[Closed] Tube Strike and Unions...

Yup. Succesful strike for improved pay (and for improved conditions for some colleagues) a while back too.

I've not had much else from them in this job but I had them on speed-dial in the bank, just about every week we'd have them stepping in to stop some random madness because managers were encouraged to act like feudal lords. Massive help to me and my team.

Yes. Worked for a major insurer which sold our division to Churchill.

Initially the purchaser tried to remove our enhanced redundancy package during TUPE, saying they were a young and growing company, and wouldn't conceive of making anyone redundant. Union which had a good working relationship with the original employer fought against this, and redundancy terms were retained.
Two years later of course Churchill was sold to RBS, and we got to make use of our retained redundancy package. Very grateful for the union then, even non members benefited from their negotiating.

When I started working, in NZ in the late 70's, union membership was mandatory, except for management/self employed/conscientious objection [i]across all industries[/i].
How the times have changed.

1.No
2.Yes

I think the problem is that the public who use the tube have had thier patience worn thin by lots of strikes of tube worker wanting rises for already very well payed work, complaining about people being suspened for completely reasonble reasons and other random strike e.t.c.

1. Yes - I wish they'd get me a starting salary of £49,000!

1. Yes and rep at my place of work
2. After privatisation the union is improving its membership stats for the attack on out term and conditions in the next few years and beyond!

My union had provided legal aid on quite a few occasions when knocked off my bike!

1: No
2: Possibly

Yep and a union H&S rep.

The word's 'ungrateful bar stewards' springs to mind.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33459515 ]Nearly £50k a year for driving a tube train - that's double the average nurses salary![/url]

After enduring transport chaos in London today resulting in the loss of a client meeting (and possibly some business for us), I'd personally sack the lot of them and give their jobs to someone who is grateful to have a job.

Totally out of order these guys being allowed to hold London and it's people to ransome in this way. Their selfish actions must have cost businesses 10's of millions of pounds today alone. Surely this money could be much better spent making a system that's fully automatic in the first place (like Copenhagen), getting rid of the troublesome drivers all together so that this sort of thing can't happen in the future.

If tens of millions of pounds worth of business depend upon them, are they not due some of that?

And the nhs and other public sector workers don't?

If tens of millions of pounds worth of business depend upon them, are they not due some of that?

Are you serious - the tube drivers are there because these businesses (through rates) and us the public fund Transport for London!

And the nhs and other public sector workers don't?

Well if they're payed half what a tube driver earns, for doing way more work then I'd say they're much more entitled to strike. I mean £50k for driving a mostly automatic tube train - hardly rocket science is it?

£50k FFS, that's more than most doctors start on after 7 years of training 😯

And the nhs and other public sector workers don't?

I didn't say that they don't. (I an a public sector worker.)

My mate drives a little (overground) train and earns more than me.

If tens of millions of pounds worth of business depend upon them, are they not due some of that?

Yes, exactly!
Very responsible job.

Union member here too.

in our society, there seems a general rule that, the more obviously one’s work benefits other people, the less one is likely to be paid for it. Again, an objective measure is hard to find, but one easy way to get a sense is to ask: what would happen were this entire class of people to simply disappear? Say what you like about nurses, garbage collectors, or mechanics, it’s obvious that were they to vanish in a puff of smoke, the results would be immediate and catastrophic. A world without teachers or dock-workers would soon be in trouble, and even one without science fiction writers or ska musicians would clearly be a lesser place. It’s not entirely clear how humanity would suffer were all private equity CEOs, lobbyists, PR researchers, actuaries, telemarketers, bailiffs or legal consultants to similarly vanish. (Many suspect it might markedly improve.) Yet apart from a handful of well-touted exceptions (doctors), the rule holds surprisingly well.

Tube drivers disappearing has an effect. Therefore it's not a [url= http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/ ]bullshit job[/url] and people with bullshit jobs get annoyed when they're well paid.

Is there any chance a discussion about the incomes "deserved" by tube drivers/bankers/politicians can avoid being pegged to nurses' or teachers' respective pay levels?

agent007 - Member
The word's 'ungrateful bar stewards' springs to mind.

Nearly £50k a year for driving a tube train - that's double the average nurses salary!

After enduring transport chaos in London today resulting in the loss of a client meeting (and possibly some business for us), I'd personally sack the lot of them and give their jobs to someone who is grateful to have a job.

Totally out of order these guys being allowed to hold London and it's people to ransome in this way. Their selfish actions must have cost businesses 10's of millions of pounds today alone. Surely this money could be much better spent making a system that's fully automatic in the first place (like Copenhagen), getting rid of the troublesome drivers all together so that this sort of thing can't happen in the future.

Nah, your bosses should sack you and your colleagues and replace you all with computers.

Is there any chance a discussion about the incomes "deserved" by tube drivers/bankers/politicians can avoid being pegged to nurses' or teachers' respective pay levels?

Ok.

That's £18k more than I get for being a Paramedic Manager.

It's £13k more than I get, but I don't have to spend all day in a tunnel staring at parallel lines demonstrating perspective.

some very clever PR going on here by Boris and the Tories to ensure that we're all talking about tube drivers and their salaries.

It's not just tube drivers on strike; they're probably in the minority in fact. It's also cleaners, security, support staff, blah blah blah, many of whom are on nothing like 40K a year, and are now being told to work nights and 25 out of every 26 weekends IIRC.

But somehow everyone is talking about the drivers and whether they're worth it. Which suits the union-busters very nicely.

Nearly £50k a year for driving a tube train - that's double the average nurses salary!

After enduring transport chaos in London today resulting in the loss of a client meeting (and possibly some business for us), I'd personally sack the lot of them and give their jobs to someone who is grateful to have a job.

Totally out of order these guys being allowed to hold London and it's people to ransome in this way. Their selfish actions must have cost businesses 10's of millions of pounds today alone. Surely this money could be much better spent making a system that's fully automatic in the first place (like Copenhagen), getting rid of the troublesome drivers all together so that this sort of thing can't happen in the future.

Agent007 - you sound jealous (along with very ignorant too).
Just because most nurses etc are on half what tube drivers are on - is not any basis to knock them.
It does kinda ask the question why does the government value nurses so low though ... again, nothing to do with tube drivers.

 

Ok.

That's £18k more than I get for being a Paramedic Manager.

Touché.

Have a 1% payrise!

Is the DLR running? I think it won't be long before the tube follows the DLR and goes automated.

doris5000 - Member

some very clever PR going on here by Boris and the Tories to ensure that we're all talking about tube drivers and their salaries.

It's not just tube drivers on strike; they're probably in the minority in fact. It's also cleaners, security, support staff, blah blah blah, many of whom are on nothing like 40K a year, and are now being told to work nights and 25 out of every 26 weekends IIRC.

But somehow everyone is talking about the drivers and whether they're worth it. Which suits the union-busters very nicely.

QFT.

Hey guess what? If your daily life falls apart because someone goes on strike, then you should take them seriously.

If you feel nurses deserve more, let's work on that.

I didn't realise that only poor people were allowed to go on strike.

I work in Govan...... like working in a tunnel but much worse. Suppose I'll go in demanding £70k tomorrow, which can't make sense as I work in defence and we're all making a fortune?

Totally out of order these guys being allowed to hold London and it's people to ransome in this way. Their selfish actions must have cost businesses 10's of millions of pounds today alone. Surely this money could be much better spent making a system that's fully automatic in the first place (like Copenhagen), getting rid of the troublesome drivers all together so that this sort of thing can't happen in the future.

Well surely all the shinearses who lost tens of millions of pounds today can work Sunday and get some of it back !

Have a 1% payrise!

It's Ok we got one after striking.

If BBC website is accurate:
Tube drivers starting salary is £49,673 after 6 months training - 36 hr week and 43 days holiday.

Is the DLR running? I think it won't be long before the tube follows the DLR and goes automated.

Lets hope so.

I didn't realise that only poor people were allowed to go on strike.

Nope, but when you're doing a job that requires just 6 months training (and if we're honest anyone with less than half a brain could do it no problem), yet you're paid double the average salary to do it, then striking smacks of pure ungratefulness to me.

There are plenty of hard working people in the country who would be grateful for the opportunity to earn just half of what these overpaid, over unionised idiots are demanding - without inconveniencing all of the rest of us in the process.

the strike probably has more to do with unions flexing their muscles and giving the Tories a poke in the eye than anything else but the tube drivers basically need sacking. If they really think they are hard done by when many of them sit in the cabs of trains that are already automated (central, victoria, jubilee) then they need a wake up call.

They already *start* on £50K, work 35 hour weeks, get 43 days annual leave (with a high rate of sickness absence on top of this taking time off for many drivers to close to 60 days a year), get unlimited free travel for their families across London (worth another £10-12k in salary) and enjoy one of the best pension schemes going.

They've been asked to work 7 x night shifts a year (note - same number of shifts in total) and for this have been offered a £2K bonus and a 2% pay rise.

Surely this money could be much better spent

I think your on to something there, we could raise tax levels to improve services, pay and conditions. Bravo sir you are a genius.

This tube strike is an example of why I'm not in a union. I agree with having unions but the unions in this country are crap and are destroying the British workforce. You may think a 'successful' strike is a good thing but it is just one step further in sealing their fate. As a result of the overpaid tube workers there is a much stronger business case to go for driverless trains and unmanned ticket sales machines. Striking doesdn't hurt business it hurts the consumer/customers. It is totally counter productive. The company I work for will never build s new factory in this country because of the unions and that is a great shame. The last 4 factories out of 5 we've built in the last 6 or so years have been in other country's mainly because of the unions and militant workforce. A great shame. In one generation we are transferring skills to other countries. British workers are just too difficult. Less work at a huge premium. I a lowly middle manager and have had dealings with unions and they really are not interested in working with the management for the long term benefit of the company. Their demands are unreasonable and, though we give in to them to avoid striking we just develop a long term plan to close down the factory and set a new one up overseas. A great shame.

Touché.
Have a 1% payrise!

For the next 4yrs

Sweeeeet!

Working in a tunnel all day and now nights too fk that, 50k would be a big pay rise for me but don't think I'd take it plus do you have any idea how bad the air in the tube is,
http://www.airqualitynews.com/2014/08/18/dust-cleaning-london-tube-train-delayed-until-2017/

With them all the way. So many forget that the basic rights and conditions we all enjoy as workers were clawed from employer's hands with only one basic thing- the right to withdraw your labour.

Let that be eroded and what do any of us have?

Clawing back the very basic rights is one thing and topping up an already over inflated salary and benefits whilst grinding one of the worlds major cities to a halt is something completely different. The tube workers enjoy salary and benefits way way above the going rate for a similar, or indeed many bigger and more demanding (physically and mentally) jobs and they really should recognise that and quit pushing for even more. They're onto a good thing but clearly don't know when to stop. I have no sympathy for them, they are not badly treated, badly paid (just the opposite) or have any reason to complain or demand more. Bring on driverless trains and ticket machines. It is simply not right, ethical or fair that London is ground to a halt because of these greedy, arrogant and ungrateful people. the world doesn't owe you a living and if you have a very good living you should recognise that. At the end of the day, the workers don't work for their managers, or even the company - they work for their customers - it is they who ultimately pay their wages and benefits. And it never ends well when you piss your customers off. That is just a simple fact of life.

In other countries unions work with companies to achieve the best result for both the workers and the companies long term prospects. It works well, results in very good industrial relations and usually does not result in strikes. The sort of people that are Union leaders, in my experience at least, I wouldn't trust to wash my car. They are only in it for their own ego's and they all have a huge chip on their shoulders. This is bad for the unions, the workers they are supposedly representing and the company.

How else would you expect companies to react if they can't work with unions? They naturally do what they do best - sort out problems and blockers one way or another, and, like with the company I work for, usually results in taking the unions, and unfortunately the workers, out of the equation.

I have no real problem at all with unions striking for pay and conditions.

There are clear rules that they have to obey in calling a strike, in return they get well defined protection from sacking etc. for taking such action.

The risk they run is that they price themselves out the market and get replaced with something cheaper (hello driverless trains!)

There's a huge difference between perfectly valid strikes over pay and conditions, and industrial action used as a method to try and circumvent democracy and overthrow the elected government of the day.

I'm the first to say ****ing ****er strikers

However if it wasn't for (historic) worker revolt, worker reaction or Unions we'd all be treated much much worse today.

So far from being a necessary evil I say chapeau to those who fight for fair better conditions.

hora - Member
I'm the first to say * * strikers

However if it wasn't for (historic) worker revolt, worker reaction or Unions we'd all be treated much much worse today.

So far from being a necessary evil I say chapeau.

What hora said.

As an aside, I'm surprised at some comments above that are really just ad-homs.

Wow...I reckon they get paid more than most of STW. That's gotta hurt. And it clearly does judging from the frothing right wingers (who, let's make it clear, are, on average, less intelligent than those on the left) - they should've listened more at school.

They must have a strong union. Well done them.

I remember blowing my nose and having soot on my tissue commuting on the tube.

Work down there?

No. Its a harder job than we think.

Nightmare in London today for many who faced great difficulty in getting to work.

London tube drivers are very well paid, my nephew is a driver and he acknowledges there is no other job in which he could make anything close to the money he does. With add one and other benefits a driver can clear £60k+ with very generous holidays.

Quite simply the tube is a public service which allows millions of Londers to get to work (and thus pay their taxes for the benefit of the country), striking should be illegal.

This is actually a very odd thread in light of the 10th anniversary of 7/7, and the stories of heroism by tube workers.

Personally, I'd say that these days staff who can perform evacuations, shut down electrical systems (including the HV line kit), and organise emergency services are to be valued.

Or do the DM-reading STW'ers think its all about punching tickets?

No it's not a hard job. At all. Many millions of people commute in the tube and are exposed to the dirt in the system on the way to much lower paid jobs and there is not exactly an epidemic of people dieing in London because of it. Anyway they get twice the holiday entitlement than anyone else to clear their lungs out. There are plenty of other jobs out there in the public and private sector that are harder and more dangerous and they attract far less salary and benefits. Tube workers stick out like a sore thumb with their significant pay and benefits. Fair enough, and good luck to them, but don't insult us by demanding more.

As has already been said, it is NOT just the drivers on strike, but you already know that and just want to pretend the majority of strikers are paid the same.

If we are into wage comparisons why not start talking about how much all the useless managers and the blond buffoon get paid, they are just as responsible for the strike. They are paid to deal with industrial relations and they have failed.

Coedy - valued yes. Overvalued, no. What about any worker who works in a big building who are responsible for evacuating and shutting down electrical systems. And what about the firefighters, paramedics and Police who actually were mostly involved in the 7/7 situation who are all on half the pay and benefits of the tube workers.

TBH there's quite a useful exercise you can perform here... Split everyone who has an opinion into 2 columns. One of them only talks about driver pay, the other doesn't. Then, split the "driver pay" column into 2 more- people who don't realise it's not just drivers that are on strike, and people who choose to focus on drivers and their good pay package and ignore everyone else

The former, we should inform. The others, we should know them for what they are.

The managers who have to deal with industrial relations are not paid to do that, it is an additional task over and above their day job (or part of their job as well as the day job) which is to manage the business and make it a success. They are not like the hugely overpaid union leaders who basically have nothing to do all day but deal with industrial relations issues. And anyway the useless managers (so that'll be me then) don't have the nuclear solution like the workers do so the b balance of power is massively out of whack.

I'm not against unions but am against striking and the UK unions and their tactics. They just militant, often bullies cajoling people into doing things they don't want to do.

Yes i am in a union and yes i have been on strike (oh and it wasn't about pay and it was in France so way more fun and way more supported by the public as i recall) -i missed striking last time my union in the uk did because i was already on a rostered day off, but i went on the demo etc.

Amazing how many clever folk on here seem to forget that like the air force, the driver is one part (often paid a lot more) of the whole setup. And that by its location the tube drivers supposed exorbitant salaries are inclusive of a 'London weighting' that the doctors and nurses salaries you are comparing them with are not. i would get paid between 15 and 20% more (outer and inner) if I worked in London but i don't see any of the clever folk on here subtracting a sixth from the pay of tube staff when they compare them to other jobs outside London.

It is not just tube drivers going on strike, it is a lot of lower paid people who do all the other stuff that is not driving the train and still have to work nights to keep the trains themselves running. I wonder what some of them are paid and how much less exciting those numbers are to you. The automated driver option is pretty hollow when you consider the people you still have to employ however trains are driven, and that these employees are subject to these changes and striking too.

And hey, what about market forces, city folks? What price for keeping your city running? How expensive and impractical would the tube need to get for you to think its worth relocating your business or staff outside london? How much more should tfl look after their staff before its more economical to buy them out and replace them with people on new contracts/working conditions or automated trains, and ticket machines? How much money to develop and run robot platform/security staff and cleaners? The demand to keep this service going in order for the city to continue to generate wealth is very high, how is this different from any other part of the supply /support/logistics chain making sure they get the best share they can from this?

The UK unions are the weakest in the western world, they legally have less power than in any other half civilised country.

Other cities around the world run perfectly well on driverless underground systems and unmanned ticket machines. In fact the majority of other tube networks outside of this country do, so not that hard at all. London has one advantage, the sheer number of people using the tube every day, so the business case would be, I expect, not too difficult to justify. But then again i'm just one of those 'clever folk' so what do I know?

And also, like with many of these things, those rich city folk are not the ones this sort of action is hurting. They can probably work from home. Actually it is hurting most those who are earning less, have less benefits and actually have to be at their place of work to work and might be losing a day's pay because of it.

The UK unions are the weakest in the western world, they legally have less power than in any other half civilised country.

...and still not good enough for our prime minister, who if general elections were run like he wants strike ballots (turnout and majority rules) would not be in government now let alone in 2010.
Nb the strike ballot for this particular strike had both a turnout and majority that has never ever been seen in a general election in this country.

Other cities around the world run perfectly well on driverless underground systems and unmanned ticket machines. In fact the majority of other tube networks outside of this country do, so not that hard at all. London has one advantage, the sheer number of people using the tube every day, so the business case would be, I expect, not too difficult to justify. But then again i'm just one of those 'clever folk' so what do I know?

Great, sounds like you might be just the man to price up converting the oldest and most 'compact' (platforms, tunnel sizes) tube system in the world to driverless and those glass platform doors, and factor in the running costs of all the other staff that are still facing working nights and you still need. Then you can decide how much it is worth to do that and still look after the rest if the non-driving non-ticketing workforce working nights, and how much its worth to do the same but without the driverless trains changes.

If its worth doing it the first way, then the unions will blink first, if its less expensive to do it the second way then the employer will blink first. Really, how different is this in principle from any other business negotiation?

actually it is hurting most those who are earning less, have less benefits and actually have to be at their place of work to work and might be losing a day's pay because of it.

That will be the 'means of production' you are talking about then. Not just them that is hurt by them not getting to work, their employers and the parts of the city that rely on the businesses that employ the little people. You talk as if the city would just carry on conference calling and facetiming forever if the tube, city/borough council and the service industry all fell apart because the infrasturcture couldn't take it. Really this is a fascinating insight into how the wealthiest people in the country still need little people and little tube trains not just to get to work but to support the rest of the infrastructure that supports their continuing to be wealthy.

Quite simply the tube is a public service which allows millions of Londers to get to work (and thus pay their taxes for the benefit of the country), striking should be illegal.

Without private sector taxes, we wouldn't have the public services. That's one way of looking at it.

The other way is that without those public services the private sector couldn't function. (As proven today.)

TBH there's quite a useful exercise you can perform here... Split everyone who has an opinion into 2 columns. One of them only talks about driver pay, the other doesn't. Then, split the "driver pay" column into 2 more- people who don't realise it's not just drivers that are on strike, and people who choose to focus on drivers and their good pay package and ignore everyone else

I think there many that are ignoring the fact that it is more than just the tube drivers striking is, as I said earlier that because the tube drivers have in the past stiked over other things so often the public have lost patience, and that ends up reflecting on everyone else striking.

yup only 20% of LU staff are drivers, dunno what their salary is tho
but theyre all getting big changes to their contract

but the hidden victims will be all those shady unlicensed taxi drivers you get a white knuckle ride home from at 4 am from vauxhall ! whatll they do when they tubes run all night!

Tony, a 22-year-old LU customer service advisor

We are the first face that customers see and we regularly get lots of grief.

I was assaulted recently by a customer because we were enforcing a one-way barrier system. He grabbed me and started threatening me. I am not paid to put up with that abuse but it's a reality of the job.

Luckily for me there were other staff in the vicinity. Under the new night Tube plans I could be on my own. Not a week goes by that we don't have three calls to the British Transport Police but it can take them up to half an hour to get there so you are basically dealing with it by yourself.

We are seeing homeless people sleeping in stations, with 24-hour running and fewer members of station staff you are going to get more problems like that with drunk people.

We've been told there will be more police officers around, but we have had no assurances about how visible they will be. It's no good if they are up in the control room or sitting with the driver if something is going on at the back of the train or in another part of the station.

We don't want to cause disruption, but it's the only option we have left to get management to address the issues we have.

jambalaya - Member

striking should be illegal.

😀

Well the tube does exist and life will carry on once the strike is over, but the point i'm making is that the people the strikers want to hurt the most - the wealthiest, are actually the least impacted as they tend to do jobs where they can be just as productive at home as in the office. The 'little people' are impacted the most who tend not to be the rich imperialist bastards that the unions have such an issue with.

Most business negotiations are aimed at finding a middle ground that benefits both parties. The unions are not interested in that - it's their way or the highway, so not a negotiation.

We'll see about driverless tube trains. Engineers are clever people so I have no doubt the necessary modifications can be made. It's a matter of when, not if. Do you really think that a situation will be allowed to continue where a small group of people can cause so much disruption to millions in one of the most important cities in the world? It's not insight, it's not clever thinking, its just cause and effect. If a strike is given into now, then a strikes will continue every year whenever the unions feel like it. It is not rocket science. The Unions exist to protect and improve the conditions for the workers and they will jump on every chance to do that irrespective if it is right or not without consideration of anyone else. If they are given an inch they'll demand a mile. That is clearly not an acceptable situation.

I think the point i'm trying to make, without getting too tied up in the tube workers, is that striking is counter productive and ultimately leads to the demise and security of the workers jobs, or even entire industries. I personally am not necessarily in favour of mechanisation/automation/exporting jobs abroad, I want to see a thriving and diverse jobs market in the UK for the sake of my kids, but I see the Unions as being a significant threat to that. They lack any sense of reasonableness or consideration of the bigger picture or the challenges business face. They don't negotiate - negotiation is a process where a middle ground that benefits both sides is reached, but unions often refuse to negotiate backed up with the threat of the nuclear option of striking always on the table. The government might be happy to call their bluff, but a lot of businesses are not. They are simply held to ransome

but the point i'm making is that the people the strikers want to hurt the most - the wealthiest,

The strike is absolutely nothing to do with hurting the wealthy, it is about protecting the strikers own working conditions. It is not an attack on anyone, it is a withdrawal of work by people being pressured into accepting new working practices that they don't think have been properly thought through .

striking is counter productiv

really? bob crowes last round of strikes got driver pay from 42k to 50k

Yes well done them. Always a smart move the hasten your demise!

We must protect and respect anyone's right to withdraw their labour. With that right comes the obvious responsibility which I am sure is equally welcomed. Everyone's a winner

And the new drivers starting now will probably not retire as tube drivers when the job becomes redundant. Short term win/lose vs working together to ensure the future of the business for the employees and owners.

Hasten their demise?

In case you hadn't noticed they are expanding the service, it is a resounding success story.

Short term win/lose vs working together to ensure the future of the business for the employees and owners.

Funny that working together is only ever used as a criticism of one side of the partnership, reveals the bs bias straight away.

Most business negotiations are aimed at finding a middle ground that benefits both parties. The unions are not interested in that - it's their way or the highway, so not a negotiation.

From an [url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/tube-strike-live-the-underground-drivers-letter-that-may-change-your-mind-on-todays-walk-out-10378637.html ]open letter from a driver[/url], so obviously not to be trusted, even so....

[b]TfL could have spent the last three months genuinely discussing how to resolve this dispute. They chose not to. They have not changed their position in any way (until yesterday, keep reading I’ll get to that).[/b]

If London comes to a halt this week, the people who should be blamed are not those who work hard to keep it moving all year round. It is the directors, and those above them, who simply do not believe that their staff have a right to a reasonable quality of life.

[b]Yesterday’s events (Monday 6th July) at ACAS were really quite extraordinary. TfL having failed to change their offer for the last three months, now made a new proposal in the afternoon, but explained that it was “time bound” and would be “withdrawn if its conditions were not accepted by 18.30 this evening” by all four trade unions and industrial action was suspend.[/b]

TfL must have been aware that of course it would be impossible for Unions to comply with this ultimatum. Unions would need to properly consider the implications of the proposal and consult with Reps and their Executive Committees. Unions offered to return to ACAS at 12.00 today (Tuesday 7th July) to respond to the proposal but were told that it would be off the table after 18.30 today (Monday).

To be clear, Unions did not reject the offer. It has been withdrawn because the four Trade Unions were unable to comply with an utterly unrealistic “take it or leave it” ultimatum. It is pointless for Unions to express an opinion on an offer that no longer exists.

This now puts Unions in a position where there is no offer on pay, conditions or Night Tube on the table. It is difficult to believe that TfL are negotiating in good faith. Their offer seems to have been designed, not to resolve the dispute but to be used as a way to blame the Unions for what now seems to be inevitable industrial action.

Resounding....

Generally I have seen unions cause more damage than they solve...selfish short term gains have killed a few companies I have dealt with. However for those in public sector I understand why you would join a union as the government has no loyalty or pragmatism in negotiations generally, as found out recently by a family member who works for UK border force (redundant).

eally? bob crowes last round of strikes got driver pay from 42k to 50k

But that was purely incidental. All Bob Crowe's strikes were mainly about "Safety"!
😉

Nobody excep tme mentioned the First great Western strike over 2 days also on going and the Northerrn train staff who where warned they would have their union funds sequestrated, seem as if there are strikes and strikes, and all 3 are down to staff being reduced and less staff to deal with passengers.

I've been involved in 4 strikes in my working life, only one of them was about pay.
None of them were anything to do with pissing off rich people or grabbing headlines.
All of them were a result of a breakdown in negotiations and were very much a last resort.

In fact, we went on strike last year during a ridiculous restructuring of Social Services. Our main reason for striking was that we did not agree with a process that we believed would leave children in danger. Cue headlines earlier this year that the restructuring our protests failed to prevent caused massive shortages of Social workers, leaving nearly 300 vulnerable children without an allocated worker.
Very often, people go on strike for very different reasons than money.

I can't even figure out why we need drivers. Get it automated and get rid of them.

I can't even figure out why we need drivers. Get it automated and get rid of them.

On our line we probably have someone on the track about once a week, often more, and I've lost count of the times they've escaped unhurt or with only minor injuries because of the drivers reactions.

People outside of the job don't really have any conception of what we do in the background (I'm not a driver by the way).

LUL have really been watering down the safety procedures over the last few years and the night tube issue has snapped the elastic and totally cheesed everyone off. If I remember right 90 per cent of those balloted voted, and of those 80 per cent voted to strike. Any government would love to have a mandate like that!

5thElefant - Member
I can't even figure out why we need drivers. Get it automated and get rid of them.

POSTED 54 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

What a balloon.

It is simply not right, ethical or fair that London is ground to a halt because of these greedy, arrogant and ungrateful people. the world doesn't owe you a living and if you have a very good living you should recognise that. At the end of the day, the workers don't work for their managers, or even the company - they work for their customers - it is they who ultimately pay their wages and benefits. And it never ends well when you piss your customers off. That is just a simple fact of life.

The first two sentences of this could be talking about a number of recent pay 'disputes' in the banking sector, non? "We can't cap bankers bonuses becsause x y and z. We must bail out this that and the other bank because x y and z. We cannot sack or prosecute these people because of x y and z."

Funny how because it is ordinary people with no friends in government that this process of 'do right by us or we will screw things up for you by stopping/leaving/not playing ball" is now not ethical or correct.

And the thing with pissing your customers off is that if they are a captive audience then you really can piss them off and get away with it. (Step forward South West Water for local example to me) and you are in business terms in a far stronger bargaining position than somewhere with a realistic choice of ways of getting to work and room to expand on and improve the more favoured choice if what you are offering falls out of favour. There is simply no room above or below ground to build a rival tube system and little scope for making more seats on buses and getting them around any faster.
So yes, the 20% of tube staff on strike may get pushed out by frankly enormous investment in retrofitting these systems in possibly the least retrofittable and byzantine tube system in the world, but 1) given the somewhat special challenges of doing so in that tube system versus some of the others, is it really worth it yet? And 2) that doesn't stop the other less well paid 80% of staff continuing to bargain for better conditions or even pay as they comtinue to realise the unique position they find themselves in -'little people' who have so much leverage because of the incredibly important system and economy that has been made possible in such a geographically small area mostly because their own tube system has allowed this.

Again, in business terms this makes sense, they are in a fantastic bargaining position that would have been ruthlessly exploited already were we talking about an unregulated transport system with shareholders that realised its importance to the workings of the city and could set its own ticket pricing for the benefit of shareholders as opposed to employees.

It is just that it is the 'wrong' people doing well out of this particular negotiation that is unusual.

Never ceases to amaze me the transformation to snide shill c$$t, when ones convenience is being inconvenienced, "don't hold me up or make me wait u c$$t I'll ****in shank ya" 😆 I wonder if these emotional responses are used to exploit us?

Drac - Moderator
Ok.
That's £18k more than I get for being a Paramedic Manager.

And you know why? Because they voted to strike when their job evaluation was fiddled by the SHA to reduce its value, then stuck together, negotiated and played brinksmanship with the government up until the eleventh hour. Result, a fair job match which has subsequently raised the pay grades of most roles in the Trust.

Unions FTW.

50k a year? Source?

And are there any vacancies for doing bugger all @£50K.

I'm not surprised so many nurses or teachers quit on £25k working 7 days a week.