Rail industry preparing for national strikes

[baz962]

Depends on the company culture. If company A values a healthy working environment, it will instruct the HR department appropriately and give it the resources to deal with it. If company B decides that's costing too much time and money compared to just accepting employee burnout and turnover, the HR department will just as easily dismiss things and concentrate on the basics of pay, overtime, holidays etc.

Company A can very easily become Company B if there's a shift in management, a downturn in profits, etc...

To be fair though and just to be clear , I would never treat a colleague differently because they didn't strike. It is probably impossible to do anything about. There is a difference between clear bullying and someone just refusing to swap shifts etc .

 

[320320]

Whilst I accept that the strike vote is overwhelming for rail unions, its a shame that a corresponding vote is not held of the travelling public who I suspect would overwhelmingly reject the proposed strike.

Great idea. seeing as you want the public to have a say in employees Ts&Cs we should charge them a subscription fee that can be used to increase the employees salary and avert industrial action.

 

[johncrossley]

Nobody said workplace bullying
is tolerated - it absolutely isn’t. If people don’t like you they won’t go out of their way to make small talk with you and they probably won’t be inclined to help you out by doing things like swapping shifts, which they’re under absolutely no obligation to do. It’s entirely a matter of those individuals.

What does any of that have to do with the HR department?

In a normal workplace this could be grounds for a complaint if someone feels they are being discriminated against, for whatever reason.

 

[the sniper]

In the medium term I would expect legislation but they are certainly not going to bend-over backwards to deal with the RMT...and indeed why should they as we all know if you did then we would be in the same position next year when the RMT would want another payday.

And if there's 10% inflation again in 2023, you'd presumably still be happy to receive no pay increase again?

Plus the rather large elephant in the room, the fact that any eventual pay rise will have already been spent by the staff striking over it. Bizarre politics indeed.

When inflation is over 10%, there are very long term implications for accepting next to nothing now. You'll never make up that ground. When pay disputes were about a couple of percent here or there around or above inflation, you might have been right.

Whilst I accept that the strike vote is overwhelming for rail unions, its a shame that a corresponding vote is not held of the travelling public who I suspect would overwhelmingly reject the proposed strike.

No, duh...

 

[Towers]

When inflation is over 10%, there are very long term implications for accepting next to nothing now. You'll never make up that ground. When pay disputes were about a couple of percent here or there around or above inflation, you might have been right.

Anyone who thinks that the government are going to hand down a circa 10% pay rise is, sadly, in cuckoo land. I take your point, but it would have been a far more pragmatic option to hold off a year or two, when the industry would hopefully be a little more settled and any pay demand would have been more justified after a longer period of high inflation. The immediate outcome of strike action this year will be people finding an already challenging financial situation even more difficult; in some/many cases I would think probably impossibly so.

 

[43066]

In a normal workplace this could be grounds for a complaint if someone feels they are being discriminated against, for whatever reason.

I honestly don’t see how and I’ve worked in several non railway workplaces. The railway isn’t “abnormal” in this respect and actual bullying is taken very seriously.

The HR department isn’t going to force your colleagues be friends with you if they don’t want to, though.

 

[johncrossley]

And if there's 10% inflation again in 2023, you'd presumably still be happy to receive no pay increase again?

Why does anyone get a pay rise? To keep their staff. That's how it works in most companies and in most industries. If you, as an employer, don't offer a good enough package then it is possible that your staff will find a job elsewhere. When someone resigns from their job, the employer sometimes offers them more money so they don't leave.

 

[the sniper]

In a normal workplace this could be grounds for a complaint if someone feels they are being discriminated against, for whatever reason.

'Victim': "He wouldn't swap his rest days with me"

Management/HR: "Why wouldn't you swap your rest days with him?"

'Abuser': "Who are you to ask me what I do with my booked days off and what does it matter if I'm not willing to inconvenience my own personal life to help someone I have no relationship with...?"

In reality, Management/HR would have nothing to do with this.

 

[baz962]

'Victim': "He wouldn't swap his rest days with me"

Management/HR: "Why wouldn't you swap your rest days with him?"

'Abuser': "Who are you to ask me what I do with my booked days off and what does it matter if I'm not willing to inconvenience my own personal life to help someone I have no relationship with...?"

In reality, Management/HR would have nothing to do with this.

Or 'abuser' I'm busy on my rest day. Looking after my children/ doctor / dentist/something already booked etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

'Victim': "He wouldn't swap his rest days with me"

Management/HR: "Why wouldn't you swap your rest days with him?"

'Abuser': "Who are you to ask me what I do with my booked days off and what does it matter if I'm not willing to inconvenience my own personal life to help someone I have no relationship with...?"

In reality, Management/HR would have nothing to do with this.

A better way to deal with shift swapping is to have a swapping "marketplace", where if you want to swap a shift you submit which one and give an indication of what you'd swap for, and these swaps are matched up (or not) on your behalf without knowing who and using a predefined written process for how you prioritise if there are two possibilities, e.g. first come first served. This is much more effective than having to sort it out with your mates. I've actually implemented an IT system to do this (not for the railway) on one of my projects.

 

[SignallerJohn]

A better way to deal with shift swapping is to have a swapping "marketplace", where if you want to swap a shift you submit which one and give an indication of what you'd swap for, and these swaps are matched up (or not) on your behalf without knowing who. This is much more effective than having to sort it out with your mates. I've actually implemented an IT system to do this (not for the railway) on one of my projects.

I disagree. I know a good handful of people who won’t touch additional shifts and give their sundays in. But if you go to them and say you’re abroad they will do the Sunday for you because of the relationship built. Then your system doesn’t include equalisation so it’s a moot point really

 

[the sniper]

Anyone who thinks that the government are going to hand down a circa 10% pay rise is, sadly, in cuckoo land.

You don't ask for what you expect to accept...

Why does anyone get a pay rise? To keep their staff. That's how it works in most companies and in most industries. If you, as an employer, don't offer a good enough package then it is possible that your staff will find a job elsewhere. When someone resigns from their job, the employer sometimes offers them more money so they don't leave.

Maybe why so few people have had a pay rise for years and are struggling? Your system is broken, I wouldn't advocate for it.

Or 'abuser' I'm busy on my rest day. Looking after my children/ doctor / dentist/something already booked etc.

Needn't be anything other than honest, there's nothing to hide. Once Management/HR can force you to swap rest days with anybody who demands it, you're in real trouble! I don't mind inconveniencing myself for someone who I get on with or who I know has/would be willing to help me, that's life.

 

[johncrossley]

Maybe why so few people have had a pay rise for years and are struggling? Your system is broken, I wouldn't advocate for it.

It isn't 'my system'. It is 'the system'. Some people are willing to forego pay rises because they like their job, or haven't found a better one yet. Obviously the vast majority of people get pay rises and it is the same in any capitalist country.

I disagree. I know a good handful of people who won’t touch additional shifts and give their sundays in. But if you go to them and say you’re abroad they will do the Sunday for you because of the relationship built. Then your system doesn’t include equalisation so it’s a moot point really

@Bletchleyite's idea sounds a lot fairer to me.

 

[muz379]

A better way to deal with shift swapping is to have a swapping "marketplace", where if you want to swap a shift you submit which one and give an indication of what you'd swap for, and these swaps are matched up (or not) on your behalf without knowing who and using a predefined written process for how you prioritise if there are two possibilities, e.g. first come first served. This is much more effective than having to sort it out with your mates. I've actually implemented an IT system to do this (not for the railway) on one of my projects.

I wouldn't use a system like that I'd just use other means to get the days off I need or go without .

Swaps rely on a great deal of goodwill and are based on relationships people build up . Knowing someone would do you the favour back if you were desperate for example .

 

[43066]

A better way to deal with shift swapping is to have a swapping "marketplace", where if you want to swap a shift you submit which one and give an indication of what you'd swap for, and these swaps are matched up (or not) on your behalf without knowing who and using a predefined written process for how you prioritise if there are two possibilities, e.g. first come first served. This is much more effective than having to sort it out with your mates. I've actually implemented an IT system to do this (not for the railway) on one of my projects.

Who is going to pay for something like that to he developed? Certainly not the TOC. Everyone has access to the roster and who is working what. It’s down to you to arrange your own swaps.

In any case it’s easier and quicker just to drop someone a message if (say) I want to get rid of some earlies, and I can see someone who I know likes them, who is working the shifts I prefer.

 

[High Dyke]

ALDI workers do not have a rigid rulebook with dozens of different grades and arcane shift patterns which exclude Sundays. However, they are paid more than some of the mainstream supermarkets as they are flexible and muck in filling shelves when checkouts aren't busy. Perhaps combining some functions into one job description might yield benefits which the employer can see real?

In some respects that is one of Network Rail's 'modernisation' proposals. With staff being multi-skilled, in signalling and track repairs. Whilst the concept may be beneficial to management it also meant expecting staff to carry out more tasks with revised terms and conditions.

Great idea. seeing as you want the public to have a say in employees Ts&Cs we should charge them a subscription fee that can be used to increase the employees salary and avert industrial action.

Indeed. I would suggest that the word 'subscription' is replaced by 'financial contribution'. Does that sound fare (sic)?

 

[Goldfish62]

He did have choices. He left announcing furlough to the very last minute. It was announced at the same time Boris ordered hospitality venues to close, so worried employees didn't know what was happening as their employers didn't have time to read the information on furlough, before telling their employees that there'll be no work as the business has to close. Even then he made employers the gate keepers to furlough money, it was all about supporting businesses by ensuring they retained their employees, not about ensuring employees weren't left unable to afford food. Furlough also allowed employers to stop paying employees company money with immediate effect, rather than having to pay them in full while doing consultation and for any notice period.

I was talking about the whole concept of furlough, not the specifics of how it was implemented. Sunak became seemingly immensely popular due to furlough. That's my point.

If you want specifics, yes, it was introduced late, finished early and 80% was lower than some other countries. None of that appeared to detect from his popularity, though.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So there's been a vote to strike. Who does the RMT negotiate with?
As I understand it the dispute is with Network Rail and 13 TOCs, or 14 different employers in total.
How is that going to play out in negotiation and action terms?
The NR dispute is the most likely to cause widespread disruption, as the signallers are capable of stopping the network.
That includes in Wales (TfW) and Scotland (Scotrail) which are not otherwise involved in this particular RMT dispute (though they may be in others).
But individual TOC action can only affect a portion of the network.
Does RDG (representing NR and the TOCs) or the DfT have any direct role in the negotiations?
Presumably GBR, if it existed, would be the "employer", but there will still be private TOC elements in the negotiations.
This all seems very different to national strikes under BR which often involved "beer and sandwiches" at No 10, and last-minute arbitrations hosted by ACAS.

 

[duncanp]

The Telegraph is reporting that Boris Johnson is willing to cut a deal with the unions.

Or to be more precise, he is supportive of proposals from within the rail industry to settle the dispute.

I suppose the devil is in the detail, and whether the unions are prepared to accept what is offered.

Boris Johnson willing to cut deal with unions over rail strike threat

Treasury digging in against Number 10's push for a 5pc pay rise for thousands of workers

www.telegraph.co.uk

Boris Johnson willing to cut deal with unions over rail strike threat​

Treasury digging in against Number 10's push for a 5pc pay rise for thousands of workers

Boris Johnson is prepared to strike a pay deal with unions to avert a sweeping railway strike as a new rift opens between the Prime Minister and Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor.

Senior rail industry figures say that Mr Johnson is keen for an agreement but the Treasury will not grant an exemption to lift the public sector pay cap to avoid the most potent rail strike in a generation.

The disagreement has sparked a fresh row between Number 10 and Number 11, with a rail industry source accusing the Treasury of "King Canute-like behaviour" in trying to resist the demands.

The Rail, Maritime and Transport union (RMT) last night voted to bring train services to a halt this summer as they call for a new pay deal and resist much-needed reforms to the railways.

The Prime Minister and Grant Shapps are understood to be supportive of rail industry proposals to offer a pay rise of around 5pc to tens of thousands of rail workers to break the industrial relations deadlock.

Increases in public sector pay were capped at 2pc last month, rising to 3pc if certain “productivity gains” can be shown as deliverable.

The Treasury is aware that creating a special exemption for the railways would be likely to spark anger among the likes of nurses, doctors and teachers.

A senior rail industry source said: “Let’s just say we could settle this for 5pc. And let’s just say they [the RMT] agree. But at the moment we wouldn’t be allowed to settle it - because we are breaching the 3pc [cap], even though we can fully fund it.

“The Prime Minister gets that. Grant Shapps gets that. There is the risk of almost King Canute-like behaviour within the Treasury.”

The split is the latest stand-off between the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, who are at odds over the rollout of a controversial windfall tax on energy companies.

A strike by Network Rail workers, the first since 1994, would have significant repercussions for the UK economy. Without signal workers, only a handful of services would be able to run.

Andrew Gilligan, the Prime Minister’s transport adviser, is leading contingency planning to combat such an eventuality - which would also have serious implications for supply chains.

The Telegraph disclosed earlier this month that a Network Rail strike could cause power outages and food shortages. Last night the RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said that he was targeting industrial action in mid-June after workers back industrial action at the ballot box.

He said: “[Our] members want a decent pay rise, job security and no compulsory redundancies.

“We sincerely hope ministers will encourage the employers to return to the negotiating table and hammer out a reasonable settlement with the RMT."

In response Andrew Haines, chief executive of Network Rail, said: “We know our people are concerned about job security and pay. As a public body we have been working on offering a pay increase that taxpayers can afford, and we continue to discuss this with our trades unions. We urge the RMT to sit down with us and continue to talk, not walk, so that we can find a compromise and avoid damaging industrial action.”

George Eustice, the Environment Secretary, warned this morning that public sector workers should not expect big increases because the current economic circumstances mean there is a need for "pay restraint".

He told Times Radio: “There is going to have to be, obviously, some pay restraint and when it comes to the public sector right from MPs, right through to doctors and nurses, there are independent pay review panels.

"They will make their recommendations and obviously we look very closely at that when setting public sector pay.

“But it is going to be quite important to try and show restraint because if we continue to borrow and spend money as the Labour Party have said they would do, to do that when you are in an inflationary environment could compound the problem and could drive prices higher still.”

 

[NI 271]

That isn't how public finances work, there is a finite amount of cash knocking about & once its gone its gone.

There most certainly isn't. My word, if the last two years should have shown people anything, it's that. Google 'Quantitive Easing'. Being so forthright while being plain wrong really weakens any input you have in the wider discussion, the nation's finances are NOT like those of a household budget, the Bank Of England exists.

 

[Goldfish62]

So there's been a vote to strike. Who does the RMT negotiate with?
As I understand it the dispute is with Network Rail and 13 TOCs, or 14 different employers in total.
How is that going to play out in negotiation and action terms?
The NR dispute is the most likely to cause widespread disruption, as the signallers are capable of stopping the network.
That includes in Wales (TfW) and Scotland (Scotrail) which are not otherwise involved in this particular RMT dispute (though they may be in others).
But individual TOC action can only affect a portion of the network.
Does RDG (representing NR and the TOCs) or the DfT have any direct role in the negotiations?
Presumably GBR, if it existed, would be the "employer", but there will still be private TOC elements in the negotiations.
This all seems very different to national strikes under BR which often involved "beer and sandwiches" at No 10, and last-minute arbitrations hosted by ACAS.

You beat me to it.

Legally, each is a separate trade dispute between the RMT and the individual employers. There will be no "national strike", but a series of strikes against separate employers that may happen to coincide on the same dates.

Although, having said that, I don't see any point in the RMT calling the TOCs out on the same date as NR signallers, as the latter will bring the whole network to a halt anyway.

Likewise, bringing out 50% of TOCs on strike on alternate dates would have almost the same impact as all being on strike at once, but with only half the wage loss.

My final comment: does the RMT have the resources to negotiate concurrently with 16 separate employers in the same industry?

 

[Towers]

You beat me to it.

Legally, each is a separate trade dispute between the RMT and the individual employers. There will be no "national strike", but a series of strikes against separate employers that may happen to coincide on the same dates.

Although, having said that, I don't see any point in the RMT calling the TOCs out on the same date as NR signallers, as the latter will bring the whole network to a halt anyway.

Likewise, bringing out 50% of TOCs on strike on alternate dates would have almost the same impact as all being on strike at once, but with only half the wage loss.

My final comment: does the RMT have the resources to negotiate concurrently with 16 separate employers in the same industry?

I imagine the meat & bones of any negotiation will involve the government, in some way shape or form. The action is squarely aimed at them.

 

[Paceman]

In Northern’s case if they don’t make any pay offer between now and any potential strike date then any rhetoric about this action being premature is proved disingenuous at best.

 

[ungreat]

Spot on. The rot set in the minute that referendum was called. Farage and co have a lot to answer for not least all the lies on the big red bus. Funnily enough we have all got accustomed to our politicians lying none stop these past few years....

Spot on

Great idea. seeing as you want the public to have a say in employees Ts&Cs we should charge them a subscription fee that can be used to increase the employees salary and avert industrial action.

 

[Goldfish62]

I imagine the meat & bones of any negotiation will involve the government, in some way shape or form. The action is squarely aimed at them.

Yes, that is true and they will obviously have to give permission for any pay increase, but they won't be in the room.

 

[NI 271]

Great idea. seeing as you want the public to have a say in employees Ts&Cs we should charge them a subscription fee that can be used to increase the employees salary and avert industrial action.

I genuinely sat, open mouthed, upon reading that. It's a truly incredible submission. I'm still re-reading it in disbelief.

 

[320320]

Indeed. I would suggest that the word 'subscription' is replaced by 'financial contribution'. Does that sound fare (sic)?

The ‘fare’ is paid to travel on the train not to take over the employment rights of the staff.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I imagine the meat & bones of any negotiation will involve the government, in some way shape or form. The action is squarely aimed at them.

But only on the pay front?
The government isn't going to negotiate on industry job security or working practices, is it.
Possibly the DfT has an agenda for the shape and size of the industry for the GBR model, and within that maybe policy on things like ticket offices and DOO.
But Nos 10 & 11 are not going to get into that, they will only be interested in the headline pay figure and its impact on the funding of the rail industry.
On top of that there are 14 employers, all with different staff Ts & Cs.
How does a national pay figure play at the individual TOC/NR level?

 

[ainsworth74]

The Telegraph is reporting that Boris Johnson is willing to cut a deal with the unions.

Or to be more precise, he is supportive of proposals from within the rail industry to settle the dispute.

I suppose the devil is in the detail, and whether the unions are prepared to accept what is offered.

Boris Johnson willing to cut deal with unions over rail strike threat

Treasury digging in against Number 10's push for a 5pc pay rise for thousands of workers

www.telegraph.co.uk

And I see several references to the Treasury being the stumbling block which is as I suspected. I'm sure Boris will be keen to do a deal, he is a populist at the end of the day and spraying money around tends to please people (at least until the bills come due), but the Treasury will be the ones that are eyeing up a way of, as they see it, bringing the railway to heel and curtailing the blackhole of money it consumes.

 

[ar10642]

But only on the pay front?
The government isn't going to negotiate on industry job security or working practices, is it.
Possibly the DfT has an agenda for the shape and size of the industry for the GBR model, and within that maybe policy on things like ticket offices and DOO.
But Nos 10 & 11 are not going to get into that, they will only be interested in the headline pay figure.
On top of that there are 14 employers, all with different staff Ts & Cs.
How does a national pay figure play at the individual TOC/NR level?

I suspect the RMT just want a fight with the government and haven't troubled themselves with specifics like these.