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

[Tetchytyke]

it worked for British Gas...

Gas fitters are ten a penny.

Train drivers are not.

Even if you do a P&O and fire everyone in one fell swoop, it takes a good two years to fully train a new driver.

We hear the "cost more to fight than the settle" argument here a lot. Economically and mathematically that is simply wrong over the long term

It isn’t though.

Settling costs £0.5bn a year. Not settling costs £1.4bn a year. Those are the government’s own figures.

So as we enter the second year of the dispute we’re already £2bn down.

The only way not settling costs less is if the government succeed in beating the union into submission. And even then, the longer the dispute goes on the bigger the cost of not settling, and the longer it takes for any “saving” to become apparent.

Maybe they will, maybe they won’t.

Montgomery has replied that the offer was carefully negotiated and already included the concessions agreed with the union reps and that, whilst he is happy to talk, the unions are not getting another offer until this one has been put to the members.

And the union leaders say the deal is exactly the same as the last one they rejected. Depends who you want to believe.

I know who I believe- and it isn’t the man who gave us Avanti West Coast and TPE.

 

[Facing Back]

Because the change is too much.

OK I can understand that.

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

And I notice that my question still didn't get answered upthread. Part of the reason we are still here is because the different tocs have different terms and conditions. The government want to give the same percentage payrise to all the companies which is a bigger rise to the higher paid tocs.

I provided a response to that in post #259. Admittedly not a very good onw.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But being serious there is not going to be another offer without at least a vote against it. And truthfully I very much doubt there will be a revised offer with one.

If the members wanted to agree this deal then the RMT would agree this deal. That’s how trade unions work.

The RMT are very pragmatic when it comes down to it. If the members were clamouring to accept this deal, it would be accepted.

 

[Facing Back]

It isn’t though.

Settling costs £0.5bn a year. Not settling costs £1.4bn a year. Those are the government’s own figures.

So as we enter the second year of the dispute we’re already £2bn down.

The only way not settling costs less is if the government succeed in beating the union into submission. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t.

And the union leaders say the deal is exactly the same as the last one they rejected. Depends who you want to believe.

I know who I believe- and it isn’t the man who gave us Avanti West Coast and TPE.

Not settling costs £1.4bn a year for the duration of the strike - which will end at some point. After that the cost is £0. The £0.5bn per year will last forever.

I don't take the public rhetoric of the either the unions or the RDG at face value but I'm not going back to track changes between various deals.

 

[baz962]

OK I can understand that.

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


I provided a response to that in post #259. Admittedly not a very good onw.

Sorry I missed it. But yes it doesn't really help . I know quite a few drivers that will retire early and others that will apply elsewhere if it happens. We stay because of the better conditions.

 

[Facing Back]

If the members wanted to agree this deal then the RMT would agree this deal. That’s how trade unions work.

The RMT are very pragmatic when it comes down to it. If the members were clamouring to accept this deal, it would be accepted.

If the members voted to accept the deal then the union would accept it. However that requires a ballot. And you might very well be right that there would be an overwhelming rejection. However it might also be the case that without a ballot, there will be no new deal from the RDG.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Not settling costs £1.4bn a year for the duration of the strike - which will end at some point. After that the cost is £0. The £0.5bn per year will last forever.

The cost is only zero if the union completely caves in. If they do that today and get nothing then in about five years they’ll break even.

And, of course, if the government completely caves in today then they’ve simply wasted £3bn.

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

If the members voted to accept the deal then the union would accept it.

If the members were telling the leadership they wanted to accept then there would be a vote. Otherwise the staff start going back to work and the strike collapses- which is what happened at Northern Spirit in the early 2000s.

Clearly there is no such groundswell of opinion.

 

[Facing Back]

Sorry I missed it. But yes it doesn't really help . I know quite a few drivers that will retire early and others that will apply elsewhere if it happens. We stay because of the better conditions.

Haha thought not. I assume that there will be a raft of moves and retirements as a result of this and expect (hmmm) that there is a plan to enhance and fast-track recruitment and training to address that....

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

The cost is only zero if the union completely caves in. If they do that today and get nothing then in about five years they’ll break even.

And, of course, if the government completely caves in today then they’ve simply wasted £3bn.

High stakes poker then.

 

[baz962]

The cost is only zero if the union completely caves in. If they do that today and get nothing then in about five years they’ll break even.

And, of course, if the government completely caves in today then they’ve simply wasted £3bn.

I wonder if it has been worked out properly. Is that 1.4 billion just what it has cost over the last year or what it would of cost per year for no railway. Because if you add all the strike days up they would equal a month or less. If the strike was a whole year as in every day then that cost multiplies massively. And also some businesses will wether the odd day or two , but might cave in if it's ramped up and that would be less tax take and more people requiring benefits.
Also the 0.5 billion to settle , is that before or after the tax take and taking into account that more would be spent and so returned to the economy.

 

[HSTEd]

The cost is only zero if the union completely caves in. If they do that today and get nothing then in about five years they’ll break even.

Not quite that simple, because if this dispute drags on inflation will further reduce the real wage bill because wages will end up stuck at 2021(? when did this start again?) nominal values.

With inflation running several percent it will add up quick.

 

[Facing Back]

If the members were telling the leadership they wanted to accept then there would be a vote. Otherwise the staff start going back to work and the strike collapses- which is what happened at Northern Spirit in the early 2000s.

Clearly there is no such groundswell of opinion.

I'm not suggesting that there is, or that I think that the union should offer a referendum. Merely that without doing it I think it is very, very unlikely that the RDG will budge. They are also clearly unwilling to offer concessions so that the RMT can call one now. That suggests to me that they do not believe the RMT have any desire to call one.

 

[baz962]

Haha thought not. I assume that there will be a raft of moves and retirements as a result of this and expect (hmmm) that there is a plan to enhance and fast-track recruitment and training to address that....

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


High stakes poker then.

The trouble with the training though is it will firstly barely cover the current shortfall , then you are trying to eliminate the overtime and then cover anyone leaving if it's all enforced. Secondly most training is done by current staff and many would step down from training duties if this all happens.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Is that 1.4 billion just what it has cost over the last year or what it would of cost per year for no railway

The government’s own figures are that the dispute cost the economy £700m for the six months June to December 2022.

 

[Bantamzen]

Because the change is too much. And I notice that my question still didn't get answered upthread. Part of the reason we are still here is because the different tocs have different terms and conditions. The government want to give the same percentage payrise to all the companies which is a bigger rise to the higher paid tocs. Some of those higher paid tocs have worse conditions and so will get a higher payrise for less loss. The unions want a simple payrise and then to negotiate separately with each company on the changes , but without this agreement to no strikes. Once you agree to that the government will offer say 1% to buy pretty much every condition and then you are stuck because you agreed to no strikes. I already posted before that several companies get 10k more but worse terms. So I personally would want at least 10k and then the same percentage as those. I accept less salary for better conditions and infact I moved from a toc paying 9k more for that reason.

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


Can't really bring the pay increase into it because everyone in every industry gets payrises sooner or later. The minimum wage goes up but they don't have changes to conditions. But as I said before I'm not resistant to change. But they want too much for too little. And still you don't say how you balance between companies.

It is far from uncommon for different parts of the public sector to get smaller percentage rises than those on higher annual salaries. So welcome to the world of publicly funded employment, I'm not sure what you were expecting from it but perhaps now you've got a glimpse of what it's like on the dark side...

If the members wanted to agree this deal then the RMT would agree this deal. That’s how trade unions work.

The RMT are very pragmatic when it comes down to it. If the members were clamouring to accept this deal, it would be accepted.

No, trade unions ballot their members on the crucial decisions like accepting a pay offer, even when they know the feelings of their membership.

 

[baz962]

The government’s own figures are that the dispute cost the economy £700m for the six months June to December 2022.

So with the odd strike days. So if it had been a full on everyday strike it would be much higher

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

It is far from uncommon for different parts of the public sector to get smaller percentage rises than those on higher annual salaries. So welcome to the world of publicly funded employment, I'm not sure what you were expecting from it but perhaps now you've got a glimpse of what it's like on the dark side...


No, trade unions ballot their members on the crucial decisions like accepting a pay offer, even when they know the feelings of their membership.

I'm not unhappy with a smaller percentage. I'm unhappy with both a smaller percentage in pay with a bigger change in conditions. But in your example does that include the same jobs. Because I don't mind getting less than nurses or police etc. But it's different than a driver doing the same job .

 

[Facing Back]

The trouble with the training though is it will firstly barely cover the current shortfall , then you are trying to eliminate the overtime and then cover anyone leaving if it's all enforced. Secondly most training is done by current staff and many would step down from training duties if this all happens.

Yep. There will clearly be carnage for a period. Which will impact on the perceived success of the changes to the public - so there is risk attached to the approach.

 

[baz962]

OK I can understand that.

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


I provided a response to that in post #259. Admittedly not a very good onw.

Also another point about what you posted is that a driver or guard isn't going to wait to catch up , they will just apply to higher paid tocs. Also the government offer isn't less to the higher paid tocs , it's identical.

 

[N0G83]

Trust me I have been driving trains so packed I'm leaving people behind. We don't need to win people back.

But are your services short-formed?

 

[ValentaFan1974]

The RMT need to swallow it, offer a vote on the current “deal”, agree to no strikes for four weeks and then they can return the “No” vote to the RDG so at least they can say they offered a ballot. Maybe then we can move this forward… until then nothing is going to change and the sooner the RMT see that the better. We’re all sick of this now…

 

[Facing Back]

Also another point about what you posted is that a driver or guard isn't going to wait to catch up , they will just apply to higher paid tocs. Also the government offer isn't less to the higher paid tocs , it's identical.

Yes of course and I was alluding to that. The TOCs who are at the top of the pay ladder will suddenly find all open positions filled and people will shuffle up the ladder to where there are still vacancies leaving those at the bottom of the ladder quite a recruitment challenge. Unless of course the DfT takes steps to limit the movement of staff between TOCs, which although difficult, can be done legally. Obviously what can't be stopped is the attrition through people just leaving the industry.

Yes the current offer is identical in percentage terms to all TOCs, so the higher paid ones get a bigger rise. I was talking about over time reducing the difference. I had guessed that there might be a gradiated offer on pay depending on current salary, but that would either have meant an uplift from the 4/5% for the lowest paid TOCs (not going to happen) or a smaller offer to the highest paid (a mountain too high to scale after several years of a pay-freeze. This will probably lead to years of future dispute if the DfT sticks with it, or we will continue with a tiered system where "gold" TOCs get higher pay. A more likely outcome perhaps is new entrants getting a standard across the board - another principle the unions are not fond of.

Which is in the RMT offer now if I remember correctly.

 

[Bantamzen]

I'm not unhappy with a smaller percentage. I'm unhappy with both a smaller percentage in pay with a bigger change in conditions. But in your example does that include the same jobs. Because I don't mind getting less than nurses or police etc. But it's different than a driver doing the same job .

Pretty much yes it does. Different departments are already paid different amounts by grades which equate to similar types of work, and its happened a few times where the better paid ones get higher rises. The thing that I fear many people forget in all this is that for the first time in decades, it is the government pulling the strings and setting the pay rise limits, and generally speaking the public sector gets less than the market facing equivalents. So good pay deals, even for the best paid sectors are usually quite hard to come by. It comes with the turf.

In the past it was worth it in exchange for better job security, final salary pensions etc. But even those have been eroded which is why the public sector haemorrhages staff, usually the best to private industry. Once the franchises started to fail the writing was on the wall for all of you in the industry, the government was never going to give you private sector levels of pay or T&Cs, and would demand more for less. I'm afraid this is at the heart of the matter, the railway industry failed when it really should not have. When the dust settles in the future, everyone in the industry needs to take a step back and consider just why that was. Its no good blaming everybody else, the entire industry needs to take a good, long hard look at itself and ask what could it have done better.

In the meantime you will all have to consider if it is worth going into another 18 months of dispute, in the hope that a Labour government is returned and that it decides to prioritise you over everything else. Otherwise 18 months could turn into a lot longer, and even if Labour do get in I've got a sneaky feeling the railways won't be top of the priorities.

 

[whoosh]

Yet we’re now into the second year of the dispute.

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

Because if the dispute continues, the cost of the dispute continues too.

Even if the unions throw in the towel today, we’re still £2bn down on where we should have been.

It’s all about that taxpayer value.

Cheap at the price! Changing the law to take away civil liberties - freedoms - of the population (or part of the population- at least initially) of being able to take strike action.
How would the government have made a convicing argument to do that without a long prolonged dispute? How much would it spent in PR to convince the population that that was a good thing?
It couldn't, and it would've cost loads.

So... engineer one...

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.

Ticket office closures - they would've faced a backlash anyway. Now they can look reasonable and keep open some of the larger ones planned for closure, and close the others - which is what they wanted to start with.

So where does either side go from here? Clearly the government don’t want to negotiate a settlement, they want to humiliate the unions.

Totally. They want to provoke more strike action so they can 'ride to the rescue of hardworking families' and put their Minimum Service Bill into action.
Picture the scene - there's a strike. But are the media talking about the issues that led to the strike, or the continuation of the dispute - or are they talking about the fact that some trains are running, and 'hardworking families' can now get to work and school thanks to the change in the law?
How do you think it's going to go?

Overall the number of staff employed by TfW Rail and Merseyrail are insignificant to the total number. Then strikes on other operators will mean additional passengers for TfW and Merseyrail.

I don't know how rostering works but given cancellation of strikes often means industrial action timetables are still in place, I would guess it means drivers are rostered based on the RMT action, with more having rest days to coincide and fewer uncovered driver shifts on other days. Then if drivers get extra for volunteering to do overtime, there's a saving made.

On RMT strike days, drivers have been rostered for the normal timetable - including rest day work.
This is why it was complete nonsense when the RMT called off their strike before Christmas, but it was too late to change back, "because drivers are rostered a week in advance." They were rostered for the normal timetable!!
The fact this cancelled strike day was allowed to still cause disruption, when efforts could have been made for disruption to be kept to a minimum, is yet further evidence that this dispute has been engineered and is what the government wants.

 

[Facing Back]

Cheap at the price! Changing the law to take away civil liberties - freedoms - of the population (or part of the population- at least initially) of being able to take strike action.
How would the government have made a convicing argument to do that without a long prolonged dispute? How much would it spent in PR to convince the population that that was a good thing?
It couldn't, and it would've cost loads.

So... engineer one...



Ticket office closures - they would've faced a backlash anyway. Now they can look reasonable and keep open some of the larger ones planned for closure, and close the others - which is what they wanted to start with.



Totally. They want to provoke more strike action so they can 'ride to the rescue of hardworking families' and put their Minimum Service Bill I to action.
Picture the scene - there's a strike. But are the media talking about the issues that led to the strike, or the continuation of the dispute - or are they talking about the fact that some trains are running, and 'hardworking families' can now get to work and school thanks to the change in the law?
How do you think it's going to go?




On RMT strike days, drivers have been rostered for the normal timetable - including rest day work.
This is why it was complete nonsense when the RMT called off their strike before Christmas, but it was too late to change back, "because drivers are rostered a week in advance." They were rostered for the normal timetable!!
The fact this cancelled strike day was allowed to still cause disruption, when efforts could have been made for disruption to be kept to a minimum, is yet further evidence that this dispute has been engineered and the is what the government wants.

You've given that conspiracy quite some thought haven't you? I imagine "the government" would be delighted at being considered this Machiavellian and being able to conceive and execute such a detailed and dastardly plan.

 

[mandub]

Yes of course and I was alluding to that. The TOCs who are at the top of the pay ladder will suddenly find all open positions filled and people will shuffle up the ladder to where there are still vacancies leaving those at the bottom of the ladder quite a recruitment challenge.

Yep.
My depot is losing 12 fully route & traction trained drivers to Avanti over the next 6-12 months.
2 are going to Cross Country and 1 or 2 every couple of months to TPE or Freight.

 

[Facing Back]

Yep.
My depot is losing 12 fully route & traction trained drivers to Avanti over the next 6-12 months.
2 are going to Cross Country and 1 or 2 every couple of months to TPE or Freight.

How many drivers do you have roughly?

 

[mandub]

How many drivers do you have roughly?

About 190 I think.
190 spaces anyway.
They will all be replaced with new drivers......but it's a slow process to become fully productive on all routes/traction, especially with no RDW.

 

[Facing Back]

About 190 I think.
190 spaces anyway.
They will all be replaced with new drivers......but it's a slow process to become fully productive on all routes/traction, especially with no RDW.

ok thanks

 

[gazzaa2]

It is having an effect in the long term.
Take the recent Saturday strike on the August Bank holiday weekend.

That ruined the long weekend plans of the managers who had provide the strike cover. Albeit with a very nice and costly bonus payment funded by the taxpayer, for doing so (ironically this bonus payment is way more than they would pay the actual staff for the same days work). Additionally they are running at 2x-4x more people to cover the RMT jobs because they are not competent with what they are tasked with.

RMT members will just work a days overtime and more than recover the pay lost to the strike day, and they get a valuable Saturday off work, which is normally difficult to get.


Taking the above into account, the Government position which we as taxpayers are funding is a losing one. Also, management are not going to be happy to continue losing their weekends, which over time adds additional pressure.

It's all very convenient. It was the same during the long Northern strike which coincidentally just became take every Saturday off for strike (which seemingly rail staff hate working) and then work another day overtime to make up for it.

RMT have not done anything radical, it's just a cold war of attrition. The government can withstand it because it's only the odd day every 2-3 weeks and they're still able to claim they won't back down to union pressure and the RMT can claim that they're taking on the government and not backing down etc but really are only taking Saturdays off here and there which the government can withstand and the workers can because they can work other days.

Maybe if Lynch just said a year ago we're striking every Saturday indefinitely (with the subsequent disruption to Sunday morning) then it would have been resolved by now, but the government can withstand a couple of days a month.

 

[whoosh]

You've given that conspiracy quite some thought haven't you? I imagine "the government" would be delighted at being considered this Machiavellian and being able to conceive and execute such a detailed and dastardly plan.

Not really, lol!

Peter Wilkinson of the DfT relished and wanted "bust ups" with train drivers.
The Conservative party wanted a Minimum Service Bill (it was in their last manifesto, and the one before that when Teresa May gambled her low majority and came back into power with even less of one).

With work from home, a wonderful opportunity has presented itself, especially as business leaders aren't leaning on the government to "sort it out, because productivity is down because our employees can't get to the office."

 

[john349uk]

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.