RMT statement discussion.

[185]

The ROSCO's for a start.

Couldn't agree more. For 25 years they've had a license to print money.

Sooner they go the better, without any recompense - they've been on the taxpayer's gravytrain for too long.

 

[baz962]

And still people pull out the what about nurses and teachers blah blah . When they quote driver's salaries , they quote the highest ( not all driver salaries are 70k). But when they quote other industries , they quote the lowest. Let me say again. My local hospital in Bedfordshire was looking for a midwife on 50k around three years ago. My son in laws mother is a headteacher in Bedfordshire on over 60k and has been on that money for a fair few years. My old doctor ( GP ) used to publish their average practice salary ... £104,000 . I know an ex teacher ( not head ) was on £54k. My local police department were looking for an assistant chief constable on £101,000 . I know several ex police that were on £45k to 55k by the time they left.

 

[GB]

And still people pull out the what about nurses and teachers blah blah . When they quote driver's salaries , they quote the highest ( not all driver salaries are 70k). But when they quote other industries , they quote the lowest. Let me say again. My local hospital in Bedfordshire was looking for a midwife on 50k around three years ago. My son in laws mother is a headteacher in Bedfordshire on over 60k and has been on that money for a fair few years. My old doctor ( GP ) used to publish their average practice salary ... £104,000 . I know an ex teacher ( not head ) was on £54k. My local police department were looking for an assistant chief constable on £101,000 . I know several ex police that were on £45k to 55k by the time they left.

The people that complain about railway salaries are generally never the ones to state their own salaries either. They also fail to understand that part of a high salary for traincrew is for a return on investment for the company. They are not going to want to spend 10's of thousands and the best part of a year to train someone only to have them jump ship down the road.

 

[DelayRepay]

The purpose of a union is to improve conditions for its members - that is the very reason the RMT exists so I don't think they can be criticised for wanting to secure wage increases.

However, they do need to be mindful of the reality of the situation. The industry is being heavily subsidised by the tax payers at the moment, and the country's finances are not in a great place. I'm afraid that pushing for pay increases at the moment is likely to accelerate moves to reduce staff numbers - more unstaffed stations, more part time or closed booking offices, more driver only operation, timetable cut backs meaning fewer drivers, guards, fitters, cleaners etc are needed. The list goes on.

Unlike the pre-pandemic days, strikes won't have a huge impact on the economy because many businesses can keep running without staff travelling. Whilst strikes will inconvenience and annoy leisure travellers, this won't create the same kind of political pressure that impacting business travellers and commuters would have done in the past.

So overall I understand why the RMT are seeking higher wages, but I am not sure that this can be achieved through strike action. I think strike action will harm their cause in the longer term.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Apr 2022 ==

The people that complain about railway salaries are generally never the ones to state their own salaries either. They also fail to understand that part of a high salary for traincrew is for a return on investment for the company. They are not going to want to spend 10's of thousands and the best part of a year to train someone only to have them jump ship down the road.

The problem for traincrew is that, as GBR is established, there won't be a 'down the road' to jump to.

 

[g492p]

These unions really don’t have a clue. Look at the wider picture and see the situation most other workers are in.
The government can effectively say that any rail staff pay rose is paid by taxpayers via subsidy. That puts tail staff verses nurses, teachers etc in the eyes of the public, and it’s easy to see who would get the sympathy in that case.
The RMT are presumably looking for a win after they were shown to be powerless in the P&O situation. Undermining customer confidence in the rail industry, putting rail jobs at long term risk, is obviously a price worth paying.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Apr 2022 ==


Exactly this. Rail staff are exceptionally well paid without having to pay for uni degrees like teachers, nurses etc who then get a lower starting rate.
It’s laughable that a number of train crew seem to think they are hard done by at the same time as they deliver woefully inconsistent levels of service.

Teachers, nurses, those on benefits, minimum wage workers are all gettting a pay rise. In the private sector, wages are estimated to rise by 5% this year on average. I think it’s fair that rail staff receive a pay increase too. Also, I think your last sentence reveals a lot about how you view railway staff in general. As if there’s not good and bad employees across all sectors.

 

[nedchester]

The purpose of a union is to improve conditions for its members - that is the very reason the RMT exists so I don't think they can be criticised for wanting to secure wage increases.

However, they do need to be mindful of the reality of the situation. The industry is being heavily subsidised by the tax payers at the moment, and the country's finances are not in a great place. I'm afraid that pushing for pay increases at the moment is likely to accelerate moves to reduce staff numbers - more unstaffed stations, more part time or closed booking offices, more driver only operation, timetable cut backs meaning fewer drivers, guards, fitters, cleaners etc are needed. The list goes on.

Unlike the pre-pandemic days, strikes won't have a huge impact on the economy because many businesses can keep running without staff travelling. Whilst strikes will inconvenience and annoy leisure travellers, this won't create the same kind of political pressure that impacting business travellers and commuters would have done in the past.

So overall I understand why the RMT are seeking higher wages, but I am not sure that this can be achieved through strike action. I think strike action will harm their cause in the longer term.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Apr 2022 ==



The problem for traincrew is that, as GBR is established, there won't be a 'down the road' to jump to.

Exactly this.

I have no doubt though that in any case booking offices are going to shut (as mobile ticketing technology improves) and DOO becomes more prevalent.

 

[SignallerJohn]

Got my RMT bingo sheet ready:

* Jealousy
* Shouldn’t be paid more than other jobs
* Paid enough already
* I’m RMT and I think X about it
* No money
* You should be happy with what you’re got
* Insert other job role that should be paid higher but isn’t, so we shouldn’t be either

There is much more to this than meets the eye. Don’t let the fact pay rise is included distract you from the fact that there are things happening behind the scenes that anybody with a passion for the railway and it’s history should be concerned with.

I did check to see if any of you guys commented on any posts relating to MPs getting paid more but none of you have as far as I can see. So the irony isn’t lost on me.

Edit: I forgot to say the cons will defo say we haven’t given the railway a pay rise let’s give it to the NHS

 

[Merle Haggard]

I was a railway employee and happy to be a union member (T.S.S.A.) all my working life but, without wishing to be contraversial, may I point out the following about the R.M.T.?

On their website, the R.M.T. show details of their Rule Book; Rule 1 shows their ' Name, Objectives, Constitution' The list of objectives, item 4, is presumably in order of importance. Have a look; it appears that 4 (b) is more important than those that follow.

I won't spell it out, leave you to consider. I am expressing no opinion myself.

 

[ComUtoR]

I can’t see any rail staff getting a payrise this year, above what has already been agreed.

I will absolutely be getting a rise this year. Probably a decent one and with luck, one in line with inflation. No previous agreements have been in place. This will be a 100% new deal.

The problem for traincrew is that, as GBR is established, there won't be a 'down the road' to jump to.

What do you genuinely believe GBR will create when it comes to the TOCs ? We have already seen a new National Contract implemented but that hasn't done anything new. It's a Franchise, run by a private company in all but name. There will be separation of terms and conditions, pay, and company ownership, all over the country.

Lots of greener grass with ships in the bay.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Exactly, so why should train crew receive something (even if it is minimal) rather than three years of nothing?

Every little helps

At our TOC this will be the 3rd year for drivers and 2nd year for conductors of pay freeze fyi. Tube have agreed a rise, TfW I believe have sold there Sundays for a large increase.....

 

[Carlisle]

Why do you presume to speak for the entire industry? Your job might well have got easier, mine was largely the same.

Therefore you weren’t offered any additional rest days , spare from home shifts or early finishes throughout the whole pandemic?

 

[AY1975]

It is noticeable that Transport for Wales, London Overground, Scotrail and Caledonian Sleeper are not included in the TOCs listed by the RMT.

Nor are Grand Central or Hull Trains. Or Eurostar for that matter.

 

[Wolfie]

Couldn't agree more. For 25 years they've had a license to print money.

Sooner they go the better, without any recompense - they've been on the taxpayer's gravytrain for too long.

Utter genius - NOT! Deprivation of property without compensation. Firstly utterly illegal under the European Convention of Human Rights. Secondly how in one simple lesson to trash your country's reputation as a safe place to do business subject to the rule of law. Forget inward investment or, if it comes, expect to pay a massive premium.

 

[Starmill]

The reason why this is always going to be a problem is because rail is in too many markets for which it is either completely unsuitable or it is poorly adapted to. This places an enormous burden of costs on the entire industry, such that it's inevitable that government, when seeking to apply the normal principles of public sector pay, will come up against the industry's demands.

The solution would be to either a) abandon the business-oriented elements of the railway and just operate it based on the functions the government dictates and pays for, like a hospital, or b) carefully reallocate the resources we have to routes where they're the most justified. The latter is more difficult because it takes capital expenditure to convert loss-making lines to bus services or light railways.

This was a real problem long before the pandemic, unfortunately, the pandemic has speeded up the growth of the issues.

Try to think of it from the perspective of the Treasury's civil servants (I know they're hated so on here): the industry has already received £25 billion or more of special additional funding over the last two years, and apart from the railway still existing that's not particularly bought them anything. You can argue that that's the baseline minimum they should have done and I would agree with that, but that's fundamentally not the way they or Ministers see the subject. I would like that to change, perhaps if you would too it's worth considering voting for an opposition party who would spend more on public services?

 

[Mintona]

I will absolutely be getting a rise this year. Probably a decent one and with luck, one in line with inflation. No previous agreements have been in place. This will be a 100% new deal.

Unless you’re changing TOC, good luck. I would be amazed if the unions don’t get laughed out of the meeting.

 

[jettofab]

Exactly this. Rail staff are exceptionally well paid without having to pay for uni degrees like teachers, nurses etc who then get a lower starting rate.
It’s laughable that a number of train crew seem to think they are hard done by at the same time as they deliver woefully inconsistent levels of service.

Many of us have degrees; thankfully the railway hasn't yet gone the way of so many industries who insist on degrees despite the fact they are unnecessary for the role, but nonetheless many of us have degrees. Nursing never used to need a degree. I'm well paid, but not exceptionally so compared to my uni mates. Plenty earn more than me, plenty earn less. We all have different pluses and minuses to our jobs, different responsibilities. I've said it before on here, but seeing what my TOC is looking to do in terms of diagrams and productivity, regardless of the toll to our health, it's becoming marginal to me whether I see a long term future as rail staff. Several in the mess are looking to go sooner than expected. The costs of replacing those that leave are substantial, and there is a huge loss when those with many years of experience choose to leave, not just cost wise. I'd rather better work than more money, but better work seems pretty unlikely so better money goes some way to retaining staff. At a TOC that doesn't pay the headline 70k rates, the money doesn't go hugely far when you consider the difficulties that go along with the job (child care is incredibly difficult to arrange and for that reason there are a number of parents whose partners don't work or work in low paid part time jobs, particularly when the children are very young, we have to live within a certain distance, we can rarely use public transport to get to work, the transferrable skills are few but the chances of making a mistake in your role are high so if you have an unplanned exit your options are limited). They're not difficulties unique to the railway by any stretch, but that doesn't change the fact that there has to be something attractive about the job or you face a brain drain.

 

[DarloRich]

my only input: there are more people working on the railway that drivers and guards. Perhaps look a bit wider than those two roles.

 

[Annetts key]

that depends on your definition of operations or maintenance. I know operations people who have gone.

To clarify, in operations, the company have said that they currently don’t have any plans for a reorganisation. There may be some small changes, as there are some planned signal box closures.

In maintenance (including the part known as works delivery), the company have made it very clear that they want to save a substantial amount of money. Hence there are discussions between the company and the three trade unions. In these discussions the company have put forward their ideas, which is to reduce the number of front line staff. When asked if they would be reducing the number of other staff (in maintenance), such as management and administration, they said they do not currently plan to. But there may be a small amount of changes in the future.

The company have said that they have not, and will not offer a voluntary redundancy scheme for operations (because they currently don’t have plans to reorganise this part).

They have not yet offered a voluntary redundancy scheme for maintenance, and will not, until the new organisation has been decided. Then, they said they will offer such a scheme.

None of the above means that people can’t retire, or leave via the normal methods. And obviously some people will be leaving via these methods.

Across the whole company, they have over the past 12 months (or maybe more) been selective on recruitment to fill vacancies. The extent of which has varied. It’s hard to get an overall picture, due to the devolution within Network Rail). This has affected some areas more than others.

Currently on maintenance, the company are not filling vacancies (unless an offer has already been made).

So although they have had some voluntary redundancy schemes over the past 12 months, these were only available to a limited number of staff.

What the future holds, I’m not sure, as they are trying to save a substantial amount of money and it’s not at all clear where all the savings will be made.

 

[Clarence Yard]

I respect what you say Clarence Yard, but when I am driving a train out of London with over 700 people on board headed to the southwest, clearly taking in over 50k in revenue, is it really unreasonable of me to think now IS the time to get a payrise (after 2 years of nothing). The railways are surely making money on long distance routes, must we all suffer for the fact the commuter routes are dead in the water?.

Yes, it is perfectly reasonable to ask for a pay rise, given how everyone is having to cope with higher costs.

But the RMT should be sitting down with the DfT and asking the question. They should be explaining that key staff are now looking outside of the industry to get a better paid job (or jobs) and the DfT are currently paying a fortune (through the TOCs) in recruitment and training costs.

They should point out the pay inconsistencies between DfT TOCs, and talk about the advantages of moving to a single pay spine for all TOCs and GBR entities.

The disparity this year between TfL, who are in year 4 of their 4 year deal (February RPI + 0.2%),and DfT TOCs is stark and the unions should be pointing this out too. There should be an attempt to get a similar 4 year deal, in return for some proper joint work on restructuring in various activities.

Only if these talks get nowhere should they then ballot the members.

 

[LowLevel]

my only input: there are more people working on the railway that drivers and guards. Perhaps look a bit wider than those two roles.

It is very true. I am not particularly well paid in the guard's league table (near the bottom in fact) but on £31k per year plus overtime I'm still on much more than some other grades for whom having large chunks chucked on their expenses is proving to be problematic.

I don't unfortunately think going on strike will achieve anything but what the answer is I don't know.

 

[nottsnurse]

At our TOC this will be the 3rd year for drivers and 2nd year for conductors of pay freeze fyi. Tube have agreed a rise, TfW I believe have sold there Sundays for a large increase.....

Many Agenda For Change staff working for the NHS effectively had a 20% pay cut between 2010 and 2020.

As an aside, Intensive Care Nurses, who have a minimum of 3 years degree study and 18 months of post-qualification specialist training, are paid at exactly the same rate as every other non-specialist nurse within the NHS, despite being recognised as having a specialist role.

I'm no fan of "race to the bottom", indeed I'm a GMB union rep, so such a policy is the opposite of what I believe, but if I were to say to you or anyone else in the rail industry "we're going to reduce your pay by a 5th but expect you to take on more roles and responsibility" I'm sure you'd all be up in arms.

Unfortunately if we walked out of work people would die, hence why many of my colleagues feel unable to support such action. When the rail industry strikes, people walk.

 

[muz379]

Find it kinda funny that the following logic is applied "railway staff have had above inflation payrises for years they will be fine going without" . When some tocs have been making healthy profits year on year yet suddenly we are expected to collectively mourn for their lack of profits and accept that staff conditions are made worse as a consequence .

On the other hand drivers and guards, whilst I recognise they have an awful lot of responsibility which is rightly acknowledged by a higher salary, considering many are already paid £50k+ per year, I can’t help thinking they should be grateful for what they’ve got. They’re already paid a considerable amount more than the majority of the population, they’re not going to die without a pay rise for one year. I know what I’ve said there sounds harsh, but the reality of the situation we all face with this morally and economically corrupt government is harsh. I would be saying the same about anyone earning £50k+ per year regardless what their profession was.

I don't think its right to combine drivers and guards into one group like that . In alll TOC's I know of there is at least a £20k seperation between the two . In many cases guards wages are around the £30k mark . To be honest I do not think it will be a good thing for the TOC's with guards paid around that rate in the long run if pay is not increased somewhat , work in the outside world is changing and what was 3 years ago a compettitive salary with competetitive terms is starting to look less favourable vs the changing landscape of work in thw wider econmy . Yes people will not die without a pay rise this year but for how many years will that logic be applied ? This would already be year 3


Flexible or home working is much more popular and many companies are experrimenting with 4 day weeks . I know of some guards who are already making the calculations about how much they could afford to lose salary wise for the benefit of home working , no more unsociable shifts or saturday night trouble . For many of them the tentative thing keeping them in the industry is the pension . And pay stagnation also impacts on the pension prospects so that is not going to tempt them for long .

 

[northwichcat]

If the industry is making big profits then I assume all government covid subsidiaries have finished and are in actual fact well on the way to being paid back.

If this is the case vote yes if not get a sense of perspective.

If that's the case why are the RMT asking employees of state controlled TOCs to vote?

And don't they already have a strike ballot for TransPennine Express? Why do they need a second?

 

[Fokx]

And don't they already have a strike ballot for TransPennine Express? Why do they need a second?

TPE strike is regarding:
- Payment inequalities in regards to overtime and forced Sundays and ticket scanning compared to other TOCs running on same routes

National Strike is regarding:
- No payrise in three years
- No promise of no mass redundancies
- Attacks on working conditions

If the current TPE was solved the later would still take place as it’s for a completely different reason

 

[northwichcat]

Find it kinda funny that the following logic is applied "railway staff have had above inflation payrises for years they will be fine going without" . When some tocs have been making healthy profits year on year yet suddenly we are expected to collectively mourn for their lack of profits and accept that staff conditions are made worse as a consequence .

You have overlooked a couple of key points.

Pay doesn't revert to the originally contracted level at the end of the year. If inflation is 2% every year and you get a 4% pay rise after your first full year, followed by a pay freeze the next then you're still better off than getting a 2% rise every year.

If a TOC makes a £1m profit one year then then they can still make a £2m loss the next year, then they'd be worse off than not having taken on the franchise in the first place.

The other thing is, like it or not, is a private TOC has a contract with the government the same way you have a contract with your employer. If the terms of the contract aren't met the TOC is allowed to challenge it, the same way you are allowed to vote for industrial action if your employer doesn't comply with the terms of your contract.

 

[43066]

Therefore you weren’t offered any additional rest days , spare shifts from home or early finishes throughout the whole pandemic?

Well, since you ask,

No earlier finishes, no additional rest days at any point. Spare from home did happen right at the start, for a few shifts over the weeks it lasted for. It didn’t happen much for drivers simply because there were too few of us to run the service and when the timetable was reduced overtime was cut. When we were spare from home it was basically illegal to venture outdoors anyway…

Any benefit from that has been more than offset in recent months by inability to get time off due to even fewer staff, with ad hoc annual leave regularly being declined.

To give some perspective I’ve been at work every day since last Tuesday, including getting home after 0200 several days this week. After twelve straight days working, I’ll have one day off on Sunday, then four more days on! That’s due to some overtime but also due to a couple of instances of leave being declined.

That’s quite an extreme example - but gives a sense of how thinly stretched things are.

Utter genius - NOT! Deprivation of property without compensation.

Not sure anyone has suggested that?

Many Agenda For Change staff working for the NHS effectively had a 20% pay cut between 2010 and 2020.

As an aside, Intensive Care Nurses, who have a minimum of 3 years degree study and 18 months of post-qualification specialist training, are paid at exactly the same rate as every other non-specialist nurse within the NHS, despite being recognised as having a specialist role.

I'm no fan of "race to the bottom", indeed I'm a GMB union rep, so such a policy is the opposite of what I believe, but if I were to say to you or anyone else in the rail industry "we're going to reduce your pay by a 5th but expect you to take on more roles and responsibility" I'm sure you'd all be up in arms.

Unfortunately if we walked out of work people would die, hence why many of my colleagues feel unable to support such action. When the rail industry strikes, people walk.

I’m not entirely sure what your point is? Are the railway unions supposed to say to their members: “nurses have had a real terms pay cut, therefore so should you”?

Sorry to say I’ve had it up to here with hearing about how wonderful the NHS is over the past two years and many of the staff seem to have an absolute God complex. It’s a far, far bigger financial basket case than the railway will ever be. Plenty of people are dying unnecessarily from late diagnosed cancers etc. due to GPs basically shutting up shop and hospitals focussing only on Covid.

 

[northwichcat]

TPE strike is regarding:
- Payment inequalities in regards to overtime and forced Sundays and ticket scanning compared to other TOCs running on same routes

National Strike is regarding:
- No payrise in three years
- No promise of no mass redundancies
- Attacks on working conditions

If the current TPE was solved the later would still take place as it’s for a completely different reason

Ignoring the "no promise of no mass redundancies", they sound related to me. You seem to be saying the existing TPE strike relates to pay and working conditions. Do the RMT expect a meeting with a HR manager on Monday to discuss payment inequalities, then a separate meeting with the MD on Tuesday to discuss pay rises?

I'm also not convinced "no promise of no mass redundancies" warrants a vote on strike action.
Talks with management - yes.
Walking out and disrupting the public when 1/3 of the working age population have either been furloughed or made redundant since 2020 and the TOCs haven't even started a consultation on redundancies - certainly not.

 

[Fokx]

Ignoring the "no promise of no mass redundancies", they sound related to me. You seem to be saying the existing TPE strike relates to pay and working conditions.

Related in the same way that lemons and limes are citrus but a lemon is not a lime.

Overtime payments aren’t the same as a general salary increase. A salary increase effects everyone in that grade and overtime payments only effect those who volunteer to do said overtime and actively want it (many don’t).

 

[muz379]

You have overlooked a couple of key points.

Pay doesn't revert to the originally contracted level at the end of the year. If inflation is 2% every year and you get a 4% pay rise after your first full year, followed by a pay freeze the next then you're still better off than getting a 2% rise every year.

If a TOC makes a £1m profit one year then then they can still make a £2m loss the next year, then they'd be worse off than not having taken on the franchise in the first place.

The other thing is, like it or not, is a private TOC has a contract with the government the same way you have a contract with your employer. If the terms of the contract aren't met the TOC is allowed to challenge it, the same way you are allowed to vote for industrial action if your employer doesn't comply with the terms of your contract.

quite , it was more aimed at just pointing out the general rhetoric and logic of some on this forum than a soundly academic point . The minute rail staff salaries are brought up the green eyed monster comes out and we have had it good for years so can go without . But the minute a toc loses even a single bean even in many cases despite that being because of its own poor management we all have to pitch in to make it work .

That is of course not exclusive to the rail industry but is a wider feature of political logic in the country but that is irrelevant to this forum .

Ignoring the "no promise of no mass redundancies", they sound related to me. You seem to be saying the existing TPE strike relates to pay and working conditions. Do the RMT expect a meeting with a HR manager on Monday to discuss payment inequalities, then a separate meeting with the MD on Tuesday to discuss pay rises?

To be fair depending on how TPE collective bargaining is structured it might be full time officials of the union meeting to discuss pay claims and workplace reps meeting to discuss grade specific issues through their grade specific councils .

 

[Bantamzen]

The purpose of a union is to improve conditions for its members - that is the very reason the RMT exists so I don't think they can be criticised for wanting to secure wage increases.

However, they do need to be mindful of the reality of the situation. The industry is being heavily subsidised by the tax payers at the moment, and the country's finances are not in a great place. I'm afraid that pushing for pay increases at the moment is likely to accelerate moves to reduce staff numbers - more unstaffed stations, more part time or closed booking offices, more driver only operation, timetable cut backs meaning fewer drivers, guards, fitters, cleaners etc are needed. The list goes on.

Unlike the pre-pandemic days, strikes won't have a huge impact on the economy because many businesses can keep running without staff travelling. Whilst strikes will inconvenience and annoy leisure travellers, this won't create the same kind of political pressure that impacting business travellers and commuters would have done in the past.

So overall I understand why the RMT are seeking higher wages, but I am not sure that this can be achieved through strike action. I think strike action will harm their cause in the longer term.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Apr 2022 ==



The problem for traincrew is that, as GBR is established, there won't be a 'down the road' to jump to.

I think is a fair view, nothing wrong with a union going after pay rises however keeping a realistic goal, especially if industrial action is a possibility, is key. This government has already shown its perfectly happy to drop investment in infrastructure & in some parts of the country reduce service levels, so a prolonged campaign for pay rise levels way beyond elsewhere is not going to help. Punters will vote with their feet, and when even worse passenger levels come in the Tories won't hesitate to make more cuts in the industry.