Railway staff unions industrial and strike action - 2023

[whole diary]

[a-driver]

Train operators and the government do NOT want Sundays in the working week.

When the offer made to ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) makes no specific mention of it, and appears to be talking about just making them ‘committed’ for everyone as they are for some now.

Which is a problem for some of us who aren’t committed to working Sundays.

No only is it enforced overtime but with leisure travel now the main focus is an agreement in place for the maximum number of Sundays you could be rostered?  If there’s an uplift in services on a Sunday surely there’s a risk that you could end up being rostered considerably more Sundays than we are at present.

[IndustryInsider]

Which is a problem for some of us who aren’t committed to working Sundays.

No only is it enforced overtime but with leisure travel now the main focus is an agreement in place for the maximum number of Sundays you could be rostered?  If there’s an uplift in services on a Sunday surely there’s a risk that you could end up being rostered considerably more Sundays than we are at present.

It's possible and any agreement would need to have maximums agreed.  I don't expect there to be a huge uplift in services on a Sunday - several routes already run at Saturday frequency levels (with a later start up) -  but just an expectation that those that are scheduled to run, will run.  The driver links that have committed Sunday's already have not seen any extra Sunday's added over the many years that has been the case, staying at one in three - and it's very noticeable that Sunday cancellations on services crewed by those depots/links are pretty rare.

[TrainSpy]

Train operators and the government do NOT want Sundays in the working week.

When the offer made to ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) makes no specific mention of it, and appears to be talking about just making them ‘committed’ for everyone as they are for some now.

Which is a problem for some of us who aren’t committed to working Sundays.

No only is it enforced overtime but with leisure travel now the main focus is an agreement in place for the maximum number of Sundays you could be rostered?  If there’s an uplift in services on a Sunday surely there’s a risk that you could end up being rostered considerably more Sundays than we are at present.

Certainly for the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) side of things, the internal stuff I've seen makes clear that there is an opt-out for those who don't work Sundays. Assume the precise frequency would be negotiated locally?

[IndustryInsider]

From an ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) communication from the General Secretary to members:

Today, with Simon Weller, assistant general secretary, and Andy Hudd, EC vice-president, I met the Rail Minister, Huw Merriman, for an hour at Great Minster House. He told us he wanted to ‘facilitate’ a resolution to the pay dispute we have with 15 TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company). This meeting had been in everyone’s diaries for some time and pre-dated the RDG^‡(resolve)’s offer.
 
We told him that the ‘offer’ leaked to the press earlier last week was done in a way that was utterly reprehensible. After six and a half months waiting for a response to our reasonable request for an increase in pay for our members who have not had one since 2019, the RDG sent out an offer at the end of play on Friday and released elements to the press and media before we had even seen it.
 
They did not have the professional or personal courtesy to let us know it was coming, and ensured that we would not have time to properly consider it and respond.
 
We told the minister this morning – and Steve Montgomery and Andy Meadows, representing the RDG, who were also in the room – that if the government thinks it can negotiate with us via the pages of The Sun or the Daily Mail and make an offer that is really a sleight of hand then they are very much mistaken.
 
That offer will now be dealt with by the EC at its scheduled session on Monday 16 January.

[TaplowGreen]

From an ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) communication from the General Secretary to members:

Today, with Simon Weller, assistant general secretary, and Andy Hudd, EC vice-president, I met the Rail Minister, Huw Merriman, for an hour at Great Minster House. He told us he wanted to ‘facilitate’ a resolution to the pay dispute we have with 15 TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company). This meeting had been in everyone’s diaries for some time and pre-dated the RDG^‡(resolve)’s offer.
 
We told him that the ‘offer’ leaked to the press earlier last week was done in a way that was utterly reprehensible. After six and a half months waiting for a response to our reasonable request for an increase in pay for our members who have not had one since 2019, the RDG sent out an offer at the end of play on Friday and released elements to the press and media before we had even seen it.
 
They did not have the professional or personal courtesy to let us know it was coming, and ensured that we would not have time to properly consider it and respond.
 
We told the minister this morning – and Steve Montgomery and Andy Meadows, representing the RDG, who were also in the room – that if the government thinks it can negotiate with us via the pages of The Sun or the Daily Mail and make an offer that is really a sleight of hand then they are very much mistaken.
 
That offer will now be dealt with by the EC at its scheduled session on Monday 16 January.

Andy Hudd keeps some interesting company, with some interesting views.........

[IndustryInsider]

Andy Hudd keeps some interesting company, with some interesting views.........

If we've resorted to slinging mud, it looks like Minister Huw Merriman isn't averse to a bit of 'interesting company' as well:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5885029/Married-Tory-MP-married-three-children-love-child-aide.html

[grahame]

Andy Hudd keeps some interesting company, with some interesting views.........

If we've resorted to slinging mud, it looks like Minister Huw Merriman isn't averse to a bit of 'interesting company' as well:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5885029/Married-Tory-MP-married-three-children-love-child-aide.html

I have sadly come to the conclusion that in order to be a major successful public figure, most aspirers need to do things rather beyond what others would see as normal or acceptable limits and then have the balls (or gender neutral equivalent), spunk, street-wise nouse to carry them off.     Which means that we find ourselves lead by a lot of people we don't feel are very nice, however effective they may be.   There are some who seem to fit the nice mould - I am pretty sure a few of those may simply be clever enough to ride (or hide) the issues, but I'm equally sure that some are genuine.

[TaplowGreen]

Andy Hudd keeps some interesting company, with some interesting views.........

If we've resorted to slinging mud, it looks like Minister Huw Merriman isn't averse to a bit of 'interesting company' as well:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5885029/Married-Tory-MP-married-three-children-love-child-aide.html

Mudslinging implicitly suggests unfairness and/or unjustness.

I don't think it's either unfair or unjust to challenge the appropriateness of a senior member of a British Trade Union associating himself and sharing that platform with a who's who of racists, anti-semites, atrocity revisionists, Putin apologists and some who are in the employment of Russian and Iranian Governments or propaganda outlets.

In fact I note that the venue has subsequently thought better of it and cancelled the event - good on them.

I'm obviously happy to hear any counter argument to this, and in the words of one of the other eminent panel members, I salute the strength, courage and indefatigability of anyone who has one.

[IndustryInsider]

I think it’s very interesting that nobody decided to actually comment on the content of the statement I quoted given its significance.

Instead, all it prompted was a trip to Google to search for Andy Hudd.

[grahame]

I think it’s very interesting that nobody decided to actually comment on the content of the statement I quoted given its significance.

Instead, all it prompted was a trip to Google to search for Andy Hudd.

Good choice of words.   Many posts here tend to silently inform members and the like / feedback tends to come on the  side shoots.  I do know (from various checks) that content is often read and taken in, even if it gets no responses (even as small as a like), and that's especially the case where the topic has significant controversy.

With the current industrial issues, I personally watch with enormous interest but virtually no comment. It is an emotional fight, perhaps of political principle, between various parties none of whom have passengers at top of their agenda (we are a necessary corollary to all of them, no more) and we have no real say in sorting out the problem, even assuming we consider it a problem - some though not many members, I suspect, see it as an opportunity.

It is indeed sad where we drop towards name-calling and the moderator / admin team will pick up, when we notice, if things go too far.  At the same time, it is valid to ask Google "who is he" about the players involved as it helps us understand where they are coming from and perhaps motivations.

So - II thank you for that post; I suspect it is read but not acknowledged / followed up as you might have expected.  It is certainly valued in moving information forward.

[TrainSpy]

I think this is quite interesting in the context of the evidence given by unions and industry to the Transport Select Committee. Rather than me comment on it, it may be worth a scan through for those interested.

www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/6cf2329d-75b9-49e8-a7e9-666ead62b39c

From an ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) communication from the General Secretary to members:

Today, with Simon Weller, assistant general secretary, and Andy Hudd, EC vice-president, I met the Rail Minister, Huw Merriman, for an hour at Great Minster House. He told us he wanted to ‘facilitate’ a resolution to the pay dispute we have with 15 TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company). This meeting had been in everyone’s diaries for some time and pre-dated the RDG^‡(resolve)’s offer.
 
We told him that the ‘offer’ leaked to the press earlier last week was done in a way that was utterly reprehensible. After six and a half months waiting for a response to our reasonable request for an increase in pay for our members who have not had one since 2019, the RDG sent out an offer at the end of play on Friday and released elements to the press and media before we had even seen it.
 
They did not have the professional or personal courtesy to let us know it was coming, and ensured that we would not have time to properly consider it and respond.
 
We told the minister this morning – and Steve Montgomery and Andy Meadows, representing the RDG, who were also in the room – that if the government thinks it can negotiate with us via the pages of The Sun or the Daily Mail and make an offer that is really a sleight of hand then they are very much mistaken.
 
That offer will now be dealt with by the EC at its scheduled session on Monday 16 January.

[Bob_Blakey]

.....in the context of the evidence given by unions and industry to the Transport Select Committee. .....

Having watched this earlier today I am more confident that an agreement could be reached fairly quickly between the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers)/TSSA^» (Transport Salaried Staffs' Association - about) and NR^» (Network Rail - home page)/RDG^‡(resolve) but that won't provide a reliable train service if the attitude of ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about)'s Mick Whelan was anything to go by - signallers on duty and stations open but most drivers still on strike would be as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Hopefully he just presented as a stroppy git for the benefit of the cameras!

[TrainSpy]

I agree - its pretty clear the unions are in different places! And its also pretty clear that the unsolicited offer on Friday wasn't really something Mick W wanted to deal with right now. Will have to see how it plays out

[ellendune]

I agree - its pretty clear the unions are in different places! And its also pretty clear that the unsolicited offer on Friday wasn't really something Mick W wanted to deal with right now. Will have to see how it plays out

In what sense was it unsolicited.  His complaint was that it was delivered without warning just before the meeting so they had no time to consider it.  That seems perfectly reasonable to me.  Also it was leaked to the press at the same time. Which is I agree not very professional. 

[TrainSpy]

I agree - its pretty clear the unions are in different places! And its also pretty clear that the unsolicited offer on Friday wasn't really something Mick W wanted to deal with right now. Will have to see how it plays out

In what sense was it unsolicited.  His complaint was that it was delivered without warning just before the meeting so they had no time to consider it.  That seems perfectly reasonable to me.  Also it was leaked to the press at the same time. Which is I agree not very professional. 

Just in the sense that it wasn't requested by ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about). And awkward in the sense that he could no longer say that ASLEF had not received an offer - which means you then have to engage in the detail of what a deal might look like (even if what's in the offer is unacceptable)

"Without warning" is interesting given the evidence Steve Montgomery gave to MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) yesterday about multiple discussions and attempts to arrange a meeting beforehand (which ASLEF hasn't denied).

If the document doing the rounds is actually the offer sent to ASLEF, the first paragraphs might give some insight into why they could have decided to do it as they did, beyond just a rather cheap PR^▸ (Public Relations) move.

"Due to the limited availability of Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers & Fireman (ASLEF) representatives over the last four months of 2022 we have not been able to make much progress in our discussions as we had envisaged on the key areas of workforce reforms. This has prevented us from being able to table a pay offer for 2022.

"In recognition of this situation, this Pay and Workforce Reform Principles Proposal document seeks to set out the employers’ position taking cognisance of the preliminary discussions at industry-wide level, in conjunction with a two-year pay offer. The intention is this will facilitate accelerating our discussions between our respective representatives of the passenger train operators (TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company)) listed in Appendix 1 and ASLEF and a resolution to the current disputes that exist between TOCs and ASLEF. "