Jump to content

Scotrail


ScottR96

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

People choosing to take their days off doesn't require defending m8.

They're effectively working to rule to force a better pay deal, which they're quite entitled to do. Doesn't mean that they won't deservedly catch some of the blame for the disruption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're effectively working to rule to force a better pay deal, which they're quite entitled to do. Doesn't mean that they won't deservedly catch some of the blame for the disruption.

Workers don't deserve blame for taking their days off in any industry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, 'WellDel said:

Doesn't matter if you earn £20k or £50k, and it doesn't matter if you work for the NHS, fly a plane, or collect bull semen for a living. People live to their means with mortgages and car finance or whatever, and fill their cars and heat their homes with the same rocketing fuels as everyone else. The minimum you should expect is a rise that ensures your money holds the same value year on year. 

The world's smallest violin is playing over here, for anyone on £50k a year who chose to put themselves up to their eyeballs with mortgage payments and car finance. They should have used some of that money to build up a healthy buffer against the rising cost of living instead. That's basic financial prudence. 

A question that you don't address is where is the money coming from to now hike their wages to £55k fully in line with the cost of living - as opposed to a more modest increase that closes the gap with the average employee. Ultimately the rest of society pays for that through government funding - or, in this case, even higher fares - as well as even more price inflation. 

It absolutely does matter what the starting salary is then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, virginton said:

The world's smallest violin is playing over here, for anyone on £50k a year who chose to put themselves up to their eyeballs with mortgage payments and car finance. They should have used some of that money to build up a healthy buffer against the rising cost of living instead. That's basic financial prudence. 

A question that you don't address is where is the money coming from to now hike their wages to £55k fully in line with the cost of living - as opposed to a more modest increase that closes the gap with the average employee. Ultimately the rest of society pays for that through government funding - or, in this case, even higher fares - as well as even more price inflation. 

It absolutely does matter what the starting salary is then. 

Who's talking about folk who have themselves up to their eyeballs with mortgages etc and living outwith their means? You get them in all walks of life no matter how much they earn, and I have zero sympathy. You could give some folk £250k a year and they'd still max out their credit cards. You can't fix stupid.

Perhaps, though  the person on his 50k or whatever is the sole earner for a young family rather than, say, two people bringing in 25k each. There may not be scope for this buffer you think they should be building. Every penny of that income may be accounted for in raising a family. 

And why should the gap in wages be closed? The world works by people investing their time and efforts training and studying to fulfill more challenging positions. Why are doctors doctors, when, if your ideal was correct, they could just opt to do something far less stressful and responsible? There would be a societal collapse if there was no financial and benefits incentives to carry out more complex jobs.

Everyone deserves a deal that keeps up with inflation etc as a minimum, no matter who they are or what they do. I earn what I earn, and don't begrudge a single penny to anyone who is in an occupation which pays more than mine, or indeed anyone who earns less and manages to get themselves a rise. Except politicians, they can all get to f**k.

If everyone gets a deal in line with rising costs there's no issue. The base offer here is a little over 2%, inflation is expected to peak at over 10% this year. Doesn't even come close to the modest increase you're mooting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 'WellDel said:

Who's talking about folk who have themselves up to their eyeballs with mortgages etc and living outwith their means? You get them in all walks of life no matter how much they earn, and I have zero sympathy. You could give some folk £250k a year and they'd still max out their credit cards. You can't fix stupid.

Perhaps, though  the person on his 50k or whatever is the sole earner for a young family rather than, say, two people bringing in 25k each. There may not be scope for this buffer you think they should be building. Every penny of that income may be accounted for in raising a family. 

And why should the gap in wages be closed? The world works by people investing their time and efforts training and studying to fulfill more challenging positions. Why are doctors doctors, when, if your ideal was correct, they could just opt to do something far less stressful and responsible? There would be a societal collapse if there was no financial and benefits incentives to carry out more complex jobs.

Everyone deserves a deal that keeps up with inflation etc as a minimum, no matter who they are or what they do. I earn what I earn, and don't begrudge a single penny to anyone who is in an occupation which pays more than mine, or indeed anyone who earns less and manages to get themselves a rise. Except politicians, they can all get to f**k.

If everyone gets a deal in line with rising costs there's no issue. The base offer here is a little over 2%, inflation is expected to peak at over 10% this year. Doesn't even come close to the modest increase you're mooting.

 

There current increase on offer is what they agreed to last year.  The same negotiation that gave them an above inflation pay increase backdated to April.  

If you accept a 2 year pay increase, don't cry about it 7 months later.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hold on, you're saying that their contracts were renegotiated a matter of months ago, and at that stage the employer didn't think to maybe try to address the fact that they have insufficient staffing levels and are totally reliant on people working on their days off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There current increase on offer is what they agreed to last year.  The same negotiation that gave them an above inflation pay increase backdated to April.  
If you accept a 2 year pay increase, don't cry about it 7 months later.
 
Hold on, you're saying that their contracts were renegotiated a matter of months ago, and at that stage the employer didn't think to maybe try to address the fact that they have insufficient staffing levels and are totally reliant on people working on their days off?
This never happened. Entirely different grade.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it also completely different grades that were provided with increased rest day working remuneration?
You got the information wrong. Move on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 19QOS19 said:
1 hour ago, strichener said:
Was it also completely different grades that were provided with increased rest day working remuneration?

You got the information wrong. Move on.

Can you answer the question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 'WellDel said:

Who's talking about folk who have themselves up to their eyeballs with mortgages etc and living outwith their means? You get them in all walks of life no matter how much they earn, and I have zero sympathy. You could give some folk £250k a year and they'd still max out their credit cards. You can't fix stupid.

Perhaps, though  the person on his 50k or whatever is the sole earner for a young family rather than, say, two people bringing in 25k each. There may not be scope for this buffer you think they should be building. Every penny of that income may be accounted for in raising a family. 

Or much more likely - given it is a family we're talking about in this scenario - there is a second wage-earner in the household who on an average salary would take their household income to £75k per year. 

There should be absolutely zero sympathy or societal concern for how they choose to raise their family with that level of income (and almost certainly the wealth that comes with it). 

Quote

And why should the gap in wages be closed? The world works by people investing their time and efforts training and studying to fulfill more challenging positions. Why are doctors doctors, when, if your ideal was correct, they could just opt to do something far less stressful and responsible? There would be a societal collapse if there was no financial and benefits incentives to carry out more complex jobs.

The gap in income should be closed because income inequality is a huge societal ill. While there are people scraping by on eighty fucking pounds per week, I know exactly where the priority for uplifting incomes should lie. 

Benefits and minimum wages should increase above inflation, while those on well above average salaries should have a more modest increase. 

Quote

Everyone deserves a deal that keeps up with inflation etc as a minimum, no matter who they are or what they do. I earn what I earn, and don't begrudge a single penny to anyone who is in an occupation which pays more than mine, or indeed anyone who earns less and manages to get themselves a rise. Except politicians, they can all get to f**k.

If everyone gets a deal in line with rising costs there's no issue. The base offer here is a little over 2%, inflation is expected to peak at over 10% this year. Doesn't even come close to the modest increase you're mooting.

Well no, because if everyone gets a deal that matches inflation then the economy will continue to generate further inflation and further need for rising wages to covers costs. It is a vicious cycle. 

A 5% increase would be reasonable. 

The wider point is that UK unions have adopted a largely defensive wagon-circling policy for their specific membership. The only way to actually address the problems and win public support though is to start assaulting wealth disparity on a broad front, including the abject poverty being experienced by their non-unionised plebs in society as well. Narrow syndicalism is going nowhere and is particularly risible in a public service. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 'WellDel said:

Everyone deserves a deal that keeps up with inflation etc as a minimum, no matter who they are or what they do. 

If everyone gets a deal in line with rising costs there's no issue. The base offer here is a little over 2%, inflation is expected to peak at over 10% this year.

 

Worked well in the mid seventies

(it didn't)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Or much more likely - given it is a family we're talking about in this scenario - there is a second wage-earner in the household who on an average salary would take their household income to £75k per year. 

There should be absolutely zero sympathy or societal concern for how they choose to raise their family with that level of income (and almost certainly the wealth that comes with it). 

The gap in income should be closed because income inequality is a huge societal ill. While there are people scraping by on eighty fucking pounds per week, I know exactly where the priority for uplifting incomes should lie. 

Benefits and minimum wages should increase above inflation, while those on well above average salaries should have a more modest increase. 

Well no, because if everyone gets a deal that matches inflation then the economy will continue to generate further inflation and further need for rising wages to covers costs. It is a vicious cycle. 

A 5% increase would be reasonable

The wider point is that UK unions have adopted a largely defensive wagon-circling policy for their specific membership. The only way to actually address the problems and win public support though is to start assaulting wealth disparity on a broad front, including the abject poverty being experienced by their non-unionised plebs in society as well. Narrow syndicalism is going nowhere and is particularly risible in a public service. 

And who's to say a 5% increase wouldn't be accepted?

Not saying it would or wouldn't, but less than half of that has been guaranteed in their offer. That region would be a sensible starting point at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here I was thinking getting the train was making my own arrangements 

Edit: Maybe Network rail should stop putting out tweets like this 

 

Edited by Clown Job
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/05/2022 at 16:19, 'WellDel said:

And who's to say a 5% increase wouldn't be accepted?

Not saying it would or wouldn't, but less than half of that has been guaranteed in their offer. That region would be a sensible starting point at least.

I listened to Kevin Lindsay, the RMT guy on Radio Scotland this am. The interviewer suggested that they were looking for 10% - he denied it, but wouldnt say what was "acceptable".

Scotrail (and this goes back years) have fucked this by relying on staff doing overtime in order to provide the core timetable and left themselves wide open to this situation.

Having said that, the Scotrail staff were generally delighted to take the overtime on offer - I worked somewhere in my 20s where overtime made up 30% of my salary. You get used to it.

If Scotrail had employed enough staff to run without overtime, I wonder if the RMT would have gone on strike because the drivers had lost overtime money 😆 ?

I am self employed and while materials may cost more, what I make for myself hasnt (and realistically cant) gone up at all, so I have little sympathy with people earning £50k pa bleating about it, esp when you consider that Lothian Bus Drivers earn about 2/3 of that.........................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

I listened to Kevin Lindsay, the RMT guy on Radio Scotland this am. The interviewer suggested that they were looking for 10% - he denied it, but wouldnt say what was "acceptable".

Scotrail (and this goes back years) have fucked this by relying on staff doing overtime in order to provide the core timetable and left themselves wide open to this situation.

Having said that, the Scotrail staff were generally delighted to take the overtime on offer - I worked somewhere in my 20s where overtime made up 30% of my salary. You get used to it.

If Scotrail had employed enough staff to run without overtime, I wonder if the RMT would have gone on strike because the drivers had lost overtime money 😆 ?

I am self employed and while materials may cost more, what I make for myself hasnt (and realistically cant) gone up at all, so I have little sympathy with people earning £50k pa bleating about it, esp when you consider that Lothian Bus Drivers earn about 2/3 of that.........................

£50k to £80k and wanting more. Must be Tories!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened to Kevin Lindsay, the RMT guy on Radio Scotland this am. The interviewer suggested that they were looking for 10% - he denied it, but wouldnt say what was "acceptable".
Scotrail (and this goes back years) have fucked this by relying on staff doing overtime in order to provide the core timetable and left themselves wide open to this situation.
Having said that, the Scotrail staff were generally delighted to take the overtime on offer - I worked somewhere in my 20s where overtime made up 30% of my salary. You get used to it.
If Scotrail had employed enough staff to run without overtime, I wonder if the RMT would have gone on strike because the drivers had lost overtime money  ?
I am self employed and while materials may cost more, what I make for myself hasnt (and realistically cant) gone up at all, so I have little sympathy with people earning £50k pa bleating about it, esp when you consider that Lothian Bus Drivers earn about 2/3 of that.........................


Said it before and I'll say it again - anyone counting/relying on OT to make up their wage is a complete moron and I have no sympathy for them when that time eventually goes. You should always be living your life off you basic wage with anything on top of that a bonus.
£50k to £80k and wanting more. Must be Tories!

Scotrail drivers don't get anywhere close to 80K.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

 


Said it before and I'll say it again - anyone counting/relying on OT to make up their wage is a complete moron and I have no sympathy for them when that time eventually goes. You should always be living your life off you basic wage with anything on top of that a bonus.

Scotrail drivers don't get anywhere close to 80K.

 

According to the MSM they do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...