DfT in a Hurry on Rail Reform

[LowLevel]

Nah.

Technology payments have always existed at my TOC and will continue to do so.

If they want you to take on something extra, then staff will be compensated. It’s as simple as that.

I think the original point though was that not everyone shares the same view which I reckon the railway staff posting on this thread have ably demonstrated We all have different priorities. Mine is protecting our rolling rest day pattern and long weekends.

 

[KM1991]

I think the original point though was that not everyone shares the same view which I reckon the railway staff posting on this thread have ably demonstrated We all have different priorities. Mine is protecting our rolling rest day pattern and long weekends.

Thankfully, we now have a new government and hopefully one with a completely different approach to the Tories that did everything they could to try to destroy the railways (they failed! ) .

New pay deal with no fundamental changes to Ts & Cs is imminent.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Labour policy is to bring TOCs back into public ownership as their existing contracts expire. I'm not sure when the next one does, or whether they need to enact some legislation to achieve that, but if they do then the deadline is clear. They can then just fold them into Operator of Last Resort until they work out what to do next.

Legislation isn't needed for TOC contracts to revert to DOHL on expiry or for breach, but it is needed if they are to stay with in the public sector permanently.

I strongly suspect Peter Hendy has been quietly working behind the scenes with Labour.

Don’t forget that the Williams/Shapps proposals caused a furore with the Owning Groups because the DfT could still set the policy agenda for GBR on outsourcing franchises or not. That meant that a change of Government could easily wrap the franchises up into GBR, which is exactly what is going to happen. Hence the attempts to push it into the long grass.

Although the recent Green Paper tried to row back, in part, from those levers, most of the original legal intent remained intact and the new Government just need to take that and put back in the policy decision levers that Williams/Shapps envisaged, telling GBR that they either have to run the services themselves or devolve them to the likes of Metro Mayors.

It is widely regarded at Owning Group level that Shapps had a number done on him by his civil servants, who devised a potential legal framework that could work either for both Conservatives and Labour policy objectives and, as such, was a politically stupid Minister.

The Owning Groups had a particular perspective because of the threat to their long term interests but it is clear that in the wake of Williams-Shapps there were attempts to move decisions away from TOCs whilst leaving them contractually liable for the consequences, which was clearly never going to be acceptable. TOCs may be micro-managed but until reform/legislation, all commercial decisions need to go via them and the 'ATOC machinery'.

Nah.

Technology payments have always existed at my TOC and will continue to do so.

If they want you to take on something extra, then staff will be compensated. It’s as simple as that.

Extra work makes sense. But the same work just moving to new processes is difficult to justify unless there is a clear productivity dividend. A pragmatic approach by both sides is the most desirable approach.

 

[Bartsimho]

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

In pretty much all Industries it's called training. A training program is put on as part of either specialised new equipment or continuous training where the employee attends this program instead of the regular job and they are compensated with full pay for the hours on this training program

Nah.

Technology payments have always existed at my TOC and will continue to do so.

If they want you to take on something extra, then staff will be compensated. It’s as simple as that.

Sounds like a one way path to bankruptcy or a decision to let there be a high turnover if every new bit of training requires even more pay when it is usually to replace some old out of date training for an old piece of equipment being phased out

Thankfully, we now have a new government and hopefully one with a completely different approach to the Tories that did everything they could to try to destroy the railways (they failed! ) .

Probably only a slightly different approach. One of careful support not willing to overstretch or bend over backwards to the unions.

I sense a "The railway being run for the sake of the railway not the passenger" situation being seen very soon

 

[KM1991]

In pretty much all Industries it's called training. A training program is put on as part of either specialised new equipment or continuous training where the employee attends this program instead of the regular job and they are compensated with full pay for the hours on this training program


Sounds like a one way path to bankruptcy or a decision to let there be a high turnover if every new bit of training requires even more pay when it is usually to replace some old out of date training for an old piece of equipment being phased out


Probably only a slightly different approach. One of careful support not willing to overstretch or bend over backwards to the unions.

I sense a "The railway being run for the sake of the railway not the passenger" situation being seen very soon

Haha

“Over stretch or bend over backwards to the unions”

What does that even mean? Asking for wage rises that match inflation?

State of this country.

 

[Bartsimho]

Haha

“Over stretch or bend over backwards to the unions”

What does that even mean? Asking for wage rises that match inflation?

State of this country.

I guess it's always over what time period you are looking.

I did some research a while ago looking at Pay vs Inflation since 1975 so a long time scale that takes into account the rises due to Privatisation (from several companies competing for employees not just one monolithic one in control).

Employees benefitted from Privatisation on the pay front as there were now competing companies and not a singular company. I have found the weekly pay for a British Rail Driver in 1975 in Hansard https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1975/jun/18/pay-rates

This states from £41.65 to £53.10 now this might be crude but multiplying that by 52 gives £2165.80 to £2761.20 as the pay scale.

From what I can gather current pay varies by a large amount across the operators from a lowest of £30,000 to £70,000. https://www.reed.com/articles/train-driver-salary-benefits

Calculating inflation using the Bank of England Calculator gives that based on the 1975 wages rising only by inflation the current pay for Drivers would be £19,661.22 to £25,062.16.

Links are also present to the record in Hansard for 1975 pay, a recruitment site talking about pay per TOC and the Bank of England Inflation calculator which allowed conversion through decimalisation to the present day. I think we should always look over longer time scales because even if someone enters an industry after a big pay rise they are still a beneficiary from it. This is just for Drivers but the Hansard record also includes other professions.

 

[KM1991]

I guess it's always over what time period you are looking.

I did some research a while ago looking at Pay vs Inflation since 1975 so a long time scale that takes into account the rises due to Privatisation (from several companies competing for employees not just one monolithic one in control).

Employees benefitted from Privatisation on the pay front as there were now competing companies and not a singular company. I have found the weekly pay for a British Rail Driver in 1975 in Hansard https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1975/jun/18/pay-rates

This states from £41.65 to £53.10 now this might be crude but multiplying that by 52 gives £2165.80 to £2761.20 as the pay scale.

From what I can gather current pay varies by a large amount across the operators from a lowest of £30,000 to £70,000. https://www.reed.com/articles/train-driver-salary-benefits

Calculating inflation using the Bank of England Calculator gives that based on the 1975 wages rising only by inflation the current pay for Drivers would be £19,661.22 to £25,062.16.

Links are also present to the record in Hansard for 1975 pay, a recruitment site talking about pay per TOC and the Bank of England Inflation calculator which allowed conversion through decimalisation to the present day. I think we should always look over longer time scales because even if someone enters an industry after a big pay rise they are still a beneficiary from it. This is just for Drivers but the Hansard record also includes other professions.

Ok, so you have an issue with how much Train drivers are paid - It’s easier if you say that from the start next time…

Many other roles on the railway are on close to minimum wage, including Train Dispatchers for some TOCs, Catering staff, Gateline.

They need inflation matching pay rises.

 

[Bartsimho]

Ok, so you have an issue with how much Train drivers are paid - It’s easier if you say that from the start next time…

Many other roles on the railway are on close to minimum wage, including Train Dispatchers for some TOCs, Catering staff, Gateline.

They need inflation matching pay rises.

I was saying look at it over larger time scales rather than purely year on year. That is a 3 month old bit of research I did on one specific section but the idea of looking at longer timescales still holds

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

Working in IT we're expected to learn new things on a daily basis and I have never been compensated for it over and above my salary. Different circumstances I guess as not learning makes me obsolete and learning new tech makes me more valuable

 

[En]

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

on what basis ?

especially when it doesn't change the role fundamentally ...
if we are talking aobut a substantial recasting of a role due to new technology or equipment which leads to what in other circumstances would be dealt with as a 'at risk' and Redeplomynet scenario then there might some merit but if it;s changing from a ticket machine and a coin bag to a new ticket machine ,a card machine and a smaller coin pouch ...

Yes, training and update courses are part of a job, as long as get the time allocated within normal hours to do them shouldn't need any extra payment.

But staff shouldn't expect it for everything, Otherwise would still be using quills and ink pens, because no one allowed to write on a tablet computer. If you applied rule as you phrase it, then if they changed the style of handle on toilet door, and didn't offer training and compensation then no one would use it.

Time and Technology move on, and accepting change and modernisation is part of a career.

the toilet door comment reminds me of a story from 20 odd years ago to do with a volunteering organisation that had quite a entwined history with both the the railway and down t'pit
We'd recently re-equipped all the Divisions in the 'zone' ( an Area in reality, but a merger of previous Areas , when every pit and steelworks had their own divsion so each town in the district had their own Area) with new resuscitation kits, because we'd got something like 15 sets and had contacts in the trade we had custom made bags for those new kits ( organisation badging , some user friendly options double zips etc) , meanwhile the 'prototype' kit ( exact same packing list) had been brought in the first place by the University, Student unit and that being at the time a one off , was put in an off the shelf 'barrel' bag from a commerical supplier ... cutting to the chase I once had someone refuse to take the Protoype kit becasue ' they hadn;t been trained on it ' exact same packing list, exact same model of Oxygen regualtor , oxygen cylinder from the same pool from a major rental supplier ...

This is why some peopel , regarldess of their own beleis, membership and support of trades unions have a degree of cynicism aobut things like 'technology payments' doubly so when training has been delivered on company time ( whether by extraction from duty or by offering the training as overtime at premium rates)

 

[43096]

Of course unions deserve a pay rise etc.

Unions don’t deserve a pay rise. The staff may do, though.

 

[michael74]

How are the unions in the “1970s”?

Is it normal for some people on this forum to pretend to work on the railways?

Very much work on the railway.

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

It's a good job that this isn't true of other sectors, such as the NHS. It's an expectation that you keep yourself updated and learn new skills all the time, it's just a part of CPD and career development.

 

[Parham Wood]

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

A lot of workers in other professions have to undertake regular training to keep up to date and to pass exams in order to keep practicing and they get no extra money for doing this, just that they keep their job. I am not against a fair wage for a job but to want extra payment for every change is not realistic these days when a reasonable wage is paid and some would argue too high a wage for drivers in many situations.

 

[Djgr]

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

I find this comment astonishing. It shows how detached railway workers are from the real world.

 

[dk1]

I find this comment astonishing. It shows how detached railway workers are from the real world.

Don’t forget management side have agreed to all these demands. Us rail workers are only standing by what was agreed between them and their union. We both sides must adhere to our agreements whether we like them or not.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Do you have evidence to support that?

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/zg0nfp4p/passenger-rail-performance-cancellations-data-period-03-2024-25.pdf

 

[class ep-09]

I find this comment astonishing. It shows how detached railway workers are from the real world.

All of them?

If you think so, you are detached from reality …

 

[WAB]

Depends which bit of the real world. These things vary by industry. In previous non railway roles I received private health care, bonuses and a “car allowance”, despite not owning a car at the time and working in central London! none of these are offered to train crew. Tech payments are tiny in the scheme of things, so I’m surprised people are quite so exercised by them.

Yes, but this is used to justify all sorts of costs to the railway. They all need to be gotten under control.

Don’t forget management side have agreed to all these demands. Us rail workers are only standing by what was agreed between them and their union. We both sides must adhere to our agreements whether we like them or not.

Doesn't mean it is reasonable - railway managers are also in the bubble!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Staff should always be compensated for learning new things that come in after they joined the role.

Good lord - are you serious? I still learn stuff every week even at my age. It is part of the job and what makes it interesting.

 

[dk1]

Doesn't mean it is reasonable - railway managers are also in the bubble!

That’s just how it is. Last time I received anything was £300 for agreeing to accept a tablet for everything around five years ago. That’s saved the company money over and over again since in publications and ease of communication. Even do all driver instructing stuff on it ‘live’ these days.

 

[Falcon1200]

If they want you to take on something extra, then staff will be compensated. It’s as simple as that.

Again, why?

Tories that did everything they could to try to destroy the railways (they failed! ) .

Really; How many lines closed during their last time in power, 2010-2024? Whereas new ones opened!

Anyone who thinks that a Labour Government will lead to a Golden Age for rail where money is no object is ignoring the lessons of history.

 

[Djgr]

Good lord - are you serious? I still learn stuff every week even at my age. It is part of the job and what makes it interesting.

I think the current government will invest in the railways but only if this nonsense is stopped.

I can see ticket office closures and DOO back on the agenda because once all is nationalised money spent here is money that can't be spent on things such as education and health.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Really; How many lines closed during their last time in power, 2010-2024? Whereas new ones opened!

Anyone who thinks that a Labour Government will lead to a Golden Age for rail where money is no object is ignoring the lessons of history.

Exactly!

 

[43066]

I think the original point though was that not everyone shares the same view which I reckon the railway staff posting on this thread have ably demonstrated We all have different priorities. Mine is protecting our rolling rest day pattern and long weekends.

Completely agree the work life balance/lifestyle stuff is more important than tech payments. But equally we shouldn’t sell ourselves short.

Yes, but this is used to justify all sorts of costs to the railway. They all need to be gotten under control.

It’s a small one off payment which is recouped many times over by the technology being implemented. In @dk1 ’s example above that’s probably less than the value of one rest day shift, only paid once every few years when something is introduced.

Again, why?

Because it’s longstanding industry practice.

Same reason my airline captain mate gets five figures worth of flight pay each year, on top of his basic salary. Same reason I used to get a car allowance and I don’t on the railway.

In any case, it’s all negotiable. If we get rid of tech payments what will we get instead? Private health cover?

Anyone who thinks that a Labour Government will lead to a Golden Age for rail where money is no object is ignoring the lessons of history.

Nobody has said that. However the signs are the new government wants a reset and a more constructive relationship with the unions going forward, and recognises that that is the way to drive industry reform. Quibbling over tech payments, which are insignificant in the scheme of things, isn’t the way to achieve that.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Here's a prediction. Railways are brought completely under public ownership and control. More money will be thrown at the problem, unions will want want extra money for every tiny bit of change, some improvements will happen, funding will become unsustainable, fundamental issues like relying on overtime and rest day working to run a normal timetable will continue. Poor management and micromanaging from the DfT will stifle any meaningful change or positive collaboration with the unions, which they'll use as an opportunity to strike and take disruptive action short of striking to get more money. Somehow, someone needs to get everyone to collaborate not keep fighting each other. I doubt that will happen.

 

[railfan99]

However the signs are the new government wants a reset and a more constructive relationship with the unions going forward, and recognises that that is the way to drive industry reform.

How does any new Labour government struggling with public finances in an economy that's barely growing manage relations with union(s) whose leadership (and sometimes a majority of voting members) want above-inflation wage/salary increases?

Granting the latter is highly likely to stoke inflation that over time destroys individuals' savings (and has other adverse effects).

I assume unions provide a high percentage of Labour's funding. It's hard to say "no" when an organisation is beholden to a group.

One positive is despite the decline in business travel and strikes/train cancellations, passenger revenue is increasing, at least nominally. Passenger numbers are similarly pleasing notwithstanding debates about split ticketing and the Elizabeth Line.

Here's a prediction. Railways are brought completely under public ownership and control. More money will be thrown at the problem, unions will want want extra money for every tiny bit of change, some improvements will happen, funding will become unsustainable, fundamental issues like relying on overtime and rest day working to run a normal timetable will continue. Poor management and micromanaging from the DfT will stifle any meaningful change or positive collaboration with the unions, which they'll use as an opportunity to strike and take disruptive action short of striking to get more money. Somehow, someone needs to get everyone to collaborate not keep fighting each other. I doubt that will happen.

Are some of the civil servants in the DfT either railway enthusiasts or those with a deep professional passion to see the railways move forward and prosper?

Or are many of these public servants just staying in DfT for a few years then moving on to another department or agency?

 

[AverageJoe]

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/zg0nfp4p/passenger-rail-performance-cancellations-data-period-03-2024-25.pdf

But that’s only referring to P coding.
When I stand on a platform I’m constantly hearing last minute cancellations due to this that or the other which won’t end up in that table, so as for overall cancellations is doesn’t give the full story.

I’d also say TPE were one of the more favourable looking scores on that chart.

 

[class26]

I think the current government will invest in the railways but only if this nonsense is stopped.

I can see ticket office closures and DOO back on the agenda because once all is nationalised money spent here is money that can't be spent on things such as education and health.

They will have to or they will not reach net zero targets/ Forcing people back into cars is hardly envorimentally friendly

 

[scrapy]

Often the tech payments are for employees time, not simply for accepting the technology. For example those with phones and tablets are responsible for ensuring they are charged every day at home. The minute or so each day maybe going and plugging them in, adds up over 200 days a year.

Employees are also generally expected to familiarise themselves with them in their own time and sort out any technical problems in their own time. It's rare that anytime is given within the working day for such tasks.

 

[KNN]

They will have to or they will not reach net zero targets/ Forcing people back into cars is hardly envorimentally friendly

It seems unlikely that they'd go through an overhaul and leave the massively varied terms and conditions as they are. Certainly not for new employees.

Also, as others have said, I can see why a union would fight to keep it, but in 2024 the idea of a technology payment is untenable.