RMT dispute on Merseyrail

[Bletchleyite]

They offered to let driver open so long as guard still closed and dispatched.

I support this as a standard on the entire guarded mainline network, and it already is in many cases (VTWC, XC, SN before the guards went, for example) but Merseyrail is only really NR out of convenience (if it were built even 5 years later I reckon it would not have been, certainly 10 years later), and does not need guards.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is there a major crowd event in Merseyside before the Golf Open on 20-24 July at Birkdale?
Can't see the RMT waiting that long.
I don't see how they can get a better offer than no redundancies and no pay cuts.

 

[313103]

Quite rightly they refused. A second safety critical member of staff on all Merseyrail trains is not necessary. And having one would destroy the business case for the new fleet.

I'm sorry, but the guards will lose long-term. This will be like the Dockers. What they need to be negotiating for is not retention, but a fair policy of phasing out and redeployment that will ensure good redundancy payments where applicable, and alternative roles where applicable with no loss of pay.

Merseyrail is like LU (DOO), Metrolink (DOO), Newcastle Metro (DOO), German S-Bahnen and U-Bahnen (DOO)...it is not a mainline railway and the issues are not even similar.

The Guards will lose long term no matter what, so better trying to fight or just laying down and having your tummy tickled. I already further up thread or maybe on the Northern issue suggested what the starting position should be and then lets start negotiating from there.

So a trade union exists for getting rid of its membership hmm interesting that one. A trade union does not exist to phase out jobs i mean lets face it the companies themselves are experts at doing that. How do you redeploy someone in a less then secure role and then expect a higher redundancy payment when that role is done away with (and history is on the side that will be done away with).

On Merseyrail the union is caught between a rock and a hard place, a no win situation.

 

[Bevan Price]

I have sympathy with anyone threatened with loss of their job. However, I think that the guards need to think beyond the current RMT attitude. Just how many days pay can they afford to lose, to fight a battle that this tory government will not allow them to win ?

The "Southern" dispute has shown that the government has done little to care about London area commuters from suffering great inconvenience. They are even like likely to be worried about inconvenience to passengers "up north". I am afraid the guards need to learn the lesson to only fight battles when you have a chance of winning. The consequence of extended industrial action is likely to backfire on rail staff:-

1. Passengers get fed up and many start to use alternative transport.
2. Reduction in train frequencies to compensate for lost traffic.
3. Lower numbers of rail staff required to operate fewer trains.

Just remember what happened to the coal mining industry after Mr Scargill fought a battle he was never going to be allowed to win....

 

[313103]

I have sympathy with anyone threatened with loss of their job. However, I think that the guards need to think beyond the current RMT attitude. Just how many days pay can they afford to lose, to fight a battle that this tory government will not allow them to win ?

The "Southern" dispute has shown that the government has done little to care about London area commuters from suffering great inconvenience. They are even like likely to be worried about inconvenience to passengers "up north". I am afraid the guards need to learn the lesson to only fight battles when you have a chance of winning. The consequence of extended industrial action is likely to backfire on rail staff:-

1. Passengers get fed up and many start to use alternative transport.
2. Reduction in train frequencies to compensate for lost traffic.
3. Lower numbers of rail staff required to operate fewer trains.

Just remember what happened to the coal mining industry after Mr Scargill fought a battle he was never going to be allowed to win....

People keep telling me and others not to listen to what the RMT have to say, yet no one has convinced me to listen otherwise.

Also people keep telling me about Scargill and what happened, the political agenda of Thatcher at the time was to always close the mines down so he was proven right the government of the day did just that. Even if Scargill did nothing (which from what i see a lot of people want the RMT to do) she would have had the mines closed with little fuss and who knows the mining industry might have closed quicker then it actually did.

 

[Bevan Price]

People keep telling me and others not to listen to what the RMT have to say, yet no one has convinced me to listen otherwise.

Also people keep telling me about Scargill and what happened, the political agenda of Thatcher at the time was to always close the mines down so he was proven right the government of the day did just that. Even if Scargill did nothing (which from what i see a lot of people want the RMT to do) she would have had the mines closed with little fuss and who knows the mining industry might have closed quicker then it actually did.

No - the political agenda was to break the power of the unions - the mines were incidental to the main agenda.

And beware, there are probably elements within the tory party who would not be unhappy to see some railways sacrificed.

 

[robertclark125]

The other thing about that dispute with the miners was, the NUM got split early on, when Notts miners kept working during the strike, due to them not getting a ballot, and the split in the NUM, which led to the creation of the UDM, was what helped the government.

On Southern, the two unions involved, the RMT and ASLEF, have a sort of split, in that ASLEF, whilst still in dispute with Southern, have put offers to their members, which have been rejected, but not by big margins, and haven't called anymore strikes. The RMT have called strikes, and the most recent one, apparently, had little disruption.

Now, on Merseyrail, some ASLEF members have refused to cross picket lines manned by RMT members. What the RMT needs to hope for is either ASLEF ballots its members, and/or ASLEF members to continue to refuse to cross picket lines. If ASLEF members do start crossing picket lines, or rather more of them do, then the two unions could find themselves not working together, i.e. not in unison. This could lead to, on strike days, more trains running than has been the case at present.

One other thing, I think it's already been mentioned about the Open golf at Birkdale. I think we can all accept that's a key target, and no doubt the RMT will have other strike days. I'm just wondering if Merseyrail management have any tricks up their sleeve though.

 

[alastair]

I have sympathy with anyone threatened with loss of their job. However, I think that the guards need to think beyond the current RMT attitude. Just how many days pay can they afford to lose, to fight a battle that this tory government will not allow them to win ?

The "Southern" dispute has shown that the government has done little to care about London area commuters from suffering great inconvenience. They are even like likely to be worried about inconvenience to passengers "up north". I am afraid the guards need to learn the lesson to only fight battles when you have a chance of winning. The consequence of extended industrial action is likely to backfire on rail staff:-

1. Passengers get fed up and many start to use alternative transport.
2. Reduction in train frequencies to compensate for lost traffic.
3. Lower numbers of rail staff required to operate fewer trains.

Just remember what happened to the coal mining industry after Mr Scargill fought a battle he was never going to be allowed to win....

I agree with a lot of your post,but why bring in the "this tory government will not allow them to win" stuff?

Is it not the case that Merseyrail is part of Merseytravel which is Labour controlled (for the moment anyway!) and nothing to do with national government?

 

[Bletchleyite]

TSo a trade union exists for getting rid of its membership hmm interesting that one. A trade union does not exist to phase out jobs i mean lets face it the companies themselves are experts at doing that. How do you redeploy someone in a less then secure role and then expect a higher redundancy payment when that role is done away with (and history is on the side that will be done away with).

A trade union exists to get the best deal it can for its members.

The best deal it can get for its members is to smooth the path of redeployment, and in the case of those on short-term contracts redundancy.

That is what it should be doing. As it is, it's just going to lose, big style. Merseyrail *will* go DOO. I'd put a lot of money on it. And so it should. And because of the faff the unions are causing, Merseyrail isn't going to be nice to them, just like GTR wasn't. (Though I maintain that the Merseyrail case for DOO is so far different from the GTR one it's barely even similar).

As for unions protecting the role for possible future holders of it, that's in my view well beyond their remit and they should pack it in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just remember what happened to the coal mining industry after Mr Scargill fought a battle he was never going to be allowed to win....

And the dockers, locally. That's what's going to happen.

DOO for Merseyrail makes sense, and the unions are not going to stop it, just as they didn't[1] on GTR. They really need to refocus their fight on ensuring good terms for the change rather than trying to stop it.

[1] The sham-role of OBS, which I would put money on being dumped at the next franchise change, barely counts.

 

[313103]

And the dockers, locally. That's what's going to happen.

DOO for Merseyrail makes sense, and the unions are not going to stop it, just as they didn't[1] on GTR. They really need to refocus their fight on ensuring good terms for the change rather than trying to stop it.

[1] The sham-role of OBS, which I would put money on being dumped at the next franchise change, barely counts.

Exactly the sham role of a obs was always doomed to fail, so will any other role, in any other company, the idea is to reduce headcount to furfill a Government wish (despite what others might say).

If the obs role is a sham on southern, what makes you think its good no matter what they are called on say merseyrail, arriva,and anyone else with plans of destaffing?

It would appear from what i have read from you that the only thing the union can do is to negotiate a redundancy payment for all staff which is a laugh as Southern didnt want to go there because at the end of the day the companies would rather you just leave and not come back. I think if companies offered a decent amount of money for staff to leave they would do so in droves.

 

[urbophile]

I agree with a lot of your post,but why bring in the "this tory government will not allow them to win" stuff?

Is it not the case that Merseyrail is part of Merseytravel which is Labour controlled (for the moment anyway!) and nothing to do with national government?

True, except that local authorities, including Merseytravel, have to accept Tory budgets and priorities. That's how the Tories win, by getting others to do their dirty work for them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

True, except that local authorities, including Merseytravel, have to accept Tory budgets and priorities. That's how the Tories win, by getting others to do their dirty work for them.

There is a lot of meddling, but to be honest this was coming anyway.

 

[Bevan Price]

I agree with a lot of your post,but why bring in the "this tory government will not allow them to win" stuff?

Is it not the case that Merseyrail is part of Merseytravel which is Labour controlled (for the moment anyway!) and nothing to do with national government?

Merseytravel gets its money from the local councils - all of which have had reductions in funding from the central (tory) governments. Throughout the country, many council-supported bus services have been cut, but the tory government does not care - nor will they care if local rail services are affected.

 

[Carlisle]

Also people keep telling me about Scargill and what happened, the political agenda of Thatcher at the time was to always close the mines down so he was proven right the government of the day did just that. Even if Scargill did nothing (which from what i see a lot of people want the RMT to do) she would have had the mines closed with little fuss and who knows the mining industry might have closed quicker then it actually did.

Successive governments, aided by emissions legislation, the creation of green taxes etc have failed to encourage/invest in any clean coal technology so the industry has just been allowed to die a natural death as a result of plant becoming uneconomic/ life expired , it wasn't just down to Thatchers battle with the NUM

 

[Goldfish62]

They offered to let driver open so long as guard still closed and dispatched.

Which of course was always meaningless given that this method of operation had already been in use since around 2000.

 

[Goldfish62]

True, except that local authorities, including Merseytravel, have to accept Tory budgets and priorities. That's how the Tories win, by getting others to do their dirty work for them.

Exactly, and if Merseytravel are forced to keep guards then cuts will come elsewhere, such as to supported bus services. These will potentially put elderly and vulnerable people at far greater risk than not having a guard on a local train service.

 

[185]

Exactly, and if Merseytravel are forced to keep guards then cuts will come elsewhere, such as to supported bus services. These will potentially put elderly and vulnerable people at far greater risk than not having a guard on a local train service.

Conversely, unlike other areas, the Elderly and Disabled cost the taxpayer a large additional amount given their free rides on trains and ferries are also paid for. Should funding for these additional, non encts journeys be funded or removed to prevent bus-cuts?

Arguments aside, for me, the major concern about spending at Merseytravel, is infact their own staff, and property cost. (Brand new Mann Island HQ)

A recent trawl through salaries, jobs and departments at a neighbouring PTE suggests there are a *lot* of middle-to-high band staff effectively with non-jobs. It bugs me that the public fund PTEs, most of which are filled with 'well qualified' people wandering the building on 70K upwards, with a job which 20 years ago would have been a £16,000 office clerk - who in real terms usually was far more productive.

If the government had looked closer on it's Qango killing spree (2012-14) when many public organisations where shut or slimmed down, they would have seen the mass wastage going on at these PTEs.

At the helm of Merseytravel is David Brown - yet another cast-off from South Yorkshire who has systematically wasted millions and causing crisis after crisis (Walsrus Card, Bus cuts, threatened ferry closure), like his predecessor Neil Scales (Merseytram).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Posters only seem to look on the bad side of change.
Aren't there new guards jobs on TPE and even Northern, with all the new services coming in?
And new retail/customer service roles?
Jobs change all the time. People move where the jobs are.
Customer service, retail and security roles are increasing, button pushing and manual intervention are declining with technology advances.
Who has not had to make seemingly unattractive moves for career reasons?
There is absolutely no place for unchanging jobs in the same place for ever, which seemingly is what the RMT expects.
ASLEF at least seems prepared to discuss change.

Going back to the miners, the point today is that we just had a day of NOT BURNING COAL to produce electricity.
Even had the miners won their dispute, the mines would still have closed, because of cheaper opencast/imported coal, alternative fuels and climate change regulation.
Of course, the rail jobs associated with transporting coal have been decimated, which is regrettable, as is the ending of guards on many trains.
But economic and technological progress is inevitable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which of course was always meaningless given that this method of operation had already been in use since around 2000.

Not on Merseyrail, but I suspect this is only because the 50x aren't fitted for it.

Interestingly (and a crossover with the other thread) the 175s were, but the staff and unions kicked off and they were modified for guard release, which I still think was silly as it is in my view a much better method of operation than guard-release where the guard has to do tickets. It is this method of operation I support for Northern (and indeed the entire mainline network) - but Merseyrail isn't Northern, and I support DOO fully on it.

 

[craigybagel]

Not on Merseyrail, but I suspect this is only because the 50x aren't fitted for it.

Interestingly (and a crossover with the other thread) the 175s were, but the staff and unions kicked off and they were modified for guard release, which I still think was silly as it is in my view a much better method of operation than guard-release where the guard has to do tickets. It is this method of operation I support for Northern (and indeed the entire mainline network) - but Merseyrail isn't Northern, and I support DOO fully on it.

And as I've pointed out several times, it's not silly at all when they don't fit on all the platform's they call at. It wasn't just because the union's kicked off.

 

[Arcadia77]

Conversely, unlike other areas, the Elderly and Disabled cost the taxpayer a large additional amount given their free rides on trains and ferries are also paid for. Should funding for these additional, non encts journeys be funded or removed to prevent bus-cuts?

Arguments aside, for me, the major concern about spending at Merseytravel, is infact their own staff, and property cost. (Brand new Mann Island HQ)

A recent trawl through salaries, jobs and departments at a neighbouring PTE suggests there are a *lot* of middle-to-high band staff effectively with non-jobs. It bugs me that the public fund PTEs, most of which are filled with 'well qualified' people wandering the building on 70K upwards, with a job which 20 years ago would have been a £16,000 office clerk - who in real terms usually was far more productive.

If the government had looked closer on it's Qango killing spree (2012-14) when many public organisations where shut or slimmed down, they would have seen the mass wastage going on at these PTEs.

At the helm of Merseytravel is David Brown - yet another cast-off from South Yorkshire who has systematically wasted millions and causing crisis after crisis (Walsrus Card, Bus cuts, threatened ferry closure), like his predecessor Neil Scales (Merseytram).

Erm, David Brown left Merseytravel 18 months ago.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And as I've pointed out several times, it's not silly at all when they don't fit on all the platform's they call at. It wasn't just because the union's kicked off.

If you use local door on those platforms, there is a *small* risk of the driver releasing wrongly, and after that a *small* risk of someone actually falling out. Partly further mitigated by prominent "DO NOT RELEASE DOORS" signage or similar.

Good enough for me, TBH, when you consider the significant benefits of that method of operation where the guard does revenue.

 

[8A Rail]

Posters only seem to look on the bad side of change.
Aren't there new guards jobs on TPE and even Northern, with all the new services coming in?
And new retail/customer service roles?
Jobs change all the time. People move where the jobs are.
Customer service, retail and security roles are increasing, button pushing and manual intervention are declining with technology advances.
Who has not had to make seemingly unattractive moves for career reasons?
There is absolutely no place for unchanging jobs in the same place for ever, which seemingly is what the RMT expects.
ASLEF at least seems prepared to discuss change.

Going back to the miners, the point today is that we just had a day of NOT BURNING COAL to produce electricity.
Even had the miners won their dispute, the mines would still have closed, because of cheaper opencast/imported coal, alternative fuels and climate change regulation.
Of course, the rail jobs associated with transporting coal have been decimated, which is regrettable, as is the ending of guards on many trains.
But economic and technological progress is inevitable.

Yes I understand were you are coming from BUT there has to be a cut off point sooner or later with regards to how far you let technology go though. If technology / costs gets to the point were it eliminate's half the countries working people (as an example), how will the country survive and look after itself - it wont be able too and what is happening now with social care / local services etc would be minor compared to then. We need to safeguard as many jobs as possible to safeguard the countries welfare.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes I understand were you are coming from BUT there has to be a cut off point sooner or later with regards to how far you let technology go though.

No, there doesn't. There needs to be a re-examination about how we deal with that. That might include looking for jobs that aren't done but could be and funding them, but might include things like universal basic income where we all profit from the wealth generated by machines.

Trying to stop the march of progress is silly and Luddite. And no specific *job* should attempt to be preserved per-se.

(And don't forget that tech has created an industry of its own!)

 

[Robertj21a]

Edit........

We need to safeguard as many jobs as possible to safeguard the countries welfare.

Err, no we don't. It's silly, wasteful and totally unnecessary - more like a communist state !

 

[Dave1987]

Err, no we don't. It's silly, wasteful and totally unnecessary - more like a communist state !

Well as long as you are OK with paying the benefits of all those put out of work.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes I understand were you are coming from BUT there has to be a cut off point sooner or later with regards to how far you let technology go though.

Let me guess, that cut off point conveniently happens to be now on Merseyrail, is that right?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well as long as you are OK with paying the benefits of all those put out of work.

UBI (universal basic income) reframes that somewhat. Let us all benefit from the money gained from the work of machines. I used to think it ridiculous, but I'm really coming round to it now.

Let me guess, that cut off point conveniently happens to be now on Merseyrail, is that right?

 

[Robertj21a]

Well as long as you are OK with paying the benefits of all those put out of work.

There's work out there for those who want to work, few need to rely on benefits. It may not be anything like what they're used to, but work is work. '....A change is as good as a rest......'