Rail strikes discussion

[matacaster]

Civil servants should lose the London Allowance if they aren't travelling into London daily its basically a salary increase that rail workers can't access

Agree.

 

[Thumper1127]

Agree.

I also agree. But it is also worth pointing out that companies in London are also realising that they don’t have to pay London salaries for some jobs if they can secure quality employees elsewhere who can equally do the job remotely from other parts of the UK. Levelling up by accident rather than design, well paid jobs in other regions not requiring London allowance because there is no need for the daily commute to London to secure the salary.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Head of RDG says talk will carry on tomorrow to avert strikes although also says RMT have got nowhere with NR today.

Train strikes: Dispute still resolvable, says industry boss​

Mr Montgomery - who is also the managing director of First Rail, which runs a number of rail services in Britain - told BBC News that rail bosses were trying to work with trade unions "on how to carry out modernisation and reform of the industry" amid falling passenger numbers.
"Ultimately we do want to give our people a pay increase... but we have to get on with reform, and that helps us deliver the next phase of giving people a pay rise."
Challenged over the apparent lack of a pay offer from many train operators, Mr Montgomery said talks, both informal and formal, had been ongoing and discussions would continue on Monday.
"We need both parties around the table and we really require details and an acceptance that reform can go ahead," he said.

Emphasis on reform from RDG may indicate some movement from the unions may unlock an improved offer although I doubt anything is going to stop action next week. Only DfT aka the Treasury can move this forward but it takes two to tango.

 

[Bald Rick]

The S&T told me. Also quite logical since if they only work at night, what are you supposed to during the day with failures?

well the S&T are wrong. They may have been told the wrong info, of course.

Because Network Rail has to do what the government wants and the government wants cuts.

no, the Government wants a more efficient and affordable rail system.

If safety is not compromised why have we not done this before? Oh wait, we did, as RailTrack and we all know how that ended ...

Railtrack ceased to exist over 20 years ago, in a very, very different industry environment (I was there, we’re you?) and technology is rather different now. But the main reason we haven’t done it before is, I‘m afraid, the difficulty in negotiating it with the unions. Fortunately they are much more pragmatic now.

Degraded working for potentially 12 hours is (and would be the same for 8 hours unsurprisingly, but you don't seem to understand this).

I fully understand it. And as I said previously, it is not going to happen as it will cause big performance issues as well as being an increased safety risk. No one will want it to happen (but you don’t seem to understand this).

I'm actually amazed they only pay you 29k. I had no idea. What a jip, that's nowhere near enough for that job.

Signaller pay varies considerably by grade, £29k is Grade 2, Frade 10 signallers are on just short of £50k.

How it works in that particular location I don't know, but wherever I've worked (in S&T) it's always been that although you'd predominantly stick to your patch if a neighbouring patch was in need of assistance then you would be called to go there.

It would generally be weighed up what the risk of leaving your patch would be (e.g. is the benefit to going worth risking leaving your patch uncovered, or does your patch have a second team on who can cover it?), and a COSS might be found for that patch with local knowledge.

I would not try to refuse going anywhere as long as I either felt I had sufficient local knowledge of that area, or had a COSS provided. The furthest I have been asked to go was some 66 miles from my depot, and I would have gone, however it was decided that it wasn't worth the risk of leaving my patch uncovered.

The nuance is that you can be asked to go off patch, but you don’t have to, like you do ‘on patch’.

and, of course, some people are more helpful than others in this regard.

Obviously HS1 is a little different to the other routes as it’s not operated by conventional signalling or by Network Rail

it is signalled by Network Rail signallers, from Ashford, using a control system that is very similar to the control system used in ROCs. Indeed it is in the same room as the conventional signalling for much of Kent.

 

[Need2]

I also agree. But it is also worth pointing out that companies in London are also realising that they don’t have to pay London salaries for some jobs if they can secure quality employees elsewhere who can equally do the job remotely from other parts of the UK. Levelling up by accident rather than design, well paid jobs in other regions not requiring London allowance because there is no need for the daily commute to London to secure the salary.

Exactly what I said when the wfh was being talked about and how (predominately) London office workers were getting a defacto pay rise for not having to actually ’go’ to work.
If a job can be done at home then it can be done anywhere (in the world)

 

[pt_mad]

The point has been made before, but the Govt didn't keep railway staff in work out of some kindness. They made a strategic decision (you may disagree with the decision) to keep the railways running during Covid and designated us as key workers. We were not asked if we wanted to work, or go on furlough. We were instructed to continue working. Fair enough and I was glad to be busy and in work, but it was a Govt choice, not a gift to be repaid by staff at a later date.

There may actually have been some staff who would have preferred furlough to be fair. Particularly ones who felt vulnerable due to having less than perfect health and fitness. It ones who have a comfortable home life who might have wanted a short break from work with family had it been available.
As poster here indicated, it was likely a strategic decision to keep the railway staffed and running, 1. If you offered voluntary furlough you may end up with too few staff in some places to run an essential service and too many in others and it'd be too difficult to plan, considering new timetables take months to plan. 2. The government may have taken the view that if furlough is taxpayer cash for the workers to stay at home, they would rather have then in work on hand to keep the railway going in some form rather than getting paid to do nothing.
And most critically 3. Nobody knew how long the lockdown might last. Nobody knew how quickly people would need the railway again. The PM said in March 2020 we'd turn the tide on the virus within 12 weeks. So they'd need the railway to be ready to be able to revert back to any timetable necessary as soon as necessary up to and including the full timetable if needed. It's no good struggling to get all your staff back and on planned jobs because they were all furloughed.
Add to that 4. If operational staff were off the job too long they may lose their competency and need reassessing for certain tasks. Keeping them working keeps then competent for as soon as the railway needs them.

Totally agree. While it is worth pointing out that rail staff did not suffer redundancies (unlike so many private businesses, including the heating engineer I use whose company he built over 10 years folded) it must not be used as an excuse not to address the current issues. What the answer is to the current situation is a moot point but staff should not have to pay, going forward, for a government decision at the time. Address the issues as they are now, not because what happened during lockdown.

But was no job loses to do them a favour or because nobody knew how long the situation would last for (could be 12 weeks, 12 months, 2 years)? Nobody knew whether the full timetable would need to be by late summer 2020, whether winter would bite, whether people would stay away or come back quickly. It turned out numbers built up again fairly reasonably ish up to October 2020 when Covid started to bite again meaning stronger restrictions coming back in.

It would be unrealistic to have closed the doors and locked the railways during the lockdowns and get rid of your staff. You'd struggle to get it back in any reasonable time and you'd probably cause deeper recession. A country needs to keep it's infrastructure in tact and ready to go.

In fact, what it seems here is that proposed job loses (of which this poster says there were none in the form of redundancy) are just on the cards now rather than during the actual pandemic itself. The govt have waited to see how things look after covid and decided now which jobs they might want or not want. So really the job loses were simply delayed from the pandemic until now. Don't forget redundancy would attract certain mandatory or negotiated payments. Severance schemes can often be less generous.

Any vacancies not replaced are job loses too if they're permanent.

 

[HST274]

Head of RDG says talk will carry on tomorrow to avert strikes although also says RMT have got nowhere with NR today.

Train strikes: Dispute still resolvable, says industry boss​

Emphasis on reform from RDG may indicate some movement from the unions may unlock an improved offer although I doubt anything is going to stop action next week. Only DfT aka the Treasury can move this forward but it takes two to tango.

I would not be surprised that, if tomorrow the RMT turned round and said 'we only want a pay rise', they would get 5-7%, but obviously resulting in many redundancies etc. That obviously won't and (imo) shouldn't happen though.

 

[alxndr]

The nuance is that you can be asked to go off patch, but you don’t have to, like you do ‘on patch’.

and, of course, some people are more helpful than others in this regard.

The reality is that I've never seen anyone refuse when requested to go by management/control. I have, however, seen people moaned at for going without sufficient authorisation—people are generally willing to help out.

Losing that goodwill might be the most harmful thing to come from the current business. As much as staff like to moan, when it comes to it there is an awful lot of goodwill that keeps the place running. If you lose that it all starts to fall apart. I've seen it on a local scale with poor managers, but this is far more pervasive and widespread now.

 

[Bald Rick]

The reality is that I've never seen anyone refuse when requested to go by management/control.

I have, but not that often.

As much as staff like to moan, when it comes to it there is an awful lot of goodwill that keeps the place running. If you lose that it all starts to fall apart.

agreed 100%

 

[Watershed]

Had drivers been furloughed, they would have lost their competency

Not if it had been properly managed. Eurostar, along with several of the other OAOs and FOCs, furloughed their staff at various points, taking them off furlough just enough to retain their competency.

Obviously with the taxpayer funding the "franchised" railway's costs, the only saving would have been through any reduction in pay that was agreed (e.g. the typical furlough 80%). And with the government fundamentally backing the railways, it's unclear whether the unions would have agreed to that.

Any pay increase will eventually end up back in the treasury anyway. Income tax, NI, VAT, fuel duty and all the other plethora of taxes.

It's far from the case that all spending ends up returning in taxes. The total tax take of GDP is 26%, which gives somewhat of an idea (obviously individual circumstances will vary).

For instance, if people use their pay increase to afford higher petrol and energy prices, a lot of that will be going into the coffers of Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries (and the companies that are involved along the process, such as refineries).

Or they may decide to increase their savings or pay off debts, which with increased interest rates and uncertainty is an attractive prospect.

Southeastern High Speed is operating between Ashford Ebbsfleet and St Pancras on Strike Days at what seems like a fairly reasonable frequency. But the last train leaves London at 1730 I gather. Obviously HS1 is a little different to the other routes as it’s not operated by conventional signalling or by Network Rail & the drivers will mostly be in ASLEF.

Now I may be mistaken but I had been led to believe the onboard staff were not allowed to be in a union, although that may be incorrect. Presumably the early shut down is to stop everyone overcrowding the trains?

I have to accompany someone to medical appointment in Great Portland Street on Tuesday morning so am hoping that HS1 is operating because it’s going to cost a pretty penny!

As with several other third party linea, HS1 is signalled and maintained by Network Rail, even though the infrastructure (or strictly speaking, the concession) is owned by a private consortium.

So on strike days, it will only be open between 07:30 and 18:30. In order to get trains back to the depot and off NR-signalled metals by 18:30 that means last departures need to be somewhere around 17:00.

They are still productive and have full diagrams of work.

They might still have full diagrams but there is an awful lot of passing required with the current Thameslink structure and the lack of cross-cover means that everything goes to pot at the slightest hint of disruption. In some ways the expansion of routes probably made it unavoidable but it's not an optimal position in the long term.

Obviously the DfT (and Treasury) knows the price of everything and the value of nothing, so would rather avoid the short term expense of expanding route knowledge than get the benefit of resilience during disruption.

 

[ar10642]

Me too, but that wasn’t the question.

The answer is no. Nobody should be prevented from getting a payrise or getting taxed extra. It would just make things even worse.

Exactly what I said when the wfh was being talked about and how (predominately) London office workers were getting a defacto pay rise for not having to actually ’go’ to work.
If a job can be done at home then it can be done anywhere (in the world)

I'm not really seeing that in job ads for me. London jobs are still paying a lot more than local ones in Sussex despite being mostly remote. Most of them still require you to go into the office once a week or something.

 

[Bluejays]

The same advice applies as in any job though, if you aren’t happy find a new job!

A comment that says a lot about you.

 

[Watershed]

A comment that says a lot about you.

I think you'll find it's very much what the majority of the general public would think.

It seems a peculiarity unique to the railway bubble that some people feel entitled to a job they enjoy for life. Whilst that would be lovely, it's just not realistic in the world we live in.

Things change and if you don't like your job, the easiest answer 9 times out of 10 is to find another one.

 

[D1537]

Why does that matter? A failed English or Maths GCSE can prevent entry to a college. Just one missed day during exam season is needed to cause that!

Not that it's the point, but Maths and English GCSEs are all finished. There are only a handful of mainstream GCSE exams after Monday, notably History (Tuesday) and Physics (Thursday).

There is a Maths A-Level paper on Tuesday, but it's an afternoon exam so shouldn't be hit by morning travel delays.

 

[ar10642]

A comment that says a lot about you.

Does it? I'd say it's what the vast majority think.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Does it? I'd say it's what the vast majority think.

More than likely. A 'job for life' seems an antiquated concept to many people.

 

[windingroad]

A comment that says a lot about you.

I think that poster clarified that they were fully supportive of railway workers getting a fair deal and the strikes, so they weren't necessarily coming at this from a "if you don't like it, leave" perspective.

 

[Cdd89]

The same advice applies as in any job though, if you aren’t happy find a new job!

While this is definitely true for those who don’t enjoy the work, I’m not sure I think it should be true for reasonable disputes over pay, in skilled roles on the railway.

If the railway paid ‘market rate’ (and unions magically didn’t exist) such that there was a revolving door of staff, you would have issues with wasted training costs, expensive or disruptive errors being made due to the lack of historical knowledge, and lack of interest in training up new colleagues because you know they’ll probably be gone in a few months.

 

[Dryce]

If the railway paid ‘market rate’ (and unions magically didn’t exist) such that there was a revolving door of staff, you would have issues with wasted training costs, expensive or disruptive errors being made due to the lack of historical knowledge, and lack of interest in training up new colleagues because you know they’ll probably be gone in a few months.

Alternatively if you have a very static employment environment with incumbents in a taxpayer subsidised industry with little in the way of competition in some parts then you might wonder if there is very very low staff turnover in some positions that there isn't a problem of protectionist incumbency.

 

[dan5324]

The utter tosh that’s typed on here. From actual railway workers. It’s really no surprise the vast majority take the car. I dare say these strikes will just increase share to the car and even less will use rail.

 

[Kipperthecat]

Both sides are digging in for a protracted dispute.Great.

Just to inform them ,but modernisation is and always has taken place. Migration of signalling into ROC's, use of PLPR train, contactless payment on LU etc. all reduce number of staff required.

Shapps said on Sunday that 2700 staff had already taken voluntary redundancy (this scheme was only open to managers ) and now he is after reducing the boots on the ground. Can I remind him of what happens when you lose experience : you end up with back of a fag packet estimations (like how much it would cost to 'wire' the GWR) or timetable chaos (2018) because you had inexperienced planners at Milton Keynes.

The RMT could have picked any of the above issues to ballot over , but didn't. Too busy with internal issues ? Mick Lynch stands down as RMT AGS amid allegations … . How do the staff you didn't feel worthy of a ballot to save their jobs feel ? And don't even get me started on the double standards of the union's stance on DOO !

Totally unimpressed by either side and we are caught in the middle.

The repercussions to call for strikes has already begun. People showing their true colours : attempting to book leave on strike days etc. That and worse have already been happening & we haven't had a day off yet. Reap what you sow. After this is all over, it will be the staff and management that will have to deal with the animosity which will come & where will be Shapps & Lynch then ?

 

[NewSouthgate]

I don’t know why people on here keep lambasting Grant Shapps as no one in that big building beside the Thames which is currently being renovated at a humongous cost has any idea as to what percentage would or should be given to settle the issue. The rep from the Labour shadow cabinet has just been interviewed on BBC breakfast and when asked even for a ball park percentage said she could not answer that question. It would be good if someone in that building could give a straight answer to a straight question I don’t expect this whole debacle to finish anytime quickly.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

The answer is no. Nobody should be prevented from getting a payrise or getting taxed extra. It would just make things even worse.

I'm not really seeing that in job ads for me. London jobs are still paying a lot more than local ones in Sussex despite being mostly remote. Most of them still require you to go into the office once a week or something.

And the cost of living in Sussex is considerably higher than say Lancashire.

 

[The Planner]

Both sides are digging in for a protracted dispute.Great.

Just to inform them ,but modernisation is and always has taken place. Migration of signalling into ROC's, use of PLPR train, contactless payment on LU etc. all reduce number of staff required.

Shapps said on Sunday that 2700 staff had already taken voluntary redundancy (this scheme was only open to managers ) and now he is after reducing the boots on the ground. Can I remind him of what happens when you lose experience : you end up with back of a fag packet estimations (like how much it would cost to 'wire' the GWR) or timetable chaos (2018) because you had inexperienced planners at Milton Keynes.

The RMT could have picked any of the above issues to ballot over , but didn't. Too busy with internal issues ? Mick Lynch stands down as RMT AGS amid allegations … . How do the staff you didn't feel worthy of a ballot to save their jobs feel ? And don't even get me started on the double standards of the union's stance on DOO !

Totally unimpressed by either side and we are caught in the middle.

The repercussions to call for strikes has already begun. People showing their true colours : attempting to book leave on strike days etc. That and worse have already been happening & we haven't had a day off yet. Reap what you sow. After this is all over, it will be the staff and management that will have to deal with the animosity which will come & where will be Shapps & Lynch then ?

2018 is often blamed on the planners, but plenty of experienced people were saying it wouldn't work but weren't listened to.

 

[HuggyB87]

If I was a betting man... the strikes will be called off in what the media will call "an 11th hour" agreement

 

[Dan G]

Can anyone point me towards a *detailed* explainer of what this dispute is about please?

I've scoured the RMT website and get the gist -- paltry pay award, T&Cs attack, "pension raid", job cuts + and apparently Network Rail maintenance hour reductions -- but it's all in emotive language with no calm, clear detail. E.g. what actually are the T&C attacks? What changes to pensions are being proposed? As a veteran of many public pension changes, I want to know the details, the numbers.

I'd love to know the facts of the issues. The pay side I get and support -- staff absolutely deserve at least 7%. I'd like to know more about the rest so I can form an opinion about that too.

 

[KM1991]

Who's to say the working from home trend will continue like this forever? I'm not sure how anyone can saw with 100% certainty traveling patterns have changed forever.

It's a convenient line to produce when your plan is to absolutely decimate the railway though.

It’s a load of nonsense too. Anyone that works with trains or travels/commutes will tell you trains are back to being ram packed again.

Helps their agenda though like you said.

 

[CFRAIL]

If I was a betting man... the strikes will be called off in what the media will call "an 11th hour" agreement

This is still my belief, but IMO it's cutting really fine now. That said I'm still relatively new to the industry so unsure if they've been called off this late in the past.

 

[HuggyB87]

It’s a load of nonsense too. Anyone that works with trains or travels/commutes will tell you trains are back to being ram packed again.

Helps their agenda though like you said.

Best way to measure this... look at station car parks.

Liverpool South Parkway... if you're not in before 9, you ain't getting a parking space.

 

[KM1991]

If I was a betting man... the strikes will be called off in what the media will call "an 11th hour" agreement

Sounds like we are creeping towards that territory, but I think the gap is just too big to sort out within the next 12 hours or so