RMT strike referendum passed

[Starmill]

They aren't because taxation is calculated on an annual salary basis.

Quite.

Yes you are quite correct, and the loss of earnings from the strikes will have drawn even those whose earning are close to the higher bracket back already.

That's not how taxation works over the whole tax year

It is bad news for your Class 1 National Insurance Contributions however.

 

[YorkRailFan]

ASLEF now needs to make sure it does as effective a job as the RMT in telling the public the dispute is primarily over changes to terms and conditions. I think the RMT did a good job, but the media still seems to think drivers are just after money and are greedy because they're already well paid.

Even the Guardian, which has generally supported the strikes, has recently appeared to have less sympathy and has trotted out the same lines about how much money drivers want, how much they're paid (and saying that some earn six figures, but not implicitly saying how that's achieved, such as doing lots of overtime) and so on.

If the Government wants to settle things, it knows what it has to do. With an election looming, it surely cannot want these battles to continue.

I think ASLEF is having a go at that now

An "offer" made in April included a land grab for all our terms and conditions (which are different at each company) so it could never work so was rejected. Don't be fooled by bad faith actors. ASLEF members are united in continuing industrial action to secure a fair deal.

https://twitter.com/ASLEFunion/status/1730239810101473695?t=0Jni0FvaqrE8chb0gRGDDQ&s=19

 

[Starmill]

How come the ballot passed just before the most financially stressful time of year then, if people are better off with RDW and strikes?

The time of year could simply be coincidence, albeit it's probably not.

 

[greatkingrat]

It is bad news for your Class 1 National Insurance Contributions however.

Nope, for most people, they will be better off from an NI point of view getting the money in a lump sum as they will end up paying 2% on some or all of it rather than 12%.

 

[Lemmy99uk]

How much has the average member lost in strike pay in this dispute?

Based on number of days worked they have probably gained as overtime would have covered the days lost to the dispute, but the hours worked would have been paid at a higher rate.

I never understand this. Is there some strange additional overtime that appears during a strike, or is it the same overtime that is always there?

If people who don’t normally work overtime have done so because of the shortfall in their wages, they have just taken the overtime from the people who would normally work it, who will then be worse off.

 

[43066]

I never understand this. Is there some strange additional overtime that appears during a strike, or is it the same overtime that is always there?

If people who don’t normally work overtime have done so because of the shortfall in their wages, they have just taken the overtime from the people who would normally work it, who will then be worse off.

Only potentially for the tiny minority of people who usually work literally every day they can as overtime. Otherwise there’s generally enough around that everyone will be able to work at least one day per pay period should they need to.

Add to that that people with a low rest day count get first priority for overtime, so will almost always be able to work as much as they wish.

Overall, excellent news that the deal has been accepted.

 

[kw12]

I never understand this. Is there some strange additional overtime that appears during a strike, or is it the same overtime that is always there?

If people who don’t normally work overtime have done so because of the shortfall in their wages, they have just taken the overtime from the people who would normally work it, who will then be worse off.

It is the same overtime that is always there. Thus anyone who has worked less overtime than normal as a result (not just those who would normally work everyday available) will indeed be worse off.

 

[43066]

It is the same overtime that is always there. Thus anyone who has worked less overtime than normal as a result (not just those who would normally work everyday available) will indeed be worse off.

But virtually nobody (other than those who max it out) will have had to work less than normal - that certainly seems to the be the experience of the TMs I work with. Their Sundays are outside, so even easier to pick up extra shifts, and at higher pay rates than strike days are lost at.

Hence the “average” member (doing anything from none to moderate amounts of overtime) is unlikely to have lost anything, and many will actually have gained, as explained in post #41.

 

[newtownmgr]

Unite as well but it's relatively minor.

RMT is the biggest win - IIRC for drivers it'd about 50/50 RMT/ASLEF but for guards it's 90+% RMT.

(These figures are from memory, take with a strong grain of salt.)

95% of drivers are in Aslef. Most RMT drivers are on LU

 

[SouthStand]

Does this mean the end of strikes for the time being and I can rely on the trains running to get me to the airport for my trip in January?

 

[Jan Mayen]

Does this mean the end of strikes for the time being and I can rely on the trains running to get me to the airport for my trip in January?

No. ASLEF may call a strike.

 

[DMckduck97]

How come the ballot passed just before the most financially stressful time of year then, if people are better off with RDW and strikes?

Because it comes with backpay dating back to the 2022 anniversary, a higher rate going forward which in turn also raises overtime and premium rates.

Overtime will still be available in abundance as the Christmas sickness bug is slowly embedding itself

 

[RAPC]

Very pleased for the RMT union members. All very avoidable, had the government not wasted most of the time with bad faith negotiations, with no itent of settling. It might only be a relatively short term fix, but at least there is some form of increase and no changes to T&Cs.

 

[dk1]

No. ASLEF may call a strike.

I think ASLEF will call a strike is more likely. I am personally expecting an announcement tomorrow.

 

[Robcuk]

Because it's not how maths works where enhanced payments are made. This includes rest days, overtime, Sunday working and other things.

For example - say for Sunday work a guard is paid at time +10% (so 110% pay). Using made up figures:
10 hours work at £15ph base rate so £16.50ph Sunday rate. This gives 10x16.50=£165.00 for the shift. Add 5% to the total amount and the back pay for that shift under your system would be £8.25

With the backdated rise the base rate would have been £15.75, with a £17.33 Sunday rate.
For the same shift as above - 10x17.33=£173.30. Subtract the amount already paid and the back pay that is really due is £8.30.

You would be underpaying the back pay by a small amount if you just applied the % increase to the gross.

Thanks for the clarification - Shame it wasn't that easy

 

[footprints]

No. See below.


Because the offer they refused to put to their members was for a two year deal, the second year of which was for 4% regardless of Terms and conditions changed in those second phase of talks. Some TOC would have had less changes than others, but all were to get the same rise. The offer was designed to be rejected.



The 5% no strings (that's 'no strings' for a year that's gone by already so hasn't had any strings applied anyway, before we make it sound like some sort of awesome deal) now on offer is a ONE year deal.
Talks for 2023's pay take place next year, crucially on a TOC by TOC basis, and there is no "all-in 4% limit on whoever you are whatever your grade and whatever conditions you are giving up".
Each TOC will now negotiate individually for pay and changes to terms and conditions for 2023's pay award. This is quite clearly not the same.


This has been explained to you before.

I'm comparing what was offered for the 2022 pay deal in April 2023 with what's now been agreed. The three elements are the same.

The time to compare what's previously been proposed for 2023 with what's actually been agreed is surely only after a deal for 2023 has been done.

I think ASLEF will call a strike is more likely. I am personally expecting an announcement tomorrow.

Aren't their Executive Committee meeting on Monday? Considering how sensitive ASLEF have been about targeting particular dates, I think an overtime ban is more likely. The Government won't care regardless, of course, they can castigate drivers even more now they have agreement with the RMT.

 

[dk1]

Aren't their Executive Committee meeting on Monday? Considering how sensitive ASLEF have been about targeting particular dates, I think an overtime ban is more likely. The Government won't care regardless, of course, they can castigate drivers even more now they have agreement with the RMT.

Time will tell.

 

[Starmill]

Nope, for most people, they will be better off from an NI point of view getting the money in a lump sum as they will end up paying 2% on some or all of it rather than 12%.

"Most" people are just below or at £50,268 annual equivalent?

 

[greatkingrat]

"Most" people are just below or at £50,268 annual equivalent?

They don't need to be. NI isn't calculated annually like tax is. Even fairly low paid staff could easily exceed the Upper Earnings Limit in that pay period once you add on a big chunk of backpay.

 

[Starmill]

They don't need to be. NI isn't calculated annually like tax is. Even fairly low paid staff could easily exceed the Upper Earnings Limit in that pay period once you add on a big chunk of backpay.

That's precisely my point. Someone on £29.5k as a conductor say would get about £2.5k as 20 months 5% uplift. So added to their basic pay for a period that's still well under the break even point on the 2% threshold.

 

[JD2168]

This is very good news to hear about the RMT issues being settled for the time being, now it needs ASLEF to come to an agreement that is acceptable for themselves & their members.

 

[greatkingrat]

That's precisely my point. Someone on £29.5k as a conductor say would get about £2.5k as 20 months 5% uplift. So added to their basic pay for a period that's still well under the break even point on the 2% threshold.

The upper threshold is £967 per week, or £3868 per 4 weeks. Your conductor would get £2270 basic + £2500 backpay = £4770, which is well over the 2% threshold.

 

[matthewjohnson]

I'm comparing what was offered for the 2022 pay deal in April 2023 with what's now been agreed. The three elements are the same.

The time to compare what's previously been proposed for 2023 with what's actually been agreed is surely only after a deal for 2023 has been done.


Aren't their Executive Committee meeting on Monday? Considering how sensitive ASLEF have been about targeting particular dates, I think an overtime ban is more likely. The Government won't care regardless, of course, they can castigate drivers even more now they have agreement with the RMT.

Announcement tomorrow about the weekend of the 16th I would guess. Then Monday to decide on the Christmas period

 

[winks]

It looks like strikes will be back on the cards next spring, along with nurses and other public sector workers. (Consultants got an additional payrise on top of the 6% already agreed for ‘23). Could be a dodgy time for the government if they wish to hold an election with strikes erupting everywhere.

 

[Goldfish62]

It looks like strikes will be back on the cards next spring,

Possibly, but that's the really pessimistic view, and of the tiny minority that wishes for perpetual industrial action.

While I can't wait for the opportunity to dispose of this government I'm sure most people inside and outside the industry would wish for a long period of industrial calm.

 

[BMoiz]

They aren't because taxation is calculated on an annual salary basis.

PAYE is calculated on that period's pay x number of periods in a year and then applies the appropriate tax banding. So if you earn over £4,189 gross in a month, anything over will be taxed at 40% as the system essentially assumes that will be your pay for the rest of the year. So yes, everyone's jumping into the higher tax bracket for that one month (and then getting a rebate at the end of the year)

 

[KM1991]

PAYE is calculated on that period's pay x number of periods in a year and then applies the appropriate tax banding. So if you earn over £4,189 gross in a month, anything over will be taxed at 40% as the system essentially assumes that will be your pay for the rest of the year. So yes, everyone's jumping into the higher tax bracket for that one month (and then getting a rebate at the end of the year)

Yep.

 

[kw12]

PAYE is calculated on that period's pay x number of periods in a year and then applies the appropriate tax banding. So if you earn over £4,189 gross in a month, anything over will be taxed at 40% as the system essentially assumes that will be your pay for the rest of the year. So yes, everyone's jumping into the higher tax bracket for that one month (and then getting a rebate at the end of the year)

That's not how PAYE works.

Most people pay tax on a cumulative basis, so the system calculates the tax due based on all of their taxable income so far this tax year. For example, if the pay run is for the 10th month of the tax year higher rate tax will be deducted only if the total taxable pay for the year to date exceeds 10/12ths of the annual higher rate threshold of £50270. Thus, someone with a salary of £29.5K and £2,500 backpay (and the standard 1257L tax code) will not pay any higher rate tax.

HMRC issues some people with a tax code ending M1. For these people, the tax due is calculated based solely on their taxable income during that pay run (ie it is calculated on what is known as a "Month 1" basis). So someone with a M1 tax code would pay higher rate tax for the pay run with the backpay but not in the pay runs for the rest of the tax year. They will receive a rebate the following tax year.

 

[158801]

What I find interestin is the % of people at each TOC who voted "no"

DEFEND JOBS, PAY AND CONDITIONS – TRAIN OPERATING COMPANIES

www.rmt.org.uk

Its probably an average of 10% - but at TPE and Avanti it's closer to 20%. Why so high at these two TOC's. And, the question is :- if they voted "no" then what % pay rise would these people be wanting in order to vote "yes".

I'm sure that, if the majortity had voted "no", then the RMT would now be announcing a couple of strike days before Xmas -resulting in even more lost money for it' members

 

[Krokodil]

How come the ballot passed just before the most financially stressful time of year then, if people are better off with RDW and strikes?

It's got sod all to do with the time of year. The government have finally stopped trying to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut and have come forward with a sensible offer. That is all.

It is the same overtime that is always there. Thus anyone who has worked less overtime than normal as a result (not just those who would normally work everyday available) will indeed be worse off.

Not necessarily, partly because of covid backlogs and partly because of the government-induced climate, staff have left faster than they have been replaced in many cases so there may be more rest days going than usual. In any case, even if the ones who work so many rest days that they practically live at work are a little bit down then it shouldn't matter because they'll still have earned more than their basic pay and no one should plan their non-avoidable expenditure (bills and food) on the basis of non-contractural overtime.

PAYE is calculated on that period's pay x number of periods in a year and then applies the appropriate tax banding. So if you earn over £4,189 gross in a month, anything over will be taxed at 40% as the system essentially assumes that will be your pay for the rest of the year. So yes, everyone's jumping into the higher tax bracket for that one month (and then getting a rebate at the end of the year)

Some small employers might treat each month as a silo but most employers calculate Income Tax on the basis of "year to date". NI is calculated as individual weeks but the only people who might be disadvantaged by a lump sum are those who would usually be below the Lower Earnings Limit.