RMT union vote for a national rail strike

[Legacywr]

Question Time BBC1 now.

[Mr Dendrite]

valiant said:

Carbon Sasquatch said:

It's a different culture & maybe you haven't experienced both.

Compulsory redundancy can be for either the worst performers when reducing a team size or for roles no longer needed.

VR typically attracts 2 types - early retirement & the best people, with long service who know they can get another job.

The people you want to get rid of almost never apply for VR.

No compulsory redundancy ever, under any circumstances suits the slackers in any organisation.

The ‘people you want to get rid of’ should be performance managed out of the business. Poor employees should be dealt with with effective and proactive management and should not rely on VR in the hope they apply or use CR to get rid and end up with a demoralised workforce. There are processes in place just like in any other workplace to deal with poor performance and these would have been agreed with the unions prior. As long as the process is followed to the letter then there’s nothing a union can do.

Using CR to rid yourself of troublesome employees is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Sounds effective the way you state it. But, huge but, in reality performance management is a massive drain on resource, time, effort and money by a company and unless it it is carried out very precisely it usually ends up costing the company more than a straight redundancy would have done in the first place. Performance warnings, performance improvement plans, written warnings etc etc You will almost inevitably end up with compromise agreements and non disclosures etc etc. Performance managing someone is effectively a process in destroying them to try and make them leave before the company has to open its cheque book. A badly used and unpleasant process for all concerned.

[rigga]

valiant said:

The ‘people you want to get rid of’ should be performance managed out of the business. Poor employees should be dealt with with effective and proactive management and should not rely on VR in the hope they apply or use CR to get rid and end up with a demoralised workforce. There are processes in place just like in any other workplace to deal with poor performance and these would have been agreed with the unions prior. As long as the process is followed to the letter then there’s nothing a union can do.

Using CR to rid yourself of troublesome employees is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

In 19 years I knew of no one being disciplined and sacked for poor performance , and there were quite a few who qualified . And quite a few incidents that deserved it.

Management simply didn't bother ,they were not interested in confrontation , those who caused issues were moved between teams to move the issue on, in the hope another manager could harness them better .

Everyone who started had the best intentions and often was a good worker , but working in an environment where everyone was paid the same regardless of effort, eventually work rate dropped to the lowest level.

VR was offered just after I left , but restricted to certain grades .

Large maintenance depot based for a TOC.

I worked in a different industry for the same number of years before I joined the railway, and often thought it was shambolic.

Edited by rigga on Thursday 23 June 23:11

[Ouroboros]

That was similar to my experience.

I think no one begrudges paying high wages, they work shifts etc, but let's get real. The gov is up to it eye balls in debt, the railway is debt loaded as well. There is a limit.

[Vasco]

rigga said:

valiant said:

The ‘people you want to get rid of’ should be performance managed out of the business. Poor employees should be dealt with with effective and proactive management and should not rely on VR in the hope they apply or use CR to get rid and end up with a demoralised workforce. There are processes in place just like in any other workplace to deal with poor performance and these would have been agreed with the unions prior. As long as the process is followed to the letter then there’s nothing a union can do.

Using CR to rid yourself of troublesome employees is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

In 19 years I knew of no one being disciplined and sacked for poor performance , and there were quite a few who qualified . And quite a few incidents that deserved it.

Management simply didn't bother ,they were not interested in confrontation , those who caused issues were moved between teams to move the issue on, in the hope another manager could harness them better .

Everyone who started had the best intentions and often was a good worker , but working in an environment where everyone was paid the same regardless of effort, eventually work rate dropped to the lowest level.

VR was offered just after I left , but restricted to certain grades .

Large maintenance depot based for a TOC.

I worked in a different industry for the same number of years before I joined the railway, and often thought it was shambolic.

Edited by rigga on Thursday 23 June 23:11

If that had been me I would have been utterly frustrated if there was no proper control exerted over colleagues who didn't pull their weight.
Interesting that you decided to leave. It often appears that there must be a very low turnover of rail staff - once employed they stay in the railways for ever more!

[survivalist]

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

[rigga]

Vasco said:

rigga said:

valiant said:

The ‘people you want to get rid of’ should be performance managed out of the business. Poor employees should be dealt with with effective and proactive management and should not rely on VR in the hope they apply or use CR to get rid and end up with a demoralised workforce. There are processes in place just like in any other workplace to deal with poor performance and these would have been agreed with the unions prior. As long as the process is followed to the letter then there’s nothing a union can do.

Using CR to rid yourself of troublesome employees is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

In 19 years I knew of no one being disciplined and sacked for poor performance , and there were quite a few who qualified . And quite a few incidents that deserved it.

Management simply didn't bother ,they were not interested in confrontation , those who caused issues were moved between teams to move the issue on, in the hope another manager could harness them better .

Everyone who started had the best intentions and often was a good worker , but working in an environment where everyone was paid the same regardless of effort, eventually work rate dropped to the lowest level.

VR was offered just after I left , but restricted to certain grades .

Large maintenance depot based for a TOC.

I worked in a different industry for the same number of years before I joined the railway, and often thought it was shambolic.

Edited by rigga on Thursday 23 June 23:11

If that had been me I would have been utterly frustrated if there was no proper control exerted over colleagues who didn't pull their weight.
Interesting that you decided to leave. It often appears that there must be a very low turnover of rail staff - once employed they stay in the railways for ever more!

I retired 15 months back , was at the point I'd had enough , and I could , never felt better.
I was in a small team of 6 initially , focussed on fleet reliability, which was fault finding, attending failures in service and serious incident testing , including fatalities. Interesting work .

The main body was employed for general servicing , which I had to do for the first two years there, mind numbing after a while , as you were constantly doing the same jobs , hamstrung at times by organisational problems ,meaning units didn't arrive on time and couldn't be completed fully before release back to service, deferred work just ramped up over time and was always a loosing battle.
This did impact moral as pressure was constant to get the units out , people get pissed off, and start rebelling and dragging heels .

Once you see someone just sitting around a lot. Eventually others follow , it just spirals . Money is good if you can hack the shifts , know you're going to be working when everyone else is out enjoying the!selves , Christmas and New year included .

Two points regarding this current dispute
Not everyone in the railway has Sunday outside of their normal working week , it certainly was very much part of mine , and as always with railway quirks, was actually the first day of any week.
Pensions are being attacked currently , extending from 62 to 65. This was recently extended from 60 to 62 ,so I can see why they will fight this hard, shift working has been proven to shorten life expectancy, to keep moving the goal posts where someone can retire and hopefully enjoy retirement will jar.

Pensions take a big chunk out of the workers wages ,they don't just have them given to them.

[Gary C]

Ridgemont said:

To be fair any job would be preferable.

I hear that a lot on here.

My Grandad and my Dad enjoyed their time down the pit.

Hard and reasonably dangerous, but a good job they enjoyed. My Dads first job was looking after the pit ponies.

[stitched]

survivalist said:

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

The majority of people I know, from working self employed as a maintenance engineer in factories spread from the south of France to London, know better than to rely on rail as a means of transport.
If I needed to be somewhere, at a reasonable cost I would use a different method and I think most people the same.
If our rail network performed like Japans or Switzerlands, might be more examples out there but those two I have enjoyed, then perhaps it would be worth the expense.
It doesn't and it isn't.

[Vasco]

stitched said:

survivalist said:

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

The majority of people I know, from working self employed as a maintenance engineer in factories spread from the south of France to London, know better than to rely on rail as a means of transport.
If I needed to be somewhere, at a reasonable cost I would use a different method and I think most people the same.
If our rail network performed like Japans or Switzerlands, might be more examples out there but those two I have enjoyed, then perhaps it would be worth the expense.
It doesn't and it isn't.

It's all a bit depressing isn't it. Ironically, I'd been trying to use the trains a bit more, to save so much driving, but it hasn't really worked out. I'm not expecting Japanese or Swiss standards but I would like both RELIABILITY and a FAIR PRICE.
I've done a few jaunts around the country by train in recent years and the various delays haven't been too bad, particularly as some are outside the railways control (trespassers, suicide etc) but, in more recent times, the number of cancellations has been ridiculous.
I have a car, and enjoy the flexibility that it gives me - both time of day/night and direct travel. Despite the current cost of petrol I will generally use the car as it's simply more convenient. Once you have a car, and accept the overall running costs, the extra mileage becomes of marginal concern and some rail fares then look absolutely crazy.

[I Know Nothing]

rigga said:

In 19 years I knew of no one being disciplined and sacked for poor performance , and there were quite a few who qualified . And quite a few incidents that deserved it.

Management simply didn't bother ,they were not interested in confrontation , those who caused issues were moved between teams to move the issue on, in the hope another manager could harness them better .

Everyone who started had the best intentions and often was a good worker , but working in an environment where everyone was paid the same regardless of effort, eventually work rate dropped to the lowest level.

VR was offered just after I left , but restricted to certain grades .

Large maintenance depot based for a TOC.

I worked in a different industry for the same number of years before I joined the railway, and often thought it was shambolic.

Edited by rigga on Thursday 23 June 23:11

Then shouldn't the sacking, pay reductions and renegotiation of contract start with senior managers, it is they who are failing.

[ChocolateFrog]

survivalist said:

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

Well it probably hasn't impacted print journalists atleast.

Was discussing that article today and like I said previously, the passenger numbers at Leeds were down by atleast 98%, I was looking at it with my own eyes.

When there's more staff than punters at 1600 on a weekday in Leeds there's definitely a big impact whatever the media want to tell you.

[biggles330d]

ChocolateFrog said:

survivalist said:

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

Well it probably hasn't impacted print journalists atleast.

Was discussing that article today and like I said previously, the passenger numbers at Leeds were down by atleast 98%, I was looking at it with my own eyes.

When there's more staff than punters at 1600 on a weekday in Leeds there's definitely a big impact whatever the media want to tell you.

i think the point is that the world hasn't stopped as it might once have done. I know loads of people who had started to return to the office and this week simple worked from home. No real disruption as such, other than to the coffee and sandwich sellers.
What that says to me is that strikes hold no real fear like they once did. The impact is marginal. In fact, over those few days this week the employers in the industry have probably saved a fortune from not having to run loss making trains.

[biggles330d]

I Know Nothing said:

rigga said:

In 19 years I knew of no one being disciplined and sacked for poor performance , and there were quite a few who qualified . And quite a few incidents that deserved it.

Management simply didn't bother ,they were not interested in confrontation , those who caused issues were moved between teams to move the issue on, in the hope another manager could harness them better .

Everyone who started had the best intentions and often was a good worker , but working in an environment where everyone was paid the same regardless of effort, eventually work rate dropped to the lowest level.

VR was offered just after I left , but restricted to certain grades .

Large maintenance depot based for a TOC.

I worked in a different industry for the same number of years before I joined the railway, and often thought it was shambolic.

Edited by rigga on Thursday 23 June 23:11

Then shouldn't the sacking, pay reductions and renegotiation of contract start with senior managers, it is they who are failing.

I can imagine the sort of senior manager you are taking about. Comes in being a hard ass, taking on the slackers. Unionised workforce round on him and it is impossible to tackle the root problem without the union stopping the job. Hence the first point that management becomes mostly about cajoling a workforce to do the job to any standard they want. I doubt any managers are paid enough to deal with the crap of trying.

My O/H works in education and its the same. She has to forever play the long game because it's almost impossible to get rid of woeful performers. All that ends up happening is they get pushed around or tolerated and worked around as best as possible which is massively demotivating for those who genuinely do want to do a great job.

[survivalist]

biggles330d said:

ChocolateFrog said:

survivalist said:

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

Well it probably hasn't impacted print journalists atleast.

Was discussing that article today and like I said previously, the passenger numbers at Leeds were down by atleast 98%, I was looking at it with my own eyes.

When there's more staff than punters at 1600 on a weekday in Leeds there's definitely a big impact whatever the media want to tell you.

i think the point is that the world hasn't stopped as it might once have done. I know loads of people who had started to return to the office and this week simple worked from home. No real disruption as such, other than to the coffee and sandwich sellers.
What that says to me is that strikes hold no real fear like they once did. The impact is marginal. In fact, over those few days this week the employers in the industry have probably saved a fortune from not having to run loss making trains.

The commuter train I use twice a week was really starting to fill up, but suspect that this week the majority did just that - log on remotely and plan to head back in to the office next week.

That’s the challenge with commuter trains - a big % of the occupants are office workers.

They are also, one would imagine, some of the most profitable trains to run.

Massive reduction in season ticket holders also means a bigger financial hit.

[Tlandcruiser]

survivalist said:

They are also, one would imagine, some of the most profitable trains to run.

It’s the day trippers/ leisure customers which are the most profitable

[S17Thumper]

ChocolateFrog said:

survivalist said:

Seems like these strikes haven’t had the disruptive effect they might have had previously. Biggest impact seems to have been retail and hospitality.

Train strikes: Why haven't they caused more disruption?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61857007

Well it probably hasn't impacted print journalists atleast.

Was discussing that article today and like I said previously, the passenger numbers at Leeds were down by atleast 98%, I was looking at it with my own eyes.

When there's more staff than punters at 1600 on a weekday in Leeds there's definitely a big impact whatever the media want to tell you.

You miss the point, there are far far fewer people who must get to work these days.

They go, ‘oh well’ and work from home.

No real impact for those people. The railway is no longer as crucial for them, thats a weakness for those striking.

[kestral]

Legacywr said:

How can you think it’s even possible NOT to have CR in any industry/jobs market?

Because under the socialist Labour governments of the 70's it was an agreement in the rule book that there would be no compulsory redundancies on the railway, only job redeployment.

As did many other nationalised industries.

Privatisation removed that from the rule book but the RMT still have it as their policy.

[FiF]

Can imagine a teacher's strike would have an impact. All those families who now have to stay at home or arrange childcare somehow.

[Legacywr]

kestral said:

Legacywr said:

How can you think it’s even possible NOT to have CR in any industry/jobs market?

Because under the socialist Labour governments of the 70's it was an agreement in the rule book that there would be no compulsory redundancies on the railway, only job redeployment.

As did many other nationalised industries.

Privatisation removed that from the rule book but the RMT still have it as their policy.

Stereotypically, unions are 40 years behind the times I guess.