RMT Extends Strike Action on Network Rail to Dec 24-27

[pt_mad]

That was due to illegal lack of process - failing in their legal obligation and to all it was unfair. After months of failing to reach resolution on the railways, the sympathy will not be the same - and there is no talk of a completely new crew coming in from overseas on fractions of the pay, hidden in the wings.

Who would replace the staff if they let themselves be made redundant then?

 

[Andrew1395]

What surprises me is why after nearly 30 years since privatisation, why the companies did not push for changes in working practices when times were better. When they were even more profitable, and customer growth was booming. Why no push for DOO in 2005? Probably because it did not suit their both online then.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Who would replace the staff if they let themselves be made redundant then?

There's no shortage of applicants for railway jobs.

 

[pt_mad]

What surprises me is why after nearly 30 years since privatisation, why the companies did not push for changes in working practices when times were better. When they were even more profitable, and customer growth was booming. Why no push for DOO in 2005? Probably because it did not suit their both online then.

Can only assume that Labour had no desire to upset things to that degree during their years. Much of the front line restructuring which occurred after privatisation was perceived as being on favourable working terms afaik.

It would probably have been hard to use the reasons of costs needing to be reduced due to reduced footfall during the pre covid years, when footfall was often increasing all the time at very fast rates in some places.

 

[Clarence Yard]

With a short franchise, there was no payback for the companies involved.

 

[DDB]

What surprises me is why after nearly 30 years since privatisation, why the companies did not push for changes in working practices when times were better. When they were even more profitable, and customer growth was booming. Why no push for DOO in 2005? Probably because it did not suit their both online then.

Could be as franchises were relatively short so no incentive to do things that would give short term pain for long term gain.

 

[fishwomp]

There's no shortage of applicants for railway jobs.

Training would take a long time for most roles.

 

[pt_mad]

There's no shortage of applicants for railway jobs.

But they're not going to be available to start with full competency immediately are they?

If they wanted to enforce a brand new set of TandCs on a set of staff who lets say are absolutely essential to the running of the railway pre new working practices, and if say a significant number of existing staff said nope, don't like that, not signing, are they going to make them redundant and take on new staff and roll things back until they are trained up?

 

[mcmad]

This sums up some of the cost creep in NR nicely from ORR review of NR finances 2021/22

NR have subsequently pushed the numbers down with redundancy programme but thats costed plenty to implement. So given enhancements have drifted through CP6 you would have expected headcount to have reduced but no doubt many people have been under employed pending DfT decision on what they are going to proceed with.

Perhaps they could look at the devolution process which generated several new layers of senior management across the various route and regions that have added nothing but additional costs and more paperwork.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

What surprises me is why after nearly 30 years since privatisation, why the companies did not push for changes in working practices when times were better. When they were even more profitable, and customer growth was booming. Why no push for DOO in 2005? Probably because it did not suit their both online then.

Not really they bid on known T&Cs and any that tried to change them risked industrial action with loss of revenue straight to the bottom line and in a worst case a forfeiture of bonds so owning groups would have a lot at risk. Privatisation was actually good for the unions and their members until Covid came along yet year after year they all pushed for renationalisation. If that had happened there would be less employed now. This is why the unions want to negotiate with each operator as historically they cut better deals.

 

[Andrew1395]

Sadly the railways have not gradually modernised their terms & conditions over the last 50 years.
For example then Sunday was a 'rest day', fewer people worked or travelled on it. Now it must be in the top 3 for passenger numbers.
Passengers deserve the same level of Sunday service from 10am as a weekday.

That’s simply untrue. Between 1982 and 1992 there were massive changes. From changes among footplate grades and T&Cs, to changes to Management grades. The real difference is that within TOCs for too long the senior management had no financial interest in pushing for changes due to the franchising model. But even so there have been significant changes since privatisation. The one area the private TOCs have not really moved on is DOO.

As to Sundays, it was very busy at Euston in the mid 1980s. I was working shifts that finished at midnight due to having nine sleeper car train departures, and inter city services busy throughout the day. And of course we had TPO, parcels, newspapers and redstar traffic at the station. And it never closed unlike today. There was a 24 hour presence of customers and a 24 hour open booking office window.

 

[ComUtoR]

There's no shortage of applicants for railway jobs.

How many are suitable ? How many will fail the assessments, medicals, interviews, and then still make the competency level required ?

It's just another meaningless phrase.

 

[pt_mad]

Not really they bid on known T&Cs and any that tried to change them risked industrial action with loss of revenue straight to the bottom line and in a worst case a forfeiture of bonds so owning groups would have a lot at risk. Privatisation was actually good for the unions and their members until Covid came along yet year after year they all pushed for renationalisation. If that had happened there would be less employed now. This is why the unions want to negotiate with each operator as historically they cut better deals.

Some did actually restructure operational roles in the early 2000s. And imo it was nothing like this time, the terms were fair and favourable.

So why 20 years later it seems acceptable to wind back conditions of employment when the railway is far far busier than those days, is anyone's guess.

 

[Andrew1395]

With a short franchise, there was no payback for the companies involved.

Well, Chiltern have been around a fair old time. SWT was what fifteen years?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

With a short franchise, there was no payback for the companies involved.

At privatisation there was still double-manning on trains travelling over 110mph (HSTs and IC225s essentially).
Among other things it mean slower trains at weekends, when BR would not fund double manning.
The TOCs and ASLEF negotiated those restricions away - led by Virgin I think (15 year franchises).
Virgin also introduced DCO on Pendolinos without staff problems, as I recall.

 

[pt_mad]

How many are suitable ? How many will fail the assessments, medicals, interviews, and then still make the competency level required ?

It's just another meaningless phrase.

How many school leavers would apply if roles opened to 16 year olds, simply because they have very low living costs due to living with family? They'd probably get loads applying even if it was minimum wage. This has happened in the hospitality industry.
But as you point out, it doesn't mean candidates would necessarily be of the quality required, or have the aptitude, or stick the job. And they would certainly not have the competence in instant time if a quarter of the industry was made redundant due to refusing a deal or refusing to sign new terms.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Some did actually restructure operational roles in the early 2000s. And imo it was nothing like this time, the terms were fair and favourable.

So why 20 years later it seems acceptable to wind back conditions of employment when the railway is far far busier than those days, is anyone's guess.

because non railway people at the DfT are running the show and the TOCs are just enablers now and well paid at senior level to do that role. Franchises should have been suspended during covid and reinstated now may have needed adjustment to terms but teh principle of accountability for delivering the service would have been at their door as well financial viability.

 

[Andrew1395]

There's no shortage of applicants for railway jobs.

We used to hold recruitment days in hotels back in the 1980s. Hundreds would turn up. First the basic assessments tests weeded out some. Then we interviewed for posts from cleaners to guards, signallers and station admin staff.

Many offered jobs on the day never turned up for their first day, and many moved on quite quickly. Some failed training or left due to other management reasons during their probation. Shift work did not suit everyone. Others found the jobs not to their liking. Many though went from turnaround cleaners to supervisors, senior conductors. Ticket collectors to signallers. Grtting good candidates that can grow within the business is the foundation of success.

Maintaining a workforce that delivers business objectives is not simply about having lots of applicants. It is not that simple with the aim of ending up with a group of competent, reliable and dedicated employees.

 

[43066]

It may be members aim to reach a compromise but I wouldn't guarantee that the Government would see that as a success. In my view the DCO thing is overblown, a rational objective would be that when the RMT tries to stop trains services by reducing the availabilty of guards in extremis they can run trains without them. The RMT have been giving out the impression that they run the railways for the last few years. That overreach is the problem that can not be accepted by the Government as it becomes the sole employer in GBR. The battle has to be now.

The emboldened sentence makes it abundantly clear that this entire statement is an expression of what you what you want to happen, based on a dislike of the RMT, rather than any genuine insight into the situation.

Whatever agreement is reached in the short term, it is clear that DOO/DCO won’t be possible everywhere for a good while, and traditional guards are still going to be necessary on large parts of the network next month, next year (and quite a few more years beyond that). Hence the RMT still have some bargaining power, so they might as well go all out and threaten to cause as much disruption as possible to raise the stakes.

Ticket offices and some other grades are clearly more under existential threat, so the negotiation here is indeed likely to be more around managing exits/redeployments. But overall the union’s judgement is clearly that the best thing they can do on the TOC side is also to fight hard rather than simply rolling over.

 

[Mawkie]

There's no shortage of applicants for railway jobs.

And part of that is the terms and conditions currently offered. Once those terms and conditions are reduced to that of a supermarket worker....

 

[pt_mad]

Ticket offices and some other grades are clearly more under existential threat, so the negotiation here is indeed likely to be more around managing exits/redeployments. But overall the union’s judgement is clearly that the best thing they can do on the TOC side is also to fight hard rather than simply rolling over.

Even with ticket offices though, IF the idea is to put all station staff in new multi-skilled roles, but say a deal couldn't be reached, what if too many station staff in the wrong roles (not ticket office) just waited for redundancy?

 

[Bikeman78]

Has it?? I make many a journey on Southern when not at Uni - particularly on the West Coastway and often Brighton Main Line - and on the rare occasions I see them, they don't seem to make any attempt to engage with customers at all. I'm not sure what they actually do.

100% agree with this. I've not had my ticket checked on Southern for years. Normally the OBS loiters by one doorway and pokes their head out of the door at each stop. If it were me, I'd be trying to make myself useful.

 

[43066]

Even with ticket offices though, IF the idea is to put all station staff in new multi-skilled roles, but say a deal couldn't be reached, what if too many station staff in the wrong roles (not ticket office) just waited for redundancy?

It’s a fairly safe bet nothing better for them would happen by just waiting, than if the whole thing was negotiated as part of a wider deal by the RMT. Especially things like assurances around redeployment, and voluntary redundancy.

Otherwise it would likely be a standard redundancy consultation then straight out the door with statutory minimum.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And part of that is the terms and conditions currently offered. Once those terms and conditions are reduced to that of a supermarket worker....

Which isn't going to happen.

100% agree with this. I've not had my ticket checked on Southern for years. Normally the OBS loiters by one doorway and pokes their head out of the door at each stop. If it were me, I'd be trying to make myself useful.

Some do indeed seem about as active as south WCML guards, sadly.

 

[43066]

Which isn't going to happen.

Never say never. Look at gateline contractor staff, for example. Is that any better than being (say) a supermarket security guard?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Never say never. Look at gateline contractor staff, for example. Is that any better than being (say) a supermarket security guard?

Probably not, but due to the Unions I simply can't see directly employed rail staff ending up in that position.

 

[Bikeman78]

I once hit a tree 3 minutes travel time from a major NR maintenance depot and it took 90 minutes for anyone to make it to the train.

Did they turn up without a saw? I'm not joking. That has happened.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How many are suitable ? How many will fail the assessments, medicals, interviews, and then still make the competency level required ?

What is the current percentage of current applicants who fall into that stated capacity?

 

[LowLevel]

Did they turn up without a saw? I'm not joking. That has happened.

Actually yes, though through no fault of their own - the mobile operations manager turned up first. We had to wait for the off track person with a saw.

 

[43066]

Probably not, but due to the Unions I simply can't see directly employed rail staff ending up in that position.

But the unions are only as effective as their members are prepared to make them. Ultimately that’s why people saying “I work in a ticket office, I don’t see any point in taking industrial action” are ultimately just undermining their own position. Their only leverage to negotiate a better than minimal exit, in a job whose days are clearly numbered, is being part of a strong union.