RMT union vote for a national rail strike
Discussion
Slaav said:
Honestly bothered by the bit in bold…. And really not being contentious but is the true role of a union in this day and age to call a strike so that people who would possibly willingly accept the new contracts get the old ones?
It slightly reminds me of the Fireman/Firefighters striking back in c. Dec 2002/3. The union were demanding something like a 45% pay rise but without that, there were still plenty of applicants for every vacancy. In London, they had something like 500 applicants per vacancy? (It might have been 50 or even 150 but that doesn’t sound Daily Mail enough…)
That was possibly the worst thought out strike ever. I don't think most of the public realised what a sweet deal firemen were on until then. It slightly reminds me of the Fireman/Firefighters striking back in c. Dec 2002/3. The union were demanding something like a 45% pay rise but without that, there were still plenty of applicants for every vacancy. In London, they had something like 500 applicants per vacancy? (It might have been 50 or even 150 but that doesn’t sound Daily Mail enough…)
legzr1 said:
Electro1980 said:
. What exactly is it that makes it difficult?
Cost and timescale.There was a clue in my question that you found strange…
Edited by Electro1980 on Sunday 29th May 07:38
Derek Smith said:
Sorry if this has been mentioned before.
The effects will be blunted by WFH I reckon. It will increase the workload of Mogg who will have to carry a lot more passive-aggressive cards around with him for a while, but for everyone else it might well be a return to new normal.
Trains are very busy at the weekend, with leisure commuters making up a huge percent of footfall, so the strikes will just be at the weekend no doubt. The effects will be blunted by WFH I reckon. It will increase the workload of Mogg who will have to carry a lot more passive-aggressive cards around with him for a while, but for everyone else it might well be a return to new normal.
What wrong with a sector or industry with good pay and conditions for their staff? There seems to be a load of people on this thread that hate the fact that train drivers get a good wage, I find it really bizarre. I wouldn’t want to drive train all day and have the constant thought of suicidal people viewing your train as the perfect way out on a daily basis.
I haven’t got a vested interest in anything rail but I do work in engineering, the water industry. Over the last few years here are some of the changes made to our contracts, no extra wages has been offered for any of these
All new starters on a lower wage than existing workers, 5k less a year
7 years to reach top of the band
Single time is now 7am till 7pm
Cant claim a call out payment when on call before 7pm
Moving working time when on call to 11am - 7pm
Training to be duel skilled as an electrician, 16 week course then off you go on 400v live working
Have to wear trackers with management now able to watch and track out movements all day
Compare this with the changes to supervisors and management
Can work from home most of the time
Change in car allowance, now get 5k a year on top of wages and 11p a mile for your own car rather than a company car
Our union is crap, a union can only be as strong as their trump card of strike action, we have lost this. I always wonder why people are happy to smash front line workers wages and rights when there could be chance your own kids might want to work in that industry one day. It’s like stitching your own kids up?
I haven’t got a vested interest in anything rail but I do work in engineering, the water industry. Over the last few years here are some of the changes made to our contracts, no extra wages has been offered for any of these
All new starters on a lower wage than existing workers, 5k less a year
7 years to reach top of the band
Single time is now 7am till 7pm
Cant claim a call out payment when on call before 7pm
Moving working time when on call to 11am - 7pm
Training to be duel skilled as an electrician, 16 week course then off you go on 400v live working
Have to wear trackers with management now able to watch and track out movements all day
Compare this with the changes to supervisors and management
Can work from home most of the time
Change in car allowance, now get 5k a year on top of wages and 11p a mile for your own car rather than a company car
Our union is crap, a union can only be as strong as their trump card of strike action, we have lost this. I always wonder why people are happy to smash front line workers wages and rights when there could be chance your own kids might want to work in that industry one day. It’s like stitching your own kids up?
Gooose said:
What wrong with a sector or industry with good pay and conditions for their staff? There seems to be a load of people on this thread that hate the fact that train drivers get a good wage, I find it really bizarre.
Passenger numbers are still way down on pre-pandemic numbers and the railways are being kept afloat by public subsidy even more than they were before. Any pay rise therefore will be coming from the taxpayer. That is why people might want to have a moan.
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is that the change in the law regarding ballot numbers and minimum thresholds for a ‘yes’ vote has changed the way negotiations between unions and management are conducted and consequently we’re hearing about a lot more industrial action than maybe before.
Time was was when it was only when negotiations broke down did the unions ballot for some sort of action whereas nowadays it seems that balloting is seen as part of the negotiation process.
Management may seem confident that the ‘yes vote’ threshold will not be reached and so will be rock solid in their position and not move an inch so going into negotiations with an already approved ballot shows management that the opposite is the case. It’s been the case before where management gave away concessions needlessly when it subsequently went to a ballot and the threshold was NOT reached. They felt they gave stuff away prematurely.
This is proved by the localised station dispute on the tube very recently (which raised a short thread here) where a strike was called and a convincing yes vote attained where a solution was then found and the strike called off.
A strike isn’t happening until it’s actually happening and a lot can change between now and then.
Time was was when it was only when negotiations broke down did the unions ballot for some sort of action whereas nowadays it seems that balloting is seen as part of the negotiation process.
Management may seem confident that the ‘yes vote’ threshold will not be reached and so will be rock solid in their position and not move an inch so going into negotiations with an already approved ballot shows management that the opposite is the case. It’s been the case before where management gave away concessions needlessly when it subsequently went to a ballot and the threshold was NOT reached. They felt they gave stuff away prematurely.
This is proved by the localised station dispute on the tube very recently (which raised a short thread here) where a strike was called and a convincing yes vote attained where a solution was then found and the strike called off.
A strike isn’t happening until it’s actually happening and a lot can change between now and then.
Edited by valiant on Sunday 29th May 10:01
Leicester Loyal said:
A hell of a lot of replies so please bare with me, only just woke up from a nightshift. Let me also say that I respect all opinions, if I was annoyed by these strikes as it was effecting my commute then I'd probably hold the same opinion as some of you.
Basic negotiating, someone in local govt should surely know if we go in and ask for 5%, we'll get offered 2. If we ask for 11, we'll probably end up with 4 or 5, which most of us would accept I believe.
For a lot of us though, it's not about the money, it's about other things, we know there's going to be compulsory redundancies, we know they're slimming down the workforce, we know there's plans to attack the pensions in the next few years, we know there's plans to automate the industry, we know we're an aging workforce, we know we're losing vital knowledge. We've saw first hand in the past months what happened at British Gas, and the plans are to do the same to us, fire and re-hire, we will obviously fight our hardest to stop that.
There's enough older lads leaving in the next few years to ensure the workforce is shrunken down slightly anyway.
One lad has just handed in his resignation and got a sales job on exactly the same money as he was on here, Monday to Friday, working from home 3 days a week, no shifts, no weekends, no nights, less stress, no pressure of something going wrong and someone getting seriously hurt, no putting your name to a piece of work that if something happens will have you dragged through court and charged etc. I applaud him for his decision.
The maintenance periods are becoming less and less frequent, which means assets are more likely to fail/break, causing even more faults and potentially a serious issue. We've seen past incidents on the railway which have resulted in injury or death because of a lack of or poor maintenance. Less boots on the ground means less maintenance. The red tape and paperwork that comes with the job is unbelievable, you wouldn't believe it unless you actually worked within the sector, long gone are the days of turning up to site and getting straight on with your job.
2 man teams rather than 3, much more pressure on each individual, adding to workload, which is what we're finding at the minute, day in day out.
Cheers for all the questions, genuinely enjoy discussing it with others outside of the union and the sector, even if most of you don't agree with what we're doing. I hope it doesn't come to a strike and something can be done prior to that.
Just reading this thread, thanks for that comprehensive answer Leicester!! Johnnytheboy said:
Do they struggle to recruit railway staff because of the low wages?
Depends on your area, the discipline and the job. You very rarely walk straight off the street and start in my discipline, you go through the apprenticeship or come from a different discipline.Kwackersaki said:
Genuine question, in what ways do they waste money?
I work in manufacturing in the private sector and it always amazes me how much companies waste and how resistant people are to change to prevent it.
Christ how long have you got? Poor planning from managers, conflicting disciplines working on the same patch, procurement is a disgrace, they pay many multiples of RRP, silly management or company ideas, the latest good one was paying millions for van trackers/driving aids, then a year or so later not paying the bill so the whole system was stopped. I could sit here all day, but it's probably things that you witness on a daily basis, when questioned it's just 'the way things are'.I work in manufacturing in the private sector and it always amazes me how much companies waste and how resistant people are to change to prevent it.
Ian Geary said:
It strikes (haha) me that the RMT have an outdated militant streak running through it
- the idea they're clinging to "rights" they "earned" -basicically blackmail, because they can. Classy
- they announce strike action before even starting negotiations
The govt have a manifesto pledge about ensuring minimum services during strikes..the RMT are sailing close to the wind with this militant nonsense from the 70s, and they're going to get very little sympathy from the public if the govt push it through (unlike say the junior doctor debacle a few years ago)
Also, they seem to be dreaming about an 11% pay rise, no compulsory redundancy etc. Who on earth expects that? It's pie in the sky.
I'm in local govt, and we've had compulsory redundancies, teams shrink, work increase etc Ok we got 1.75% last year, and looking at perhaps about 4% for the coming year.
Anyone expecting 11% would be laughed out of the room.
It would be interesting if staff could do something about the waste.. I can't believe it's all top down - there will be bottom up waste too, where staff just CBA, "not my job" etc
We've been trying to negotiate for 30 months now, we aren't getting anywhere, hence we're reluctantly striking. You think this is what people want? Some lads are in the same position that the UK is, wages barely covering bills etc. A strike day means we'll lose a days pay, but most of us are prepared to stomach that for what we believe is the greater good in the long run.- the idea they're clinging to "rights" they "earned" -basicically blackmail, because they can. Classy
- they announce strike action before even starting negotiations
The govt have a manifesto pledge about ensuring minimum services during strikes..the RMT are sailing close to the wind with this militant nonsense from the 70s, and they're going to get very little sympathy from the public if the govt push it through (unlike say the junior doctor debacle a few years ago)
Also, they seem to be dreaming about an 11% pay rise, no compulsory redundancy etc. Who on earth expects that? It's pie in the sky.
I'm in local govt, and we've had compulsory redundancies, teams shrink, work increase etc Ok we got 1.75% last year, and looking at perhaps about 4% for the coming year.
Anyone expecting 11% would be laughed out of the room.
It would be interesting if staff could do something about the waste.. I can't believe it's all top down - there will be bottom up waste too, where staff just CBA, "not my job" etc
Basic negotiating, someone in local govt should surely know if we go in and ask for 5%, we'll get offered 2. If we ask for 11, we'll probably end up with 4 or 5, which most of us would accept I believe.
For a lot of us though, it's not about the money, it's about other things, we know there's going to be compulsory redundancies, we know they're slimming down the workforce, we know there's plans to attack the pensions in the next few years, we know there's plans to automate the industry, we know we're an aging workforce, we know we're losing vital knowledge. We've saw first hand in the past months what happened at British Gas, and the plans are to do the same to us, fire and re-hire, we will obviously fight our hardest to stop that.
Welshbeef said:
From what I gather they are asking for
11% pay rise
Job security
No redundancies
That isn’t possible to deliver. 11% pay rise means instant ticket price rise
You say poor management? We say changing dynamic - lower consumers period wFH
I honestly think we'd accept a tiny or even no payrise in exchange for job security and no compulsory redundancies. 11% pay rise
Job security
No redundancies
That isn’t possible to deliver. 11% pay rise means instant ticket price rise
You say poor management? We say changing dynamic - lower consumers period wFH
There's enough older lads leaving in the next few years to ensure the workforce is shrunken down slightly anyway.
Vasco said:
Well said.
The rail unions never help themselves by their apparent arrogance and 'bully boy' tactics to get their own way. If they ever considered other people and realised that most rail staff are already well paid it might be a start. However, the union simply say that other people are no concern of theirs and that their demands must be met or they'll hold the country to ransom (overall, for the country as a whole freight trains can be more essential than passenger trains).
The unions need to get rid of various outdated practices and accept revised T&Cs covering Sundays, rest day and overtime payments, ticket office automation etc etc.
Only then should a fair pay rise be considered.
I probably work in the best paid discipline, and about half of us don't earn a basic wage higher than the national average salary. You want to get rid of T&Cs for covering Sundays, nights weekends etc. and you want lads to do all this for 23k a year? They'll all just leave if that happened.The rail unions never help themselves by their apparent arrogance and 'bully boy' tactics to get their own way. If they ever considered other people and realised that most rail staff are already well paid it might be a start. However, the union simply say that other people are no concern of theirs and that their demands must be met or they'll hold the country to ransom (overall, for the country as a whole freight trains can be more essential than passenger trains).
The unions need to get rid of various outdated practices and accept revised T&Cs covering Sundays, rest day and overtime payments, ticket office automation etc etc.
Only then should a fair pay rise be considered.
One lad has just handed in his resignation and got a sales job on exactly the same money as he was on here, Monday to Friday, working from home 3 days a week, no shifts, no weekends, no nights, less stress, no pressure of something going wrong and someone getting seriously hurt, no putting your name to a piece of work that if something happens will have you dragged through court and charged etc. I applaud him for his decision.
Mr Spoon said:
See, if you do work for the rail, then I have no empathy for you. If you do not like your working conditions go find a new job, but wait, your job is so much easier than having to be accountable in the real world, that you would prefer to moan and groan and go on strike. Good work.
I worked for years for a pittance doing an apprenticeship to train up to be able to do this job, of course I'm going to fight to make it better for myself. I enjoy my job and want to carry on doing it. I also want to fight to keep the rights that the past generations have obtained for us. I suggest you start a union yourself and improve your working conditions, that's what I'd like to see across many sectors personally, but I know it's probably not possible.Biggy Stardust said:
Further genuine question- in what way does it compromise safety? I hear this phrase trotted out regularly but with no explanation.
A couple of reasons in my opinionThe maintenance periods are becoming less and less frequent, which means assets are more likely to fail/break, causing even more faults and potentially a serious issue. We've seen past incidents on the railway which have resulted in injury or death because of a lack of or poor maintenance. Less boots on the ground means less maintenance. The red tape and paperwork that comes with the job is unbelievable, you wouldn't believe it unless you actually worked within the sector, long gone are the days of turning up to site and getting straight on with your job.
2 man teams rather than 3, much more pressure on each individual, adding to workload, which is what we're finding at the minute, day in day out.
Cheers for all the questions, genuinely enjoy discussing it with others outside of the union and the sector, even if most of you don't agree with what we're doing. I hope it doesn't come to a strike and something can be done prior to that.
Vickers_VC10 said:
Trains are very busy at the weekend, with leisure commuters making up a huge percent of footfall, so the strikes will just be at the weekend no doubt.
Nobody really cares about that though. The impressive reporting comes from shutting down commuter services, with 20 mile traffic jams and thousands of people milling around bus stops. The commuters (such as they are) these days will just WFH. I suspect you could shut down the main line into Paddington for a week, and barely anyone would notice.
If they strike at the weekend, then more people will drive, but there won’t be anything like the chaos. Weekend/holiday trains have played second fiddle to commuter trains for decades.
The ability of the railway workers to bring the country to its knees ended in February 2020. Automation will finish it off over time, if they can automate a car, they can certainly automate a train.
JagLover said:
Any pay rise therefore will be coming from the taxpayer. That is why people might want to have a moan.
We’re into the third year of a three year (so far) pay freeze, and other public sector employees have had rises in his period.The cost of living is soaring.
When is the point that it would be reasonable to have pay rise, if now is the wrong time?
Gooose said:
What wrong with a sector or industry with good pay and conditions for their staff? There seems to be a load of people on this thread that hate the fact that train drivers get a good wage, I find it really bizarre. I wouldn’t want to drive train all day and have the constant thought of suicidal people viewing your train as the perfect way out on a daily basis.
Good terms and conditions obtained by blackmail. The rest of us have to work in a free market and get paid accordingly. I don't care what anyone earns if it's driven by a free market. There will be a reason why it's well paid (skills, desirability, training, commitment).Add to that the general attitude of most rail workers to customers and people not part of their "club" and you can see why they are hated (I have worked in the rail industry so have direct experience).
If the job doesn't pay what you want then don't sign up to be a train driver. Close a career that pays you what you want.
98elise said:
Gooose said:
What wrong with a sector or industry with good pay and conditions for their staff? There seems to be a load of people on this thread that hate the fact that train drivers get a good wage, I find it really bizarre. I wouldn’t want to drive train all day and have the constant thought of suicidal people viewing your train as the perfect way out on a daily basis.
Good terms and conditions obtained by blackmail. The rest of us have to work in a free market and get paid accordingly. I don't care what anyone earns if it's driven by a free market. There will be a reason why it's well paid (skills, desirability, training, commitment).Add to that the general attitude of most rail workers to customers and people not part of their "club" and you can see why they are hated (I have worked in the rail industry so have direct experience).
If the job doesn't pay what you want then don't sign up to be a train driver. Close a career that pays you what you want.
With regard to your free market point, train drivers salaries went up due to the free market privatisation created, if one company paid more than another, drivers would apply for a job there.
Paying a bit more than another company and attracting qualified drivers meant less training costs for the recruiting company too.
2xChevrons said:
In general - people who think that driving a train is just pulling a lever to 'go' and another to 'stop' are operating on about the same level of insight as those who think that airliner pilots don't have to do anything because it's all done by autopilot these days. I hope no one would say that flying a Airbus A380 wasn't without skill, risk, judgement or difficulty.
More specifically:
Train drivers have to 'sign' for both a route and a type of traction (the specific model of train). Signing a route means the driver is fully conversant with every yard of track, the location and amount of every change in speed limit, the location, type, number and meaning of every signal, the location, designation and number of every set of points, the location and number of every platform, the name and length of every tunnel, the location and type of every crossing, every change in gradient (and what that gradient is) and so on. And that includes all the passing loops, every running line and all possible routings through stations - it's no good only knowing the 'proper' route up a main line if there's a diversion one day and you're routed onto another one.
Here's an old route-learning video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANKeWdBylHs - this one's fairly short but everything the narrator mentions has to be memorised and understood. And drivers can end up having to know routes hundreds of miles long, and can sign for multiple routes at once. As well as all these fixed features, route knowledge includes knowing the braking points (when to decelerate or brake - and by how much - for stations, junctions or speed limit changes), and the location of bridges, tunnels, wayside structures and even distinctive bumps or humps in the line, wobbly bits of track and so on so they can be sure of exactly where they are (and, therefore, where they are in relation to crucial things like signals and speed restrictions) even if they're driving completely blind in a thick fog or a dark night. They have to know where, say, traffic lights and street lamps could be confused with railway signals, and how other trains on other running tracks will appear, so they don't get a heart-stopping moment as they round a curve and see a train and a taillight seemingly right in front of them - it's actually on an adjacent running line but the curvature of the track makes it seem directly ahead. I've seen some drivers' route-learning notes that included notes of sounds and smells from trackside factories, farms etc.
Signing for 'traction' is like type rating for aircraft - it means the driver is fully conversant with the technical aspects of the unit, what its limitations are, how its systems work; does it have EP brakes, twin-pipe Westinghouse brakes, selectable air or vacuum brakes, blended air and dynamic braking, separate air and dynamic braking? Does it have distinct power and brake notches or are they infinitely variable? Does it have automatic sanding and/or automatic wheelslip detection? Can you just throw the power handle wide open from a standing start or will that pop a breaker? Does it have multiple working gear - what sort and with what other traction can it work? How is it coupled? How do you prepare the unit from 'cold and dark' and how do you shut it down safely? What safety and train control systems does it have? How are they isolated if they're faulty or reset if they're triggered? What faultfinding/limp home techniques do you need to know, and what failures are beyond a driver's ability to deal with out on the line? And so on and on and on and on.
And that's all before you get to the skills and challenges of actually driving the thing. You could be eating up distance at over two miles per minute, having to keep your mind a good five or ten miles ahead of where you actually are to make sure you run exactly at the timetabled speed while staying safe for the weather, track and traffic conditions. You could be doing some high-intensity commuter belt work where hitting every braking point at the exact right speed with the exact right amount of brake to bring the front of the unit to a smooth stop directly in align with the stopping board at the end of the platform is key to keeping up to time. Or you could be running a 2400-ton freight train over a line with a 'saw tooth' gradient profile, leaving one end of the train going downhill while the other is still going up hill, and having to judge the amount of power required at any given time to keep the couplings taught, but not over-tensioned. Or keeping the same train under control down a long 1-in-100 bank, always keeping in mind that you've only got enough air in the brake system for three, maybe five, good brake applications and you can't modulate them up and down - you have to fully release the brakes before re-applying them.
That's still not touching on even a decent fraction of the technical skills and challenges that can face a train crew, let alone all the adjacent safety-critical procedural stuff. To return to my airliner analogy, it can look very easy to an outsider when it's all going well, but when it all goes wrong is when the human operator earns the big bucks.
I'm not a train driver, either. I've been fortunate enough to talk to a good many railwaymen and I have an interest in how things - rail, road, sea, air - work. I'd like to think I've something of an appreciation for what's required.
Thanks for this intersting post. It might make some of the knee jerk posters thunk....or maybe not? More specifically:
Train drivers have to 'sign' for both a route and a type of traction (the specific model of train). Signing a route means the driver is fully conversant with every yard of track, the location and amount of every change in speed limit, the location, type, number and meaning of every signal, the location, designation and number of every set of points, the location and number of every platform, the name and length of every tunnel, the location and type of every crossing, every change in gradient (and what that gradient is) and so on. And that includes all the passing loops, every running line and all possible routings through stations - it's no good only knowing the 'proper' route up a main line if there's a diversion one day and you're routed onto another one.
Here's an old route-learning video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANKeWdBylHs - this one's fairly short but everything the narrator mentions has to be memorised and understood. And drivers can end up having to know routes hundreds of miles long, and can sign for multiple routes at once. As well as all these fixed features, route knowledge includes knowing the braking points (when to decelerate or brake - and by how much - for stations, junctions or speed limit changes), and the location of bridges, tunnels, wayside structures and even distinctive bumps or humps in the line, wobbly bits of track and so on so they can be sure of exactly where they are (and, therefore, where they are in relation to crucial things like signals and speed restrictions) even if they're driving completely blind in a thick fog or a dark night. They have to know where, say, traffic lights and street lamps could be confused with railway signals, and how other trains on other running tracks will appear, so they don't get a heart-stopping moment as they round a curve and see a train and a taillight seemingly right in front of them - it's actually on an adjacent running line but the curvature of the track makes it seem directly ahead. I've seen some drivers' route-learning notes that included notes of sounds and smells from trackside factories, farms etc.
Signing for 'traction' is like type rating for aircraft - it means the driver is fully conversant with the technical aspects of the unit, what its limitations are, how its systems work; does it have EP brakes, twin-pipe Westinghouse brakes, selectable air or vacuum brakes, blended air and dynamic braking, separate air and dynamic braking? Does it have distinct power and brake notches or are they infinitely variable? Does it have automatic sanding and/or automatic wheelslip detection? Can you just throw the power handle wide open from a standing start or will that pop a breaker? Does it have multiple working gear - what sort and with what other traction can it work? How is it coupled? How do you prepare the unit from 'cold and dark' and how do you shut it down safely? What safety and train control systems does it have? How are they isolated if they're faulty or reset if they're triggered? What faultfinding/limp home techniques do you need to know, and what failures are beyond a driver's ability to deal with out on the line? And so on and on and on and on.
And that's all before you get to the skills and challenges of actually driving the thing. You could be eating up distance at over two miles per minute, having to keep your mind a good five or ten miles ahead of where you actually are to make sure you run exactly at the timetabled speed while staying safe for the weather, track and traffic conditions. You could be doing some high-intensity commuter belt work where hitting every braking point at the exact right speed with the exact right amount of brake to bring the front of the unit to a smooth stop directly in align with the stopping board at the end of the platform is key to keeping up to time. Or you could be running a 2400-ton freight train over a line with a 'saw tooth' gradient profile, leaving one end of the train going downhill while the other is still going up hill, and having to judge the amount of power required at any given time to keep the couplings taught, but not over-tensioned. Or keeping the same train under control down a long 1-in-100 bank, always keeping in mind that you've only got enough air in the brake system for three, maybe five, good brake applications and you can't modulate them up and down - you have to fully release the brakes before re-applying them.
That's still not touching on even a decent fraction of the technical skills and challenges that can face a train crew, let alone all the adjacent safety-critical procedural stuff. To return to my airliner analogy, it can look very easy to an outsider when it's all going well, but when it all goes wrong is when the human operator earns the big bucks.
I'm not a train driver, either. I've been fortunate enough to talk to a good many railwaymen and I have an interest in how things - rail, road, sea, air - work. I'd like to think I've something of an appreciation for what's required.
Edited by 2xChevrons on Thursday 26th May 19:08
motco said:
I'm waiting for this to emerge:
A slogan popularised by Marx but one whose origins may go as far back as the bible itself, and was certainly in common use well before his 'Critique of the Gotha Programme' (1875) Karl Marx said:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs
in 1865 Electro1980 said:
Neither of those make any of it difficult. Cost is coming down all the time, and is measured against the cost of paying drivers and time is irrelevant. What makes it a strange question is it’s not my job to provide a detailed plan and it’s clear you were after a “gotcha” with no actual information yourself. The technology exists and is in use. It’s only a matter of time.
It wasn’t a ‘gotcha’. It was simply me trying to find out if you had any idea what you were talking about. Edited by Electro1980 on Sunday 29th May 07:38
I have your answer
BigMon said:
No it won't. As I said previously, compare the posts on here with the CEO pay thread. It's N,P&E in a nutshell.
Yep. It's always been obvious but having 2 threads running at the same time really shows the difference between the forelock-tugging to our betters and the sneering resentment towards uppity peasants. 
98elise said:
Good terms and conditions obtained by blackmail. The rest of us have to work in a free market and get paid accordingly. I don't care what anyone earns if it's driven by a free market. There will be a reason why it's well paid (skills, desirability, training, commitment).
Yeah, if Signallers want more money they should just go and work for another railway or start their own. Lazy. Gareth1974 said:
JagLover said:
Any pay rise therefore will be coming from the taxpayer. That is why people might want to have a moan.
We’re into the third year of a three year (so far) pay freeze, and other public sector employees have had rises in his period.The cost of living is soaring.
When is the point that it would be reasonable to have pay rise, if now is the wrong time?
This is merely a means of transportation and one that requires large amounts of public money to continue in operation. One option could be to scale back its activities to the point where breakeven is achieved, and then future pay rises could be met through inflationary fare increases and/or efficiency savings. I doubt this would be popular with the staff though as it would require mass redundancies.
JagLover said:
Gareth1974 said:
JagLover said:
Any pay rise therefore will be coming from the taxpayer. That is why people might want to have a moan.
We’re into the third year of a three year (so far) pay freeze, and other public sector employees have had rises in his period.The cost of living is soaring.
When is the point that it would be reasonable to have pay rise, if now is the wrong time?
This is merely a means of transportation and one that requires large amounts of public money to continue in operation. One option could be to scale back its activities to the point where breakeven is achieved, and then future pay rises could be met through inflationary fare increases and/or efficiency savings. I doubt this would be popular with the staff though as it would require mass redundancies.
Inflationary fare increases have happened in every year of the pay freeze.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff