FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should train drivers be able to strike?
Should train drivers be able to strike?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have?" Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
" Another series of strikes. They just like striking. They are destroying the service. Sad . " Anyone blaming the workers rather than the owners and under the post franchise based shareholder paying system has fallen for the headlines put out by other rich business owners. Your staff are your business, be decent to them, it’s pretty simple, without them you have nothing. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay." Exactly this. | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road." Loss of jobs would cause even more strikes … | |||
" Another series of strikes. They just like striking. They are destroying the service. Sad . Anyone blaming the workers rather than the owners and under the post franchise based shareholder paying system has fallen for the headlines put out by other rich business owners. Your staff are your business, be decent to them, it’s pretty simple, without them you have nothing." Scarred by decades of pointless tube strikes, I’m afraid. I no longer trust them or believe that they have valid causes for striking | |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay." Is that what they are striking for? That they have none of the items you list? No. | |||
| |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay. Is that what they are striking for? That they have none of the items you list? No. " No but maybe what they are striking for will benefit is all in the long run. | |||
| |||
" Another series of strikes. They just like striking. They are destroying the service. Sad . " I'm pretty sure that the reason we have one of the worst bit also most expensive rail services in Europe is not because of the recent strikes. It's not the unions destroying the service | |||
| |||
"If you understand why the strikes are taking place you'll start to have some empathy for the drivers. Yes, they currently get paid well, but there's a huge shortage, to run the services that the operator has put on, they all have to work overtime as standard, that shouldn't be the case. The government are just wanting to have a standoff with the unions to show power, rather than meet with them to discuss and resolve. " So what you're saying here is that the employers are causing all of this because they haven't managed their staffing levels professionally and that the wages themselves are satisfactory to the drivers etc who are reportedly striking to demand wage increases..... It's a bucket of crap And a pissing contest takes two The unions are needed but they're letting themselves down in the eyes of the people who put them where they are today. Never forget where you came from or piss on those below you as they can kick the ladder out from under you very easily  | |||
| |||
"Striking can be a very effective tool but I feel the reasons for these strikes are grasping and totally flying in the face of the reality the majority of people are facing as far as accessing a living wage and the CofL crisis. It's losing support as people aren't stupid, the fact they are dis-satisfied by a wage most couldn't dream of is beyond belief." I totally agree with this. Strike action should be a last resort but The transport unions will strike over anything. | |||
"As I understand it, it's not the drivers that are striking (they are quite well paid). It's other employees who are striking, without whom trains cannot run. " I often see people saying it's about the cleaners and low paid staff. Cleaners and Security staff are employed by agencies so wouldn't benefit from any extra pay or better conditions. | |||
| |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay. Is that what they are striking for? That they have none of the items you list? No. No but maybe what they are striking for will benefit is all in the long run. " How does them getting a pay rise benefit me? I pay for it! | |||
| |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay. Is that what they are striking for? That they have none of the items you list? No. No but maybe what they are striking for will benefit is all in the long run. How does them getting a pay rise benefit me? I pay for it! " You do not pay any railway workers wages. RMT aren’t just striking over pay. I hope this helps. | |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay. Is that what they are striking for? That they have none of the items you list? No. No but maybe what they are striking for will benefit is all in the long run. How does them getting a pay rise benefit me? I pay for it! " Your rail fares will go up by inflation regardless of whether they get a payrise. The payrises have been costed and would dent profits/shareholder dividends but are easily affordable. So how exactly would you pay for it? | |||
| |||
| |||
"The whole system is messed up. We travelled around Europe by train in the summer for 5 weeks. The only cancelled train was the one from London to our town. Rail fares in the UK are very high. It’s cost between £4k-£5K annually for a season ticket where the journey is 25 minutes and the trains are packed so I often have to stand. Passengers aren’t happy, the rail workers aren’t happy. I genuinely don’t know what the answer is. " What's the difference between UK Vs Europe? The fact that private companies operate the lines in the UK. The lines aren't maintained and prices only rise. I wasn't around during public rail, but I don't see any advantages of private rail based on my lifetime | |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay." In general I am not in favour of strikes, but people always have the choice of withholding their labour, whether through a union organised strike or as an individual. I do not have annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and I pay an insurance to provide a subsistence wage should I become unable to work through illness for a prolonged period. | |||
"Everyone should be able to strike. It’s because of strikes we have most of the working rights we have now. If you’re against strikes maybe you should give up you annual leave, breaks, paternity/maternity leave and sick pay." This | |||
| |||
"They probably won't be able too if we let Putin take over." Putin taking over the railways seems unlikely... | |||
| |||
"I think some people forget that the striking workers don’t get paid for strike days. Could you afford to lose multiple days pay each month? Would you be willing to do so to fight for a better deal? They aren’t striking for the fun of it and to have a day off." How many are striking because they actually are on board with the agenda though? How many are simply toe'ing the party line because of peer pressure and loyalty to the union ideology... | |||
"They probably won't be able too if we let Putin take over." Hi. Who was suggesting that option? | |||
| |||
| |||
"I don't get this whole upset over pay. The workforce is a commodity market. Your not paid on your value to society. Your not paid based on how long you've studied, how many qualifications you have or how smart you are. You are paid based on the availability of what you bring to table as a commodity and the value that creates for your employer. Remember it's your labour you sell and it's your employer who buys it. Train drivers have a unique skill that is very difficult and expensive to replace. Unlike say bus drivers who can be trained in about 8 weeks and relatively cheaply. Also people do underestimate the rare mindset that you need to be a good train driver. You not need a degree or masses of education. But you need the right mindset. Hence why lots of "smart" and "educated" people fail to meet the requirement standards. So train driver are paid according to their value as a rare workforce commodity. They have effectively taken a pay cut over the last 3 years. They did not complain over the pandemic despite in many companies pausing previously agreed pay deals durring the pandemic. So naturally it was expected that once the pandemic was over these previously agreed pay deals that had been agreed would be honoured all be it a couple of years late. Now just like any other profession or industry drivers expect pay to be held at the market value of their commodity, not to continue to take pay cuts and pay deals already agreed to be dishonoured. I think society tends not to have so much a problem when it's well paid white collar professions having pay rises but there's something that seems to make us spit our tea when blue collar workers in blue collar jobs are well paid. Something this government loves encourage is working people turning against working people. They are happy for working people to focus on train drivers pay and attack them rather that them attack the real reasons why their pay is so poor or rather than focus on who's really stealing the wealth of this nation." Don’t forget that the majority of striking rail workers aren’t train drivers. | |||
"The members of the union voted overwhelmingly to strike, so all should abide by that (it’s not just about pay, it’s job losses too). Solidarity is key, something that is an alien concept to many these days as we are increasingly selfish as a society. If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union." So anyone opposed to strike action should leave the union? No wonder there is such support for strike action, if any dissenters are bullied out of the union as you suggest. What a horrible idea. | |||
| |||
"The members of the union voted overwhelmingly to strike, so all should abide by that (it’s not just about pay, it’s job losses too). Solidarity is key, something that is an alien concept to many these days as we are increasingly selfish as a society. If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union." What you are describing there is an echo chamber. | |||
"The members of the union voted overwhelmingly to strike, so all should abide by that (it’s not just about pay, it’s job losses too). Solidarity is key, something that is an alien concept to many these days as we are increasingly selfish as a society. If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union. So anyone opposed to strike action should leave the union? No wonder there is such support for strike action, if any dissenters are bullied out of the union as you suggest. What a horrible idea. " I was replying to a comment above about union members not wanting to strike, and forgot to quote reply. My point was that if you’re in a union and the members vote for industrial action, you should abide by that even if you didn’t vote for it. Solidarity I’m not saying anyone would be bullied to leave. Not at all. Rather, if a union member was completely opposed to the action their union takes and doesn’t want to take part in the action, leaving the union is an option. | |||
"Problem with striking, if the business offers a service that affects other people, they'll find a more reliable solution. In time it'll make you redundant. That happened with coal Me and my dad were doing some digger / groundworks at a huge coal powered power station. It was a long job and went on for over a year. When we started, there was a set of train tracks info the power station and 3 times a day, a coal train trundled in with 1000's of tons of coal. It shook the ground and must have been nearly 100 carriages. Awesome sight to witness. Anyhow after about 3 months working, and watching the magnificent coal trains, 3 times a day. The coal strikes started and the trains virtually stopped. The manager came chatting to us one day and we talked about the strikes and missing the train. He said it's a shame but we can't be held to ransome. We've nearly finished converting to gas and will never be beholden to coal or their strikes again. A good 3 months later, not a single train passed, those rail tracks have stood deserted and rusty ever since. " Same thing happened in a factory near where I lived growing up in Dublin. Biggest employer in the town. Unions kept striking for less and less important reasons, made the plant uncompetitive, and it shut, driving unemployment rates locally sky high. Sad to see. And right til the end, the strikers and unions refused to believe that the factory would ever close, kept saying it was a bluff. Then wanted the government to step in and run the factory at a massive loss. Delusional. | |||
"The members of the union voted overwhelmingly to strike, so all should abide by that (it’s not just about pay, it’s job losses too). Solidarity is key, something that is an alien concept to many these days as we are increasingly selfish as a society. If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union. So anyone opposed to strike action should leave the union? No wonder there is such support for strike action, if any dissenters are bullied out of the union as you suggest. What a horrible idea. I was replying to a comment above about union members not wanting to strike, and forgot to quote reply. My point was that if you’re in a union and the members vote for industrial action, you should abide by that even if you didn’t vote for it. Solidarity I’m not saying anyone would be bullied to leave. Not at all. Rather, if a union member was completely opposed to the action their union takes and doesn’t want to take part in the action, leaving the union is an option. " There not whet you said. You said “ If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union." Now you’re saying try don’t have to leave, but leaving is “an option”. That’s a very different statement. Unfortunately, such bullying is commonplace in unions. | |||
| |||
| |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road." Yes, that is also a solution  | |||
"One of my neighbours drives freight trains they settled their pay claim months ago as their firm hasn't got the government pulling the strings " Yes, that is good it all went ok there | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road.Yes, that is also a solution "… and how might the unions react to the suggestion of such job losses? | |||
"Are you going to ask the same question every time they strike lol Did you ask the same about royal mail staff striking? " Yes I do as it is an important topic, yes it was about when they couldnt deliver to all areas | |||
"Yes. People should have sovereignty over themselves and their labour. And unions should have greater powers restored, to represent this " This It may affect my ability to get to work, but I believe everyone should be able to take action for fair pay and working conditions if they need to | |||
"Yes. People should have sovereignty over themselves and their labour. And unions should have greater powers restored, to represent this This It may affect my ability to get to work, but I believe everyone should be able to take action for fair pay and working conditions if they need to"I think we're all in agreement with that. No one has said unions are bad on principle. The annoyance is that 'fair pay and working conditions' is subjective and they appear to already HAVE these but want more and more. Taking in a country wide view they are way out of touch with the rest of the population who are debating much more achievable and reasonable goals. There's talk of old pay agreements not being honoured. Well, take the employer to court and win on legal grounds. That's not a strike scenario I would have thought. Was the agreeing of the old pay deal in the first place done using strikes? Where does it end. | |||
"Yes. People should have sovereignty over themselves and their labour. And unions should have greater powers restored, to represent this This It may affect my ability to get to work, but I believe everyone should be able to take action for fair pay and working conditions if they need to"I gave up feeling that way when I lived in London and Bob Crowe took the absolute piss with the frequency or strokes and flimsiness of the reasons. | |||
"The members of the union voted overwhelmingly to strike, so all should abide by that (it’s not just about pay, it’s job losses too). Solidarity is key, something that is an alien concept to many these days as we are increasingly selfish as a society. If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union. So anyone opposed to strike action should leave the union? No wonder there is such support for strike action, if any dissenters are bullied out of the union as you suggest. What a horrible idea. I was replying to a comment above about union members not wanting to strike, and forgot to quote reply. My point was that if you’re in a union and the members vote for industrial action, you should abide by that even if you didn’t vote for it. Solidarity I’m not saying anyone would be bullied to leave. Not at all. Rather, if a union member was completely opposed to the action their union takes and doesn’t want to take part in the action, leaving the union is an option. There not whet you said. You said “ If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union." Now you’re saying try don’t have to leave, but leaving is “an option”. That’s a very different statement. Unfortunately, such bullying is commonplace in unions. " “Bullying is commonplace in unions” That’s a bold and unsubstantiated claim! | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. Loss of jobs would cause even more strikes … " Perhaps... followed by more automation. It's only a matter of time. | |||
"The members of the union voted overwhelmingly to strike, so all should abide by that (it’s not just about pay, it’s job losses too). Solidarity is key, something that is an alien concept to many these days as we are increasingly selfish as a society. If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union. So anyone opposed to strike action should leave the union? No wonder there is such support for strike action, if any dissenters are bullied out of the union as you suggest. What a horrible idea. I was replying to a comment above about union members not wanting to strike, and forgot to quote reply. My point was that if you’re in a union and the members vote for industrial action, you should abide by that even if you didn’t vote for it. Solidarity I’m not saying anyone would be bullied to leave. Not at all. Rather, if a union member was completely opposed to the action their union takes and doesn’t want to take part in the action, leaving the union is an option. There not whet you said. You said “ If union members are opposed to the strike action they should quit the union." Now you’re saying try don’t have to leave, but leaving is “an option”. That’s a very different statement. Unfortunately, such bullying is commonplace in unions. “Bullying is commonplace in unions” That’s a bold and unsubstantiated claim! " Not really. Bullying and intimidation. | |||
| |||
| |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. Loss of jobs would cause even more strikes … Perhaps... followed by more automation. It's only a matter of time." That's inevitable anyway. Strikes or not, only it may speed up the process. Businesses don't care about the people, they care about profits. That is what it comes down to. As soon as a more cost effective solution is found, regardless of how good and loyal without any trouble making the employees have been, they will be replaced by the cheapest alternative as soon as available. Sooner or later more and more roles will become automated, even the jobs that may seem unlikely at present. Soon enough the most populated job role will be maintance for the automation. Even then that may be phased out eventually. As I said above, strikes are only an issue with the public/individuals when it inconveniences said public/individual. If given the chance, when being treated in X way by an employer, how many others would be demanding action taken be it strikes or other solutions, for better working conditions because it benefits them and not what issues it causes for others. I expect a fair few of those striking now were complaining when royal mail strikes, or if certain medical staff decided to strike. It is the selfish way of most people. Said companies and business care very little for us as a customer, even less so about you as an individual, or their staff other than how much they bring in and how little they can get away with paying out. They don't care if person Y is unable to get to work, they care about what their own financial loss is. Its all even more frustrating when it is a business or service that announces record breaking profits, big bonuses to higher ups but not even a sniff to the workforce that makes those profits possible. Except a copy and paste "thank you" email at the end of year. | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. Loss of jobs would cause even more strikes … Perhaps... followed by more automation. It's only a matter of time. That's inevitable anyway. Strikes or not, only it may speed up the process. Businesses don't care about the people, they care about profits. That is what it comes down to. As soon as a more cost effective solution is found, regardless of how good and loyal without any trouble making the employees have been, they will be replaced by the cheapest alternative as soon as available. Sooner or later more and more roles will become automated, even the jobs that may seem unlikely at present. Soon enough the most populated job role will be maintance for the automation. Even then that may be phased out eventually. As I said above, strikes are only an issue with the public/individuals when it inconveniences said public/individual. If given the chance, when being treated in X way by an employer, how many others would be demanding action taken be it strikes or other solutions, for better working conditions because it benefits them and not what issues it causes for others. I expect a fair few of those striking now were complaining when royal mail strikes, or if certain medical staff decided to strike. It is the selfish way of most people. Said companies and business care very little for us as a customer, even less so about you as an individual, or their staff other than how much they bring in and how little they can get away with paying out. They don't care if person Y is unable to get to work, they care about what their own financial loss is. Its all even more frustrating when it is a business or service that announces record breaking profits, big bonuses to higher ups but not even a sniff to the workforce that makes those profits possible. Except a copy and paste "thank you" email at the end of year. " Emergency services such as medical, fire, police should not be permitted to strike to a level that endangers lives. FULL STOP. Anyone who says a x% change in pay is more important than safeguarding the public needs to take a long hard look at themselves. Minimum levels of staffing are where these services operate on a day-to-day basis already. To reduce that any further is endangerment. I bet the union bosses would be nowhere to be seen at an inquest if people died as a direct result of strikes. | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. Loss of jobs would cause even more strikes … Perhaps... followed by more automation. It's only a matter of time. That's inevitable anyway. Strikes or not, only it may speed up the process. Businesses don't care about the people, they care about profits. That is what it comes down to. As soon as a more cost effective solution is found, regardless of how good and loyal without any trouble making the employees have been, they will be replaced by the cheapest alternative as soon as available. Sooner or later more and more roles will become automated, even the jobs that may seem unlikely at present. Soon enough the most populated job role will be maintance for the automation. Even then that may be phased out eventually. As I said above, strikes are only an issue with the public/individuals when it inconveniences said public/individual. If given the chance, when being treated in X way by an employer, how many others would be demanding action taken be it strikes or other solutions, for better working conditions because it benefits them and not what issues it causes for others. I expect a fair few of those striking now were complaining when royal mail strikes, or if certain medical staff decided to strike. It is the selfish way of most people. Said companies and business care very little for us as a customer, even less so about you as an individual, or their staff other than how much they bring in and how little they can get away with paying out. They don't care if person Y is unable to get to work, they care about what their own financial loss is. Its all even more frustrating when it is a business or service that announces record breaking profits, big bonuses to higher ups but not even a sniff to the workforce that makes those profits possible. Except a copy and paste "thank you" email at the end of year. Emergency services such as medical, fire, police should not be permitted to strike to a level that endangers lives. FULL STOP. Anyone who says a x% change in pay is more important than safeguarding the public needs to take a long hard look at themselves. Minimum levels of staffing are where these services operate on a day-to-day basis already. To reduce that any further is endangerment. I bet the union bosses would be nowhere to be seen at an inquest if people died as a direct result of strikes. " I'd still back emergency services striking if they are being exploited by their employer. Granted, if you go in to such roles as a career then you obviously do so (for most) for the pride in what you do, not the pay but being underpaid, overworked, poorly equipped, and just general shitty working conditions and treatment by an employer has a breaking point. So long as the work continues to be done, the treatment as such will continue so long as it stays above the pitiful human rights standards for the workplace. Everyone, even those that keep others safe, should be allowed to stand up to such workplace treatments, and expect better. Those that strike always get the blame, yet so few acknowledge that the employer is just as much a part of the issue. Rarely held accountable for their part in it all. We would all be fucked if people just stopped (which is happening) applying for, or just leaving such roles. Strikes are not perfect but they do target at the heart of the employer. Just so happens there is collateral damage unfortunately. | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. Loss of jobs would cause even more strikes … Perhaps... followed by more automation. It's only a matter of time. That's inevitable anyway. Strikes or not, only it may speed up the process. Businesses don't care about the people, they care about profits. That is what it comes down to. As soon as a more cost effective solution is found, regardless of how good and loyal without any trouble making the employees have been, they will be replaced by the cheapest alternative as soon as available. Sooner or later more and more roles will become automated, even the jobs that may seem unlikely at present. Soon enough the most populated job role will be maintance for the automation. Even then that may be phased out eventually. As I said above, strikes are only an issue with the public/individuals when it inconveniences said public/individual. If given the chance, when being treated in X way by an employer, how many others would be demanding action taken be it strikes or other solutions, for better working conditions because it benefits them and not what issues it causes for others. I expect a fair few of those striking now were complaining when royal mail strikes, or if certain medical staff decided to strike. It is the selfish way of most people. Said companies and business care very little for us as a customer, even less so about you as an individual, or their staff other than how much they bring in and how little they can get away with paying out. They don't care if person Y is unable to get to work, they care about what their own financial loss is. Its all even more frustrating when it is a business or service that announces record breaking profits, big bonuses to higher ups but not even a sniff to the workforce that makes those profits possible. Except a copy and paste "thank you" email at the end of year. Emergency services such as medical, fire, police should not be permitted to strike to a level that endangers lives. FULL STOP. Anyone who says a x% change in pay is more important than safeguarding the public needs to take a long hard look at themselves. Minimum levels of staffing are where these services operate on a day-to-day basis already. To reduce that any further is endangerment. I bet the union bosses would be nowhere to be seen at an inquest if people died as a direct result of strikes. I'd still back emergency services striking if they are being exploited by their employer. Granted, if you go in to such roles as a career then you obviously do so (for most) for the pride in what you do, not the pay but being underpaid, overworked, poorly equipped, and just general shitty working conditions and treatment by an employer has a breaking point. So long as the work continues to be done, the treatment as such will continue so long as it stays above the pitiful human rights standards for the workplace. Everyone, even those that keep others safe, should be allowed to stand up to such workplace treatments, and expect better. Those that strike always get the blame, yet so few acknowledge that the employer is just as much a part of the issue. Rarely held accountable for their part in it all. We would all be fucked if people just stopped (which is happening) applying for, or just leaving such roles. Strikes are not perfect but they do target at the heart of the employer. Just so happens there is collateral damage unfortunately. " There are legal routes and protections for safe working environments. Striking is not the only way. | |||
| |||
"Police and prison officers can't strike. Medical staff won't strike if it is to the detriment of patient care. I'm not sure why that hypothetical situation that can't happen is being discussed when it's a completely different sector that is being discussed?" The medical did strike though, recently too. You're right though, it was a hypothetical to discuss the principle of striking itself. It's a great thing and a privilege that was hard won, but comes with responsibility and should not be misused or abused | |||
| |||
| |||
"If a group of people feel that they aren't being listened to and that withdrawing their labour is the only way forwards, then fair enough. The alternative to people having the right to withdraw their labour pretty bleak. " It should be a last resort. It isn’t. Union leaders like making a name for themselves by being seen the be militant. This is not new. | |||
"If they have a legitimate issue and it is supported legally and all other options have been exhausted, then yes of course. " I agree. But that is rarely the case, and I am not persuaded that that is the case with the rail strikes | |||
| |||
"If they have a legitimate issue and it is supported legally and all other options have been exhausted, then yes of course. I agree. But that is rarely the case, and I am not persuaded that that is the case with the rail strikes " I imagine every union will now be throwing their hat in the ring in the next 12 months with opportunistic threats of strike actions. It feels like it's "time". Chaos, lack of leadership, weak economy, division rife... | |||
| |||
"Support the strikers. Never cross a picket line. " Dozens of industries have different unions and only a select few resort to strikes, some very frequentlyand far too readily. I am in a union and it has always successfully negotiated on our behalf with no strikes necessary. I think if there are regular strikes being thrown down I'd be taking a close look at who is doing the negotiating as they're clearly not up to the job | |||
"Support the strikers. Never cross a picket line. Dozens of industries have different unions and only a select few resort to strikes, some very frequentlyand far too readily. I am in a union and it has always successfully negotiated on our behalf with no strikes necessary. I think if there are regular strikes being thrown down I'd be taking a close look at who is doing the negotiating as they're clearly not up to the job" But it is well documented that the government have interfered in these negotiations, the issue is not with the RMT, striking was a last resort. The government dint wantbto give then the rate of inflation because it will set off a chain reaction of similar pay claims. But its laughable, inflation is rocketing and all people are asking is to keep pace and that is seen as reasonable and greedy (in a sector which increase their prices by inflation) but the same government have happily removed the cap on bankers bonuses. It's not that the RMT aren't up to the job, it's that they and their members aren't backing down | |||
| |||
"Support the strikers. Never cross a picket line. " If I agree with their cause. I crossed London Underground pocket lines many many times, for example, as I thought they were taking the piss | |||
"I think some people forget that the striking workers don’t get paid for strike days. Could you afford to lose multiple days pay each month? Would you be willing to do so to fight for a better deal? They aren’t striking for the fun of it and to have a day off. How many are striking because they actually are on board with the agenda though? How many are simply toe'ing the party line because of peer pressure and loyalty to the union ideology..." Again I completely agree. | |||
"I don't get this whole upset over pay. The workforce is a commodity market. Your not paid on your value to society. Your not paid based on how long you've studied, how many qualifications you have or how smart you are. You are paid based on the availability of what you bring to table as a commodity and the value that creates for your employer. Remember it's your labour you sell and it's your employer who buys it. Train drivers have a unique skill that is very difficult and expensive to replace. Unlike say bus drivers who can be trained in about 8 weeks and relatively cheaply. Also people do underestimate the rare mindset that you need to be a good train driver. You not need a degree or masses of education. But you need the right mindset. Hence why lots of "smart" and "educated" people fail to meet the requirement standards. So train driver are paid according to their value as a rare workforce commodity. They have effectively taken a pay cut over the last 3 years. They did not complain over the pandemic despite in many companies pausing previously agreed pay deals durring the pandemic. So naturally it was expected that once the pandemic was over these previously agreed pay deals that had been agreed would be honoured all be it a couple of years late. Now just like any other profession or industry drivers expect pay to be held at the market value of their commodity, not to continue to take pay cuts and pay deals already agreed to be dishonoured. I think society tends not to have so much a problem when it's well paid white collar professions having pay rises but there's something that seems to make us spit our tea when blue collar workers in blue collar jobs are well paid. Something this government loves encourage is working people turning against working people. They are happy for working people to focus on train drivers pay and attack them rather that them attack the real reasons why their pay is so poor or rather than focus on who's really stealing the wealth of this nation. Don’t forget that the majority of striking rail workers aren’t train drivers. " No they are often signallers, control staff and station staff who also are paid what most people would consider a decent wage for the work they do. | |||
"One of my neighbours drives freight trains they settled their pay claim months ago as their firm hasn't got the government pulling the strings Yes, that is good it all went ok there "It's not a good point though because of course the government is pulling the strings because taxpayers money is involved in the railways. | |||
"Well tomorrow’s going to be interesting with 999 call handlers walking out… love how the media aren’t banging that drum. " Are they predicting very long waits for ambulances.? | |||
"I think some people forget that the striking workers don’t get paid for strike days. Could you afford to lose multiple days pay each month? Would you be willing to do so to fight for a better deal? They aren’t striking for the fun of it and to have a day off. How many are striking because they actually are on board with the agenda though? How many are simply toe'ing the party line because of peer pressure and loyalty to the union ideology..." Who knows. I'm no union fan. If anything the opposite. But we very clearly have never needed workers councils and unions more than we have now. And part of the gig is... All in. If people can't grasp that if they buy into the Concept of a trade union, that sometimes they might be asked to do some things they wouldn't normally choose to, but to support the cause of the union... They really haven't understood the Concept very well. | |||
"Well tomorrow’s going to be interesting with 999 call handlers walking out… love how the media aren’t banging that drum. Are they predicting very long waits for ambulances.? " And the reason is because there is less than 500 of them going on strike. Shifts have been changed to 12 any staff shortages. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I'm not in a union but I'd defend anyone's rights to be in one and to have protection to strike with no fear of retaliation. Unions have helped to drive some good employment law changes in the UK ... Imagine if you worked in the US where you can be tapped on the shoulder in the middle of a teleconference and then literally esc*rted off site - no chance to day goodbye to colleagues etc " I totally agree unions have their place I just think some of them are very militant and it's more about politics than members. | |||
| |||
"Absolutely they should! We should be angry at the bosses, not the staff just trying to get a fair pay increase. If wage increases matched inflation, people wouldn't need to strike. Unfortunately most of the profits just go into the bosses pockets instead of the staff" If all wages went up in line with inflation, inflation would constantly get higher. These people are not poorly paid however people that rely on me train and tube network to go about their lives and earned their money are being stopped from doing so and as I have said before striking should be a last resort but with the transport unions that doesn't seem to be the case. | |||
"Yes. People should have sovereignty over themselves and their labour. And unions should have greater powers restored, to represent this " | |||
"People live beyond their means and don't have great financial resilience. It's just the way of it these days. The buy now pay later ethos is tough to weather in current financial storms but a good wage is still a good wage. If you trim ALL the extras, the highend groceries, the pre-prepared groceries, the takeaways, drinking, smoking, the holidays, the gym membership that's never used, new clothes just because, fortnightly or monthly haircuts, salon visits, the sky subscriptions etc, the 2nd car unless it's essential for work etc... If you have done all that and are truly back to necessities only and still have no money for food or heat THEN you need foodbanks and additional supports. Few, in my actual experience, make these adjustments to live within their means. Expectations for gains in wages need adjusted. It's that simple." Or, crazy idea, companies could give pay increases in line with inflation? When companies report huge profits and pay out significant share holder dividends, why should vyhe employees take a payout? It's not their fault that inflation I'd so high and the rail companies can afford it | |||
| |||
"People live beyond their means and don't have great financial resilience. It's just the way of it these days. The buy now pay later ethos is tough to weather in current financial storms but a good wage is still a good wage. If you trim ALL the extras, the highend groceries, the pre-prepared groceries, the takeaways, drinking, smoking, the holidays, the gym membership that's never used, new clothes just because, fortnightly or monthly haircuts, salon visits, the sky subscriptions etc, the 2nd car unless it's essential for work etc... If you have done all that and are truly back to necessities only and still have no money for food or heat THEN you need foodbanks and additional supports. Few, in my actual experience, make these adjustments to live within their means. Expectations for gains in wages need adjusted. It's that simple. Or, crazy idea, companies could give pay increases in line with inflation? When companies report huge profits and pay out significant share holder dividends, why should vyhe employees take a payout? It's not their fault that inflation I'd so high and the rail companies can afford it" A fair days pay for a fair days work is not what you are describing there. You've changed now to 'the fat cats are coining it in, where's my cut?' Which is a very different agenda... | |||
| |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course" Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. | |||
"People live beyond their means and don't have great financial resilience. It's just the way of it these days. The buy now pay later ethos is tough to weather in current financial storms but a good wage is still a good wage. If you trim ALL the extras, the highend groceries, the pre-prepared groceries, the takeaways, drinking, smoking, the holidays, the gym membership that's never used, new clothes just because, fortnightly or monthly haircuts, salon visits, the sky subscriptions etc, the 2nd car unless it's essential for work etc... If you have done all that and are truly back to necessities only and still have no money for food or heat THEN you need foodbanks and additional supports. Few, in my actual experience, make these adjustments to live within their means. Expectations for gains in wages need adjusted. It's that simple. Or, crazy idea, companies could give pay increases in line with inflation? When companies report huge profits and pay out significant share holder dividends, why should vyhe employees take a payout? It's not their fault that inflation I'd so high and the rail companies can afford it A fair days pay for a fair days work is not what you are describing there. You've changed now to 'the fat cats are coining it in, where's my cut?' Which is a very different agenda..." So you accept that the fat cars are coining it in but also think normal working people are incapable of making cuts they shouldn't have to make? Do yiu think a pay increase in line with inflation is unreasonable? | |||
"Support the strikes. People being inconvenienced is the point: it raises awareness, and forces the corporations to act to mitigate the issue. If the public weren't inconvenienced, no one would know or care. The real dilemma is when it comes to healthcare workers. " When I was in a hospital last week, there were posters on the wall about striking for frontline medical workers. I didn't read the poster in full, but they were on the corridor walls. | |||
"People live beyond their means and don't have great financial resilience. It's just the way of it these days. The buy now pay later ethos is tough to weather in current financial storms but a good wage is still a good wage. If you trim ALL the extras, the highend groceries, the pre-prepared groceries, the takeaways, drinking, smoking, the holidays, the gym membership that's never used, new clothes just because, fortnightly or monthly haircuts, salon visits, the sky subscriptions etc, the 2nd car unless it's essential for work etc... If you have done all that and are truly back to necessities only and still have no money for food or heat THEN you need foodbanks and additional supports. Few, in my actual experience, make these adjustments to live within their means. Expectations for gains in wages need adjusted. It's that simple. Or, crazy idea, companies could give pay increases in line with inflation? When companies report huge profits and pay out significant share holder dividends, why should vyhe employees take a payout? It's not their fault that inflation I'd so high and the rail companies can afford it A fair days pay for a fair days work is not what you are describing there. You've changed now to 'the fat cats are coining it in, where's my cut?' Which is a very different agenda... So you accept that the fat cars are coining it in but also think normal working people are incapable of making cuts they shouldn't have to make? Do yiu think a pay increase in line with inflation is unreasonable?" I live in the real world with realistic expectations and not fantasy land where puttout your hand gets you whatever your heart desires. Inflation atm is not sustainable so for these financial crisis times no I don't think it's an achievable ask to demand an unusually inflated % for long-term wages. There are many alternatives to this. There are options for a lump sum or shares in lieu of cash. Soooo many things. Like I said, the negotiators aren't doing their job. It's political and the workers are cannon fodder. As are the customers. | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course" You are wrong about this round of strikes as the tubes are not striking. I don't think there is any proposal for driverless tubes at the moment. | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. " The DLR is probably the most efficient of all the tube services and they have been driverless for decades. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. The DLR is probably the most efficient of all the tube services and they have been driverless for decades. " That's good if it works. How are you measuring efficiency? And comparing it with other tube lines? | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. " New technology helps us in so many ways but will also come at a huge cost, At one time there was thousands of dockers until containers and machines to lift them took over the labour, Car factories employed thousands until robots replaced them, Auto driving trains self-service cheek outs and Amazon style supermarkets with hardly any staff, the list goes on, In 20 years time there won't be much left for the semi-skilled person never mind casual labour | |||
"If you understand why the strikes are taking place you'll start to have some empathy for the drivers. Yes, they currently get paid well, but there's a huge shortage, to run the services that the operator has put on, they all have to work overtime as standard, that shouldn't be the case. The government are just wanting to have a standoff with the unions to show power, rather than meet with them to discuss and resolve. " Totally agree Look a little deeper into the reasons and it becomes clear Anyone else in their situation would do the same | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. The DLR is probably the most efficient of all the tube services and they have been driverless for decades. That's good if it works. How are you measuring efficiency? And comparing it with other tube lines? " I measure it by the fact I can get on it! Pretty much the whole DLR is accessible. Vast swathes of the Tube are not. My journeys round London are often twice as long as required just because of the lack of accessibility. | |||
"Everyone should have the right to withdraw labour as part of a dispute. These rights came about to protect workers from unscrupulous management and have given us holidays, better pay, better conditions and safer workplaces. As for the rail workers, this dispute is about working practices as much as wages. The Tories and media want you to support the race to the bottom, don’t get sucked in. " The strikes are largely about the unions in question wanting to be seen as militant . Other unions quietly get the job done. People like Mick want strikes | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. New technology helps us in so many ways but will also come at a huge cost, At one time there was thousands of dockers until containers and machines to lift them took over the labour, Car factories employed thousands until robots replaced them, Auto driving trains self-service cheek outs and Amazon style supermarkets with hardly any staff, the list goes on, In 20 years time there won't be much left for the semi-skilled person never mind casual labour " Jobs becoming more skilled is not a new trend, and will continue. And it is pretty clear that not many people want to do the casual jobs … lack of staff in bars, restaurants, shops, farms etc. | |||
"Everyone should have the right to withdraw labour as part of a dispute. These rights came about to protect workers from unscrupulous management and have given us holidays, better pay, better conditions and safer workplaces. As for the rail workers, this dispute is about working practices as much as wages. The Tories and media want you to support the race to the bottom, don’t get sucked in. The strikes are largely about the unions in question wanting to be seen as militant . Other unions quietly get the job done. People like Mick want strikes " | |||
 | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. The DLR is probably the most efficient of all the tube services and they have been driverless for decades. That's good if it works. How are you measuring efficiency? And comparing it with other tube lines? I measure it by the fact I can get on it! Pretty much the whole DLR is accessible. Vast swathes of the Tube are not. My journeys round London are often twice as long as required just because of the lack of accessibility. " Sure but accessibility is very different to efficiency. And neither of them have much to do with having or not having a driver. | |||
"1. Automated trains are not pheasible on main lines and for freight trains. " Not yet perhaps... | |||
"One of my neighbours drives freight trains they settled their pay claim months ago as their firm hasn't got the government pulling the strings Yes, that is good it all went ok there
It's not a good point though because of course the government is pulling the strings because taxpayers money is involved in the railways. "The new transport minister said the other day that there's a deal to be done so perhaps she will be helpful unlike the last incumbent | |||
"is a part of the strike againts modernisation ie driverless underground as is operated all around the world barr us ? i may be wrong but i thought that was part of the strike conditions ? underground only of course Thing is... Why do we want driverless anything? I mean are the self checkouts better?. More efficient? If the jobs go... What do they do...? Don't understand the need for driverless anything. The DLR is probably the most efficient of all the tube services and they have been driverless for decades. That's good if it works. How are you measuring efficiency? And comparing it with other tube lines? I measure it by the fact I can get on it! Pretty much the whole DLR is accessible. Vast swathes of the Tube are not. My journeys round London are often twice as long as required just because of the lack of accessibility. Sure but accessibility is very different to efficiency. And neither of them have much to do with having or not having a driver. " How do disabled passengers use trains at most mainline stations, without staff? Answer - they can't. "Please mind the gap between the train and the platform edge" Most "gaps" are gaping chasms, requiring a ramp so steep that even strong people like me have to be shoved up by a member of staff. I can use the DLR completely independently, but I couldn't board or alight at Euston without assistance from a human bean. | |||
| |||
 | |||
"One of my neighbours drives freight trains they settled their pay claim months ago as their firm hasn't got the government pulling the strings Yes, that is good it all went ok there
It's not a good point though because of course the government is pulling the strings because taxpayers money is involved in the railways.
The new transport minister said the other day that there's a deal to be done so perhaps she will be helpful unlike the last incumbent "Given that Chapps is flexibg his muscles, I suspect a deal to discredit him and make the new minister look good is inevitable | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Do what Ronald Reagan did in the 80s when air traffic controllers went on strike. If you don’t go back to work by a certain date, then your sacked. The train service is piss poor so I doubt anyone would notice any difference if the strikers were not there anymore " Piss poor due to share holders and lack of investment, not cleaners, ticket office staff and drivers | |||
"Do what Ronald Reagan did in the 80s when air traffic controllers went on strike. If you don’t go back to work by a certain date, then your sacked. The train service is piss poor so I doubt anyone would notice any difference if the strikers were not there anymore Piss poor due to share holders and lack of investment, not cleaners, ticket office staff and drivers" Of course its all the fault of those who have funded the company. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road." That’s what’s going to happen. Incrementally - a line here, a line there……the Union is not thinking about the long term strategy in the face of WFH, AI and improved automation systems generally. They are fighting a rearguard action…. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Best way to strike would be like the Japanese did. Keep everything running but didn’t charge any fares so hit the company not the people reliant on the service " saddly illegal in this country | |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have? Automated trains. Surprised they're not already in place with driverless cars on the road. That’s what’s going to happen. Incrementally - a line here, a line there……the Union is not thinking about the long term strategy in the face of WFH, AI and improved automation systems generally. They are fighting a rearguard action…." the union have said they are quite happy to modernise and take on new technologies they have done since the inception of the railways what they do not want is technologys and changes in working practises that put thier members and you the general publics saftey at risk imposed on them and that is what is being attempted .a 50% cut accross the board in maintainance budgets that's 50% less track signaling and infrastructure maintenance gone .an 80% cut in on station staff so basicly less manned stations think about that if you are elderly a lone female or disabled traveler a ticket machine cant assist you if you are struggling .and lastly a complete de skilling of the role of the guard who would you want to assist you during an incedent or accident a fully trained and knowledgable guard or min wage trolly dolly with a weeks saftey training it's not all about wages most of it is about saftey of themselves and you the general public dont be blindsided by the MSM wage comparisons in thier race to the bottom | |||
| |||
"what can be done to see less of the strikes they have" Listen to the strikers | |||
 | |||
"As I understand it, it's not the drivers that are striking (they are quite well paid). It's other employees who are striking, without whom trains cannot run. " This is true. It’s the people on lower paid jobs that work on the stations and on trackside. They’re the people who keep the trains running and run services on the stations. It’d help if people didn’t believe the bullshit fed to them by the likes of The Mail and The Express. | |||
