RDG response to RMT's recent "road map" proposal.

[yorksrob]

I was talking about mandatory overtime to someone else and I "got" their comment. It had nothing to do with your political views. Which you are quite clear about.

I want a working train service. I'm fairly clear about that.

 

[Facing Back]

I want a working train service. I'm fairly clear about that.

So do I.

 

[Dan G]

I am curious as to why the unions won't put the offer to members?

I haven't followed this in great detail and don't wish to get involved with the arguments but if an offer has been made what is the harm I'm voting on it?

As an outsider it dies seem that the government is justified in saying that they're not prepared to talk till the latest offer has been voted on.

Yeah it's an odd one. DfT/RDG's final offer was made, what, six or seven months ago?

Striking isn't having any effect or changing anything, and nor will it. Rightfully or wrongly the public don't care.

 

[scrapy]

Yeah it's an odd one. DfT/RDG's final offer was made, what, six or seven months ago?

Striking isn't having any effect or changing anything, and nor will it. Rightfully or wrongly the public don't care.

Their previous offer to that one was also a 'final' offer!

 

[Facing Back]

Lots of reasons mooted. My reading is that, from the union's side they say the offer isn't in the best interests of their members or is too close to one that has already been rejected so why would they bother. It is expensive and time consuming to ballot members so they don't put forward all offers. They have just had a large mandate to extend the period of industrial action so they say that the views of their members are clear. They could also be worried about the results - which are published - showing a lessening in support for the action - you'd have to ask the union officers I guess.

Whatever the reason, it is now entrenched and has been for months, which is difficult to walk back from. I was hoping that the recent message from the RMT proposing settlement principles was an approach to allow them to get a tweaked offer which they could then present to members, as presenting one that they have said for months is not acceptable will be seen as weak.

Final offers are not always final. But generally they set certain points to pivot around - the amount of money on the table can be final, but the way it is deployed can flex, or timeframes for implementation, or details not included in the high level.... etc

 

[Bantamzen]

It's the job of railway users to make their presence felt at the next election.

It really isn't our job. Its the job of the opposition to put forward a solid mandate on how they would make improvements. Unfortunately Starmer being more useless than a bag of dead badgers means at best there will be some token speeches around the election, which will then be quickly forgotten if Labour manage not to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, something they are very capable of.

Because it’s just a delaying tactic from the government. It takes two or three weeks to present an offer and get a vote and, of course, it would be “unfair” and “unreasonable” to continue to strike whilst an offer is being considered.

So every time the government stick in an insulting offer that the members won’t accept they buy four weeks of no-striking.

It’s staggeringly mendacious, but people buy into it because it superficially sounds reasonable.

I'm not going to lie, I had to re-read your post a couple of times. It is the job of the union to put a final offer to it's members, and let's not pretend that this is not a final offer. Its not a delaying tactic by the government, they couldn't give two figs about the dispute. They've demonstrated that time and again. So it is up to the unions to ballot their members on it for a final decision, not glibly declare that they know the strength of feeling through some mandating meetings. I like others suspect they are not doing so because they are worried support is starting to slip away.

 

[LowLevel]

I am curious as to why the unions won't put the offer to members?

I haven't followed this in great detail and don't wish to get involved with the arguments but if an offer has been made what is the harm I'm voting on it?

As an outsider it dies seem that the government is justified in saying that they're not prepared to talk till the latest offer has been voted on.

Why is the action ballot result of the same group of people not considered to be a vote on the offer by the Government as it is the unions?

Because it suits them for it not to be.

MPs are elected on turnouts that aren't even slightly comparable to what these strike ballots have been producing in terms of response and turn out.

The response regarding work life balance from the workforce has been pretty much unanimous, setting pay aside.

We don't want them changing our lives on a whim all the time in the name of "efficiency".

 

[Bantamzen]

Why is the action ballot result of the same group of people not considered to be a vote on the offer by the Government as it is the unions?

Because it suits them for it not to be.

MPs are elected on turnouts that aren't even slightly comparable to what these strike ballots have been producing in terms of response and turn out.

The response regarding work life balance from the workforce has been pretty much unanimous, setting pay aside.

We don't want them changing our lives on a whim all the time in the name of "efficiency".

Don't worry, the one thing the railway industry is guaranteed never to be accused of is being efficient...

 

[Snow1964]

Their previous offer to that one was also a 'final' offer!

But current offer hasn't changed for about 6 months, rather suggests it is not going to change.

I think RMT has recently woken up to the fact no one on other side cares about them having a couple more one day strikes. So all the are achieving is their members losing pay.

The RMT have run out of ammo, the short strikes are impotent as bargaining tool. All they have left untried is an all out indefinite strike, (and anyone who has read about Arthur Scargill in 1983-84 will know they are high risk self destruct).

Of course things have changed since miners strike started 40 years ago, strike laws and employment laws. No one would have heard of fire and rehire (on worst terms) 40 years ago.

My take on the latest M Lynch letter is RMT are stuck, and managing to block even the pay rise offered and we need a deal for part of it to save face.

 

[yorksrob]

It really isn't our job. Its the job of the opposition to put forward a solid mandate on how they would make improvements. Unfortunately Starmer being more useless than a bag of dead badgers means at best there will be some token speeches around the election, which will then be quickly forgotten if Labour manage not to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, something they are very capable of.

Ordinarily I would agree with you. If we had a working railway system. Given how bad things are, all labour have to do is to get the system running to be a major improvement.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It is the job of the union to put a final offer to it's members, and let's not pretend that this is not a final offer. Its not a delaying tactic by the government, they couldn't give two figs about the dispute. They've demonstrated that time and again. So it is up to the unions to ballot their members on it for a final decision,

This offer is a final offer. The last offer was also a final offer. The offer before that was also a final offer. The one before that was, you guessed it, a final offer.

I quite agree the government aren’t negotiating in good faith- they haven’t done since day one. RDG had almost negotiated a resolution last year and the zombie government torpedoed it. We know all this.

So why do you think “put it to the members” is a position taken in good faith? Of course it isn’t.

As I said, every time you put an offer to the members you get four weeks of no strikes. After all it is “unreasonable” to keep striking whilst it is being considered. You know your final offer won’t be accepted- it is identical to your last three final offers which weren't accepted.

I think RMT has recently woken up to the fact no one on other side cares about them having a couple more one day strikes. So all the are achieving is their members losing pay.

Of course things have changed since miners strike started 40 years ago, strike laws and employment laws. No one would have heard of fire and rehire (on worst terms) 40 years ago.

So what’s the solution? Roll over? We know the government don’t care- that’s why they’ve spent £1.4bn a year of taxpayer money prolonging a dispute that would cost them £0.5bn a year to resolve. The zombie Prime Minister wants to be a zombie Thatcher.

It isn’t just the RMT, btw. For all the bluster, it is ASLEF who have the real power. ASLEF strikes are much more effective because, whilst you can get the office junior to come and play at being a guard, you can’t get the office junior to drive the train so nothing at all runs.

Fire and rehire keeps getting mentioned. Yes, it works where the employer has access to a large pool of potential employees requiring minimal training. The Assa brothers have done it to Asda staff because someone has to repay the billions of loans they took out to buy Asda, so why wouldn’t it be the poorest people in their workforce. P&O and Irish Ferries did it because Filipino crew already know how to sail a ship.

Fire and rehire all the drivers? Good luck with that.

 

[irish_rail]

You'll get a vote in due course.

But don't expect Labour to do anything different, after all in 1964 they were elected on a "Stop Beeching" manifesto and when in office closed more than Beeching recommended and in 1997 said they were opposed to rail privatisation and apart from forcing Railtrack into administration (which was a highly dubious act legally and damaged trust in the government where business was concerned probably resulting in increased costs) did nothing.

You cannot say that because Labour governments of 26 years ago and more screwed up that the current one will. That's ancient history frankly.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I was hoping that the recent message from the RMT proposing settlement principles was an approach to allow them to get a tweaked offer which they could then present to members

It almost certainly was an attempt by the RMT to get a solution that allows them to get on with life. The RMT are effective and pragmatic negotiators (despite the public bluster). Of course they’re seeking an exit strategy.

And the Tories have told them to stick it up their arse.

Goes to show who’s really to blame for all of this.

 

[irish_rail]

Cost of settling, £0.5bn a year. Cost of not settling, £1.4bn for 1 year only and zero after that.

And I think Labour and the unions need to really start highlighting this fact to the the public and media. It really shows the government stance for how utterly incompetent and daft that it is

 

[Falcon1200]

and forcing compulsory overtime on them.

Assuming this refers to Sunday working, who is having compulsory overtime forced on them? For my entire 38 year railway career, Sundays were outside the working week and rostered, meaning an obligation to work unless cover could be arranged; And it was entirely my choice to apply for and take those jobs, in a variety of grades and roles. Anyone who does not wish to work Sundays, under whatever arrangement, should not take a job requiring Sunday working.

Settling would have cost £1bn. Not settling has cost £3bn and counting.

But no-one knew that when the dispute started!

The “modernisation” consists of converting voluntary overtime into compulsory overtime.

I say again; Anyone who does not wish to work Sundays, under whatever arrangement, should not take a job requiring Sunday working. And if the train service requires Sunday working it should not be voluntary.

 

[Dan G]

Their previous offer to that one was also a 'final' offer!

The "best and final offer" was made in January. In April there were "clarifications" but no substantive changes.

The strikes from June 2022 to January 2023 won the RMT that offer; but the strikes since January 2023 – nine months – have achieved nothing.

Why is the action ballot result of the same group of people not considered to be a vote on the offer by the Government as it is the unions?

See post #147.

This offer is a final offer. The last offer was also a final offer. The offer before that was also a final offer. The one before that was, you guessed it, a final offer.

Erm, no. The only offer from DfT/RDG to the RMT bearing the words "best and final offer" is this one, which is indeed the final one made.

 

[irish_rail]

The compulsory overtime is not something I fully agree with, I don't like the principle, but as it is in place across large parts of the railway already, and as it is common practice in many other industries too I don't get to excited about the injustice. But I can quite understand why railway workers want it to change.

The modernisation consists of much more than this and you very well know it. Typically these programmes have a business case which has benefits with large variances and margins or error so they cannot be published without serious explanation - and generally are best consumed at a very high level, so I'm not surprised it is not published but I am very sure that it exists. Myself and my company have been involved in any number of this type of programme (not in the rail industry) so you will have to forgive me if I don't take you at face value.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Sep 2023 ==


So your argument is that this government is illegitimate because you don't agree with their ideology but the last unelected labour government was legitimate because you did? Ok....

I have to take issue with this. I personally am at my limit of how much my body can take work wise. I have lots of other things on my plate, kids etc and I don't work any overtime. If I become forced to work an additional Sunday every other week, making my week a 6 day instead of a 5 day week, then that would potentially have safety consequences for me. I know my limits. I wouldn't feel safe being at work anymore than I am now. The railway is a very tiring industry, and some politicians and seemingly the Dft forget that. The consequences of fatigue on the railway could lead to death and disaster. Its too important to be messed with by clueless politicians and officials.

 

[daodao]

You cannot say that because Labour governments of 26 years ago and more screwed up that the current one will. That's ancient history frankly.

Believing that Starmer can be trusted or relied on is extremely naive. In any case, it is likely to be over 12 months until the next general election.

Unions that refuse to negotiate or put reasonable offers to their members have something to hide.

 

[irish_rail]

Believing that Starmer can be trusted or relied on is extremely naive.

No, voting Tory at the next election would be extremely naive. We cannot give them another 5 years. They have let everyone down again and again for past 14. So I'd rather "chance" it with Labour than vote for a known and proven dead duck.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Anyone who does not wish to work Sundays, under whatever arrangement, should not take a job requiring Sunday working. And if the train service requires Sunday working it should not be voluntary.

The staff do not object to working Sundays. They object to compulsory overtime.

Sundays should be in the working week. That would be efficient. It’s what the unions have wanted for years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Sep 2023 ==

Unions that refuse to negotiate

What about zombie governments who refuse to negotiate?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Sep 2023 ==

The only offer from DfT/RDG to the RMT bearing the words "best and final offer" is this one, which is indeed the final one made.

So all the other final offers they published as final offers weren’t final offers? Ah but of course.

 

[Snow1964]

I have to take issue with this. I personally am at my limit of how much my body can take work wise. I have lots of other things on my plate, kids etc and I don't work any overtime. If I become forced to work an additional Sunday every other week, making my week a 6 day instead of a 5 day week, then that would potentially have safety consequences for me. I know my limits. I wouldn't feel safe being at work anymore than I am now. The railway is a very tiring industry, and some politicians and seemingly the Dft forget that. The consequences of fatigue on the railway could lead to death and disaster. Its too important to be messed with by clueless politicians and officials.

But surely your contract works both ways, if you want to take the money, you are expected to turn up to what is required (as per your employment contract), and if you don't like it you have chance to negociate a reduction in hours, and if don't like outcome of that, you have option to resign.

I think you will find you have signed up to present yourself at start of each day, not impaired. It has never been employers responsibility to do your childcare, presumably it was your decision to have kids, and can't blame the employer if your kids make you tired.

If you want to accept a variation to your contract, eg a promotion, or apply for different role you have to accept the good and bad that goes with it. there is a reason why no one is forced to be promoted (it is always offered), is because might not want the hassle.

However if you are being made to change your conditions for no extra pay then I would agree, its not on. You should always have the no change option.

 

[Dan G]

So all the other final offers they published as final offers weren’t final offers? Ah but of course.

December 2022 "outline framework".
January 2023 best and final offer.

That's it. Apart from the initial offer before the RMT entered into dispute, that is all the offers that have been made.

 

[Bantamzen]

This offer is a final offer. The last offer was also a final offer. The offer before that was also a final offer. The one before that was, you guessed it, a final offer.

I quite agree the government aren’t negotiating in good faith- they haven’t done since day one. RDG had almost negotiated a resolution last year and the zombie government torpedoed it. We know all this.

So why do you think “put it to the members” is a position taken in good faith? Of course it isn’t.

As I said, every time you put an offer to the members you get four weeks of no strikes. After all it is “unreasonable” to keep striking whilst it is being considered. You know your final offer won’t be accepted- it is identical to your last three final offers which weren't accepted.

At then end of the day it is responsibility of the union to put to the members. The government aren't going to change the offer just because the union refused to put it to the vote.

So what’s the solution? Roll over? We know the government don’t care- that’s why they’ve spent £1.4bn a year of taxpayer money prolonging a dispute that would cost them £0.5bn a year to resolve. The zombie Prime Minister wants to be a zombie Thatcher.

It isn’t just the RMT, btw. For all the bluster, it is ASLEF who have the real power. ASLEF strikes are much more effective because, whilst you can get the office junior to come and play at being a guard, you can’t get the office junior to drive the train so nothing at all runs.

Fire and rehire keeps getting mentioned. Yes, it works where the employer has access to a large pool of potential employees requiring minimal training. The Assa brothers have done it to Asda staff because someone has to repay the billions of loans they took out to buy Asda, so why wouldn’t it be the poorest people in their workforce. P&O and Irish Ferries did it because Filipino crew already know how to sail a ship.

Fire and rehire all the drivers? Good luck with that.

I think the real question here is what's the alternative? Its clear there is very little wriggle room here, the government are not going to back down any time soon so what else is there? There is a very real risk that a very long period of industrial action will lead to even more revenue loss for the industry, which in turn could easily threaten services and even jobs. The railway industry is not in a healthy state with costs rising and revenue not recovering as much wanted / expected. Its part of the reason why this dispute is ongoing.

 

[mandub]

This part I agree with.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Sep 2023 ==


This part I do not. The government doesn't have any money. It is all ours. Sure they can borrow more - or even print more. But lets assume we all know why that is a bad idea, they either increase spending on the railway by increasing fares or taxes, or by decreasing spending somewhere else. Where do they target? The non-doms and petrochem companies can only be taxed so many times.

What if the railways actually contribute to the UK via economic multiplier effects.
The railway is a service to the UK economy, not a sunk cost

 

[Tetchytyke]

if don't like outcome of that, you have option to resign

We saw the consequences of pushing people to the limit with the Croydon tram crash.

“But you can always resign if you don’t like it!”

Its clear there is very little wriggle room here, the government are not going to back down any time soon so what else is there?

So what’s the solution? Bend over and spread?

I continue to find it bizarre that people demand the railway staff back down because this zombie government won’t.

The railway industry is not in a healthy state with costs rising and revenue not recovering as much wanted / expected. Its part of the reason why this dispute is ongoing.

Nah, this dispute is ongoing because our pound shop Prime Minister wants to be a pound shop Margaret Thatcher and wants his Scargill moment.

The revenue is a red herring- settling would cost £0.5pm a year yet prolonging the dispute is costing £1.4bn a year. “But there’s no money!”

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Sep 2023 ==

The railway is a service to the UK economy, not a sunk cost

The roads lose billions and billions a year but nobody cares about that…

 

[mandub]

It's about *choice* you *don't have to* use the rail service, *you choose* to go gallivanting around the country on lightly used services heavily subsidised by the taxpayer. You could use a bus or car, for example.

So you do want out govt to build and maintain roads for car usage......
Does road building pay for itself or is it a cost to the taxpayer?
Perhaps I as a taxpayer don't want to pay for it as I don't use it?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Sep 2023 ==

You cannot say that because Labour governments of 26 years ago and more screwed up that the current one will. That's ancient history frankly.

Tories love bringing up previous Labour governments or even strikes from 40+ years ago. It's weird.
There is no relevance whatsoever

 

[A0]

So you do want out govt to build and maintain roads for car usage......
Does road building pay for itself or is it a cost to the taxpayer?
Perhaps I as a taxpayer don't want to pay for it as I don't use it?

Ok, so you don't want roads.

So when you dial 999 needing an ambulance to reach you because you are ill, how do you propose they reach you ?

 

[Jozhua]

What makes you think that the rail unions don't know this? Productivity agreements are not a new thing.

The government expects the proposed changes to self-fund the increase (rather than counting some of it as a cost of living rise) but they don't have a clue how much prodictivity would improve with their plans. I can assure you that many items on the government wishlist that we've seen before will offer marginal gains at best. Cutting those pointless strings would allow a compromise to be reached. Part of the issue is that the changes demanded are vague in many places and accepting them would effectively mean putting a signature on a blank piece of paper.

Look at the ticket offices. If the government just picked out the no-hopers - the single-manned, single shift ones only open for the morning peak for example - they would have been able to achieve some closures with little fuss. Instead they've gone in like a bull in a china shop and Avanti are proposing to close Euston and Man Picc.

See also the brief threat to impose nationwide DOO. TOC chiefs told the government that our trains & infrastructure weren't set up for much in the way of extensions, that the likes of Northern and TPE consider Guards to be a key asset to revenue protection, and that adding in such a divisive demand for very little gain was counter-productive. The government still tried it.


Then you observe wrong. The unions are pragmatic and open to sensible changes. ASLEF and TfW have managed to come to a wide-ranging agreement, including bringing Sundays inside the working week, with drivers taking on some dispatch responsibilities. Changes to the role of guards on Merseyrail were eventually made too.


Rail staff would accept 4% (a significant real-terms cut) which is less than some sectors are holding out for. I would be interested to know what changes have been demanded of other public sector workers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Sep 2023 ==


Birmingham CC are largely responsible for their own maladies.


There's little left to cut service-wise, though some parts of local government are very inefficient. A woman who took a job as a PA to a Director of Social Services said that she cleared the three week backlog left by her predecessor's departure in a few days and suggested to her boss that she could drop her hours and work part-time. Oh no, all the other directors have full-time PAs and so must he.

I agree regarding gov being a bull in a china shop re: these negotiations, in fact the analogy could fairly reasonably be extended to a lot of the railways.

Like you say, on many TOCs, guards are a key part of revenue protection, in a way they less need to be on the intensive SE commuter services.

Ticket shop closures may have gone down easier had they not tried to do so at massive major stations and instead closed down the infrequently open offices with few ticket purchases - potentially more gradually.

I really do wonder where the RMT and ASLEF go from here. The government has well and truly called their bluff by showing a complete disregard and lack of interest in the railways. All the industrial action over the past few months has had absolutely no impact on moving the government or RDG.

I did think until recently that only an all-out strike would bring the government to its senses, but I now think it would just be prepared to sit it out.

The unions and government need to learn to pick their battles. Both sides seem to be defiantly dug in and unwilling to compromise.

Someone at Tory HQ has clearly done the maths and discovered that the strikes are probably working in their favour, or at least not hurting them very much. They get to score some points against the unions and the media is hardly sympathetic to their cause... (especially because half the publications' staff probably can't make it in on strike days). The Conservatives also don't really care about the long term viability of the rail system anyway - indeed, the more it is brought into question, the better of an excuse they have to cut it loose. The sooner RMT recognise this, the better.

 

[Bantamzen]

So what’s the solution? Bend over and spread?

I continue to find it bizarre that people demand the railway staff back down because this zombie government won’t.

Like I asked, what's the alternative? The unions are hardly winning, the staff are losing money, the media don't care any more, and the public just tut and find other ways to get around. If industrial actions were named like ships this one would firmly be "RMS Titanic". Even in the world of trade unions, there are some times that you have to take a tactical retreat, regroup and ready for another shot at better pay / T&Cs in the future. All the rail unions are doing now is trying to stare down a government that isn't even looking at them anymore.

Nah, this dispute is ongoing because our pound shop Prime Minister wants to be a pound shop Margaret Thatcher and wants his Scargill moment.

The revenue is a red herring- settling would cost £0.5pm a year yet prolonging the dispute is costing £1.4bn a year. “But there’s no money!”

No the dispute is ongoing because the railways have had to be bailed out with public money because no-one seems to be able to make them work. That I'm afraid shows just how bad a state the industry is in, and is why efficiency demands are tied into the deal.

 

[baz962]

Ok, so you don't want roads.

So when you dial 999 needing an ambulance to reach you because you are ill, how do you propose they reach you ?

Well we could ask similar questions of you. You personally might not use rail , but some of the staff of NHS , police , armed forces and shops you use will use them to get to work. Also some prison officers. Some of the goods you buy will have been sent by freight.