Summer staffing issues

[Bletchleyite]

The answer is make the tax system more conducive to working overtime, rather than punishing it. And you'll see benefits in other roles outside the railway too.

The marginal rate issues certainly need fixing. They make no sense and were a cynical attempt to avoid putting higher rate up by a percentage point or two which would have been much fairer.

 

[Starmill]

Are many drivers anywhere near the 100K "marginal rate" issue now?

From a recent thread (sorry I can't find the source now - if it's incorrect I'm sure someone will offer a correction), London Waterloo drivers have basic full time salary of £80k now. Some will be more e.g. LNER.

 

[Bald Rick]

The marginal rate issues certainly need fixing. They make no sense and were a cynical attempt to avoid putting higher rate up by a percentage point or two which would have been much fairer.

I can never understand why the higher rate didn’t revert to 50%. ‘No rise in income tax’ policy I guess.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2026 ==

From a recent thread (sorry I can't find the source now - if it's incorrect I'm sure someone will offer a correction), London Waterloo drivers have basic full time salary of £80k now. Some will be more e.g. LNER.

Yep plenty on basic in that ball park. Add in a couple of rest days a month - non-pensionable of course - and any Sundays for those that have it outside the working week, and you will be north of £100k.

 

[bramling]

The marginal rate issues certainly need fixing. They make no sense and were a cynical attempt to avoid putting higher rate up by a percentage point or two which would have been much fairer.

Is it really a good solution to incentivise more overtime? This still doesn’t solve the problem that people won’t want to do it at certain times.

 

[Stossgebet]

And people hearing those numbers, and remembering 2 long years of industrial disputes, should be aware that after most passenger train drivers went without a payrise for 5 years, when it did come, it was at about half of what the inflation rate was over the same period of time.

The covid craziness was a real sliding doors moment.

If train crew weren't in dispute, because the world never went crazy, then salaries would be significantly higher today. But of course, if that were the case, then the thresholds could have risen too, and the loss of buiness and commuter traffic wouldn't have happened, so those increased wages wouldn't have been an issue.

The reaction to covid really did leave some huge bills and consequences that will last for years to come. But there has to be a better way to deap with it, rather than punishing work, be it through the significantly increased employer rate of NI or punitive tax thresholds.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it really a good solution to incentivise more overtime? This still doesn’t solve the problem that people won’t want to do it at certain times.

That isn't the only reason to fix it to be fair. It's regressive taxation which is normally considered undesirable. That it does discourage progression and hard work isn't the only thing wrong with it, but it does discourage driver overtime!

 

[Stossgebet]

Is it really a good solution to incentivise more overtime? This still doesn’t solve the problem that people won’t want to do it at certain times.

That is a conundrum, my hope would be that incentivising it, means someone that might not do a day or 2 in the summer, might be tempted to, in order to cover some of the ever increasing costs of a family holiday and spending money. But it must always remain a choice. And as such, you need to convice those that now moderate their overtime or don't do any at all. Because as the figures show, the salary is very good, and those people that have cleared or reduced their mortgage, and who's kids have grown up and left home, don't need to do overtime. Those with young families and big mortgages could be more willing in some cases, but not at the risk of losing valuable child care nursery benefits and punitive taxes.

I don't have the answer, just a suggestion. That gettig rid of, or significantly raising that 100k threshold, above which, effective taxes are 60% (or more based on personal circumstances) would help a bit in more roles than just train drivers.

 

[bramling]

That is a conundrum, my hope would be that incentivising it, means someone that might not do a day or 2 in the summer, might be tempted to, in order to cover some of the ever increasing costs of a family holiday and spending money. But it must always remain a choice. And as such, you need to convice those that now moderate their overtime or don't do any at all. Because as the figures show, the salary is very good, and those people that have cleared or reduced their mortgage, and who's kids have grown up and left home, don't need to do overtime. Those with young families and big mortgages could be more willing in some cases, but not at the risk of losing valuable child care nursery benefits and punitive taxes.

There's other ways of supplementing income for costs like those mentioned above, stick some money into an ISA for example which has the added benefit of being tax-free.

Shiftwork is debilitating enough as it is without doing more of it. What do we think happens when your 30-something overtime shark turns 50 and suddenly has a list of health issues as long as the arm?

From my reading of this thread, only two viable solutions have actually come up:
1) Reduce services over the summer (my personal view is this isn't what we should be aiming for)
2) Have the right staff establishment and accept there will be some level of surplus at other times of year.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure a planned reduction is that bad a thing. An all day Saturday service with maxed out train lengths would probably be better for the higher all day demand from additional leisure travel and would make better use of capacity than using those units on peak extras and would require lower staffing.

I get that that's a South East thing though - away from there Mon-Fri and Sat are usually the same anyway.

 

[Stossgebet]

I am not sure how Avanti, XC, East Coast can maximise train lengths above what they already have available and what their length already is.
So cuts without changing train length is the only option there.
I prefer the option 2) in the comment above. Recruit and maintain additional staff above what we need. Creating that meaningful employment is beneficial for us all.

And to the person above that points out the risks of additional overtime. I agree. However, we are in this situation partly because people have reduced their overtime. My suggestion is to incentivise it back to where it was. Not over and above (tbougb this isn't an exact science of course)... but you'll always get the people that live to work. As much as you may not like it. That is a part of diversity. If people want to work at whatever cost, maybe even just for the love of an amazing job, who is anyone to decline people that wish? i would always prefer someone driving my train if they want to be there, rather than under some sort of duress!

 

[Falcon1200]

I have routinely done Christmas Day / Boxing Day / BH / weekends / nights because I was needed and/or wanted to help those out on the front line.

As have I, sometimes rostered shifts, sometimes overtime shifts to keep the job covered.

In my first job with BR, in the summer of 1979 I worked 12-hour shifts (0545-1745), in a booking office. 37 years later, in Control, I was still working 12-hour shifts, and on occasion 7-turn nights with the first and last days being 12-hour shifts; Partly due to the number of people in my post being reduced resulting in those remaining expected to cover the shortfall. The upshot was that this was affecting my health and wellbeing so I retired.

 

[Bald Rick]

From my reading of this thread, only two viable solutions have actually come up:
1) Reduce services over the summer (my personal view is this isn't what we should be aiming for)
2) Have the right staff establishment and accept there will be some level of surplus at other times of year.

3) renegotiate leave quotas / arrangements.

 

[bramling]

3) renegotiate leave quotas / arrangements.

How do you do that without running into the issue of people going sick or finding some other way of making themselves unavailable when they want time off at a high-demand time? (Genuine question!).

 

[Bald Rick]

How do you do that without running into the issue of people going sick or finding some other way of making themselves unavailable when they want time off at a high-demand time? (Genuine question!).

Oh it’s not for every TOC. Some already have leave arrangements which work fine. Some don’t, and those are the ones that could / should be changed.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

There are also union related restrictions in some places, and these vary TOC to TOC - for example having to make yourself available by the middle of the previous week, unable to specify particular parts of the day you could work, e.g. earlies, lates, can all limit the number of volunteers.

I have noticed this at certain operators. What’s the reason for having to make yourself available several days in advance or facing a penalty?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have noticed this at certain operators. What’s the reason for having to make yourself available several days in advance or facing a penalty?

It doesn't seem unreasonable that people should commit a few days in advance to aid planning. Though the ability to offer it on the day would sometimes make sense.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

It doesn't seem unreasonable that people should commit a few days in advance to aid planning. Though the ability to offer it on the day would sometimes make sense.

I believe it’s an ASLEF instruction rather than the company’s? Surely the company would want more flexibility and be able to call you the day before if need be. Is it do with fairness and resources not picking their favourites to give RDW to?

 

[Anvil1984]

I believe it’s an ASLEF instruction rather than the company’s? Surely the company would want more flexibility and be able to call you the day before if need be. Is it do with fairness and resources not picking their favourites to give RDW to?

I believe it’s to avoid “cherry-picking”. As Rest Day Work at some companies is a usually a blanket rate of 10 hours at time and a half (just an example), what happens is that some drivers will be helpful and put in advance to help plan (but end up with a 9.5 hour job) whilst others will chance it and see if they can get a 5 hour part job for the same money

 

[Starmill]

It doesn't seem unreasonable that people should commit a few days in advance to aid planning. Though the ability to offer it on the day would sometimes make sense.

A lot of staff who know a Sunday will be very poorly covered will say they're not available, and then call up the night before or on the morning and say they've become available. This leads to so-called cherry picking, where people who commit in advance are afforded zero flexibility, while those who, either for practical reasons or cynical ones, offered their availability at the last possible moment are given a huge amount of flexibility over which turn they pick up. The people in the former group get quite worked up about this. Indeed, for Northern conductors, seeing this happen week in week out is actually one of the things that leads a small slice of staff to just decline all Sundays, as they believe, justifiably, that just working their rostered ones alone is getting them a bad deal compared to the "cherry pickers". Equally, when rosters come down on it too 'hard' and won't let anyone change off not available to pick up a turn, they also shut out people who genuinely have become available because a personal event they wanted to attend had to be cancelled.

At the end of the day, all of this only becomes a problem worth bothering with when you have gaps on your roster which are a) very large and b) very easy to predict in advance. Otherwise, someone who always goes not available because they are trying to "cherry pick" would risk never picking up anything, and thus missing out on the overtime pay.

 

[Krokodil]

This is governed by the examinations timetable.

How do the Germans cope?

The last exam was on the 24th of June. A month or so before schools break up. There's definitely room to stagger the holidays over July/August/September.

I also see it as being one of those “careful what you wish for” things.

The current arrangement essentially gives an opportunity for people to be able to do stuff on weekdays in the period May, June and early July without places and attractions being full of kids, and still hopefully be able to enjoy summer-type weather.

There are plenty of people who will take their leave during that time in order to make the most of this. These people will then work during the summer school holiday period.

I think it’s civilised to essentially have a period set aside where people can enjoy their time off *without* places being packed with kids.

Start tinkering with this arrangement and it will probably introduce some new unintended consequences.

It means cheaper holidays for families and more evenly distributed work for seasonal workers. I'd sooner prioritise those objectives.

More people will want to take leave in July than in February. On that basis if you have staffing high enough to cover everything in July without overtime you are going to have excessive spare cover in February. Or you need to persuade people (or force them) to take annual leave at unpopular times.

Simple maths, unless my figures are wrong.

The block leave roster and ad hoc quota system works well, provided that the operator is fully-staffed. However if there are unfilled vacancies, too many in training, or more than the predictable amount of sickness things can fall apart.

 

[Bald Rick]

The block leave roster and ad hoc quota system works well, provided that the operator is fully-staffed. However if there are unfilled vacancies, too many in training, or more than the predictable amount of sickness things can fall apart.

Or, as is the case in some places, the quotas are too ‘generous’ such that if the quota is filled then a large amount of RDW is needed to maintain a service.

 

[bramling]

Or, as is the case in some places, the quotas are too ‘generous’ such that if the quota is filled then a large amount of RDW is needed to maintain a service.

Presumably that arises for two reasons

1) “Sorry but if I don’t get my leave in July then I will be going sick” (unspoken, of course)

2) An industry which now seems to have issues filling vacancies isn’t exactly going to help this by preventing people taking leave at the time they’d like to.

“Great annual leave opportunities*
(*in February and November)”

isn’t exactly the best job advert.


In the case of (1) you might as well plan for it, rather than suddenly have the duty uncovered when the persons rings in 2 hours before book-on time.

 

[Krokodil]

Or, as is the case in some places, the quotas are too ‘generous’ such that if the quota is filled then a large amount of RDW is needed to maintain a service.

Presumably the quotas were agreed by management as well as by the union so if the quotas are allowing too many off then it's on them.

 

[Qwerty133]

Presumably the quotas were agreed by management as well as by the union so if the quotas are allowing too many off then it's on them.

Often because what worked 30 years ago when it was agreed doesn’t work in 2026 and the level of power held by the unions make it extremely difficult to update terms for the 21st century.
It may well have been agreed by management at some point but eventually management of today need to be able to change things that were decided on by former managers who are now long retired.

 

[Krokodil]

Often because what worked 30 years ago doesn’t work in 2026.

Quotas haven't changed in 30 years?

I very much doubt that. They should be reviewed every time the depot establishment changes. The establishment too should be reviewed regularly to ensure that there are enough staff to cover the workload. If the depot is on a four day, 35 hour week with Sundays inside, 40% of the link will be on rest days on any given day. Slightly less on a weekday, slightly more on a Sunday. You remove the leave quota. Simple enough. Then you need to estimate how many staff you might have off sick, on secondment, suspended from duties etc. Finally, it's worth adding an extra few heads to be on the safe side.

I believe that the penultimate point is where TOCs are coming unstuck, they're assuming that the typical sickness rates experienced before Covid are still the norm. In practice sickness rates appear to have risen. Perhaps people are more cautious and less likely to come to work with a cold (spreading your germs around the depot is less popular than it was pre-pandemic). Age may also come into play, there is a whole generation of drivers heading for retirement - they'll have a higher sickness rate on average than a younger cohort, simply as a consequence of ageing.. How many people are otherwise unproductive is worth looking into too, at some operators there is far less tolerance for minor foul-ups (opening doors at a station you weren't booked to call at for example) than there was 10 years ago. So you have more staff on restricted duties pending investigation.

 

[Stossgebet]

Often because what worked 30 years ago when it was agreed doesn’t work in 2026 and the RMT think they are unstoppable.
Unfortunately the government failed to take the opportunity in 2020 (where several months of daily strikes would have had little impact on the vast majority of the population due to lockdown) to impose terms that work in the 21st century.

The government could easily have purchased the terms it (you) wanted, if it had given a pay rise bearly above the inflation level. As it was, they fought hard not to give a payrise without ridiculous strings, and fell foul. Then the dispute was settled with a rise half of what the inflation level was.

Seems to me, that you are happy to impose unpleasent changes on other people without their consent. That is not a nice thing, and a slippery slope. I guess you think you are out of the firing line. Or you have been in the firing line, and want to commit a vengeance against other innocent workers out of spite.

 

[Qwerty133]

Quotas haven't changed in 30 years?

I very much doubt that. They should be reviewed every time the depot establishment changes. The establishment too should be reviewed regularly to ensure that there are enough staff to cover the workload. If the depot is on a four day, 35 hour week with Sundays inside, 40% of the link will be on rest days on any given day. Slightly less on a weekday, slightly more on a Sunday. You remove the leave quota. Simple enough. Then you need to estimate how many staff you might have off sick, on secondment, suspended from duties etc. Finally, it's worth adding an extra few heads to be on the safe side.

I believe that the penultimate point is where TOCs are coming unstuck, they're assuming that the typical sickness rates experienced before Covid are still the norm. In practice sickness rates appear to have risen. Perhaps people are more cautious and less likely to come to work with a cold (spreading your germs around the depot is less popular than it was pre-pandemic). Age may also come into play, there is a whole generation of drivers heading for retirement - they'll have a higher sickness rate on average than a younger cohort, simply as a consequence of ageing.. How many people are otherwise unproductive is worth looking into too, at some operators there is far less tolerance for minor foul-ups (opening doors at a station you weren't booked to call at for example) than there was 10 years ago. So you have more staff on restricted duties pending investigation.

Quotas may have changed but the actual issue is that the quota should probably vary with the time of year and even day of the week based on expected absence levels and willingness for overtime. Whilst the typical sickness rate (adjusted for the time of year as I would expect significantly higher levels of sickness absence during the cold and flu season if the railway is in line with any other industry) needs to be accounted for at all times they should probably be accounting for a level of absence greater than this at times where volunteers for overtime are likely to be scarce.
If you take a typical depot of 200 drivers on a 4 day week and there are 80 diagrams per day Monday to Friday and a typical sickness (or otherwise unavailable excluding leave) rate of 10% you can probably afford to allow close to 20 drivers to take leave Monday-Thursday in term time but only 10 to take leave in school holidays and on Fridays and Saturdays where any additional absence is more likely to be uncovered if it was relying on overtime.

 

[Bald Rick]

Presumably the quotas were agreed by management as well as by the union so if the quotas are allowing too many off then it's on them.

Yes, on both of them. And it’s on both of them to agree a solution.

 

[Krokodil]

If you take a typical depot of 200 drivers on a 4 day week and there are 80 diagrams per day Monday to Friday and a typical sickness (or otherwise unavailable excluding leave) rate of 10% you can probably afford to allow close to 20 drivers to take leave Monday-Thursday in term time but only 10 to take leave in school holidays and on Fridays and Saturdays where any additional absence is more likely to be uncovered if it was relying on overtime.

That would go down like a cup of cold sick - in fact it's the sort of policy that would just lead to people throwing sickies because they know that they'd have no chance of a legitimate day's leave on a weekend. Two-thirds of leave is taken as blocks, so that staff can actually spend a week or two with their families, like normal people do (this isn't America where employers look askance if you suggest that you want to take an entire week off in one go). So that's a lot of weekends already booked, with your plan there would be no individual days left available on Fridays or Saturdays for someone who just wants the day off.

If you have a 200-strong link and 26 days of leave to use over 363 days, you are going to need to average at least 14.3 off on any given day (the closer to this number you go, the less wiggle room you have). Your plan averages 15.3, which is perilously tight - you'd have to ensure that every day from the beginning of the year was booked up fully in order that no one finishes the year with entitlement left over that they didn't have the opportunity to take, and then you're screwed if anyone is on any other sort of leave (sickness, maternity etc.) that results in booked annual leave days being claimed back. With a link of 200 you really need a daily leave quota of more than 20 to tread water. Ideally 25 if you want to avoid an unhappy workforce who struggle to ever get their requested days off (who would be more likely to go sick as a result).

In your link of 200 you have your 80 diagrams and there would be 80 on rest days. That leaves you with 40 spare turns in the link. Subtracting the above bare minimum annual leave quota of 20 (never mind the more realistic quota of 25), you only have 20 drivers left to cover sickness, drivers off following incidents, vacancies, reps and instructors released for their other duties, maternity/paternity leave etc. With that plan you'll be relying on overtime regularly. You are understaffed.

To cover 80 diagrams per day reliably, without regular recourse to overtime, you really need 240 drivers.

 

[bramling]

Often because what worked 30 years ago when it was agreed doesn’t work in 2026 and the level of power held by the unions make it extremely difficult to update terms for the 21st century.
It may well have been agreed by management at some point but eventually management of today need to be able to change things that were decided on by former managers who are now long retired.

What is actually different in terms of summer? I can get the whole weekends thing as there are generally a lot more services running at weekends now compared to 30 years ago, but summer is no different to how it was.