RMT statement discussion.

[Carlisle]

But the other side of that argument is that the TOCs or DfT won't do anything unless action is taken.

That argument only applies to those that can stop the job, ie Signalmen, Guards, Drivers & a few other personnel

 

[43066]

If only we on the railway where as interested in others working conditions & pay. Very strange that they have such an opinion on ours don’t you think?

Indeed. The equivalent would be you or I joining a forum discussing an industry we don’t even work in - eg a health forum and berating doctors and nurses over their pay. In my experience people who are happy and contented in their own lives don’t fixate on the earnings of others!

In which case the railway better get used to decreasing funding because taxpayers will be contacting their MPs demanding exactly that.

After the last couple of years, don’t you think the kind of people who are concerned about government spending (I’m one of them) have rather bigger things to worry about than the railways?!

Indeed. This is arguably one of the biggest failures of the way that privatisation was implemented. Every TOC was let loose to conduct pay negotiations on its own, meaning there is now a complete hotchpotch of pay and conditions across the industry, despite the fact that ultimately they are all underwritten by the government.

The government has let its monopsony completely go to waste, meaning TOCs have been cannibalising staff off each other, with concomitant training and overtime costs. It will be very difficult, if not impossible, to align terms in a way that everyone can agree on.

I’m not sure that should necessarily be seen as a failure. Raising wages has enabled railway jobs to professionalise and a broader range of people has been attracted into the industry than was the case previously, which is a good thing. Competition is healthy.

If that's the case then why are drivers job applications massively over subscribed?

Has it occurred to you that not everyone who applies is capable of doing the job to the necessary standard?

 

[nedchester]

We’ve always had pay rises year on year on the railway since time began. It’s just how it is.

I think the point is that now we the railways are now effectively being financed massively by the tax payer and therefore employees are public sector.

They cannot expect higher rises than others within the same sector.

The argument that railway workers are a 'special case' above others from the same budget doesn't wash. Just because it always happens in the past doesn't mean it can continue.

 

[Fokx]

They cannot expect higher rises than others within the same sector.

…And yet they’ve not had a penny whilst others in the public sector have. You seem to keep ignoring that fact.

 

[Wolfie]

…And yet they’ve not had a penny whilst others in the public sector have. You seem to keep ignoring that fact.

.... try looking at the previous 10 years, something that you carefully ignore. Believe me, after over 30 years experience of dealing with HMT l can safely say that it is a far from pleasant experience.

 

[DanNCL]

I’ve seen a few suggestions that rail workers should be subject to public sector pay policy. There is no argument for that to be applied to employees of any company that is not state owned. The DFT may dictate a lot of what happens at TOCs but they’re not public sector companies and accordingly should not be subject to public sector pay policy. Even the TOCs that are ran by the DFT aren’t public sector companies, they’re private companies that are owned by the taxpayer.

The only rail employers I could potentially see there being a valid argument to apply public sector pay policy to are those where the operations are very much nationalised - ScotRail, TFW, London Underground and Tyne & Wear Metro - and Network Rail.

There is zero way that the assets of a private company, which incidentally established case law says have human rights, can be deemed to be the property of the state. You may not like the fact that BR rolling stock was sold off, legally and with payment made, to private companies. You equally may not like the fact that companies bought assets and leased them to the state at what you deem to be excessive rates. However, none of that in any way shape or legal form can be translated into state legal "ownership". If HMG was dumb enough to try they'd be crucified in the Courts.

Those assets could however by nationalised by a new act of Parliament should it be decided that nationalisation is the best plan of action.

 

[Wolfie]

If passengers aren’t happy, they have the option to take it up with the politicians, who seem to be the root cause of most of the current mess.

Notwithstanding whether any of us feel staff, in particular drivers, are or aren’t deserving of pay rises going forward, the harsh reality is the industry is short of people, and needs quality candidates urgently. Attractive pay and conditions are part of that, and the industry is always at an inherent disadvantage because shift work is a complete turn-off for many.

They will take it up with the politicians but will likely demand further tightening on the right to strike.

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

Those assets could however by nationalised by a new act of Parliament should it be decided that nationalisation is the best plan of action.

Absolutely. Of course, that entails payment of fair compensation for the assets. Nationalisation without compensation happens in countries without respect of due process and the rule of law, which then pay through the nose to get investment.

 

[43066]

I think the point is that now we the railways are now effectively being financed massively by the tax payer and therefore employees are public sector.

They cannot expect higher rises than others within the same sector.

The argument that railway workers are a 'special case' above others from the same budget doesn't wash. Just because it always happens in the past doesn't mean it can continue.

Financed by the public doesn’t = public sector. That’s a highly simplistic and inaccurate way of looking at things. If EY or Deloitte are paid by the government to undertake a particular project, do their employees become public sector workers? Of course not.

TOCs are public limited companies and their employees aren’t “public sector” by most definitions.

 

[muz379]

They cannot expect higher rises than others within the same sector.

The argument that railway workers are a 'special case' above others from the same budget doesn't wash. Just because it always happens in the past doesn't mean it can continue.

I mean clearly they can expect whatever they want .

And if they are prepared to use their industrial power to fight for it there is a chance they might just get it .

To that end for the rail unions whilst they might have political views about other public sector workers , they do not represent them and largely cannot do anything for them .

 

[Starmill]

Those assets could however by nationalised by a new act of Parliament should it be decided that nationalisation is the best plan of action.

Yes they could, on payment up front of market value. The cost of this would be many tens of billions of pounds. It's simply not going to happen.

 

[DanNCL]

Absolutely. Of course, that entails payment of fair compensation for the assets. Nationalisation without compensation happens in banana republics which then pay through the nose to get investment.

Yes they could, on payment up front of market value. The cost of this would be many tens of billions of pounds. It's simply not going to happen.

I should clarify I wasn’t supporting such an idea, simply saying that it is possible.

Something does need to be done about the ROSCOs as they are not fit for purpose but nationalising their assets isn’t the answer.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Financed by the public doesn’t = public sector. That’s a highly simplistic and inaccurate way of looking at things. If EY or Deloitte are paid by the government to undertake a particular project, do their employees become public sector workers? Of course not.

TOCs are public limited companies and their employees aren’t “public sector” by most definitions.

TOCs are classed as “public non-financial corporations” so the position of the employees could be classed as public sector by default, even if those companies are being run by private entities, because of the close control now being exercised by the DfT.

This leads to all kinds of implications over equal pay legislation, which is a danger area for both unions and management but one that probably will have to be tackled in due course, unless TOC classification reverts to being “private” entities.

The current level of DFT control means that the unions would be best to engage with the DfT directly on pay and conditions policy.

 

[320320]

I’ve seen a few suggestions that rail workers should be subject to public sector pay policy. There is no argument for that to be applied to employees of any company that is not state owned. The DFT may dictate a lot of what happens at TOCs but they’re not public sector companies and accordingly should not be subject to public sector pay policy. Even the TOCs that are ran by the DFT aren’t public sector companies, they’re private companies that are owned by the taxpayer.

The only rail employers I could potentially see there being a valid argument to apply public sector pay policy to are those where the operations are very much nationalised - ScotRail, TFW, London Underground and Tyne & Wear Metro - and Network Rail.


Those assets could however by nationalised by a new act of Parliament should it be decided that nationalisation is the best plan of action.

Scotrails most recent communications to staff regarding the renationalisation has said that staff are now subject to the public sector pay policy regulations although there was a point that said Aslef and RMT grades would still retain their collective bargaining arrangements.

It looks like whoever can cause disruption will get a decent pay rise and all others will get whatever the SG offer.

 

[nedchester]

Why are people on this forum when the seem to be so anti railway, really strange concept .... if you don't like railway staff or the terms and conditions they get then go on a different forum or get worked up about something else.
I could suggest your local council, or maybe management within most of the public sector.

Is being concerned that prolonged strikes on the railway which could lead to people moving away from that mode of transport anti railway?

Quite the opposite I’d argue!

The point is that vast amounts of public money have propped up the railway during the past two years. The unions need to be realistic in their demands over what has been a once in a century event that will take some years to recover from in economic terms.

 

[43066]

TOCs are classed as “public non-financial corporations” so the position of the employees could be classed as public sector by default, even if those companies are being run by private entities, because of the close control now being exercised by the DfT.

Classified by whom? Surely they’re Private Sector non financial corporations?!

TOCs are private sector (albeit publicly traded) companies which have signed franchise agreements, and then additional EMA agreements which effectively amend the franchise agreements concerning financial support and revenue risk. If you look at the treasury sector classification documentation “Control” for these purposes means who controls the company itself (ie who are the shareholders who can appoint/remove directors) rather than the other parties to the agreements signed.

Of course it’s different when you get to franchises operated by the OLR and Scotrail who are effectively fully nationalised and controlled by companies in whom the government is the shareholder.

 

[ComUtoR]

They cannot expect higher rises than others within the same sector.

This is a VERY interesting statement. When you say 'sector' what do you actually mean ? Which 'sector' are you applying ?

Would you accept that pay rises within the same 'industry' are acceptable and those businesses within the same 'industry' should be similar ?

 

[Watershed]

I’ve seen a few suggestions that rail workers should be subject to public sector pay policy. There is no argument for that to be applied to employees of any company that is not state owned. The DFT may dictate a lot of what happens at TOCs but they’re not public sector companies and accordingly should not be subject to public sector pay policy. Even the TOCs that are ran by the DFT aren’t public sector companies, they’re private companies that are owned by the taxpayer.

The only rail employers I could potentially see there being a valid argument to apply public sector pay policy to are those where the operations are very much nationalised - ScotRail, TFW, London Underground and Tyne & Wear Metro - and Network Rail.

NHS Trusts and police forces are owned by the government, but are managed separately. Network Rail is owned by the Secretary of State in just the same way that LNER, Northern and Southeastern are. It would be highly arbitrary for there to any difference in the application of public sector pay principles between these organisations.

Financed by the public doesn’t = public sector. That’s a highly simplistic and inaccurate way of looking at things. If EY or Deloitte are paid by the government to undertake a particular project, do their employees become public sector workers? Of course not.

TOCs are public limited companies and their employees aren’t “public sector” by most definitions.

Really this comes down to the difference between being an employee and a contractor. If Deloitte is appointed as an accountant they'll be told "here's your job, now get on with it". They can make decisions about how exactly they do it.

By comparison, with the new agreements brought about in the last few years, TOCs have all of their costs paid for by the DfT and remit all revenue straight back. Every single decision - even signing off on the PO for a spare part, or the overtime for an additional footex - is made by the DfT. The relationship is now so close that is is incomparable with pre-Covid. Indeed the ONS reclassified the TOCs as public sector organisations back in July 2020.

Being part of the public sector certainly has its advantages (e.g. the fact that not a single member of franchised TOC staff was made redundant, furloughed or suffered a paycut) but there are disadvantages (e.g. the current pay restraint). Unfortunately you can't have your cake and eat it, and unless and until there is a degree of realism, the passengers will continue to be the piggies in the middle.

 

[43066]

Really this is no different to the difference between being an employee and a contractor. With the new agreements brought about in the last few years, TOCs have all of their costs paid for by the DfT and remit all revenue straight back. Every single decision - even signing off on the PO for a spare part, or the overtime for an additional footex - is made by the DfT. The relationship is now so close that it is completely different to the pre-Covid world. Indeed the ONS reclassified the TOCs as public sector organisations back in 2020.

I appreciate that but the fundamental ownership structure hasn’t changed as per my last post. The ONS classification doesn’t alter that. I realise this is a fairly esoteric point and doesn’t make a lot of practical difference.

Being part of the public sector certainly has its advantages (e.g. the fact that not a single member of franchised TOC staff was made redundant, furloughed or suffered a paycut) but there are disadvantages (e.g. the current pay restraint). Unfortunately you can't have your cake and eat it.

For whatever reason I just have an absolute aversion to working for the public sector .

 

[ComUtoR]

Unfortunately you can't have your cake and eat it,

I guarantee I will be eating a cuppa and a slice of cake pretty much within the next few months; hopefully the next month.

and unless and until there is a degree of realism, the passengers will continue to be the piggies in the middle.

As a passenger, with access to various passenger groups, why don't you take action ? Organise a boycott or lobby your local MP. Hold a demonstration outside Parliament or take some form of civil disobedience. Passengers have power too.

 

[43066]

Really this comes down to the difference between being an employee and a contractor. If Deloitte is appointed as an accountant they'll be told "here's your job, now get on with it". They can make decisions about how exactly they do it.

Slightly different to that.

The example I had in mind would be projects where Deloitte is hired to undertake a piece of long term work, be that audit, consulting project, whatever. Deloitte staff (employees not contractors) might work at the government client sight for years at a time and be fully embedded with government staff, including working to their instructions. The Deloitte staff would however remain employees of a private sector organisation throughout, albeit one which is being funded by the government to undertake government work, in accordance with the government’s instructions (a position analogous to that of many TOC employees currently).

Hence the statement upthread that “funded by the government = public sector” is nonsense.

 

[Exscrew]

Whats the likelihood of NR employees getting a pay rise,?

 

[muz379]

Being part of the public sector certainly has its advantages (e.g. the fact that not a single member of franchised TOC staff was made redundant, furloughed or suffered a paycut) but there are disadvantages (e.g. the current pay restraint). Unfortunately you can't have your cake and eat it, and unless and until there is a degree of realism, the passengers will continue to be the piggies in the middle.

People keep parroting out this line that toc employees were lucky to not be furloughed . But the evidence I have seen is that the DFT made the concious decision to keep the railway running , indeed convincing the treasury to pump substantial funds into it .

I actually struggle to see how at least for the grades required to keep the job going - traincrew , engineering , control ,signallers , some station ops to name a few could have actully been furloughed anyway . Its not like if you run a restauraunt for example you could safely furlough everyone because the job was closed . Speaking to the things I know about , it would have been near on impossible to furlough operational railway staff (even at the height of emergency TT's) and would have created an absolute mess when you tried to ramp services back up .

I really do not think it was a stoke of luck , I think it was considered impossible .

 

[Watershed]

People keep parroting out this line that toc employees were lucky to not be furloughed . But the evidence I have seen is that the DFT made the concious decision to keep the railway running , indeed convincing the treasury to pump substantial funds into it .

I actually struggle to see how at least for the grades required to keep the job going - traincrew , engineering , control ,signallers , some station ops to name a few could have actully been furloughed anyway . Its not like if you run a restauraunt for example you could safely furlough everyone because the job was closed . Speaking to the things I know about , it would have been near on impossible to furlough operational railway staff (even at the height of emergency TT's) and would have created an absolute mess when you tried to ramp services back up .

I really do not think it was a stoke of luck , I think it was considered impossible .

It was very much touch and go at the early stages of the pandemic whether the railway would continue running. Most airlines virtually shut down. Obviously things are different on the railway (they always are!) but furloughing did still happen at some of the open access TOCs and there were many agency and contract staff who were basically made redundant.

 

[muz379]

It was very much touch and go at the early stages of the pandemic whether the railway would continue running. Most airlines virtually shut down. Obviously things are different on the railway (they always are!) but furloughing did still happen at some of the open access TOCs and there were many agency and contract staff who were basically made redundant.

Yes Furlough happened at open access operators but they completely ceased operations . I dont know of any agency or contract staff at my TOC who were made redundant . I do know of staff working in outlets on stations working for SSP that did experience redundancy though .

It would have in my view been absoloutely impossible to keep the job going to any extent whilst furloughing any staff required to keep the job operating .

 

[Efini92]

Financed by the public doesn’t = public sector. That’s a highly simplistic and inaccurate way of looking at things. If EY or Deloitte are paid by the government to undertake a particular project, do their employees become public sector workers? Of course not.

TOCs are public limited companies and their employees aren’t “public sector” by most definitions.

I wish we were. I’ll have one of those civil service pensions please.

I guarantee I will be eating a cuppa and a slice of cake pretty much within the next few months; hopefully the next month.


All I want is an honest weeks pay for an honest days work, it’s not a lot to ask.

 

[Carlisle]

Well, since you ask,

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.

That’s unfortunate considering some other TOCs employees appeared to benefit significantly from such practices & seemed keen to retain it as long as possible.
I’ve long argued that given the very high level of extensive training required to drive any train on the Uk national network wages & conditions should essentially be the same or at least broadly similar .

 

[Efini92]

That’s unfortunate considering some other TOCs employees appeared to benefit significantly from such practices & seemed keen to retain it as long as possible.
I’ve long argued that given the very high level of extensive training required to drive any train on the Uk national network wages & conditions should be broadly the same or at least similar .

Once upon a time they were. However different TOC’s have negotiated different conditions and pay over the years. The big payers tended to have worse conditions.

 

[bramling]

If that's the case then why are drivers job applications massively over subscribed?

Quite simply because many people are attracted by the pound sign, but when it comes to it either don’t make it through the training, or when they do become problem people in terms of their attendance or performance.

By the time you take out those who can’t meet the medical requirements, sift away those who don’t get through the different tests, those who fail training, and of course those who at some point in the process decide the role is not for them, the high number of applicants isn’t always guaranteed to leave that much coming out the other side. It doesn’t help that elements of the population now feel work should mean not having to leave their front door!

This doesn’t just apply to drivers either. Take Controllers on London Underground, whose salary is at or just above a mainline Intercity driver. Many many applicants, yet few come out the other side, and for various reasons the role is tending to be shunned by those with the experience / knowledge needed to qualify.

 

[theageofthetra]

But not in the operations or maintenance part of Network Rail.

I've personally never seen so many TSR & ESR of 20mph on the routes I sign. Whatever is going on, it's now affecting the ability to keep to time. Lineside vegetation is also now totally out of control too, though that's a separate discussion.

 

[dk1]

I've personally never seen so many TSR & ESR of 20mph on the routes I sign. Whatever is going on, it's now affecting the ability to keep to time. Lineside vegetation is also now totally out of control too, though that's a separate discussion.

Yet the routes I drive have very few ESRs or TSRs and I am blasting the horn at many locations daily where teams are tackling line side vegetation on a large scale. It’s certainly not a nationwide problem.