Ongoing ASLEF overtime bans

[vikingdriver]

Does this affect route learning or training for trainee drivers, or just for trained drivers?

For us it will hit both with no instructors released for higher grade duties. If it continues like this it'll make training drivers for a new, much delayed fleet of trains a massive, probably impossible challenge for the company.

 

[irish_rail]

For us it will hit both with no instructors released for higher grade duties. If it continues like this it'll make training drivers for a new, much delayed fleet of trains a massive, probably impossible challenge for the company.

Same for GWR i believe. This could be pretty major if it carries on for several months in terms of losing drivers due to not being route or traction trained etc. But I guess the Dft probably haven't thought that far ahead.

 

[kw12]

For us it will hit both with no instructors released for higher grade duties. If it continues like this it'll make training drivers for a new, much delayed fleet of trains a massive, probably impossible challenge for the company.

The company might take the Merseyrail approach and cancel passenger trains specifically to release staff for training on the new trains.

 

[vikingdriver]

The company might take the Merseyrail approach and cancel passenger trains specifically to release staff for training on the new trains.

Quite possibly, though I imagine the course is solely weekday and our rosters obviously aren't, so requiring flexibility from staff in terms of moving days off or working overtime. We shall see though.

 

[Jericho]

In my view ASLEF have played an albeit poor hand badly here. It is patently clear that the DfT (aka the Treasury) have absolutely no interest whatsoever in even talking let alone settling as things currently stand and no amount of weekly rest day bans or strikes is going to change that. I'm not for one minute defending their behaviour - they are an absolute bunch of charlatans but we are where we are. You have to deal with the world as it is not how you would like it to be. ASLEF have a duty to their members to try and move things on and show unlike the government and RDG that they can behave like grown ups. Some people can afford to lose the money, others less so. They need to put the offer to their members (which should have been done in the first instance) and the inevitable resounding no will in my view put them in a stronger position going forward. It will also kill off the current line of attack. Will it suddenly lead to an improved offer? Probably not but it might at least lead to more talks which is more than what is happening at the moment. It can't be any worse than it is now. The current strategy is clearly not working so it needs to be changed.

 

[traintraining]

If the member vote costs ASLEF money then so be it, they need to be diplomatic and learn diplomacy ASLEF have to bite the bullet to get things moving doesnt matter if it costs them £20-30k for this vote, get a clear NO and then that opens doors to negotiations, absolute shambles of a government who are clueless… if they still resist talks then that will at least provide ASLEF a path on next steps.

If they want to sort this out it wouldn’t take long at all, i suspect the damage it is doing to the wider economy they will need to address the railways very soon possibly at PM level and make Sunak look like a hero for sorting things out.

ASLEF need to pressure their Labour MP friends to mention this dispute at PM questions in Parliament before they all sod off on Recess for Summer which is next week.

 

[Train_manager]

If the member vote costs ASLEF money then so be it, they need to be diplomatic and learn diplomacy ASLEF have to bite the bullet to get things moving doesnt matter if it costs them £20-30k for this vote, get a clear NO and then that opens doors to negotiations, absolute shambles of a government who are clueless… if they still resist talks then that will at least provide ASLEF a path on next steps.

If they want to sort this out it wouldn’t take long at all, i suspect the damage it is doing to the wider economy they will need to address the railways very soon possibly at PM level and make Sunak look like a hero for sorting things out.

ASLEF need to pressure their Labour MP friends to mention this dispute at PM questions in Parliament before they all sod off on Recess for Summer which is next week.

I disagree. No point in aslef wasting money on a vote. It would cost a lot more than 30k anyway. Proves nothing new.

Aslef members have voted for strike and action short of strike. May it continue!!!!

Tory government want there thatcher moment !!

 

[ainsworth74]

But there will be a new governemnt next year, one that will likely offer a reasonable sum with no strings attached, say 4 or 5 percent.

I hope there will be a new government too next year but I wouldn't be so confident that they'll just settle straight away with no strings attached. The mood music isn't exactly encouraging that they're going to be happy spending money full stop, let alone without getting something in return. Plus it's not like the DfT civil servants are going to change...

If we can find the money for the Army, prison officers etc , then we can find it for rail staff who by then will be 5 years without so much as any rise whatsoever in that period.

Though of course neither the armed forces nor prison officers can strike so they find themselves in a fairly unique position in that regard as they are even more vulnerable to exploitation by their employer than heavily unionised work forces or indeed non-unionised work forces! Generally speaking them I'm not sure it is a sensible tactic to compare oneself to either of those professions really. I suspect the average punter on the Clapham Omnibus given the choice between giving 5% to a member of the army (where the average salary is lower than that of a train driver) or 5% to a train driver is likely to opt for the army. And it is likely to be a choice (at least in terms of increases with no strings at all) with the state of UK finances following years of Tory misrule.

 

[Mag_seven]

Aslef members have voted for strike and action short of strike. May it continue!!!!

Tory government want there thatcher moment !!

I'm sure most fare paying passengers and indeed railway staff would rather see the dispute resolved than engaging in some sort of 1980s Thatcher vs the miners style battle!

 

[ainsworth74]

Tory government want there thatcher moment !!

Let's just hope that the Unions and their leaders aren't playing Scargill and the NUM to the Tories attempts at Thatcher...

 

[footprints]

I suspect the damage it is doing to the wider economy they will need to address the railways very soon possibly at PM level and make Sunak look like a hero for sorting things out.

The opposite is more likely the case. The unions have overplayed their trump card to such an extent that people are now well used to working round the disruption.

 

[Confused52]

It's a hybrid.
Arguably all the TOCs are in the private sector even if their ultimate owner is HMG, and may be refranchised out if DfT so decides.
But I would say NR and the OLR TOCs are now firmly in the public sector; most other TOCs remain private but with firm government control of their costs.
The TfW, Scotrail, Caledonian Sleeper, Merseyrail and TfL-controlled TOCs are in the public sector.
Freight and open access are definitely private sector, as are Roscos and manufacturers who employ railway staff.

Unlike central and local government staff, NHS, teachers, police etc, the railway is funded by a mix of customers (passenger and freight) and the taxpayer.

It isn't arguable. The decision is taken by the ONS and they decided that when TOCs took on ERMAs they became part of the public sector. They promised to review this when the contracts changed but following the introduction of National Rail Contracts they did not reverse that decision. The non-English and local authority controlled operators were already classed as public sector. Consequently all TOCs are public sector and not private sector from the perspective of national accounts, they are treated as a burden on the state when not making a profit.

Requiring efficiency savings and in particular that the Management of the undertakings are in control of the level of losses is absolutely essential. The dispute is about this issue in my view and whilst the union position is no change to T&Cs no resolution is possible since reducing the losses is something that any government would have to do. Making it party political is just from one side of the dispute, the problem is financial.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Point of clarification: freight and open access TOCs/HEx/Eurostar are not public sector (they did not get ERMAs).
And until the primary legislation changes, all TOC government contracts are temporary pending re-tendering to the private sector.
(We know it won't happen for the majority of TOCs).

I fully agree the dispute is really about the cost/subsidy level of the railway and the relative passenger/taxpayer support levels.

 

[Tomnick]

T

They need to put the offer to their members (which should have been done in the first instance) and the inevitable resounding no will in my view put them in a stronger position going forward.

Everyone involved in this dispute has either recently returned a strong mandate for continued action, or is currently in the process of balloting for same, all with this offer on the table. That's better than any vote on the offer directly – you wouldn't vote to continue action if you were happy to accept what's being offered, certainly.

 

[12LDA28C]

As I have said before, The Unions need to accept reality. There will be NO MORE MONEY whilst we have this government - no matter how long they extend the dispute. .

So Union members should roll over and accept a real-terms pay cut as well as large-scale attacks on their terms and conditions then yes? Would you?

 

[Watershed]

In my view ASLEF have played an albeit poor hand badly here. It is patently clear that the DfT (aka the Treasury) have absolutely no interest whatsoever in even talking let alone settling as things currently stand and no amount of weekly rest day bans or strikes is going to change that. I'm not for one minute defending their behaviour - they are an absolute bunch of charlatans but we are where we are. You have to deal with the world as it is not how you would like it to be. ASLEF have a duty to their members to try and move things on and show unlike the government and RDG that they can behave like grown ups. Some people can afford to lose the money, others less so. They need to put the offer to their members (which should have been done in the first instance) and the inevitable resounding no will in my view put them in a stronger position going forward. It will also kill off the current line of attack. Will it suddenly lead to an improved offer? Probably not but it might at least lead to more talks which is more than what is happening at the moment. It can't be any worse than it is now. The current strategy is clearly not working so it needs to be changed.

Agreed. The same with the RMT; people have got bored of the strikes by now.

 

[Jericho]

I'm not getting into a forum ping-pong on this. I've said my piece and we'll have to agree to disagree but a couple of closing thoughts. No one, least of all me, is suggesting that people 'roll over' and accept attacks on T's and C's. But the reality is continued action is not resulting even in talks let alone a revised offer and, as others have already said, people are just wearily accepting it now and adjusting their plans accordingly. So what's the plan? Where do we go from here? Just carry on doing the same thing over and over in the hope that something will change? Because it won't. It is very clear now that there will be no further talks until this derisory 'offer' is formally rejected by members in a vote but that isn't going to happen so its checkmate. Someone needs to make the first move to try and break the impasse. And anyone who thinks that on her first day in No11 Rachel Reeves is going to find £££'s down the back of the Treasury sofa to resolve it is utterly deluded. I'm out.

 

[Bantamzen]

So Union members should roll over and accept a real-terms pay cut as well as large-scale attacks on their terms and conditions then yes? Would you?

What choice is there at this stage? As things stand the government isn't shifting, the overtime ban probably isn't going to change anything in that respect. So if the union and members aren't prepared to accept what's on the table, its likely this dispute will run on for at least another 18 months until the GE. And if after what will have been 2 and a half years of ongoing disputes aren't resolved and the dispute remains in it's current state, who is to say an incoming Labour government are going to prioritise it over all the other issues? Certainly Labour haven't exactly committed themselves to change much around public sector deals to date, why would they want to do so with the rail industry? Basically holding on for the GE is a increasing risk now, come early 2025 there may be much less motivation for an incoming government to make instant changes.

The only other way is to escalate the dispute, i.e. increase the number of walkouts. But that risks creeping fatigue amongst members as pay packets start to take the hit. Maybe the government will fold, but frankly being dug in so very deep I think it would take something quite spectacular to drive them out. So the alternative risk is that the dispute simply falls apart, leaving the government where they are and with no dispute to resolve for Labour. Unions don't always get what they want, and it is always up to the top table to weigh up the risk when deadlocks occur, and give an honest appraisal to their membership.

 

[Richardr]

But there will be a new governemnt next year, one that will likely offer a reasonable sum with no strings attached, say 4 or 5 percent. One that is not so ideologically embedded in victorian times and practices. If we can find the money for the Army, prison officers etc , then we can find it for rail staff who by then will be 5 years without so much as any rise whatsoever in that period.

Just to clarify on this, the election has to be announced by 17 December 2024, which means that the election could be as late as the end of January 2025. We are still a year and a half away from that.

 

[harz99]

From my safely retired seat in Northern and GC land, my view is the lack of sensible action from the Unions has so severely compromised their position that they will never achieve a meaningful outcome for their members now involved in this dispute. Put simply, as others have said, each and every offer should have been put to the members to accept or reject, whilst holding an ongoing ban on all overtime, rest day working etc.

 

[irish_rail]

From my safely retired seat in Northern and GC land, my view is the lack of sensible action from the Unions has so severely compromised their position that they will never achieve a meaningful outcome for their members now involved in this dispute. Put simply, as others have said, each and every offer should have been put to the members to accept or reject, whilst holding an ongoing ban on all overtime, rest day working etc.

But there is zero point . The membership would never have accepted the ridiculous clauses the Daft insisted on placing on the offer. That was obvious. I haven't spoken to a single train driver who thinks we should accept the offers. Not one. So why waste everyone's time by putting it out to the membership?

I'm not getting into a forum ping-pong on this. I've said my piece and we'll have to agree to disagree but a couple of closing thoughts. No one, least of all me, is suggesting that people 'roll over' and accept attacks on T's and C's. But the reality is continued action is not resulting even in talks let alone a revised offer and, as others have already said, people are just wearily accepting it now and adjusting their plans accordingly. So what's the plan? Where do we go from here? Just carry on doing the same thing over and over in the hope that something will change? Because it won't. It is very clear now that there will be no further talks until this derisory 'offer' is formally rejected by members in a vote but that isn't going to happen so its checkmate. Someone needs to make the first move to try and break the impasse. And anyone who thinks that on her first day in No11 Rachel Reeves is going to find £££'s down the back of the Treasury sofa to resolve it is utterly deluded. I'm out.

Well we are at stalemate then. So its the economy and GDP who are suffering now. Well if the Government think that's a recipe to be relected in 2024 , good luck to them......

 

[class 9]

From my safely retired seat in Northern and GC land, my view is the lack of sensible action from the Unions has so severely compromised their position that they will never achieve a meaningful outcome for their members now involved in this dispute. Put simply, as others have said, each and every offer should have been put to the members to accept or reject, whilst holding an ongoing ban on all overtime, rest day working etc.

But that isn't how ASLEF works, the offer is considered by the Executive Committee, they decide whether its worth putting out to the members, the last offer definitely wasn't.
This was confirmed a short time later when the 6 month re ballot returned an overwhelming vote to continue industrial action.
I do agree with you about no RDW agreements & no non contractual O/T, I'd go a step further and get all Instructors and assessor's to return to just driving, thus halting training.

 

[Robertj21a]

What choice is there at this stage? As things stand the government isn't shifting, the overtime ban probably isn't going to change anything in that respect. So if the union and members aren't prepared to accept what's on the table, its likely this dispute will run on for at least another 18 months until the GE. And if after what will have been 2 and a half years of ongoing disputes aren't resolved and the dispute remains in it's current state, who is to say an incoming Labour government are going to prioritise it over all the other issues? Certainly Labour haven't exactly committed themselves to change much around public sector deals to date, why would they want to do so with the rail industry? Basically holding on for the GE is a increasing risk now, come early 2025 there may be much less motivation for an incoming government to make instant changes.

The only other way is to escalate the dispute, i.e. increase the number of walkouts. But that risks creeping fatigue amongst members as pay packets start to take the hit. Maybe the government will fold, but frankly being dug in so very deep I think it would take something quite spectacular to drive them out. So the alternative risk is that the dispute simply falls apart, leaving the government where they are and with no dispute to resolve for Labour. Unions don't always get what they want, and it is always up to the top table to weigh up the risk when deadlocks occur, and give an honest appraisal to their membership.

Rail staff continually overlook the simple fact that only a small % of the country use trains, so any dispute isn't really going to bother the government - it's nothing like the impact of the various NHS staff, or teachers.
With a GE in apx 15-18 months this will just be allowed to drag on - whatever any Union tries. Personally, I doubt that Labour will do much different as the much bigger problem is inflation.

 

[Carlisle]

I'd go a step further and get all Instructors and assessor's to return to just driving, thus halting training.

If it emerges training’s entirely dependent on rather flimsy union agreements that are very easily withdrawn, wouldn’t it make a strong case for more stringent legislation. Were striking teachers & lecturers ever threatening to halt exams & education entirely ? .

 

[class 9]

If it emerged all training depended on rather flimsy union agreements that are very very easily withdrawn, that’d make the case for more stringent legislation. Were striking teachers & lecturers ever threatening to halt exams & education entirely ? .

Can't really compare teachers/lecturers to the railway, as a school year can't be extended. Any staff in Driver training, their training would just stop, it would restart as soon as agreement was reached.
Also legislation wouldn't be applicable here as at most companies instructors/ assessors are regular Drivers when not doing the higher grade duties, they couldn't be forced to do it.

 

[baz962]

If it emerges training’s entirely dependent on rather flimsy union agreements that are very easily withdrawn, wouldn’t it make a strong case for more stringent legislation. Were striking teachers & lecturers ever threatening to halt exams & education entirely ? .

Totally Different . Driver instructors are regular drivers that volunteer to do it in return for extra pay . As the other response to you by someone mentioned it's a higher grade duty and so isn't paid in the salary , but is a regular monthly payment on top . If you decide to step down you can and as train driving can suffer from distraction a driver can refuse to have anyone in the cab . There are some people you can't really refuse , such as a driver manager doing an assessment etc . Can't be made to take a trainee or even a qualified driver or the company managing director.

 

[Train_manager]

Also legislation wouldn't be applicable here as at most companies instructors/ assessors are regular Drivers when not doing the higher grade duties, they couldn't be forced to do it.

Indeed and at some toc/foc there is no extra paid.

And at some it's only 2/3k extra PA. So after 42% tax and ni, you don't do it for the money. Some companies only pay the extra when you have a trainee with you.

 

[dk1]

DIs at our depot receive 5% whether training anyone or not. There is some age old agreement that it can be taken away should you not have any instructing duties for six months but as far as I am aware that has never been enforced.

 

[12LDA28C]

If it emerges training’s entirely dependent on rather flimsy union agreements that are very easily withdrawn, wouldn’t it make a strong case for more stringent legislation. Were striking teachers & lecturers ever threatening to halt exams & education entirely ? .

Surely the only 'strong case' made in that case would be for TOCs to be allowed to recruit enough drivers so that they don't have to rely on overtime and RDW to run the service and any training that needs to be carried out. Certainly non anti-strike legislation if that's what you're referring to.

 

[RailExplorer]

Apologies to piggyback onto this thread but I can’t see the info regarding the MTR Elizabeth Line pay deal anywhere.

The members appear to have voted roughly 75% in favour of a recent pay offer. Rumours suggest it’s because they know it’s poor but they want a deal rather than a never ending battle. EL is already fully DOO.

Pay award due 1st April 2023, but as a one off bonus, the pay award will commence 1st January 2023. The pay increase is 5%. Last year the pay award was 8%.

In addition to the pay element, T&C changes include movement on the weekly sheet will drop from 3 hours currently to 2 hours going forward. There will also be a productivity bonus paid quarterly by a day in lieu or paid yearly in monetary terms.

There are some other bits and pieces involving instructors and company paid leave for babies born before their due date.