Government minimum levels of service laws

[Pinza-C55]

It's a shame but it looks like, as a country, we need to wean ourselves off railways. There was a great boom for 20 years until Covid when UK rail usage grew to be on a par with most of Europe. But we now have to go back to the days of car dependence and trying to live without trains. Unless we can get minimum levels of service to work.

You seem to be missing the fact that both Tories and Labour are committed to the net zero carbon emissions agenda which intends to abolish the manufacture of petrol driven cars in the very near future so whatever the next government they are going to make it increasingly difficult for all except the rich to drive a car.

 

[the sniper]

Incidentally, reading the press coverage, I find it odd that I and my colleagues find ourselves in the same band of indispensability as fire and ambulance crews and ahead of health and education workers, border force and other transport workers. I can only understand that the lines have been drawn thus for political rather than practical reasons.

You'd think being considered 'indispensable' would come with some sort of benefit, guarantees or status, instead it seems to be used by the Tories as a stick to beat people with.

 

[johncrossley]

You seem to be missing the fact that both Tories and Labour are committed to the net zero carbon emissions agenda which intends to abolish the manufacture of petrol driven cars in the very near future so whatever the next government they are going to make it increasingly difficult for all except the rich to drive a car.

That is mainly going to be achieved by removing carbon emissions from electricity production and powering cars using electricity. New petrol cars will no longer be sold after 2030. The environmental argument for public transport is now dead.

 

[yorkie]

Minimum service levels also open a can of worms for the TOCs (/Government). If an "essential" service level is required on strike days, then it should also be provided during engineering work and other long term disruption (e.g. Carlisle bridge) - or by definition it isn't "essential".

A line near me is currently being operated by buses (again). Does this mean that a bus replacement service is sufficient on this line on strike days?

If it was somehow not possible to operate trains, then a bus replacement is certainly a lot better than leaving people unable to travel at all.

That's an interesting insight into your thought process, I can understand how you could consider the governments Covid restrictions, and industrial action on public transport to be restricting peoples freedom of movement.

I'm not equating the two, but it seems absurd for you to suggest that an equivalence would be the other way round.

Similar really to how Brexit has lead to a removal of peoples freedom of movement around Europe.

I am not going to go down that road in a thread not dedicated to the subject.

Perhaps you can then understand how the government imposing restrictions and legislation during Covid removing peoples freedom of movement, could be compared to the government passing legislation which removes the right of workers to peacefully withdraw there labor in protest?

I am not sure what you are asking me to do; I've stated my view on the various matters in relevant threads. I do not think that these different concepts can be equated.

I do not agree with the idea that someone who is against laws restricting our freedom of movement should automatically be against a minimum level of service requirement, if that is what you are suggesting. That makes no logical sense to me.

This is also an interesting insight, perhaps it will be possible to discuss this in person with you at a future forum meet? It's been quite a while since I have attended one and it would be great to catch up, and demonstrate my freedom to be able to move around the country free from government interference,

If you are wanting to have a discussion in good faith then maybe, but based on the tone of your posts, and the bold claims you made earlier (which have not been substantiated) I am not convinced it would be productive.

obviously we'll also need to choose a day workers have not chosen to peacefully withdraw there labour, a freedom which they currently enjoy but the government appears to wish to remove.

If you are keen on the idea of people having freedom to move around the country, why are you so keen to avoid a minimum service level, which would leave some people (for example those who do not own cars) be unable to travel anywhere?

The concept of a minimum service level already exists in other countries; it is not a novel concept. One does not have to agree with every policy or law in any country in which such a law exists in order to agree with that one.

 

[O L Leigh]

That is mainly going to be achieved by removing carbon emissions from electricity production and powering cars using electricity. New petrol cars will no longer be sold after 2030. The environmental argument for public transport is now dead.

... but not the economic one.

I recently looked up the price to either buy or lease a battery electric car. It made me wince.

 

[class ep-09]

Hopefully the HR departments will deal with that.

How ?
Will they cone to measure my temperature and do the blood test ?
Besides - there is something like fatigue , where safety critical staff legally should not come to work if they have it .

Who will tell me if I am fatigued or not ?

 

[johncrossley]

... but not the economic one.

I recently looked up the price to either buy or lease a battery electric car. It made me wince.

You are talking about today's prices, not those in 2030. Even last year, 20% of new cars sold were electric as it works out cheaper for them because electricity is (still) cheaper than petrol.

 

[headshot119]

If you are wanting to have a discussion in good faith then maybe, but based on the tone of your posts, and the bold claims you made earlier (which have not been substantiated) I am not convinced it would be productive.

I think this is sometimes were text based communication has a downfall in that it can be hard to interpret social queues, and body language in text.

I'm sure a discussion at a meet would be most productive, even if we didn't totally, or in anyway agree on the matters under discussion.

I shall leave this part of the discussion now as I do feel we may be taking the thread a little off topic. In any case I look forward to being able to join yourself and others at a future forum meet.

 

[O L Leigh]

You are talking about today's prices, not those in 2030. Even last year, 20% of new cars sold were electric as it works out cheaper for them because electricity is (still) cheaper than petrol.

Pardon me, but you were talking in the present tense. As such, I considered my observations valid.

But as we're talking about yet another future unknown, it is not possible to be authoritative on this point. The price of electric cars should come down, but the barrier to car ownership is, and always will be, the initial cost of acquiring a vehicle, whatever fuel it uses. Not everyone will be fortunate enough to have that opportunity.

 

[Snapper37]

You are talking about today's prices, not those in 2030. Even last year, 20% of new cars sold were electric as it works out cheaper for them because electricity is (still) cheaper than petrol.

Company car tax has a big effect as well. 2% for full electric. Makes a £50k electric car cheaper than a £25k diesel.

 

[the sniper]

Will traffic not be a thing in 2030, with all these extra cars on the road...?

 

[O L Leigh]

Company car tax has a big effect as well. 2% for full electric. Makes a £50k electric car cheaper than a £25k diesel.

... assuming that you have a job which affords you this perk (and that the company car tax situation does not change in the next 7 years).

 

[Horizon22]

The issue really is deciding who forms the minimum staff - if you’ve got signaller A,B,C,D and guard X,Y,Z how are you going to tell one “yeah you have to come in, sorry” and not the others? Think that’s a fundamental problem.

Or is the governments answer to that “well that’s a Union problem, not ours.”?

It might be that minimal service levels look somewhat similar to what exists now on a strike day.

 

[johncrossley]

Will traffic not be a thing in 2030, with all these extra cars on the road...?

If the commute gets too painful then people will work from home, like they already do on Mondays and Fridays.

 

[PGAT]

That is mainly going to be achieved by removing carbon emissions from electricity production and powering cars using electricity. New petrol cars will no longer be sold after 2030. The environmental argument for public transport is now dead.

Electric cars don't solve climate change, or really any problem associated with cars but I think that's a discussion for another time.

 

[newtownmgr]

A number of European countries have a minimum service level requirement in place during industrial action. However none of them enforce it as it as proved unworkable in all formats. If they are basing this plan on that model, it will be unworkable in this country, especially with a much more fragmented railway.

 

[Egg Centric]

While I've some sympathy with the idea of a minimum service level for blue light services, these laws are a disgrace when it comes to something like rail. It simply isn't important enough. The right to withdraw your labour is a fundamental one. There are (if not an enthusiast) better alternatives to rail for almost all journies anyway.

This is not to say that the current situation is sensible... it's blindingly obvious the unions have too much power. Perhaps restrict them to only being able to negoticate pay/renumeration rather than job roles?

 

[O L Leigh]

If the commute gets too painful then people will work from home, like they already do on Mondays and Fridays.

... again, assuming that you have a job that permits you to do this and an employer that is happy for you to do so.

 

[yorkie]

A number of European countries have a minimum service level requirement in place during industrial action. However none of them enforce it as it as proved unworkable in all formats. If they are basing this plan on that model, it will be unworkable in this country, especially with a much more fragmented railway.

Is the following statement untrue:

Train Strikes in Italy | ItaliaRail

Find answers to frequently asked questions about what to do if there is a rail strike during your vacation in Italy.

www.italiarail.com

If your train is providing local transport during essential services for the peak times (from 06:00 to 09:00 and from 18:00 to 21:00 Mon-Sat) these will be guaranteed, even during a train strike. Some long-distance trains are also guaranteed on all days, including holidays.

I travelled in Italy during a strike and the minimum service was in place when I travelled, but if you have some evidence to the contrary, I am open to seeing it.

here are (if not an enthusiast) better alternatives to rail for almost all journies anyway.

I don't own a car, so there is rarely a better alternative to rail for me, if I am heading out of York itself, with only a few exceptions, for the places I want to go to.

In some cases there may be other viable alternatives (e.g. York to Leeds), but few would be better (there is an argument for Whitby, and even Selby, though that depends on what part of York you live in).

Of course, from where you live, and given you have a car, it's a very different situation to me.

I totally accept that people who can drive a car are going to be far less impacted by any strike action and indeed most of the population probably won't even notice if a strike is on or not.

 

[johncrossley]

Electric cars don't solve climate change, or really any problem associated with cars but I think that's a discussion for another time.

They solve climate change if the electricity generation doesn't generate carbon emissions. You have to have a car because you can't rely on the trains not being on strike. But you might be able to if minimum service is implemented.

 

[fishwomp]

Firstly, no such arrangements exist because the legislation has not yet made it onto the Statute. Secondly, I don’t think you’re right about the likely rate of take-up for folk volunteering to cover work in the event of industrial unrest.

The question was as to how it would work, of course it isn't on the statute book yet..

Absolutely the take up will be high, very high - but it will depend on the dispute. Let's think about this.

Currently:
RMT vs Network Rail - lack of signallers are shutting down the railway, but the dispute isn't about their situation and on this forum plenty of signallers have complained about RMT grouping them into this.
RMT vs TOCs - check out a random TOC (GWR) - https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/ballot-results/defend-jobs-pay-and-conditions-gwr161122/?preview=true - 30% did not vote, and even of those that did vote, 10% did not want to strike ('are you prepared to strike ' is the question)
ASLEF vs TOCs - would be surprised if there isn't a driver or two needing cash for something....

.. but in any event, the union will be _obliged_ to pick staff for the job, randomly or otherwise..

 

[O L Leigh]

This is not to say that the current situation is sensible... it's blindingly obvious the unions have too much power. Perhaps restrict them to only being able to negoticate pay/renumeration rather than job roles?

That doesn't sound terribly sensible either. Unions are far busier dealing with issues relating to job roles and other matters pertaining to our day-to-day work than they are with negotiating pay, and achieve an awful lot more than is visible from outside the industry.

 

[Pinza-C55]

That is mainly going to be achieved by removing carbon emissions from electricity production and powering cars using electricity. New petrol cars will no longer be sold after 2030. The environmental argument for public transport is now dead.

Electricity which you may have noticed is getting increasingly expensive and likely to get even more so. And once the government loses the fuel tax they will need another tax to replace it and are already rumoured to be looking at GPRS tracking to tax journeys. I don't own a car so it doesn't bother me but I wish you luck in whatever your future holds.

 

[johncrossley]

... again, assuming that you have a job that permits you to do this and an employer that is happy for you to do so.

As long as enough employers let their staff work from home, it doesn't matter if yours doesn't from the congestion point of view.

 

[PGAT]

They solve climate change if the electricity generation doesn't generate carbon emissions. You have to have a car because you can't rely on the trains.

That's not the issue. Battery technology isn't adequate yet, and they're also fire hazards and give off alot of emissions from the metal extraction and supplying process. And electric cars do nothing to solve the fact that cars are space inefficient and dangerous. Any competent government's objective should be to minimise car usage as much as possible and getting people onto the trains, not the other way around.

 

[johncrossley]

Any competent government's objective should be to minimise car usage as much as possible.

But you can't use trains if they are on strike.

 

[O L Leigh]

Absolutely the take up will be high, very high - but it will depend on the dispute. Let's think about this.

Currently:
RMT vs Network Rail - lack of signallers are shutting down the railway, but the dispute isn't about their situation and on this forum plenty of signallers have complained about RMT grouping them into this.
RMT vs TOCs - check out a random TOC (GWR) - https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/ballot-results/defend-jobs-pay-and-conditions-gwr161122/?preview=true - 30% did not vote, and even of those that did vote, 10% did not want to strike ('are you prepared to strike ' is the question)
ASLEF vs TOCs - would be surprised if there isn't a driver or two needing cash for something....

.. but in any event, the union will be _obliged_ to pick staff for the job, randomly or otherwise..

Well you're entitled to your opinion. I would just caution that maybe it would be erroneous to assume that the voting record indicates anything about staff willingness to volunteer to work in order to meet MSL quotas.

As for any obligation falling on the union to nominate staff, that will either be decided by the legislation (which is not set) or by agreement with the TOC when (if) any legislation is passed. At present, there is nothing to indicate how MSL quotas might be met.

But you can't use trains if they are on strike.

Last time I checked, the strikes were not running 24/7/365. I'm fairly sure that I've been out driving trains virtually every day.

 

[johncrossley]

Last time I checked, the strikes were not running 24/7/365. I'm fairly sure that I've been out driving trains virtually every day.

They are frequent enough to cause people to need a car nowadays. I used to be a huge advocate of trains but now I believe we need to put as much pressure as possible on the rail industry by using cars even when trains are running, so that we send a signal that we will not tolerate strikes any more. We need to kill the union argument that strikes don't matter because people will return to the trains anyway.

 

[dk1]

If the commute gets too painful then people will work from home, like they already do on Mondays and Fridays.

Which was happening many years before the pandemic. Fridays especially.

 

[PGAT]

What's most likely is that people who still travel by train at this point are probably also people who find it more convenient than travelling by car.