Fire & Rehire for railway jobs, especially Train Drivers.

[theironroad]

With British Airways and British Gas proposing to fire and rehire many of their employees on inferior contracts, what is the general opinion on whether this could become widespread and reach the railways?

If as seems likely, the government will have almost complete control of railway franchises or whatever their new guise, and the Exchequer funding the railways, will they try to push some nuclear buttons or just want some peace and quiet and leave the staffing side of the railways, especially drivers and guards, untouched?

If you were offered a fire and rehire with inferior t & c, inferior salary (e.g. a 30% salary cut) and pension changes would you accept it or walk away?

 

[Starmill]

There with need to be a serious cost cutting exercise which so far almost the entire industry seems to be in denial about. There are far, far better ways to do it than this, though.

The Department could easily require it from the 14 companies they're in control of. The contractors would really have no say in the matter other than their choice to walk away.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Two words.

General strike.

 

[Starmill]

Two words.

General strike.

Do you really think people would go on strike in solidarity with train drivers? It doesn't seem likely to me, even for people from public services.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Do you really think people would go on strike in solidarity with train drivers? It doesn't seem likely to me, even for people from public services.

Nope, but every driver in the country will. Good luck running any sort of service when every driver is on strike. Good luck replacing us, with all of us on strike, no one to train those who'd follow behind

 

[Starmill]

Oh so you mean a driver's strike rather than a general strike. Yes I'm sure that would be the outcome.

 

[43066]

With British Airways and British Gas proposing to fire and rehire many of their employees on inferior contracts, what is the general opinion on whether this could become widespread and reach the railways?

If as seems likely, the government will have almost complete control of railway franchises or whatever their new guise, and the Exchequer funding the railways, will they try to push some nuclear buttons or just want some peace and quiet and leave the staffing side of the railways, especially drivers and guards, untouched?

If you were offered a fire and rehire with inferior t & c, inferior salary (e.g. a 30% salary cut) and pension changes would you accept it or walk away?

I suppose I’d have no option but to accept it, in the short term, but would most probably leave the industry in the medium term.

As a more general point, I can’t see there being any political appetite for the absolute chaos that this would cause: it would lead to all our war between the government/TOCs and ASLEF.

Let’s face it the DOO disputes in recent years have shown the carnage, and enormous expense, that results from major industrial unrest. So much so that the government rowed back. These schemes haven’t even been successful in reducing costs where the DfT has succeeded in forcing it through!

That said, we do need to be seeing more passengers returning to the network, ASAP. The current operation is clearly unsustainable in the long term given the low ridership.

 

[Economist]

There's 10 different train companies currently recruiting drivers as of a few days ago, that's not far off half of the network. Since a lot of companies rely on overtime due to the cost of training/hiring more drivers, if there was a long-term reduction in services the first thing to go would be overtime and only then would they consider getting rid of drivers.

Freight has made redundancies in recent years but I don't recall of any franchised passenger operation having done so. About a year back, a specific depot at a passenger company had lost a lot of work that drivers there had done on behalf of another company. Even though the union at the company has a reputation for weakness, they totally refused to even consider redundancies and the drivers were allowed, if they wished, to go to another depot of their choice. One or two plum depots in the company became full pretty quickly. Believe it or not, I heard reports recently that the depot was now short of drivers.

I'm not saying that redundancies won't happen, they might, just that there would have to be a serious long-term change to the industry before that happened.

First the overtime would go.
Secondly, a long-term goal of ASLEF has been a 32-hour week, they would probably try and find a way to get that through before any redundancies.
Thirdly, if ASLEF didn't strike at the prospect of redundancies, they would probably negotiate for a lot of near-retirement people to get offered a good payoff which would be taken up (bear in mind a few numbers are due to have massive numbers of retirements in a couple of years).
Only then would I guess that compulsory redundancies would be required.

 

[185]

Fire & Rehire... Never happen. Gates of hell for the railway.

What could happen, if the nation went into financial dire straits is a major renegotion with the unions of all railway grades' (very bottom to very top) payscales to ensure the sustainablility of the railway, but I would assume the first industry assessment prior to this occuring would be an assessment of non-operationally-critical ancillary grades ie- performance management, social community media executives, implementation of change directors, HR Business Partners (on 'market rate' £75k), ie all the ones from the random job title generator. One (brutal) facebook post from a colleague last year was "so, you get paid over 65 grand to buy flower baskets for rail enthusiasts volunterring as station adopters...". It wasn't entirely the case as am sure he does quite a bit more than that, but I do agree it shouldn't warrant a salary of that amount.

If the uniformed staff are to take a cut, those in the back in rather well paid tertiary roles should face the same cut, prior to any change.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Secondly, a long-term goal of ASLEF has been a 32-hour week, they would probably try and find a way to get that through before any redundancies.

I suspect ASLEF didn't mean with a pro-rata pay reduction, though that may be a way to do it less controversially than "do the same job for less money".

That said I'm not sure it's necessary. What probably will be needed is a reduction in staffing, though, to something like 7 * the number of people required for a Saturday service, as commuting is likely to never return in its old form. This can probably be done by "natural wastage".

The other elephant in the room is DOO and whether the Government will try to force that. I would see it more likely than any "fire and rehire".

I also don't entirely understand how "fire and rehire" is legal, as it's not redundancy - the job is still needed - redundancy requires either a role to be being abolished or the number of those roles reduced (i.e. you don't need the job doing any more). You can sometimes do it with office work by changing the role substantially (one common way is likely to be a change from "office based X" to "home based X", where people might see home based as worthy of a lower salary as you can live in a cheaper town and not pay to commute), but a train driver drives trains and a pilot flies planes, and I'm not sure how you can argue that that has changed simply by changing the rosters and the likes.

 

[Starmill]

As I keep cautioning: current working practice shouldn't be used as a guide to future decisions. At the moment the railway is in suspended animation, continuing to go through all of the same motions as if it were still operating in the economy that existed this time last year, which is entirely down to the fleet of foot the Secretary of State showed in bouncing the Treasury into making an enormous amount of public money available to do that. It will not last. The question is simply how much needs saving, whether it's more radical or more measured.

redundancy requires either a role to be being abolished or the number of those roles reduced (i.e. you don't need the job doing any more)

It's much more nuanced than this. Legal protection from redundancy is very weak, as long as the employer runs the consultation for the defined period of time, pays the contractual (and legal minimum) amounts, gives the minimum agreed notice, and doesn't engage in any unlawful discrimination.

 

[Sammy2019]

My knowledge of this is limited. But surely freight is in a much better position as the economy gradually gets back to normal.

the passenger side surely is in worse shape as people opt to work from home but I imagine there will be government funding available.

 

[DA1]

What happens with the TOC’s who have already catered for the previous high demand by getting new rolling stock and sourcing extra rolling stock?

 

[Economist]

In the short-term, they will need to make plenty of carriages available for some level of social distancing to be maintained. If anything, I'd say the danger territory is potentially when the social distancing doesn't need to be maintained but a lot of the companies with offices in big cities realise that the staff are more productive at home. The entire mentality of presenteeism is going to be ditched, I imagine the commuter TOCs will be affected the most.

Cross Country and Avanti both have large numbers of retirements coming up, plus being intercity operators, I'd say they're better placed. If office workers commute less, then they'll live further from the cities (better value hsouing-wise, especially if commuting from the north to London) but will still need to be in the office on occasion for certain events, so I wouldn't be surprised if their traffic picked up a bit. They might have a bit more domestic holiday traffic too, after all you can walk around a bit more than on a plane.

If we get to a stage where lots of redundancies look likely (hopefully we won't), I do wonder how they'd decide it. I believe LIFO has been subject to legal challenges before, so would they factor in people's SoL record and sickness. I still think reduced hours would be a far better option, it makes it much easier to scale up driver supply should it be need to meet demand and sadly I can see plenty of drivers who have maxed-out mortgages and flash cars snapping any RDW up.

Edited to add: If there was an out-and-out fire and re-hire attempt, there would be a massive amount of industrial action. The government/civil service said that they massively underestimated the amount of upheaval caused by the Southern strike, I doubt they'll do the same this time. No wonder SWR drivers got a very financially lucrative deal to accept DCO despite the Pigs, Sprinters and (possibly) Desiros not being able to accommodate in-cab monitors.

 

[43066]

I also don't entirely understand how "fire and rehire" is legal, as it's not redundancy - the job is still needed - redundancy requires either a role to be being abolished or the number of those roles reduced (i.e. you don't need the job doing any more). You can sometimes do it with office work by changing the role substantially (one common way is likely to be a change from "office based X" to "home based X", where people might see home based as worthy of a lower salary as you can live in a cheaper town and not pay to commute), but a train driver drives trains and a pilot flies planes, and I'm not sure how you can argue that that has changed simply by changing the rosters and the likes.

Essentially it’s legally permissible to make the entire workforce redundant, in light of fewer roles being available, and rehire a %. There is case law requiring a measure of fairness/objectivity in deciding which employees are rehired, so mirroring a traditional redundancy consultation in that respect.

The chances of it happening on the railway are minimal (much as certain other posters on this thread salivate at the prospect of rail staff being sacked ).

Establishment levels are run very close to the bone - my place has had to offer overtime to cover the work, throughout the pandemic. So even if the required work levels dropped off a cliff, that could be weathered simply by no longer offering rest days.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the short-term, they will need to make plenty of carriages available for some level of social distancing to be maintained. If anything, I'd say the danger territory is potentially when the social distancing doesn't need to be maintained but a lot of the companies with offices in big cities realise that the staff are more productive at home. The entire mentality of presenteeism is going to be ditched, I imagine the commuter TOCs will be affected the most.

They will - it will save them a packet. Peak commuter capacity is really expensive to provide (as you have units and staff that basically just do two return trips per day), an all day Saturday type service much cheaper.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Edited to add: If there was an out-and-out fire and re-hire attempt, there would be a massive amount of industrial action. The government/civil service said that they massively underestimated the amount of upheaval caused by the Southern strike, I doubt they'll do the same this time. No wonder SWR drivers got a very financially lucrative deal to accept DCO despite the Pigs, Sprinters and (possibly) Desiros not being able to accommodate in-cab monitors.

I suspect we'll see the Pigs scrapped, there'll likely be enough 444s to provide maybe a train an hour from Pompey as some doubling up won't be needed any more.

 

[cactustwirly]

Two words.

General strike.

Really popular with the public, especially when people are loosing jobs left right and centre. Train drivers already get paid too much.

 

[PupCuff]

Fire & Rehire... Never happen. Gates of hell for the railway.

What could happen, if the nation went into financial dire straits is a major renegotion with the unions of all railway grades' (very bottom to very top) payscales to ensure the sustainablility of the railway, but I would assume the first industry assessment prior to this occuring would be an assessment of non-operationally-critical ancillary grades ie- performance management, social community media executives, implementation of change directors, HR Business Partners (on 'market rate' £75k), ie all the ones from the random job title generator. One (brutal) facebook post from a colleague last year was "so, you get paid over 65 grand to buy flower baskets for rail enthusiasts volunterring as station adopters...". It wasn't entirely the case as am sure he does quite a bit more than that, but I do agree it shouldn't warrant a salary of that amount.

If the uniformed staff are to take a cut, those in the back in rather well paid tertiary roles should face the same cut, prior to any change.

The problem is, often Management and Support grades are easy targets for cost cutting. You can get away with cutting management and support grades numbers if the jobs you are replacing the old ones with are filled with skilled people who have a high standard of industry knowledge - in many cases, this is unfortunately lacking. Often, you'll find that the reason there are more staff (you use the example of HR Business Partners and those involved in change management) is because the local managers (like Customer Experience Managers who manage conductors or Driver Managers) aren't trained to a high enough level to deal with such matters, and the cost to train them - and salary increases to retain them - would actually cost more than employing a couple of specialists to support them in that area.

If across the business you have 30 Customer Experience Managers and a similar number of Driver Managers, with a fair turnover (perhaps say 3 a year of each), is it cheaper - both financially and in time away from the business - to train them all to manage performance, safety, HR, stakeholder liaison/community relations, or is it cheaper to provide them collectively with the support of a Performance Specialist, a Safety Officer, a HR Business Partner and a Community Relations Manager who are all already trained specialists in their area? I couldn't say how it works in different industries (aviation, logistics etc) but I'd be very surprised if their management teams didn't include such specialist staff on industry standard rates.

If you start paying those specialists less than the market rate they will simply leave for a different employer. If you lump a load of additional responsibilities on the local managers and then cut their pay, they're likely to do the same. The plus side of the whole 'free market' is that as a better paying and better 'quality' employer you can attract the best candidates away from other less well paying and lower quality companies. The downside of the free market is that other companies can up their offer and do the same to you, too.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Really popular with the public, especially when people are loosing jobs left right and centre. Train drivers already get paid too much.

So you expect me to roll over and take whatever raid on my pay, conditions, pension, leave, etc they want? Sorry but it's not going to happen.

We have to stop this race to the bottom. A culture of jealousy. Just because our terms are better than others, we're fair game for it.

Not. Going. To. Happen.

The entire driver grade will go on strike. Not even this Tory government has the stomach for that

 

[43066]

We have to stop this race to the bottom. A culture of jealousy. Just because our terms are better than others, we're fair game for it.

Plenty of that in the UK, sadly. People would far rather see others made worse off, than better themselves.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Plenty of that in the UK, sadly. People would far rather see others made worse off, than better themselves.

It's a real shame. Part of the rampant "I'm alright Jack" culture in the UK at the moment.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

They will - it will save them a packet. Peak commuter capacity is really expensive to provide (as you have units and staff that basically just do two return trips per day), an all day Saturday type service much cheaper.

You keep going on about this - BUT - unless social distancing is entirely scrapped and you can load trains to a the loading standards they used to be (a target of 135% for sliding door stock on commuter runs - zilch for I/city) - you will need to continue to provide capacity at "safe" standards for the forseeable time.

Certain Thameslink trains are +50% seated already in the peaks , a good number of key inwards Euston AC trains are similar - (these by the way are quantified figures) - week on week peak loadings are growing - even by my qualitatiative views of dropping someone off for the 0708 or 0713. Station passenger footfall is growing. People are being encouraged to go back to the office / workplace. This is going to be monitored for a while yet.

In any case -most rollling stock fleets are on relatively long leases for now - and the incentive is "pro-tem" to provide sufficient capacity in a differing capacity metric world. In any case - the railway will continue to be aware of "cost peak" trains - which are unlikely in my opinion to be taken out.

 

[notadriver]

I think a lot of jealousy comes from the people born in the 90s and millennials who are struggling to hold onto any job. They see the older generation with their well paid jobs as their number 1 enemy.

 

[Economist]

They will - it will save them a packet. Peak commuter capacity is really expensive to provide (as you have units and staff that basically just do two return trips per day), an all day Saturday type service much cheaper.

We're on permanent Saturdays at my place and there's still uncovered turns, there's loads coming through the training school and they're trying to recruit qualified drivers as I speak.

Plenty of that in the UK, sadly. People would far rather see others made worse off, than better themselves.

It always gets on my goat when people complain about train driver pay. I was a bit envious myself, however I did something about it, there's plenty of people who moan but few have the gumption to take the leap.

Then you have people saying "train drivers get loads of money for doing nothing and our soldiers get peanuts for risking their lives" without realising there's probably enough ex-military train drivers for an armed forces club at most depots. Loads of ex-coppers too, though the media (and by extension, the public) seem to have a bit of a bipolar relationship with those, they're heroes one minute and villains the next.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You keep going on about this - BUT - unless social distancing is entirely scrapped and you can load trains to a the loading standards they used to be (a target of 135% for sliding door stock on commuter runs - zilch for I/city) - you will need to continue to provide capacity at "safe" standards for the forseeable time.

Yes, very true. But social distancing isn't going to go on forever, and once people can be crammed in again considerable money can be saved by a reduction in the "peakiness" of travel. It'd also affect the Friday/Sunday peaks on IC services out of London - you won't be living in London and going up north for the weekend if you're mostly WFH, you'll be living up north!

I genuinely think that by the middle to end of next year, an all week Saturday service (potentially even including Sundays, so the same service every day of the week) with a very limited amount of peak strengthening (if any) is likely to be viable. People will still be travelling, but fewer, at varying times and more for leisure than business.

Of course, the fact that this to some extent will happen over time would allow it to be done by reducing overtime to nothing (which could do with happening anyway; the base service really should be coverable within contracted hours in any business, railway or no; overtime is for exceptions) and then natural wastage. So with regard to the thread title, no I don't think this will happen. The one grade I think should worry is Guards if the Government still have a feeling towards DOO, though I seem to recall Southern OBSs are paid more than their guards were and there are more of them than there were guards, so as long as they don't mind the different role that might not be all bad for them.

I think a lot of jealousy comes from the people born in the 90s and millennials who are struggling to hold onto any job. They see the older generation with their well paid jobs as their number 1 enemy.

Nothing stopping a millennial (which is basically someone born in the 80s, roughly - it's about coming of age in the 2000s, not being born then) getting a job on the railway if they wish. Plenty of millennials work on the railways in all sorts of roles. It's not a preserve of GenX and older!

 

[DB]

The entire driver grade will go on strike. Not even this Tory government has the stomach for that

Not at the moment, but if the passengers don't return in enough numbers when the government wants them to, and they have to very heavily subsidise the railways, then I don't think it could be ruled out.

 

[NoMorePacers]

The one grade I think should worry is Guards if the Government still have a feeling towards DOO, though I seem to recall Southern OBSs are paid more than their guards were and there are more of them than there were guards, so as long as they don't mind the different role that might not be all bad for them.

The agreement for the Southern OBSs only lasts until the end of the current GTR franchise (October 2021), right? Although I appreciate this is veering off course a little.

 

[cactustwirly]

So you expect me to roll over and take whatever raid on my pay, conditions, pension, leave, etc they want? Sorry but it's not going to happen.

We have to stop this race to the bottom. A culture of jealousy. Just because our terms are better than others, we're fair game for it.

Not. Going. To. Happen.

The entire driver grade will go on strike. Not even this Tory government has the stomach for that

Yeah if your overinflated salary is being bankrolled by the taxpayer, at a time when the economy has shrunk 25%. It's clearly not sustainable.

I work in the private sector, my company simply cannot afford to pay wages like that, if they did many many good hard working people would be out of a job to afford it.
I don't think many rail employees appreciate how lucky they really are, they have total job security.

I think they will take a paycut, because drivers etc can't quite as there aren't many other jobs to go to, the ones that are available don't pay anywhere near as much as the rail industry pays.

 

[notadriver]

Yeah if your overinflated salary is being bankrolled by the taxpayer, at a time when the economy has shrunk 25%. It's clearly not sustainable.

What salary level would you consider to not be overinflated ?