ScotRail Industrial Relations issues (including conductor strike action)

[kkong]

Is your aim on this thread to provoke?
On your first point you were proved completely wrong by multiple posters, and on your second: as well as a false accusation, have you not encountered a thing called "principle"?

Those on the gateline may well be somewhat concerned if their own jobs might be put at risk by others being asked to help, for example.

Not at all.

I find it fascinating to view an industry which seems to have so many workers who seem to work in silos (so many references to "grades") and cannot countenance doing any other role to help out: "not my job".

If I had nothing productive to be doing during working hours, I wouldn't just sit doing nothing at my desk / in a mess room until something came up.

I would ask my colleagues if there was anything I could help them with, whether in my direct line of work - project engineering - or something else within my competency, such as setting up equipment in the workshop for inspection / test or helping pack a customer shipment for export.

Of course if some urgent work comes up, you just return to your normal work and do it.

That doesn't sound unreasonable to me - in fact it is completely normal to me.

Everyone works as one team for the common good of the company.

Looking from the outside, it seems the same mindset is not present on the railway.

Some railway workers on this forum also don't seem to welcome observations and criticism from those who don't work in the industry - which is also strange to me.

You are allowed to have an opinion on something without being directly involved in it.

 

[LowLevel]

Not at all.

I find it fascinating to view an industry which seems to have so many workers who seem to work in silos (so many references to "grades") and cannot countenance doing any other role to help out: "not my job".

If I had nothing productive to be doing during working hours, I wouldn't just sit doing nothing at my desk / in a mess room until something came up.

I would ask my colleagues if there was anything I could help them with, whether in my direct line of work - project engineering - or something else within my competency, such as setting up equipment in the workshop for inspection / test or helping pack a customer shipment for export.

Of course if some urgent work comes up, you just return to your normal work and do it.

That doesn't sound unreasonable to me - in fact it is completely normal to me.

Everyone works as one team for the common good of the company.

Looking from the outside, it seems the same mindset is not present on the railway.

Some railway workers on this forum also don't seem to welcome observations and criticism from those who don't work in the industry - which is also strange to me.

You are allowed to have an opinion on something without being directly involved in it.

101 for working in a unionised industry - your job is yours, mine is mine, if you're going to help out don't get caught or someone might get ideas about getting rid of or merging one job or the other at the next re-organisation.

It might seem backwards but it has kept many people employed over the years whether you agree with it or not.

Flexible/multiskilled working is very much frowned upon.

 

[kkong]

101 for working in a unionised industry - your job is yours, mine is mine, if you're going to help out don't get caught or someone might get ideas about getting rid of or merging one job or the other at the next re-organisation.

It might seem backwards but it has kept many people employed over the years whether you agree with it or not.

Flexible/multiskilled working is very much frowned upon.

I understand the concept of unions.

But jobs change over time and new opportunities open up.

There's no cotton mills or coal mines in the UK nowadays, but plenty of jobs in tech, for example.

The tide can't and won't be held back for ever.

e.g. the "safety" requirement for two drivers to be present in the cab on trains travelling at >=100mph.

 

[Christmas]

I understand the concept of unions.

But jobs change over time and new opportunities open up.

There's no cotton mills or coal mines in the UK nowadays, but plenty of jobs in tech, for example.

The tide can't and won't be held back for ever.

e.g. the "safety" requirement for two drivers to be present in the cab on trains travelling at >=100mph.

You don't work in the railway so you don't understand the way things are done but you're also not willing to accept that that's the way it is. It doesn't matter what you do to encroach into other people's roles in your workplace because it's not the way the railway does things.

 

[cairntoul]

e.g. the "safety" requirement for two drivers to be present in the cab on trains travelling at >=100mph.

Or having a brake van or having someone walking in front waving a red flag.

 

[Darandio]

You don't work in the railway so you don't understand the way things are done but you're also not willing to accept that that's the way it is. It doesn't matter what you do to encroach into other people's roles in your workplace because it's not the way the railway does things.

To be fair this is post encapsulates the whole issue for anyone looking from the outside in. They see lots of other industries streamlining and making changes, in some cases they have no choice otherwise jobs are on the line. On the railway it's 'that's not how we do it, sorry but that's just the way it is'.

It's hardly surprising people are going to question this.

 

[Christmas]

Or having a brake van or having someone walking in front waving a red flag.

Change the record.

 

[kkong]

You don't work in the railway so you don't understand the way things are done but you're also not willing to accept that that's the way it is. It doesn't matter what you do to encroach into other people's roles in your workplace because it's not the way the railway does things.

Of course I understand "how it is" from the posts on this thread.

And it's not for me to "accept" the current working practices or not.

But it doesn't mean that I can't make observations as to how inefficiently the (publicly funded) railway seems to operate.

 

[Christmas]

To be fair this is post encapsulates the whole issue for anyone looking from the outside in. They see lots of other industries streamlining and making changes, in some cases they have no choice otherwise jobs are on the line. On the railway it's 'that's not how we do it, sorry but that's just the way it is'.

It's hardly surprising people are going to question this.

Yeah but they can't seem to accept that people don't do other's jobs for them. To continually use examples from their own line of work and try apply it to a railway setting is just wrong. Should an airline pilot nip out and help the cabin crew with the meals service if they are a bit short? No, of course not because it's not their job.

 

[320320]

Not at all.

I find it fascinating to view an industry which seems to have so many workers who seem to work in silos (so many references to "grades") and cannot countenance doing any other role to help out: "not my job".

If I had nothing productive to be doing during working hours, I wouldn't just sit doing nothing at my desk / in a mess room until something came up.

I would ask my colleagues if there was anything I could help them with, whether in my direct line of work - project engineering - or something else within my competency, such as setting up equipment in the workshop for inspection / test or helping pack a customer shipment for export.

Of course if some urgent work comes up, you just return to your normal work and do it.

That doesn't sound unreasonable to me - in fact it is completely normal to me.

Everyone works as one team for the common good of the company.

Looking from the outside, it seems the same mindset is not present on the railway.

Some railway workers on this forum also don't seem to welcome observations and criticism from those who don't work in the industry - which is also strange to me.

You are allowed to have an opinion on something without being directly involved in it.

Do you expect railway workers on this forum to welcome your opinion when all you do is criticise them?

 

[Facing Back]

You don't work in the railway so you don't understand the way things are done but you're also not willing to accept that that's the way it is. It doesn't matter what you do to encroach into other people's roles in your workplace because it's not the way the railway does things.

Well. I'm expecting a stinging rebuke as I don't work in the railway.

But I am sorry, "that's the way it is" or "that's way we do things" are not excuses not to change, or even reasons not to change in any other industry that I am aware of and I don't understand why the railway is so different so this does not apply.

I am worked in many places which had a union presence but never one where a colleague would help out a member of their team. I work in a unionised company now - although we call it a works council - and it would be unthinkable not to help a member of any "grade". We've had evenings with deadlines and only one person needs to finish something and the rest of the team has stayed to help. I wonder why our productively lags behind...

 

[kkong]

Do you expect railway workers on this forum to welcome your opinion when all you do is criticise them?

I don't expect anyone to welcome anyone else's opinion.

But I have not seen anyone defend the working practices in a rational manner - just the likes of "that's just the way it is".

And that not working in the railway industry seems to mean that your opinion and observations aren't valid.

Yeah but they can't seem to accept that people don't do other's jobs for them. To continually use examples from their own line of work and try apply it to a railway setting is just wrong. Should an airline pilot nip out and help the cabin crew with the meals service if they are a bit short? No, of course not because it's not their job.

A false comparison. Totally different jobs with wildly different training requirements.

Whereas, for example, retailing tickets at a gateline differs from retailing tickets on board a train... how?

 

[Christmas]

Well. I'm expecting a stinging rebuke as I don't work in the railway.

But I am sorry, "that's the way it is" or "that's way we do things" are not excuses not to change, or even reasons not to change in any other industry that I am aware of and I don't understand why the railway is so different so this does not apply.

I am worked in many places which had a union presence but never one where a colleague would help out a member of their team. I work in a unionised company now - although we call it a works council - and it would be unthinkable not to help a member of any "grade". We've had evenings with deadlines and only one person needs to finish something and the rest of the team has stayed to help. I wonder why our productively lags behind...

They're officially known as grades so you don't need to put the word in inverted commas.

Helping a colleague might involve answering passenger questions on the way past going to a train or for a break or carrying something, passing messages on etc. Standing on a barrier is doing someone else's job that the company, ergo the management, has failed to recruit enough staff for. It's not the same thing.

 

[74A]

Flexibility is nothing new. In the days of BR platform staff at somewhere like Chippenham would clean up litter between trains. Also there was a grade of staff who were multi skilled. In the busy summer time they could be guards to cover for holidays and extra summer services. Other times they would do platform duties and be general cover for sickness etc.

Both stopped after privatisation. Cleaners are now employed as well as platform staff at Chippenham. No such flexible role now exists. Done away with by the TOC's to save money but then they pay out overtime or cancel services in they do not have enough staff at weekends and holidays.

And of course the fragmentation means that a train can be cancelled for lack of train crew. When train crew of a different TOC are sitting in the mess room doing nothing.

 

[Christmas]

I don't expect anyone to welcome anyone else's opinion.

But I have not seen anyone defend the working practices in a rational manner - just the likes of "that's just the way it is".

And that not working in the railway industry seems to mean that your opinion and observations aren't valid.



A false comparison. Totally different jobs with wildly different training requirements.

Whereas, for example, retailing tickets at a gateline differs from retailing tickets on board a train... how?

You're talking about queue busting which already happens and has done for years. This proposal is for guards to actually operate the gateline and deal with everything that comes with it. Doing someone else's job.

 

[cairntoul]

But I have not seen anyone defend the working practices in a rational manner - just the likes of "that's just the way it is".

And that not working in the railway industry seems to mean that your opinion and observations aren't valid.

I do not believe that is completely true. For example, someone in the industry gave a good justification for the need for spare staff.
.
However times, needs and demands do change and industries need to adapt to meet the demand. I don't see that the customer must always meet the demands of the industry(*).
.
(*) Yes, there can be a middle ground where an absolute minimum requirement (safety/pay/conditions), on employee needs are met. But if they cannot be renconciled with customer demands then the customer will move on and something else will fill the gap - it always does. There is a great many towns around Glasgow, now with frequent express buses, with free wifi, that are cheaper than train travel. Yes, they take longer; however at some point in the next ten to fifteen years, self driving electric vehicles will become mainstream and the advantage that rail currently has will lessen. In the Western world that we live in, it is (unfortunately),the case, that industry must adapt (the thing evolves), or it may die.

 

[InOban]

Why are you questioning the use of the word guard? The RRSB Rule Book, agreed with Network Rail and the TOCs calls the grade a guard so no need for the condescension.

Because the role in question is, increasingly, best described as On Board Staff rather than a guard as described in the Rule Book.

 

[PaulMc7]

Because the role in question is, increasingly, best described as On Board Staff rather than a guard as described in the Rule Book.

"On board assistant" would definitely be a more accurate role title IMO. Considering that I don't use the train much I've seen conductors act as cleaners, tour guides, mental health counsellors and a lot more when I have used them. I don't envy the role especially as an autistic as I'm not talkative at all but pay isn't one thing the job is short of. Ideal conditions? Hmm maybe not perfect but no job has that.

Roles generally have modernised a lot lately and I know in my previous roles I always jumped at the chance to do other stuff. Working within your role is pretty archaic these days IMO.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Of course I understand "how it is" from the posts on this thread.

And it's not for me to "accept" the current working practices or not.

But it doesn't mean that I can't make observations as to how inefficiently the (publicly funded) railway seems to operate.

Exactly. You are allowed your opinion. Btw where is the NUM or the NGA?

 

[snookertam]

"On board assistant" would definitely be a more accurate role title IMO. Considering that I don't use the train much I've seen conductors act as cleaners, tour guides, mental health counsellors and a lot more when I have used them. I don't envy the role especially as an autistic as I'm not talkative at all but pay isn't one thing the job is short of. Ideal conditions? Hmm maybe not perfect but no job has that.

Roles generally have modernised a lot lately and I know in my previous roles I always jumped at the chance to do other stuff. Working within your role is pretty archaic these days IMO.

It’s seen as ‘archaic’ because trade unions were obliterated in the 1980s to 2000s. Otherwise they would have been in a better position to protect people’s jobs. It’s not a coincidence that we now have precarious work and food banks where back 2-3 decades ago these were unheard of.

‘Compromise’ is always in favour of those holding the purse strings and at the expense of ordinary people. The Union are right to refuse any attempt to have their members cover up for shortages elsewhere, which are ultimately not their problem. I hope they stand firm.

 

[YellowBrick]

ScotRail strikes set to go ahead during COP26 summit

The RMT union rejects the latest offer from ScotRail in a dispute over pay and conditions.

www.bbc.com

Do we know what the nature and traveller impact of the COP26 strikes are going to be? Article doesn't say.

 

[GALLANTON]

ScotRail strikes set to go ahead during COP26 summit

The RMT union rejects the latest offer from ScotRail in a dispute over pay and conditions.

www.bbc.com

Do we know what the nature and traveller impact of the COP26 strikes are going to be? Article doesn't say.

I think it'd pretty obvious what the impact of no trains would be during a major event.

 

[YellowBrick]

I figured it may be more nuanced than merely "no trains", but if that's what they're on about...

To me it seems that striking during COP26 is morally indefensible.

Due to its nature, COP26 is a once-in-a-lifetime event for any given country with the aim of trying to address a very grave universal problem. There are countless groups trying to organise lots of people going there, both officially (as part of COP26), and unofficially (the climate protesters). It's the only chance many of those (non-delegate) people will have any chance to try and influence climate change policy at an international event.

Rail is an integral part of intra-Glasgow, central-belt, and intra-national travel; striking during the event is likely to disenfranchise thousands of folks from their ability to participate in the protests. Yet the RMT is holding it hostage for what are - in comparison to the goals of COP26 - almost certainly petty and insignificant demands, and that seems remarkably selfish.

It's also ironicly self-destructive: part of the solutions that COP26 is going to inevitably have to try and use is public transport. Good luck getting folks on board with that when a sizeable chunk of the public transport is offline.

And yes, I appreciate this stance will be as popular as a Dawlish sea wall collapse.

(Disclaimer: I don't have any particular opinion on the industrial issues; just striking during COP26)

 

[Falcon1200]

The strike may well have two unintended consequences, both potentially disastrous for the railway in Scotland and therefore its employees;

People will find other means of travel and some will not return to rail after the strike.
People will not view the railway as in any way a reliable form of transport.

From outside the RMT's repeated rejection of Scotrail's offers suggests that the only thing they will accept is the employer's complete capitulation to their demands; No employer can agree to that, because the same thing will happen every year thereafter.

 

[Robertj21a]

I think many rail staff, and the RMT in particular, live in a bubble of ancient procedures where little must be allowed to ever change.
All this uncertainty just leads more people to use cars or coaches.

 

[Southsider]

I figured it may be more nuanced than merely "no trains", but if that's what they're on about...

To me it seems that striking during COP26 is morally indefensible.

Due to its nature, COP26 is a once-in-a-lifetime event for any given country with the aim of trying to address a very grave universal problem. There are countless groups trying to organise lots of people going there, both officially (as part of COP26), and unofficially (the climate protesters). It's the only chance many of those (non-delegate) people will have any chance to try and influence climate change policy at an international event.

Rail is an integral part of intra-Glasgow, central-belt, and intra-national travel; striking during the event is likely to disenfranchise thousands of folks from their ability to participate in the protests. Yet the RMT is holding it hostage for what are - in comparison to the goals of COP26 - almost certainly petty and insignificant demands, and that seems remarkably selfish.

It's also ironicly self-destructive: part of the solutions that COP26 is going to inevitably have to try and use is public transport. Good luck getting folks on board with that when a sizeable chunk of the public transport is offline.

And yes, I appreciate this stance will be as popular as a Dawlish sea wall collapse.

(Disclaimer: I don't have any particular opinion on the industrial issues; just striking during COP26)

Same here. I wonder if the RMT missed an opportunity to gain public (and political) support by suspending industrial action during COP26. Instead they took the traditional approach, how it’s done on the railways I guess.

 

[greyman42]

So next time you’re at work, if your boss asks you to go and clean the toilets because the cleaners are short staffed “and need a hand”, you’ll be fine with that will you? Laughable.

I have seen pilots cleaning the aircraft between turn arounds.

 

[LoogaBarooga]

Maybe if ScotRail made this rdw enhancement offer six months ago and not yesterday this situation could have already been put to bed.

 

[YellowBrick]

Further thought: I also wonder if geopolitics will come into it too. The world's eyes will be on Scotland in a way they haven't been since probably the G8 at Gleneages in 2005. I suspect Nicola (Sturgeon) is going to be having words with people.

 

[320320]

I figured it may be more nuanced than merely "no trains", but if that's what they're on about...

To me it seems that striking during COP26 is morally indefensible.

Due to its nature, COP26 is a once-in-a-lifetime event for any given country with the aim of trying to address a very grave universal problem. There are countless groups trying to organise lots of people going there, both officially (as part of COP26), and unofficially (the climate protesters). It's the only chance many of those (non-delegate) people will have any chance to try and influence climate change policy at an international event.

Rail is an integral part of intra-Glasgow, central-belt, and intra-national travel; striking during the event is likely to disenfranchise thousands of folks from their ability to participate in the protests. Yet the RMT is holding it hostage for what are - in comparison to the goals of COP26 - almost certainly petty and insignificant demands, and that seems remarkably selfish.

It's also ironicly self-destructive: part of the solutions that COP26 is going to inevitably have to try and use is public transport. Good luck getting folks on board with that when a sizeable chunk of the public transport is offline.

And yes, I appreciate this stance will be as popular as a Dawlish sea wall collapse.

(Disclaimer: I don't have any particular opinion on the industrial issues; just striking during COP26)

It’s certainly not “petty and insignificant“ to the people that have been on strike over pay and conditions since March.
Maybe, if you deem it to be such a trivial issue in the grand scheme of things, you should be complaining about Scotrail and the Scottish government not sorting it out rather than blaming the “selfish” staff.

Same here. I wonder if the RMT missed an opportunity to gain public (and political) support by suspending industrial action during COP26. Instead they took the traditional approach, how it’s done on the railways I guess.

What would they have got in return for that? A pat on the head and a COP26 badge?

Public or political support is more likely to get you a round of applause on a Thursday night than a pay rise.