Transpennine Industrial Relations

[Falcon1200]

How about the government make more money available if necessary?

From where ?

Railway subsidy is trifling compared to the amounts of government spending that have taken place over the last few years.

Not sure I would call the money spent subsidising the railway 'trifling', not just during Covid but before and after !

 

[43066]

Its not just staff/unions, TPE are trying maximise profit for their shareholders, but if they dont like the level of profit they can make then equally they can 'take it or leave it', and the level of subsidy needs to be sufficient to run a level of service that people will use, and the DfT micromanaging but then standing back when it all goes pear shaped is another problem which needs to be addressed.

I can just see the whole dispute reaching a level where the underlying 'business' is destroyed, and there is nothing left to fight over.

I think a well paid reasonably content workforce is the only way to run something like railways, where the level of knowledge and training required is significant. I am a big believer in the saying 'Pay peanuts, get monkeys',

To be fair I do agree with pretty much all of that. It’s certainly clear that the DfT intervening directly makes everything about ten times worse.

If that is so, why do certain unions want to have nothing to do with Sunday as a working day?

The major railway unions aren’t actually opposed to Sunday working in principle (I say that as an ASLEF member who regularly works Sundays for no extra pay!). Obviously they wouldn’t favour it being forced onto people who signed contracts with Sundays outside their working week. In this case the dispute appears to be over different grades (with Sundays outside their working weeks) being paid different % amounts over base salary in overtime rates to work Sundays.

There are various ways Sunday working cab be introduced, for example new joiners automatically having Sundays included in their working week. The reason it has historically been resisted by the industry is simply that it costs more…

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The major railway unions aren’t actually opposed to Sunday working in principle (I say that as an ASLEF member who regularly works Sundays for no extra pay!). Obviously they wouldn’t favour it being forced onto people who signed contracts with Sundays outside their working week. In this case the dispute appears to be over different grades (with Sundays outside their working weeks) being paid different % amounts over base salary in overtime rates to work Sundays.

There are various ways Sunday working cab be introduced, for example new joiners automatically having Sundays included in their working week. The reason it has historically been resisted by the industry is simply that it costs more…

Should any TOC with a known problem with Sunday staff working as you describe above be not allowed to have submitted an offer to tender for a franchise that required seven-day working, in past years?

 

[Watershed]

Should any TOC with a known problem with Sunday staff working as you describe above be not allowed to have submitted an offer to tender for a franchise that required seven-day working, in past years?

Since staff keep their existing terms & conditions when transferring to any new franchisee under TUPE, that would be quite counterproductive.

 

[muz379]

This dispute has now been ongoing for a number of months, and from a passenger viewpoint its just another issue in the whole TPE saga, which seemed to have leapt from crisis to crisis over the last 4 years. I realise there are effectively 3 players in this dispute, TPE, Union and DfT, but a potential passenger trying to travel on days when the service is decimated doesn't care, he/she either doesn't travel, or has a throughrly unpleasent/inconvenient journey.

Looking at the big picture, the public want a 7 day a week railway, and with the increase in lesiure travel Sunday services become even more important. The country as whole is looking at rising inflation and economic problems caused by Covid and the war in Ukraine, these problems mean that goverment spending is going to be under scrutiny for some years.

TPE in common with a lot of TOCs receive a government subsidy, this subsidy comes from taxpayers, and given the fluid situation in politics at the moment, particularly in the north where traditional allegiances seem to have gone I could forsee a situation where the voters see rail subsidies as a waste of money because when they want to use the services that their tax is supporting they are not running.

This would leave the DfT, TPE and unions in a situation where they fighting over a 'corpse' with reduced funding.

I realise the Unions want the best deal for their members, the DfT want contain costs, and TPE want to maximise profits, but unless some realism creeps into all 3 sides they could end up in a very unpleasent place.

Trying to align terms and conditions which probably date back in part to the nationalisation of the railways in 1948 seems to me to be part of the problem. I think a GBR solution is going to be needed, and my solution would be to say "This is what we need to run a seven day railway" ensuring that incomes are protected, i.e. no one suffers a pay cut assuming they work to a similar pattern as previously, and there then has to be a degree of, 'this is fair, take it or leave it' Would the unions then continue to persue industrial action which would effectivley destroy their industry, I dont know, past history says possibly, but I also think public sympathy would be very limited in this situation. Equally TPE could hand the franchise back, and it becomes another OLR run TOC if they don't like the 'imposed' solution.

Whilst I don't disagree with much of your analysis . I see we could encourage a more sensible politics that sees people not considering rail subsidies a waste because of the social utility.

As for a new take it or leave it deal under GBR , I mean unless the plan is to cut loads of weekday services permanently to give resources for Sunday working I can't see that being palatable to the DFT . And the unions won't accept that either . Besides that won't resolve many of the issues giving rise to shortages.

If that is so, why do certain unions want to have nothing to do with Sunday as a working day?

Should any TOC with a known problem with Sunday staff working as you describe above be not allowed to have submitted an offer to tender for a franchise that required seven-day working, in past years?

Sundays inside the week is an ASLEF charter aspiration that is to say it is union policy . The RMT also supports full employment with no reliance on overtime so again it's reasonable to suggest that if a Sunday service is to be provided they think it shouldn't be run as overtime .

The DFT still managed the content of franchise agreements and ultimately dictated the finances of it so would have had to sign off in subsidy or reduced payments back to the DFT . Some franchises were let on these terms but failed to bring them to fruition before covid . It's not an overnight process .

 

[mike57]

I see we could encourage a more sensible politics that sees people not considering rail subsidies a waste because of the social utility.

I dont think people have a problem with subsidies, but I do think people have a problem with subsidies where the service that is subsidised doesn't then operate. All the participants need to realise that if the service deteriorates to the point where you have to use other means of transport or choose not to travel then people will question the subsidies and if they are appropriate.

I actually think that the whole structure of the railways is wrong at the moment, its too disjointed, and individual companies profits are being put before running a joined up network. This is not a direct criticism of the companies, after all that is the reason for their existence, to make money for their shareholders, it is more to do with getting to a point where the money spent delivers the best results for a given spend.

 

[SuperNova]

Let's not pretend that the clickbait journalism doesn't go both ways though . What of the stories about "union barons to shut down railway" etc etc .

The end of the day majority of the public don't scratch beneath the surface of these stories and take what is reported at some sort of face value .

It's not clickbait journalism - just crap journalism. And those within the RMT would do better than using this as a stone to beat a TOC with, but they won't.

Its not just staff/unions, TPE are trying maximise profit for their shareholders

This isn't how the railway works any longer. Any profits through the farebox go to the DfT.

How about the government make more money available if necessary?

Where from? Government are already pointing out the £16bn to prop the railway up during Covid and want efficiency savings. So either taxes rise or fares to - both counter-productive.

individual companies profits are being put before running a joined up network.

Except that this is not the case. DfT have had their hand in everything through franchising and ever more so now with National Rail Contracts. The railway isn't making a profit, and TPE certainly haven't since 2016.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Mike, those money making days have gone.

Under an EMA or NRC, the TOC collects the revenue on behalf of the DfT and it is a “pass through”. The DfT pays the TOC costs similar to the old franchise payment regime except that you have to agree those costs beforehand (or have a very good explanation!) and the TOC isn’t entitled to bank any savings purely for itself or it’s owners.

The TOC receives a retrospective management fee (which had a contract performance element to it) and only that payment can be passed onto shareholders.

So what the DfT has effectively done is to create pseudo-OLR bodies out of the existing franchises in order to carry out their instructions and also keep a firm lid on costs.

 

[43066]

This isn't how the railway works any longer. Any profits through the farebox go to the DfT.

Revenue goes to the DfT. Profits can be made on management fee receipts - in fact these are more likely because the government is taking the revenue risk.

Where from? Government are already pointing out the £16bn to prop the railway up during Covid and want efficiency savings. So either taxes rise or fares to - both counter-productive.

The same magic money tree the hundreds of billions frittered away on all the Covid madness come from? It’s insulting to peoples’ intelligence to suggest “there’s no money” when the government just essentially socialised the entire economy.

Personally I’d be fully in favour of those who benefited from furlough to be subjected to a higher tax rate to recoup some of that expense over the next few years.

 

[43096]

How about the government make more money available if necessary? Railway subsidy is trifling compared to the amounts of government spending that have taken place over the last few years. Subsidy is also going to be rapidly reducing as passenger numbers (and revenues) rise.

And where does the Government get that money from? As a taxpayer there’s much bigger priorities for spending than a railway system that is used by a minority of the population, offers poor customer service at high prices and has a lottery as to whether the staff will turn up or not. Businesses that are 20% down on revenue - like the railway - don’t have the cash to give pay rises.

 

[SuperNova]

Revenue goes to the DfT. Profits can be made on management fee receipts - in fact these are more likely because the government is taking the revenue risk.

They're not really profits, but a small free

The same magic money tree the hundreds of billions frittered away on all the Covid madness come from? It’s insulting to peoples’ intelligence to suggest “there’s no money” when the government just essentially socialised the entire economy.

Personally I’d be fully in favour of those who benefited from furlough to be subjected to a higher tax rate to recoup some of that expense over the next few years.

National debt.

 

[43066]

They're not really profits, but a small free

I think you mean *fee* which is paid to the TOC to run the franchise. Whether that translates to a profit depends on the TOCs own financial and accounting position. If no profit whatsoever was being made by said TOC, why would the TOCs continue in the business?

National debt.

Or taxation (tax receipts in many areas have substantially increased as a result of inflation), or fare increases. I’m not someone who is in favour of this kind of borrowing longer term (in fact I’m quite fiscally conservative), but it’s utterly irrational to be demanding “efficiency savings” at the moment when the result is basically paralysing the service in many parts of the country - and indeed actively damaging the recovery in farebox revenue.

The fault for that lies squarely with the government.

 

[SuperNova]

Or taxation (tax receipts in many areas have substantially increased as a result of inflation), or fare increases. I’m not someone who is in favour of this kind of borrowing longer term (in fact I’m quite fiscally conservative), but it’s utterly irrational to be demanding “efficiency savings” at the moment when the result is basically paralysing the service in many parts of the country - and indeed actively damaging the recovery in farebox revenue.

The fault for that lies squarely with the government.

Yes it does. But lets also look at where this is going. Aslef will no doubt be joining the RMT for pay rises, despite Aslef members being comfortably in the top 10% of earners in the UK. Not a good look in the current climate, and expecting tax payers to fund it isn't a good look. Rail need real reform and I'm not sure the unions will play ball.

 

[43066]

Yes it does. But lets also look at where this is going. Aslef will no doubt be joining the RMT for pay rises, despite Aslef members being comfortably in the top 10% of earners in the UK. Not a good look in the current climate, and expecting tax payers to fund it isn't a good look. Rail need real reform and I'm not sure the unions will play ball.

There will be a negotiation I’m sure, just as with other unions in other sectors. I’m not personally in favour of industrial action purely over pay and fully agree that the time isn’t right. Battles do perhaps also need to be chosen a little more carefully than they currently are being.

 

[Jamesrob637]

Nothing beyond the 5th of June yet though.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Since staff keep their existing terms & conditions when transferring to any new franchisee under TUPE, that would be quite counterproductive.

If any TOC does what you state above in the full knowledge of the implications inherent in Sunday working, they will be aware of the operational problems that will follow and be implicit in the problems that will most certainly arise. Something of a poisoned chalice.

 

[muz379]

If any TOC does what you state above in the full knowledge of the implications inherent in Sunday working, they will be aware of the operational problems that will follow and be implicit in the problems that will most certainly arise. Something of a poisoned chalice.

Any new TOC taking on a franchise doesn't really get a choice tupe is the only way operations can continue.

What they could have been allowed is sufficient financial slack withing the franchise agreement to negotiate and implement changes to T's and C's during the term of their franchisr

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What they could have been allowed is sufficient financial slack withing the franchise agreement to negotiate and implement changes to T's and C's during the term of their franchisr

That aspiration has not a cat in hell's chance of an RMT agreement to any of their union members having already agreed conditions

Any new TOC taking on a franchise doesn't really get a choice tupe is the only way operations can continue.

What if no TOC decide to bid for a franchise in a case such as this?

 

[Ianigsy]

Yes some depots like say Preston they have got it right on . Most however , less so.

And this is why the service to Hull goes into meltdown several days a week. A colleague who commutes from Selby to Leeds doesn't know whether she's coming or going (but usually neither).

I wonder whether TPE are also more prone than usual to staff turnover with a lot of their crew based in locations where they can easily be poached by LNER, Avanti, Lumo, Grand Central etc. As somebody who relies on the train to see elderly parents, I'm starting to get fed up of having to use extra leave days to get over.

 

[muz379]

That aspiration has not a cat in hell's chance of an RMT agreement to any of their union members having already agreed conditions


What if no TOC decide to bid for a franchise in a case such as this?

Contrary to what you are trying to portray the RMT often negotiates changes to terms and condition of its members . As far as I am aware ACAS negotiations over terms and conditions at are still taking place at Northern following the dispute over the role of the guard . The RMT at TPE put a productivity deal out to a membership referendum in recent history which included changes to T's & C's . If a TOC wanted to bring Sundays inside the working week that would be acceptable to the RMT and as long as other areas of any deal met union policy it's likely it would get put to the membership .

If nobody bid for a franchise then the existing franchisee might be granted extension or management contract or the OLR would run things until such time that a new franchise spec could be provided for. Of course this is all irrelevant ATM because there's no franchises being offered .

 

[Killingworth]

That aspiration has not a cat in hell's chance of an RMT agreement to any of their union members having already agreed conditions


What if no TOC decide to bid for a franchise in a case such as this?

The Operator of Last Resort, otherwise the franchise ends, there are no TUPE transfers, all staff are redundant, there are no trains.

Depends on the government and franchise how such a situation might then pan out. In all probability all other franchises would be faced with total walkouts in sympathy, subject to a variety of pretexts to ensure they were legal.

If the dispute were restricted to the one franchise, after a few months a brand new operator is found, new staff are recruited and trained on new terms and conditions. Limited services slowly return a year later. By then passengers have found other ways to travel. Up to 50% of services, passengers and staff are not restored 5 years later.

Somehow the government will have to find ways to avoid getting into such scenarios, not just for the railway industry. Recalling the late 60s until the early 80s it was a constant game of acrimonious leapfrog.

 

[Watershed]

What if no TOC decide to bid for a franchise in a case such as this?

Then either the incumbent operator would be given an extension, or if terms could not be agreed, the DfT's Operator of Last Resort consultancy would step in.

However the system of franchising is dead and buried. There seems to be little sign the government is interested in TOCs doing anything beyond acting as private operators of last resort.

 

[the sniper]

Yes it does. But lets also look at where this is going. Aslef will no doubt be joining the RMT for pay rises, despite Aslef members being comfortably in the top 10% of earners in the UK. Not a good look in the current climate, and expecting tax payers to fund it isn't a good look. Rail need real reform and I'm not sure the unions will play ball.

How many years does the forum consider that the unions should wait before having the audacity to raise the issue of pay rises? This is year three for many with no pay rise, by the end of which a real terms loss of 20% will probably have occurred. I appreciate that the financial interests of staff are far from foremost in the minds of many enthusiasts/travellers, and industrial action will never be popular, particularly when many in other industries seem to have been well conditioned into the prospect of accepting ever worsening pay/conditions, because we mustn't grumble... But any active unionised workplace can not just accept perpetual pay freezes or massively below inflation offers at a time when 12% inflation is on the cards.

The real tragedy is that most workers in this country will just shrug off perpetual financial loss, thinking it should be considered the norm for all.

 

[Falcon1200]

The fault for that lies squarely with the government.

Surely there has to be some blame attached to the Unions for making impossible demands ?

But any active unionised workplace can not just accept perpetual pay freezes or massively below inflation offers at a time when 12% inflation is on the cards.

Does anyone seriously believe that railway staff will get an 12% (or anywhere near it) pay increase ?

 

[Nflkrail]

Surely there has to be some blame attached to the Unions for making impossible demands ?



Does anyone seriously believe that railway staff will get an 12% (or anywhere near it) pay increase ?

Crossrail drivers received 8.4% I believe. Others on locked in pay deals are getting similar. It's the rest of us being left behind.

 

[the sniper]

Does anyone seriously believe that railway staff will get an 12% (or anywhere near it) pay increase ?

Well I did throw about the 20% figure, but if you're offering 12%, I'd consider it...

I appreciate that some here ask for nothing and are continually successful in getting nothing, but that isn't typically how pay deals are negotiated.

 

[Falcon1200]

It's the rest of us being left behind.

Including us pensioners too; My monthly pension increase is less than half my monthly energy bill increase. But there's not a thing I can do to change that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

And where does the Government get that money from?

From obtaining more and more loans from their usual sources.

The Operator of Last Resort, otherwise the franchise ends, there are no TUPE transfers, all staff are redundant, there are no trains.

I hope no one in Government reads the above and thinks..."Now that's a good idea. Why didn't we think of it"

 

[Killingworth]

From obtaining more and more loans from their usual sources.


I hope no one in Government reads the above and thinks..."Now that's a good idea. Why didn't we think of it"

I think you'll find more than one or two already have - they don't like trains and all their subsidies! Some members of the opposition might also think the money could be better spent on the NHS etc.

 

[irish_rail]

Whilst I broadly agree, it does baffle me that Plymouth drivers don't sign Taunton to Bristol (unless this has changed recently)

Yes we were rather sorry to be forced into losing that route. But from December Plymouth drivers won't actually sign Bristol to Reading either so id say the writing is on the wall now for Plymouth going to London full stop. I mean why let a Plymouth man drive to London on a productive turn when you can throw money into training up a whole new bunch of drivers at a different depot to do the work (less productively too!). And people wonder why the railway is hemorrhaging money left right and centre..... although I'm referring to GWR this is also relevant id say to TPE.