[News] Braking news - more train strikes over the Christmas period announced

[Uh_huh_him]

they should be holding out for more pay for the changes. they shouldnt be blanket blocking all change. jobs will go, new jobs created. cant reasonably expect new tech or work practices that are more efficent, different locations or roles to require the same existing staff contracts. we the public are expecting weekend service, so we need Sunday working. or drop the pretence, so surprised how much the server relies on overtime and rest day working.

what will happen is they will eventually get larger pay, assurance on some issues, while other issues will disappear. they're all just bargining chips for the union.

They aren't blanket blocking - they have put it to their members.

I haven't seen a single quote from the RMT saying they won't negotiate on these terms.
The truth is that the offer on the table is there to be rejected, it isn't a serious offer.

It's the government who are playing politics.

 

[Whitechapel]

Yea its not your fault except that it was your choice but how about affecting business hours of transport how about not doing it at christmas time.

A strike that doesn’t inconvenience people. I’m sure that’ll be a rip roaring success.

 

[Reddleman]

9% over two years plus other benefits is already a good deal. To then have a commitment included that guarantees no compulsory redundancies till 2025 makes their unwillingness to recommend to members a complete joke. What other employees get that level of job security?

I had a lot of respect for Mick Lynch at the beginning but now it’s very clearly political and got nothing to do with the actual deal for the members. He and the overall union are a disgrace and the economic damage they are doing to other industries after two years of hardship is an absolute outrage. I wish the rail industry would grow a pair and fire them all and rehire on different terms.

 

[Reddleman]

I

I work in the private sector,
I haven't had a pay rise for 5 years, until this year.
I received only 4% because I'm in one of the higher salary bands. My colleagues on lower salary bands have received much higher increases.
None of this was dependant on changes to our terms and conditions.

Wages in the private sector have been rising over the past 18 months (generally) and most employers acknowledge they have to do something to assist their employees with the cost of living rises.

Pretending the offer put to the RMT is much better than what the private sector will see, is total bullshit.

It is better. I guarantee you none of the private sector offers include a guarantee of no redundancy until 2025.

 

[El Presidente]

Because they target days and times that affect the poor and this time of year is extremely cruel despite their good intentions for themselves

The poor can't afford the rail fares charged by the TOC's

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It is better. I guarantee you none of the private sector offers include a guarantee of no redundancy until 2025.

April 2024. Just 18 months.

Changes to work hours means Sunday will be an ordinary day so no overtime, in effect, a pay cut. Holiday entitlement reduced, sick pay reduced.

So wanting the same amount of work for less, so the shareholders can get £800 million in dividends. That is £800 million of tax payers money for a service that they aren't getting because the bosses at the top are getting thousands in bonuses.

It stinks.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

9% over two years plus other benefits is already a good deal. To then have a commitment included that guarantees no compulsory redundancies till 2025 makes their unwillingness to recommend to members a complete joke. What other employees get that level of job security?

I had a lot of respect for Mick Lynch at the beginning but now it’s very clearly political and got nothing to do with the actual deal for the members. He and the overall union are a disgrace and the economic damage they are doing to other industries after two years of hardship is an absolute outrage. I wish the rail industry would grow a pair and fire them all and rehire on different terms.

It isn't a good deal. Pure and simple.
It used to be the norm to refer to an annual rise as a cost of living increase.
It's supposed to keep wages in line with inflation. The offer is likely to see further real term reductions in pay.
Many employers will paying higher increases, without the need to change terms and conditions.

The strike has always been political as has the refusal by the government to allow a privatised company to negotiate with the union.
The RMT are right to highlight the profits being made by companies, who then claim "being held to ransom" by pay demands.

The government are happy to allow this to drag out because it stands a good chance of causing divisions in the labour party.

 

[Bozza]

April 2024. Just 18 months.

Changes to work hours means Sunday will be an ordinary day so no overtime, in effect, a pay cut. Holiday entitlement reduced, sick pay reduced.

So wanting the same amount of work for less, so the shareholders can get £800 million in dividends. That is £800 million of tax payers money for a service that they aren't getting because the bosses at the top are getting thousands in bonuses.

It stinks.

I've got no horse in this particular race. As is the case with Royal Mail now, I assume that rail services are unreliable, and I make other arrangements. Regardless of their cause, workers at these organisations erode confidence in their ability to provide a baseline service to the extent that people don't trust them and won't consider using them. Long-term that can't be a good thing.

However, shouldn't Sunday be an ordinary day in public transport? We're not in the 1970s any more - the world is far more open on Sundays than it ever was. Just because Sundays used to be special, allowing the pocketing of lucrative overtime, doesn't mean it should remain that way forever.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I've got no horse in this particular race. As is the case with Royal Mail now, I assume that rail services are unreliable, and I make other arrangements. Regardless of their cause, workers at these organisations erode confidence in their ability to provide a baseline service to the extent that people don't trust them and won't consider using them. Long-term that can't be a good thing.

However, shouldn't Sunday be an ordinary day in public transport? We're not in the 1970s any more - the world is far more open on Sundays than it ever was. Just because Sundays used to be special, allowing the pocketing of lucrative overtime, doesn't mean it should remain that way forever.

Agreed, but how many workers would allow their t's and c's to be eroded for no recompense?

I doubt there are many people who would gladly accept reduced annual leave and mandatory Sunday working in return for real terms pay cut.
I would be amazed if any private company would even consider putting that on the table.

 

[beorhthelm]

April 2024. Just 18 months.

Changes to work hours means Sunday will be an ordinary day so no overtime, in effect, a pay cut. Holiday entitlement reduced, sick pay reduced.

So wanting the same amount of work for less, so the shareholders can get £800 million in dividends. That is £800 million of tax payers money for a service that they aren't getting because the bosses at the top are getting thousands in bonuses.

It stinks.

the £800m number comes from a couple of companies global operations, including disposal of businesses abroad. do you know the actual dividends from UK operations? last time i looked operators made more from bus operations than rail.

 

[jackalbion]

Jack - please read that sentence again - I wasn’t accusing anyone of thinking that. It was a rhetorical question without a ‘they’. But is it a fact, there is collateral damage and that’s the passengers - there always is.

The strikes in the weekdays leading up to Christmas will indeed impact on me personally to the extent they coincide with a series of hospital appointments (which, if they cant be moved to non-strike days that week, will have to be rescheduled for next year - and also will impact on me (and millions of others) hoping to travel to family for Christmas (or more specifically for me if I am well enough to risk the journey, trying to get back on the 27th in time to start work again).

Anyone that has travelled on trains the day before or the day after a strike, or even earlier on the day a strike is supposed to start, will know, as I have discovered in the past 6 months, trains start late the next day (because stock is not where it’s supposed to be) and millions of people will end up travelling over Christmas on days that trains aren’t on strike, creating a bottle neck and congestion chaos - packed trains so unable to sit down, unable to get on trains because they are literally full - delayed and cancelled trains and staff shortages because of overtime bans. Anyone who thinks disruption is only caused on strike days has not experienced the full impact. Doing this in Christmas week will make Christmas a miserable experience for millions of people especially for elderly and disabled people, and could make people chose to spend Christmas alone rather than risk the chaos of delays and cancellations (on non-strike days!).

I travelled all over Europe when I was younger on the SNCF and I was always amazed at what a reliable, fast and modern service it was ( although Macron wants to privatise that) - The railways need to be renationalised IMO - it’s the only way out of this mess and for re-investment of the money we spend on rail fairs paid back into the infrastructure of our railway service and for staff to stop being exploited - and I will be voting for a Party (probably the Greens) at the next General Election to do just that but that is all I have to offer in terms of support I am afraid.

(I know there isn’t a ‘good time to strike’ but doing so at Christmas when people are already struggling with everything else in their lives, feels just downright destructive.)

I think we do agree that it needs investment, it does need to be renationalised in some form, but not under the Tories as they won’t invest.

 

[drew]

Agreed, but how many workers would allow their t's and c's to be eroded for no recompense?

I doubt there are many people who would gladly accept reduced annual leave and mandatory Sunday working in return for real terms pay cut.
I would be amazed if any private company would even consider putting that on the table.

Seems Bozza would!!

 

[Bozza]

Agreed, but how many workers would allow their t's and c's to be eroded for no recompense?

I doubt there are many people who would gladly accept reduced annual leave and mandatory Sunday working in return for real terms pay cut.
I would be amazed if any private company would even consider putting that on the table.

Oh, I'm sure.

As I say, I haven't followed this story closely at all, I was merely replying to the point about Sundays being "special". However, I certainly don't buy that reduction of overtime, in any job, represents a pay cut.

In my first ever job when I came out of university, weekend overtime was very much a thing; many people would do five hours each Saturday morning as a result. Two hours "travel time" was given for working on a weekend, and the whole lot was doubled, so 14 hours pay was received for a very easy five hours work.

Some people became accustomed to this big boost in their pay and largely structured their outgoings around it. It was never guaranteed though and, when it stopped, as it did periodically, mild panic would set in.

In short, just because the availability of overtime has nearly always been available, doesn't mean it always will. Didn't we previously see some de facto striking when rail workers refused to work overtime? If nothing else, that signals that it shouldn't be a cornerstone in the provision of a vital public service.

 

[jackalbion]

I think it’s perfectly fair to say it, that’s what people in his position are, as are industries that haven’t had Christmas trade for two years.

The Unions are paid to look after members which is what they are doing, that’s fine - but it is a case of screw everyone else to get to that.

They are not doing it for anyone else other than members, which is again fine, but let’s not pretend otherwise.

I think as a society we will all benefit from a solution in this strike, but I do accept your point that a lot of people are inconvenienced. I’m not in the view that anyone finding a way around without using the railway is strike breaking (like some Lewes supporting moron on twitter who claimed BHAFC were scabbing the RMT by putting on buses), the point is to disrupt the train service not the entirety of peoples lives, and it frustrates me when some people just want that, I don’t think that’s right.

 

[Bozza]

Seems Bozza would!!

As above - not at all.

I'm just saying that I don't believe Sundays should be seen as "special" in the provision of an essential public service in 2022.

 

[jackalbion]

only one that looks unreasonable is closure of all ticket office, which i also dont believe is true. i particularly like adoption of new technology put there, as if learning new tools and advancing skills is an imposition. it also shows a union literally stuck in the past.

Interesting you chose to completely ignore the new railway technology I used as an example, that has been brought in with Union assist, and then just said the same thing again based on no information.

 

[beorhthelm]

Interesting you chose to completely ignore the new railway technology I used as an example, that has been brought in with Union assist, and then just said the same thing again based on no information.

interesting term "union assist", as if they should the ones deciding what is and isnt used. which is the point really. i should have qualified the previous remark they block any change that alters jobs.

 

[Glawstergull]

Its broken with no way of fixing.
Trying to get one set of people with agenda A cooperate with the other on agenda Z is impossible.
Big business and a Militant Union who both have no interest in its customers or the public purse.
Find a wall, line them and pull the trigger
Then start anew.

 

[jackalbion]

interesting term "union assist", as if they should the ones deciding what is and isnt used. which is the point really. i should have qualified the previous remark they block any change that alters jobs.

Well considering their members use the software and technology, shouldn’t they be the ones that decide whether it works in practice? Or should we just use unworkable software, because it costs less but is inefficient or has large on the ground caveats which lessen operation, the railways is a big cog of people, and just saying one side sit around saying they refuse to update systems is completely baseless, there’s things they block and things they don’t block, not everything is down the Union. I can think of some Big examples where moving technology too quickly on the cheap has meant that it’s caused huge problems on the railways, introduction of Class 700s on Thameslink being a big one that still hasn‘t been fixed.

 

[Springal]

Well considering their members use the software and technology, shouldn’t they be the ones that decide whether it works in practice? Or should we just use unworkable software, because it costs less but is inefficient or has large on the ground caveats which lessen operation, the railways is a big cog of people, and just saying one side sit around saying they refuse to update systems is completely baseless, there’s things they block and things they don’t block, not everything is down the Union. I can think of some Big examples where moving technology too quickly on the cheap has meant that it’s caused huge problems on the railways, introduction of Class 700s on Thameslink being a big one that still hasn‘t been fixed.

If we relied on unions and your average Doris worker to make IT / technology decisions we’d still be running Windows XP everywhere