Pay dispute at London Underground

[winks]

https://www.itv.com/news/london/2024-01-08/sadiq-khan-offers-30m-to-stop-tube-strike

The move prompted drivers union Aslef to demand a pay rise of 12% "It means negotiations start afresh and as there is more money on the table we now want our original claim for an RPI plus pay rise of around 12%+ and a cut in working hours to be met in full," said Aslef's Finn Brennan.

You can’t make this up!

12% ? Are they insane?

 

[popeter45]

are we now stuck with both the unions striking whenever the other get a better deal?

 

[winks]

The Mayor gets criticised either way. He’s wrong if he doesn’t negotiate and finds additional money to fund an improved offer. If he does negotiate all hell breaks loose between the Unions and the Tories come out and say he’s in the pocket of the Unions. All Mayors suffer the same fate sadly

The RMT are now saying they want the £30m to fund one-off bonuses for tube staff of up to £5,000.

Aslef drivers now demand 12% rise after £30million found to avert RMT strikes

Aslef, which represents the majority of Tube drivers, says mayor has 'found the magic money tree and our members expect to share the fruit'

www.standard.co.uk

The RMT indicated that the £30m – which is worth about £1,800 per Tube worker – would not be used to increase the headline offer of five per cent. Instead, it wants the lowest-paid Tube staff to receive a “lump sum” pay rise of up to £5,000 and for pay bands to be unfrozen.

Oh dear !

 

[baza585]

Back to square one it seems.

Worse than that. Khan appears to have managed to reopen a settled dispute in the act of trying to negotiate another. He's normally quite adept at navigating these issues but this seems like an own goal to me.

Probably advised by his deputy mayor for Transport......

 

[43066]

You can’t make this up!

I think 12% was their original demand (ie an initial negotiating position), and they then quite reasonably recommended the 5% offer, on the basis that they’d been told in good faith (or so they thought) that no more was on the table. That clearly wasn’t entirely accurate, so I can see their point, and it doesn’t seem unreasonable to want to revisit negotiations in view of the evident change in TfL’s position.

The Mayor gets criticised either way. He’s wrong if he doesn’t negotiate and finds additional money to fund an improved offer. If he does negotiate all hell breaks loose between the Unions and the Tories come out and say he’s in the pocket of the Unions. All Mayors suffer the same fate sadly

The RMT are now saying they want the £30m to fund one-off bonuses for tube staff of up to £5,000.

Aslef drivers now demand 12% rise after £30million found to avert RMT strikes

Aslef, which represents the majority of Tube drivers, says mayor has 'found the magic money tree and our members expect to share the fruit'

www.standard.co.uk

Oh dear !

No surprise there. Deflection and demonisation of scapegoats has become their modus operandi; everything is someone else’s fault, whether that’s the Mayor of London, immigrants, unions, and absolutely nothing to do with the party who’ve been running the country for almost the last decade and a half!

I’m not a particular fan of Khan, nor the London mayoralty in general, but he’s making a better fist of his remit than the current government is; he at least stands a fighting chance of winning the next election he faces!

 

[bramling]

Quite! I didn't realise the title had changed to be honest. Indeed, if anything, it has re-opened the dispute in the eyes of ASLEF. From what I'm hearing in the mess room today, their members are saying they been deceived by the Company when TfL said there was no more money after the original 5% offer, and the ASLEF members seemed furious.

It's all mess room gossip though, so I'm not sure what the ASLEF hierarchy are thinking of doing.

The choice of wording “full & final” was very poor, and reflects upon the general inexperience, perhaps naivety, of the current LU senior management.

As the offer clearly wasn’t “full & final” (what does full even mean in this context?), it’s quite reasonable that staff will feel they were deceived.

I’m not sure this saga is over yet.

I think 12% was their original demand (ie an initial negotiating position), and they then quite reasonably recommended the 5% offer, on the basis that they’d been told in good faith (or so they thought) that no more was on the table. That clearly wasn’t entirely accurate, so I can see their point, and it doesn’t seem unreasonable to want to revisit negotiations in view of the evident change in TfL’s position.



No surprise there. Deflection and demonisation of scapegoats has become their modus operandi; everything is someone else’s fault, whether that’s the Mayor of London, immigrants, unions, and absolutely nothing to do with the party who’ve been running the country for almost the last decade and a half!

I’m not a particular fan of Khan, nor the London mayoralty in general, but he’s making a better fist of his remit than the current government is; he at least stands a fighting chance of winning the next election he faces!

Much as I’m not a fan of Khan, in all fairness this whole saga isn’t down to him. And whilst my view is his fares freeze policy is one of a number of reasons why TFL’s finances were already in a poor state pre 2020, in the context of Covid this is a fairly minor issue.

All that said, we should remember that Khan was one of the politicians who seemed to want Covid restrictions to continue. As for that matter did Labour.

 

[popeter45]

The choice of wording “full & final” was very poor, and reflects upon the general inexperience, perhaps naivety, of the current LU senior management.

As the offer clearly wasn’t “full & final” (what does full even mean in this context?), it’s quite reasonable that staff will feel they were deceived.

I’m not sure this saga is over yet.

but at the time it WAS a full & final offer in TFL's eyes, TFL could not offer more at the time even if they wanted, whats changed is potentally somebody/thing else is going to get screwed over to enable this change that TFL didnt have the power to make without Khans intervention the other day
theres alot of assumptions being made that TFL just wanted to screw over drivers while rubbing there hands with glee with how much they saved when at the end of they day management were given a fixed budget and that was it

 

[bramling]

but at the time it WAS a full & final offer in TFL's eyes, TFL could not offer more at the time even if they wanted, whats changed is potentally somebody/thing else is going to get screwed over to enable this change that TFL didnt have the power to make without Khans intervention the other day
theres alot of assumptions being made that TFL just wanted to screw over drivers while rubbing there hands with glee with how much they saved when at the end of they day management were given a fixed budget and that was it

That may all be so, but as Khan presides over TFL (to the point where the mayoral endorsement can be found plastered everywhere, and in many cases Khan’s name is mentioned personally) it’s hard to separate the two.

I am prepared to give the benefit of the doubt that this was clumsy rather than deliberate deception, but the end result is that it seems to have peeved the staff even more so than was originally the case - which is actually quite some achievement.

 

[Thirteen]

I doubt ASLEF will get 12% in any new negotiations but I'm sure they will get something better, I can't imagine Sadiq Khan wanting strikes especially before the May election.

I don't think anyone working for London Underground or any TfL service would want Susan Hall as Mayor, she has said she'd remove the free travel perk for nominated people which would very unpopular.

 

[bramling]

I doubt ASLEF will get 12% in any new negotiations but I'm sure they will get something better, I can't imagine Sadiq Khan wanting strikes especially before the May election.

I don't think anyone working for London Underground or any TfL service would want Susan Hall as Mayor, she has said she'd remove the free travel perk for nominated people which would very unpopular.

Why is it the Conservatives seem completely unable to put forward anything other than completely rancid candidates for this position? Alienating several thousand people at a stroke is hardly an election-winning strategy, and I’m not sure what type of voter not directly affected by such a proposal would regard removing TFL nominee passes as a salient issue.

I guess what will happen is something between 5 and 12 %. I agree it probably won’t be 12.

 

[Mikey C]

No surprise there. Deflection and demonisation of scapegoats has become their modus operandi; everything is someone else’s fault, whether that’s the Mayor of London, immigrants, unions, and absolutely nothing to do with the party who’ve been running the country for almost the last decade and a half!

This particular development is entirely down to the Mayor. If you agree a settlement with one group, based on there being no more money in the kitty, then magically at the last minute find some extra money for another group, it makes your position with the first group look ridiculous.

If you have devolved powers, then you have to take responsibility for your actions.

 

[Thirteen]

Why is it the Conservatives seem completely unable to put forward anything other than completely rancid candidates for this position? Alienating several thousand people at a stroke is hardly an election-winning strategy, and I’m not sure what type of voter not directly affected by such a proposal would regard removing TFL nominee passes as a salient issue.

It's surprising they put someone even worse than Shaun Bailey. A moderate candidate would have done a lot better IMO

 

[Mawkie]

theres alot of assumptions being made that TFL just wanted to screw over drivers while rubbing there hands with glee with how much they saved when at the end of they day management were given a fixed budget and that was it

I would have some sympathy with this argument except:

1. Drivers are actually in the minority (by some margin) in this dispute.

2. TfL execs are in line for their share of a £12.1m bonus scheme if TfL becomes self funding by April 2023

3. Andy Byford Lord was happy to accept an 11% payrise, or £40k in real terms - to £395k a year. Im happy about that as we're constantly told we need to pay the best wages to get the best people - just wondering why the same ethos isn't true for station staff, and others further down the pecking order...

 

[bluegoblin7]

3. Andy Byford was happy to accept an 11% payrise, or £40k in real terms - to £395k a year. Im happy about that as we're constantly told we need to pay the best wages to get the best people - just wondering why the same ethos isn't true for station staff, and others further down the pecking order...

Andy Lord, not Andy Byford.

 

[Mawkie]

Andy Lord, not Andy Byford.

Thanks, I'll edit.

 

[winks]

Does this dispute relate to 2023/24 ?

If the Mayor wants less of a headache could be an idea to lump this year’s pay deal in with it too

 

[bluegoblin7]

Does this dispute relate to 2023/24 ?

If the Mayor wants less of a headache could be an idea to lump this year’s pay deal in with it too

Yes, this is the 2023/24 pay deal.

It wouldn't be solely up to TfL/the Mayor if they wanted to combine the 23/24 and 24/25 pay rounds together.

 

[Horizon22]

According to the National Rail website, Chiltern are running from Gt Missenden to Marylebone but not stopping at intermediate LUL station, or indeed South Ruislip. Whilst I understand that threatened strikes like this will cause all kinds of problems for short term planners does anyone know why this is? Surely the stations will be staffed. Trains might be shorter formations than usual but that would only affect the peak.

If it was London Underground managed station, then no they might not be staffed during industrial action.

London Overground, Elizabeth line, Great Northern, DLR, Thameslink etc. also have this issue. Normally they are "priority" stations to open but even then early morning/late night services might be affected due to staffing levels.

Worse than that. Khan appears to have managed to reopen a settled dispute in the act of trying to negotiate another. He's normally quite adept at navigating these issues but this seems like an own goal to me.

Probably advised by his deputy mayor for Transport......

I agree - whilst brinkmanship isn't great, getting ASLEF on side is/was a major battle in itself. Perhaps TfL using "full and final" wasn't ideal but they were probably told it was until Khan stepped into intervene. This is always difficult for managers / operators - more money can suddenly be found if politicians want it to (expect it to come from another source deemed 'less of a priority') but it destroys the negotiating strategy.

2. TfL execs are in line for their share of a £12.1m bonus scheme if TfL becomes self funding by April 2023

3. Andy Byford Lord was happy to accept an 11% payrise, or £40k in real terms - to £395k a year. Im happy about that as we're constantly told we need to pay the best wages to get the best people - just wondering why the same ethos isn't true for station staff, and others further down the pecking order...

2. Making TfL self-funding would be a huge undertaking compared to almost any other major world city and without a severe degradation in service. Certainly would deserve some praise.

3. Not to justify it but I suppose an 11% payrise for one individual is a different ask to 11% for thousands of other - relatively wellpaid - employees.

 

[Joe Paxton]

Why is it the Conservatives seem completely unable to put forward anything other than completely rancid candidates for this position? Alienating several thousand people at a stroke is hardly an election-winning strategy, and I’m not sure what type of voter not directly affected by such a proposal would regard removing TFL nominee passes as a salient issue.

It's surprising they put someone even worse than Shaun Bailey. A moderate candidate would have done a lot better IMO

Agreed, though even Zac Goldsmith who I would have considered a moderate managed to come out with a load of utterly ridiculous stuff during the 2016 mayoral election campaign.

At present I'm guessing the Tories are just too engrossed in their nonsense 'culture war' mindset to conjure up a decent candidate. Absurd that Susan Hall is seemingly the best they can do.

 

[Tube driver]

Yes, this is the 2023/24 pay deal.

It wouldn't be solely up to TfL/the Mayor if they wanted to combine the 23/24 and 24/25 pay rounds together.

From a driver's perspective, this year's 5% was a no strings pay deal only.

The next negotiations were supposedly to sort out the driver's modernization plan and will be far far more onerous to sort.

Combining the two into a multi year deal will not be without major headaches and possibly more industrial action.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Finn Brennan, Aslef’s London organiser, told the Standard: “It means negotiations start afresh and, as there is more money on the table, we now want our original claim for an RPI+ pay rise of around 12 per cent (based on last February’s RPI rate) and a cut in working hours to be met in full.”

I’m not normally one to side against the unions, but this one can safely be summarised as greedy tube drivers are greedy.

Guys on £65k a year get a smaller percentage pay rise than guys on £25k a year. Boo hoo. Their 5% is, in real terms, a bigger cash rise than a station staff member’s 10% rise.

 

[bluegoblin7]

From a driver's perspective, this year's 5% was a no strings pay deal only.

The next negotiations were supposedly to sort out the driver's modernization plan and will be far far more onerous to sort.

Combining the two into a multi year deal will not be without major headaches and possibly more industrial action.

Trains Modernisation, and indeed similar for other grades, are separate issues. It says a lot about your thinking (consistent with a lot of drivers, a minority grade when viewed in the context of LUL as a whole) that you highlight Trains Modernisation and a "no strings" deal when there's plenty of other disputes ongoing or forthcoming (abolition of CSM and further stations-grades changes as a good example) that these are major issues.

Thank goodness for an all grades union fighting for an uplift for the lowest paid.

I've said it before and I'll no doubt say it again over the course of the dispute: it is a shame that collective bargaining is such that Aslef members don't get the 5% they were so happy to ballot to accept, rather than whatever new offer will be forthcoming.

 

[Thirteen]

This is entirely off topic but I hadn't realised TSSA had a new general secretary and it's Maryam Eslamdoust who is not only first woman to be GS of a railway union but also the first person of colour.

 

[YorkRailFan]

A second trade union has threatened industrial action on the Tube in a dispute over pay.

The Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) said it is planning to ballot its London Underground members after rejecting a pay offer.



The union said that after months of talks the offer was a pay rise of 5% and a plan to freeze pay bands and salary ranges.


TSSA general secretary, Maryam Eslamdoust said: “Our members on London Underground are deeply unhappy at this sub-standard and simply unrealistic offer.


“We will now move to a ballot for industrial action, raising the very real prospect of a crippling strike on the Tube.


“If this is to be avoided London Underground must come back to the table with an offer which takes account of the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.


“The offer, as it stands, really amounts to a pay cut for our members who do so much to keep London moving every day of the year.


“It fails to address the fact inflation has been sky high in recent times and other components of the proposed deal, relating to salary bands, are unacceptable.

“Our door is always open for further talks but it’s time for London Underground to get real.”


TSSA is the biggest trade union in Transport for London representing thousands of staff in TfL offices and stations, bus operations, London Underground, TfL Rail, and the Overground.It is unclear when the ballot will open and when a result is expected.


But it comes as commuters already face a week of misery on the Tube next week as members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union who work on the Tube take industrial action over pay.


The RMT action is expected to severely disrupt services from Monday to Thursday.


Talks were taking place on Friday in the hope that the strike action could be averted.

Tssa strike threat: Second trade union to ballot members over Tube walkout

Threat of more industrial action to 'cripple' services as passengers brace for week of strike misery

uk.news.yahoo.com

TSSA planning to go to a ballet on strike now. Still a long way to go for TFL before these disputes are solved.

 

[Daniel]

Tssa strike threat: Second trade union to ballot members over Tube walkout

Threat of more industrial action to 'cripple' services as passengers brace for week of strike misery

uk.news.yahoo.com

TSSA planning to go to a ballet on strike now. Still a long way to go for TFL before these disputes are solved.

That's from the 5th of January - they were already planning to ballot before the RMT strike was called off.

 

[Not OTT]

That is correct. Staff working for MTR Elizabeth line or Arriva Rail London receive this, as both of these companies are Train Operating Companies. Tram Operations Ltd (the FirstGroup company that operates London Trams) staff also receive this as a quirk of history too.

Hi. Not fully true as many staff are contracted out or agency, including workers who have been working for Elizabeth Line for years. I know I spoke to them regularly. it is only a min number of directly employed staff (in my local station) who gets the travel benefits.

 

[Mojo]

Yes, as one would expect, as they are not employed by either of those two companies, and the Agency Worker Regulations wouldn’t cover that

 

[Dstock7080]

New offer from LU to Unions today:
5% + £1000 consolidated payment backdated to 1 April 2023.
salaries below £35k to receive additional £400 consolidated payment.
salaries between £35k and £40k to receive additional £200 consolidated payment.
"Additional travel benefits" to be discussed with stakeholders, as part of 2024 pay offer, with aim of April 2025 for possible introduction.

 

[winks]

Seems very reasonable and meets the RMTs concerns. The travel facility will be based on the national rail PRIV Rate.

 

[Mawkie]

New offer from LU to Unions today:
5% + £1000 consolidated payment backdated to 1 April 2023.
salaries below £35k to receive additional £400 consolidated payment.
salaries between £35k and £40k to receive additional £200 consolidated payment.
"Additional travel benefits" to be discussed with stakeholders, as part of 2024 pay offer, with aim of April 2025 for possible introduction.

Yes it's a good deal IMO. And for me will be double what the company initially offered when negotiations started.

The very lowest paid will be in for 11.09%

CSA2 will be 9.6%

Train ops will be 6.6%

Thereby closing the large gap that had developed between grades.

(Don't forget the weird announcement about salary sacrificing for electric cars coming in 2025. I don't know what that means for individual staff TBH as I have no understanding of salary sacrifice and the tax implications of that.)