ASLEF accept (subject to members agreement) 5% Scotrail Pay Offer

[Siggy1980s]

Yes - I don't happen to know the ins and outs of driving but have spoken with many over my time, and it just doesn't strike me as the normal signaller-driver communication protocol.

You're correct, it's not normal.

 

[320320]

Yep, but there's plenty of opportunities to maximise your capacity. Such as being stood at a signal at danger, DRA on, direction selector to neutral. Any trainer, in any industry, worth their salt, will recognise the capacity of their trainee and encourage them to use resources available to execute their job in an efficient and productive manner.

This isn’t maximising capacity, it’s absolute basic train handling and rule book material. Attempting to teach trainees to think outside the box is setting them up for incidents by encouraging them to worry about outside factors. They gain situational awareness through experience when Their minds not focussed on train handling and route learning.

Yes, because SG will not call the route for your respective signal you are waiting to clear in the station. TRTS in an ARS area initiates the Signalling System to pull off in time for your departure.

So if the signaller is busy doing something 20 miles away in his Workstation, and you press SG, you are not forced to get the signal, especially as most signallers just press wait through force of habit on a busy Workstation.

Why though would the driver be pressing the TRTS? Is that not the guards job or station staff as part of their duties?

Thanks, I didn’t realise they had different effects.

I work DOO trains, we have TRTS on yard departure signals, departing sidings and nearly all stations where we begin a service Minus a couple where we have dispatchers.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Another problem for any govt is to stop unnecessary burdens on social services and keep tax revenues up so paying decent wages across the board can have positive economic effects as well as the obvious downside of inflation.

I’m not sure management on the railways push down on the workers and collect rewards any more, except for the most senior ones who are still on bonuses/share options. Most managers (some of whom really aren’t managing anything but a job title - they are really supervisors/clerks) will in the same boat as the workers. There will be the ones who try and make a name for themselves but there have always been those idiots around!

If I was the Scottish Government, I would be going hard for greater VI in the railways north of the border to rake in the savings to justify a better deal for the staff. The unions could play a public part in this too.

For sure moving to more VI is where the opportunity is but not in Scotland's direct gift currently. The other issue is that will cost jobs and the unions want a no compulsory redundancy agreement so realising those benefits would only come after potentially more disputes.

No easy answers.

 

[driverd]

I’m a few years (and two TOCs) in. I’ve known many instructors, mentors and managers over the years. I don’t know a single one who would generally call the signaller to question routes in the way described upthread. It’s difficult to describe but you know when something doesn’t quite add up…

Perhaps I didn't describe one of the examples quite well enough - as I say, it's difficult to give the full picture without specific details. In any case, another member basically described exactly the same situation as me and in their case it was absolutely fine? Slightly confused!

You're correct, it's not normal.

I'd agree it's not routine, it's just an example of an occasion where a small and brief intervention made the system run a little more effectively. It's what we're all here for, ultimately.

This isn’t maximising capacity, it’s absolute basic train handling and rule book material. Attempting to teach trainees to think outside the box is setting them up for incidents by encouraging them to worry about outside factors. They gain situational awareness through experience when Their minds not focussed on train handling and route learning.

Again I think you're missing what I said. When the train is stationary, having a moment to think about situational awareness is exactly an example of route learning and understanding the environment the train is operating in.

 

[Siggy1980s]

This isn’t maximising capacity, it’s absolute basic train handling and rule book material. Attempting to teach trainees to think outside the box is setting them up for incidents by encouraging them to worry about outside factors. They gain situational awareness through experience when Their minds not focussed on train handling and route learning.



Thanks, I didn’t realise they had different effects.

I work DOO trains, we have TRTS on yard departure signals, departing sidings and nearly all stations where we begin a service Minus a couple where we have dispatchers.

Ahhh ok. GSMR and its functions, are not tied into the Signalling System, what so ever.

 

[320320]

Again I think you're missing what I said. When the train is stationary, having a moment to think about situational awareness is exactly an example of route learning and understanding the environment the train is operating in.

My apologies if you are indeed a driver but your opening post read like mills and boon for train enthusiasts and, IMO, seems like an odd take for a driver.

 

[380101]

If I was the Scottish Government, I would be going hard for greater VI in the railways north of the border to rake in the savings to justify a better deal for the staff. The unions could play a public part in this to.

The 4 rail unions produced a joint paper "A vision for Scotland's Railways" last Autumn which set out in great detail how a sustainable and green, publicly owned railway in Scotland could be achieved. It was well recieved by many MSPs of all parties, yet the Scottish government and Transport Scotland have so far chosen to ignore it.

 

[DG85]

Could you explain this a little further please. I don't understand how you would negotiate with the Signaller ?

Cheers in advance.

And then do as you are instructed. I can’t ever recall meeting somewhere in the middle lol.

Or knowing a driver who is willing to pay the highest bid to get moving first lol

 

[skyhigh]

Equally, at a given junction, I know there is a stopping service that's due to come in about 7 behind the (delayed express) I was working. The stopper is meant to follow the express for circa 30 miles. On the day I was around 12 late, I rang the signaller well ahead of the junction to ask about who was getting the road first, discussed how much time I could sensibly make back in the next 10 miles etc.

Did you bring your train to a stand out of course to make this call, or did you make the call to the signaller on the move?

 

[DorkingMain]

Should non-railway staff, and pensioners, already having no choice but to accept massive real terms pay cuts due to below-inflation pay or pension rises, also have to pay higher rates of tax on top, in order to give a few select employees inflation-linked pay rises ? Because the money has to come from somewhere.

The money doesn't have to come directly out of people's pockets?

We found billions to give businesses COVID loans, and pay people to do nothing for the last two years. I refuse to believe this "robbing Peter to pay Paul" stuff - it sounds ideologically-driven rather than pragmatism

 

[Bantamzen]

The money doesn't have to come directly out of people's pockets?

We found billions to give businesses COVID loans, and pay people to do nothing for the last two years. I refuse to believe this "robbing Peter to pay Paul" stuff - it sounds ideologically-driven rather than pragmatism

Including £16 billion extra for the rail industry, meaning that most if not all employees did not have to be furloughed. However if you really believe that the vast amount of money used on covid measures come without consequences then you are in for a horrible shock.

 

[PaulMc7]

Including £16 billion extra for the rail industry, meaning that most if not all employees did not have to be furloughed. However if you really believe that the vast amount of money used on covid measures come without consequences then you are in for a horrible shock.

100% agree with this. Any public ran industry getting any sort of payrise will have huge consequences because of Covid and the rail industry had it better than most to be quite honest other than the freeze on training new drivers.

 

[dk1]

100% agree with this. Any public ran industry getting any sort of payrise will have huge consequences because of Covid and the rail industry had it better than most to be quite honest other than the freeze on training new drivers.

Driver training continued as normal at my TOC.

 

[43066]

Including £16 billion extra for the rail industry, meaning that most if not all employees did not have to be furloughed. However if you really believe that the vast amount of money used on covid measures come without consequences then you are in for a horrible shock.

And if you really believe that £16 billion was some kind of gift to railway staff you have another thing coming. As I’ve said before there are various options - borrow a bit more or claw some of the misspent furlough cash back. It’s a tiny drop in the ocean compared to what has been spent.

100% agree with this. Any public ran industry getting any sort of payrise will have huge consequences because of Covid and the rail industry had it better than most to be quite honest other than the freeze on training new drivers.

That doesn’t apply to the NHS apparently….

I simply couldn’t care less what happened in other industries, my job continued much as normal throughout.

 

[kylemore]

I don’t want to take the thread off topic but arguably that does reflect the way the railway is priced these days, yes. Certainly the long distance bit of it. Witness the thread currently running about Avanti West Coast being for wealthier people. The consensus seems to be that they feel they can fill the trains selling high priced tickets so have removed a lot of the discounting that took place previously.

(Again, I’m not commenting on whether I personally think that’s right or proper.)

And if Avanti West Coast can do that without subsidy then that's up to them and good luck to them.

However the infrastructure is publicly owned and financed and should not be provided on a protected basis to Avanti - it should be wide open to any open access outfit that can provide a service relevant to people on ordinary incomes.

Back to the pay question, again I don't blame the drivers holding out for 9%, in reality with inflation at a similar level it merely allows them to stand still. And does the driver's wages really make up a large proportion of overall costs thus affecting ticket prices? It's a genuine question - I don't know. As an amateur I would have thought access and power/fuel charges would be far more important and have much more influence on ticket prices.

 

[Bantamzen]

And if you really believe that £16 billion was some kind of gift to railway staff you have another thing coming.

No it wasn't a gift, but it did keep most rail workers, including yourself from potentially being furloughed. Talking of which....

As I’ve said before there are various options - borrow a bit more or claw some of the misspent furlough cash back. It’s a tiny drop in the ocean compared to what has been spent.

So let me just clarify, you want people forced out of work, often with a 20% cut in their income to pay for your wage rise? People who mostly earn far less than you, and suffered way more than you could ever imagine.

And you wonder why support for industrial action on the railways is not forthcoming....

 

[Falcon1200]

Get in touch with your trade union representative if you are unhappy with not getting a payrise.

None RMT members, to be brutally honest, are not the RMTs concern.

Actually I am a railway pensioner, so while I am grateful for the around 3% rise in my pension this year, the monthly amount is less than half the monthly increase in my energy bill alone, before any other price rises; But there is not a thing I can do to get a bigger rise, I just have to accept the situation.

Of course non-RMT members are not the RMT, or its members' concern, equally then RMT member's pay is not the concern of (and therefore duty to pay for ?) everybody else, who are mostly unfortunate enough to have less industrial muscle.

The money doesn't have to come directly out of people's pockets?

So where will it come from ?

We found billions to give businesses COVID loans, and pay people to do nothing for the last two years.

Which in any logical universe means there should now be less, not more, money available to spend today.

 

[Watershed]

Which in any logical universe means there should now be less, not more, money available to spend today.

Indeed. It's like saying "I was able to afford a luxury holiday to the Carribbean, so I can afford to get my house extended." Even if you can borrow enough to do both, it's going to result in a lot of pain down the line.

 

[43066]

No it wasn't a gift, but it did keep most rail workers, including yourself from being furloughed. Talking of which....

Also not something the staff had any control over…

So let me just clarify, you want people forced out of work, often with a 20% cut in their income to pay for your wage rise? People who mostly earn far less than you, and suffered way more than you could ever imagine.

You can spare me the righteous indignation. It won’t wash.

It’s taxpayers and fare-payers generally who foot the bill. I’m a taxpayer myself, I was forced to keep working to pay for the furloughed and was given absolutely no choice in the matter - so why not? The taxpayer is also paying for rises for the NHS so apparently they can afford that?!

I was also raised to believe that it’s wrong to rely on state handouts, yet we saw furlough continuing at a time when many businesses had reopened and there were staff shortages - people were also free to go and find other work while furloughed but clearly many were enjoying living on handouts paid for by those of us still working…

I will never accept there’s no money to reward railway staff while-ever the government was able to afford to pay people to sit idle.

 

[GLC]

And if you really believe that £16 billion was some kind of gift to railway staff you have another thing coming. As I’ve said before there are various options - borrow a bit more or claw some of the misspent furlough cash back. It’s a tiny drop in the ocean compared to what has been spent.

As this is concerning Scotrail, The Scottish Government is legally obliged to operate a balanced budget, and can only borrow money to fund capital expenditure, not opex. It has no power to borrow more to fund pay increases such as this. The money would have to come from an increase in taxation revenue(which as was published yesterday, is already £200 million short), or decrease in spending elsewhere

 

[43066]

Actually I am a railway pensioner, so while I am grateful for the around 3% rise in my pension this year, the monthly amount is less than half the monthly increase in my energy bill alone, before any other price rises; But there is not a thing I can do to get a bigger rise, I just have to accept the situation.

As a railway pensioner you must have benefitted from many of the same rises throughout your working life that you’re now complaining about others receiving. You’ve also presumably paid your mortgage off and aren’t raising a young family, unlike many rail staff who are suffering through the same cost of living crisis you are, only with a smaller % increase in their income than you’re getting…

So maybe stop to consider that before lecturing others?

 

[Bantamzen]

Also not something the staff had any control over…

Also something the furloughed workers had no control over...

You can spare me the righteous indignation. It won’t wash.

Well its not you that is making the decision on your pay rise, it is politicians. So it matters not one jot that it doesn't wash with you.

It’s taxpayers and fare-payers generally who foot the bill. I’m a taxpayer myself, I was forced to keep working to pay for the furloughed and was given absolutely no choice in the matter - so why not? The taxpayer is also paying for rises for the NHS so apparently they can afford that?!

Erm, you do realise that the furloughed staff are also taxpayers and they still had to pay their taxes right? What were you saying about righteous indignation?

I was also raised to believe that it’s wrong to rely on state handouts, yet we saw furlough continuing at a time when many businesses had reopened and there were staff shortages.

Can you cite some examples where furlough was applied when it should not have?

I will never accept there’s no money to reward railway staff while-ever the government was able to afford to pay people to sit idle.

But here's the thing, the government couldn't afford it. That's why we are starting to see huge cuts in public sector services. Don't you get it yet? The government is desperately trying to claw back money, not borrow / print more of it for railway workers. But don't take my word for it, just sit back and watch what happens.

 

[Atishyou]

So let me just clarify, you want people forced out of work, often with a 20% cut in their income to pay for your wage rise? People who mostly earn far less than you, and suffered way more than you could ever imagine.

And you wonder why support for industrial action on the railways is not forthcoming....

I don't think 43066 said that at all.

Is your suggestion that because drivers earn a good wage, they shouldn't get pay rises until those "who mostly earn far less" get the same?

It's not a race to the bottom. People should be paid to be able to afford to live (not just survive, but live).

As 43066 has said, many people were furloughed, I personally know quite a few people who received furlough money, then went and earnt more money elsewhere. They didn't return the furlough money, they kept both. They earn more than me and pay far less tax (self employed, not everything declared etc).

 

[43066]

Also something the furloughed workers had no control over...

Were they not allowed to find other jobs while furloughed, then?

Well its not you that is making the decision on your pay rise, it is politicians. So it matters not one jot that it doesn't wash with you.

Well we shall see about that won’t we….

Erm, you do realise that the furloughed staff are also taxpayers and they still had to pay their taxes right? What were you saying about righteous indignation?

Erm, I think you’ll find furlough was a form of taxable state benefit. So furlough claimants were tax payers in the same way as people who go down the job centre and sign on...

Can you cite some examples where furlough was applied when it should not have?

How about most examples of where it was received? I didn’t really agree with it as a policy in the first place and it was clear it went on far too long. Or are you denying that the government continued the scheme at a time when other industries were struggling to recruit?

But here's the thing, the government couldn't afford it. That's why we are starting to see huge cuts in public sector services. Don't you get it yet? The government is desperately trying to claw back money, not borrow / print more of it for railway workers. But don't take my word for it, just sit back and watch what happens.

I which case I’ll have to consider carefully what to do when the ballot paper comes round…

Is your suggestion that because drivers earn a good wage, they shouldn't get pay rises until those "who mostly earn far less" get the same?

I suspect that’s the real issue here, as with most of these threads. Railstaff earnings generally caused a lot of outrage on here long before covid!

 

[Falcon1200]

As a railway pensioner you must have benefitted from many of the same rises throughout your working life that you’re now complaining about others receiving.

Indeed I did, and as a Union member for my entire 38-year railway career I contributed as much as anyone to achieving those rises.

So maybe stop to consider that before lecturing others?

I was making what I thought was a reasonable point that whatever pay rise is achieved does have to be paid for someone; As I am sure I have said before I do not begrudge rail staff (or indeed others) a pay rise, and the 4.2% offered to Scotrail Drivers seemed to me a reasonable compromise between the cost of living crisis (affecting us all) and affordability. That is simply my opinion, not a 'lecture'.

You’ve also presumably paid your mortgage off and aren’t raising a young family, unlike many rail staff who are suffering through the same cost of living crisis you are, only with a smaller % increase in their income than you’re getting…

You presume, on the basis of practically no knowledge whatsoever, to know a lot about my living arrangements and financial situation, so please do not lecture me.

 

[43066]

They didn't return the furlough money, they kept both. They earn more than me and pay far less tax (self employed, not everything declared etc).

And we also now know that £5bn in fraudulent claims for self employed support is being filed in the “too difficult” pile and written off - around 1/3 of the entire railway support figure!

 

[Goldfish62]

The money doesn't have to come directly out of people's pockets?

We found billions to give businesses COVID loans, and pay people to do nothing for the last two years. I refuse to believe this "robbing Peter to pay Paul" stuff - it sounds ideologically-driven rather than pragmatism

Yes, but looking at it in pure economic terms a loan is a loan - it has to be repaid. And furlough was a one-off payment. A salary increase is in a completely different league. It's neither a loan that has to be repaid nor a one - off payment. It's hardwired in as a compounded increase year-on-year.

So of course any government or company is always going to be much happier handing out a loan or one-off payment. That's just basic economic fact.

 

[Bantamzen]

I don't think 43066 said that at all.

Its exactly what he said. In order to claw back some of the furlough money you would have to get it back from those who received it.

Is your suggestion that because drivers earn a good wage, they shouldn't get pay rises until those "who mostly earn far less" get the same?

No.

It's not a race to the bottom. People should be paid to be able to afford to live (not just survive, but live).

No it isn't, but railway workers do not exist in a bubble. They have to live with the reality that the government is now looking to claw back vast amounts of money it wasted, and disputes like this are ripe for their picking. There will be consequences if a dispute becomes long running.

As 43066 has said, many people were furloughed, I personally know quite a few people who received furlough money, then went and earnt more money elsewhere. They didn't return the furlough money, they kept both. They earn more than me and pay far less tax (self employed, not everything declared etc).

There's no doubt that there was indeed some fraud, and those people should be brought to account. But even if they were, there is still a far larger deficit to tackle which means in hard terms if your salary is funded publicly, you can not expect to be given massively larger pay rises than any other area of public service. This is a reality that some on these forums have yet to grasp. We'd all love, maybe even need a 10-11% pay rise but it simply is not going to happen. The Scotrail offer is actually not a bad one when compared to elsewhere.

 

[ComUtoR]

. The Scotrail offer is actually not a bad one when compared to elsewhere.

What's currently on the table ? Yes there is the headline 4.2% but what about the productivity improvements, what's the minute ?

I'd interested to hear what those who the deal will affect have to say. As they are the ones to determine if it's good or not.

 

[43066]

Indeed I did, and as a Union member for my entire 38-year railway career I contributed as much as anyone to achieving those rises.

In which case it seems a little odd that, having retired, you’re now coming in to bat against the position of the unions that you’ve personally benefited from.

I was making what I thought was a reasonable point that whatever pay rise is achieved does have to be paid for someone; As I am sure I have said before I do not begrudge rail staff (or indeed others) a pay rise, and the 4.2% offered to Scotrail Drivers seemed to me a reasonable compromise between the cost of living crisis (affecting us all) and affordability. That is simply my opinion, not a 'lecture'.

Every pay rise, including your 3% pension increase, has to be paid for by *someone* so it isn’t really a valid objection - unless you’re in favour of no pay rises ever for anyone.

You presume, on the basis of practically no knowledge whatsoever, to know a lot about my living arrangements and financial situation, so please do not lecture me.

I don’t know your situation but I would observe that I’ve worked with people above pension age who cannot afford to retire at all and have had to continue working.

You’re also telling Scotrail workers that they should be happy with 4.2% (a substantial real terms pay cut), without knowledge of their circumstances, are you not?

Someone has said upthread that there were some unpalatable strings attached so it might well be there are other good reasons for rejecting.

Yes, but looking at it in pure economic terms a loan is a loan - it has to be repaid. And furlough was a one-off payment. A salary increase is in a completely different league. It's neither a loan that has to be repaid nor a one - off payment. It's hardwired in as a compounded increase year-on-year.

That’s true but of course the cost in future years is rapidly eroded by inflation, especially when it’s as high as it is currently.

The compounding effect also works the other way. If we stand still in pay at a time of high inflation the real terms loss we suffer will become baked in and would require years of above inflation pay rises to recoup.