Scotrail

[19QOS19]

They're scaling down rail travel because A. They've they've inherited a company without enough drivers, and B. The drivers union is encouraging their members not to cover the shortage. Anything that makes the SG look bad is good for Labour. Labour have been actively supporting Conservative rule in Scottish Councils as the better option than sharing power with the SNP. 

"B" is absolutely wrong FWIW.

[vikingTON]

Aslef are certainly at it when it comes to the current "it wuz the Scottish Government that made us strike!" soundbite, as the syndicalist railway unions have been striking so regularly it should just be published on the new year calendars. 

ScotRail are however also at it in blaming "the pandemic" for suddenly being 180 (!) drivers short of what is required, which will then miraculously be made good 'by October'. A truly risible excuse for dreadful management. 

The SG are less culpable than either of those are cheeks but Sturgeon's mewling that the timetable will be "reviewed regularly" is not even remotely good enough. Your job is to crack heads together to bring this nonsense to an end. And if that involves a sweetener to avoid ridiculous disruption for up to the supposed five months it would take to have sufficient capacity then that should be given. The knock-on costs will be far greater than letting this nonsense charade continue.

In the longer term, rail employees should be converted into civil servants directly employed by the state and with the relative benefits and security that offers. In exchange though, they should have their right to close down a public service every time the syndicalist leadership feel like it removed. 

Edited May 20, 2022 by vikingTON

[welshbairn]

31 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

 

 

"B" is absolutely wrong FWIW.

 

How come ASLEF are saying it could all be sorted with a decent pay deal then? 

[19QOS19]

How come ASLEF are saying it could all be sorted with a decent pay deal then? 

Aslef haven't told or suggested to drivers not to do overtime, there's absolutely nothing stopping them working OT and I expect many still are tbh.

[craigkillie]

I figured there might be something like that, What about the download part though? Why would you not download it?

If you didn't have access to data or wanted to do it over WiFi?

[Todd_is_God]

13 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

If you didn't have access to data or wanted to do it over WiFi?

Surely can't be that; you need a data connection to use the app, and the ticket itself is a tiny amout of data.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Todd_is_God

[Bairnardo]

They're scaling down rail travel because A. They've they've inherited a company without enough drivers, and B. The drivers union is encouraging their members not to cover the shortage. Anything that makes the SG look bad is good for Labour. Labour have been actively supporting Conservative rule in Scottish Councils as the better option than sharing power with the SNP. 

As I have said before, if you have evidence for B, I'm sure Scotgov and Scotrail would like to hear it, so that they could save the people in question.

Otherwise, you should probably stop accusing people of taking wildcat industrial action because you don't like the fact that the timetable has been revised downwards as a direct result of there not being enough staff to safely cover the job.


Mandating overtime is not safe. The correct number of people employed to cover the safety critical roles, using normal working hours/patterns IS safe. It is absolutely not the fault of those refusing to surrender their earned time off (regardless of financial recompense) that the service is failing.

You are in full Tory here.

[HI HAT]

virginton has a swing and a miss regarding ASLEF going on regular strikes,  1982 was the last ASLEF strike in Scotland, it was over rostering practices. RMT on the other hand,well you’re right if you’re talking about them.

[HI HAT]

Sorry, Auto correct, virginton swing and miss

[HI HAT]

Bloody thing did it again, virginton

[HI HAT]

Damn it, you know who I mean.

[welshbairn]

8 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

As I have said before, if you have evidence for B, I'm sure Scotgov and Scotrail would like to hear it, so that they could save the people in question.

Otherwise, you should probably stop accusing people of taking wildcat industrial action because you don't like the fact that the timetable has been revised downwards as a direct result of there not being enough staff to safely cover the job.


Mandating overtime is not safe. The correct number of people employed to cover the safety critical roles, using normal working hours/patterns IS safe. It is absolutely not the fault of those refusing to surrender their earned time off (regardless of financial recompense) that the service is failing.

You are in full Tory here.

Why are ASLEF saying there would be no need for the timetable cuts if Scotrail come up with a decent pay offer? Are you suggesting overtime is unsafe and should be banned?

[Hedgecutter]

10 minutes ago, HI HAT said:

Sorry, Auto correct, virginton swing and miss

 

8 minutes ago, HI HAT said:

Bloody thing did it again, virginton

 

7 minutes ago, HI HAT said:

Damn it, you know who I mean.

^^^ swing and a miss.

[Zen Archer (Raconteur)]

11 minutes ago, HI HAT said:

Damn it, you know who I mean.

[Ginaro]

 

[Bairnardo]

13 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Why are ASLEF saying there would be no need for the timetable cuts if Scotrail come up with a decent pay offer? Are you suggesting overtime is unsafe and should be banned?

No, I'm saying it's less safe than having the correct number of trained drivers, and that it is absolutely voluntary and should never, ever, be expected as a keystone of running an adequate and safe service. I'm also saying no staff member should have any weight of expectation whatsoever placed on them re working more than their contracted hours. .

And finally, the buck for any failure to provide the required amd contracted service due to staff shortage, 100% (and thats key here, its one hundred per cent) stops with the employer, not the employee. 

[Bairnardo]

Just to add, ASLEF are on thin ice saying that as I have mentioned previously, but the bottom line is this. Overtime is voluntary, and a member of staff can withdraw their willingness to do overtime for number of reasons. The balance of time v money being chief among them, so if a number of employees have indicated to ASLEF that they no longer see overtime as being a worthwhile use of their time, then I'm sure they see fit to highlight that. After all, I knock back OT shifts regularly because I value my time off the same or higher than I value money. A shit pay offer might well push many others that way. 

 

Again tho, I am baffled by your stance. Are you doing that thing where you are an affected service user so therefore they should shut up and get back to work?

[welshbairn]

17 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

No, I'm saying it's less safe than having the correct number of trained drivers, and that it is absolutely voluntary and should never, ever, be expected as a keystone of running an adequate and safe service. I'm also saying no staff member should have any weight of expectation whatsoever placed on them re working more than their contracted hours. .

And finally, the buck for any failure to provide the required amd contracted service due to staff shortage, 100% (and thats key here, its one hundred per cent) stops with the employer, not the employee. 

Nobody has suggested overtime should be compulsory. I don't think anyone thinks the drop off of drivers agreeing to do it since the pay negotiations started is coincidental either.

Edited May 20, 2022 by welshbairn

[19QOS19]

Nobody has suggested overtime should be compulsory. I don't think anyone thinks the drop off of drivers agreeing to do it since the pay negotiations started is coincidental either.

It's pretty clear why a lot of drivers have stopped doing OT. But I can assure you it's not because ASLEF have told them to stop doing it.

[Bairnardo]

It's pretty clear why a lot of drivers have stopped doing OT. But I can assure you it's not because ASLEF have told them to stop doing it.

Is it because they can think for themselves, they value themselves, and they do not wish to carry on enabling their employer lowballing their terms and conditions?

I bet its that!

The b*****ds!!!!!#!