, which otherwise would fall on the state.