Scotrail

[Loonytoons]

Aye until the working class (what wage are they on again) need to pay more taxes to cover the public sector getting nice cushty rises, 
Im sure the retail workers on a tenner an hour will be out protesting in favour of the train drivers getting 5% on a already good wage, 

Public sector went years without a cost of living pay rise and then years with a below inflation pay rise.
25 years I've worked in the public sector and the words nice cushty rises is utterly laughable.
Job security and a half decent pension maybe you could argue.

[strichener]

1 hour ago, Loonytoons said:

Public sector went years without a cost of living pay rise and then years with a below inflation pay rise.
 

You say this like it was unique to the public sector.  As I have posted, the public sector are, on average, higher earning than the private sector.  That's before you take into account the no compulsory redundancy policy and pensions and more generous sickness policies.

[Loonytoons]

You say this like it was unique to the public sector.  As I have posted, the public sector are, on average, higher earning than the private sector.  That's before you take into account the no compulsory redundancy policy and pensions and more generous sickness policies.

My comment was aimed at 54_and_counting's claim.

I'm not saying it's unique to the public sector at all.
I'm pointing out that my branch of the public sector has never seen a "cushty pay rise" in any of the 25 years I've been in it.

[54_and_counting]

2 hours ago, Loonytoons said:

Public sector went years without a cost of living pay rise and then years with a below inflation pay rise.
25 years I've worked in the public sector and the words nice cushty rises is utterly laughable.
Job security and a half decent pension maybe you could argue.

You say the public sector went years without a cost of living pay rise as if the public sector were on minimum wage, granted there was a few of the jobs within the public sector that were poorly paid, but lets not kid ourselves that for years and years the public sector have been better paid than a good chunk of the private sector

[welshbairn]

Edited June 18, 2022 by welshbairn

[vikingTON]

6 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Which public services do you choose to downgrade/scrap in order to fund pay rises for white collar state employees?

You seem to have a massive rager for Western support for the war in Ukraine as well, so the usual cop-out of 'defence budgets' doesn't apply either. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

7 minutes ago, virginton said:

Which public services do you choose to downgrade/scrap in order to fund pay rises for white collar state employees?

 

All of them.

[strichener]

I see some public sector slacker has taken exception to the fact that the public sector can't continue with the claim that they are the poor cousins in the employment market. 

Typically not confident enough to actually provide an opinion but does the P&B equivalent of the "sorry they don't speak to the public" rebuff that you get when you want to speak to someone in the council that can actually resolve issues - uses a dotting account 

@quirks

[Guest Flash]

12 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I already have

Requirement for a person to give name and address 
13.—(1) Where a collector proposes to charge a person a penalty fare under regulation 5(1), that 
person must, subject to regulation 10(4), provide their name and address when required to do so 
by the collector. 
(2) Any person who fails to provide their name and address in accordance with paragraph (1) is 
guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 2 on the standard scale

https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/times_fares/ticket_types/187936.aspx#:~:text=If you board a train,a 'Penalty Fares Collector'.

It's already been discussed that the above currently does not apply in Scotland, but that the SG could, quite easily, change that if they so desired.

Those regulations don’t apply in Scotland but the general Railway Byelaws do. If you breach (or try to breach) any of them, you have to give your name and address if asked (Byelaw 23). Dodging your fare is a breach of byelaw 18. Byelaw 17 relates to penalty fares which don’t apply in Scotland.

“23. Name and address

any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person.

the authorised person asking for details under Byelaw 23(1) shall state the nature of the breach of any of these byelaws in general terms at the time of the request.”

Railway Byelaws

[54_and_counting]

Just out of curiosity, for the ones supporting this wage rise on top of an already decent wage

Where do they think the money is coming from? 

[Bairnardo]

15 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

Just out of curiosity, for the ones supporting this wage rise on top of an already decent wage

Where do they think the money is coming from? 

Same place their current wage, and the rise they were offered in the first place comes from. Never mind, Scotrail saved a fortune in overtime over the last few weeks

[vikingTON]

13 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Same place their current wage, and the rise they were offered in the first place comes from. 

Which would be... where, exactly?

[54_and_counting]

14 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Same place their current wage, and the rise they were offered in the first place comes from. Never mind, Scotrail saved a fortune in overtime over the last few weeks

Same place as their current wage? You mean the public purse that has a limited amount of money

Do you use the train services? 

[Bairnardo]

2 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

Same place as their current wage? You mean the public purse that has a limited amount of money

Do you use the train services? 

Yeah, obviously. 

So are we adding "source of funds" to class distinction and salary as perceived by others to the list of reasons why certain unionised employees shouldn't ask for a higher annual wage increase than that offered by their employer?

Can someone please provide the definitive list of who is ok to ask for more, and who needs to first apply this moral code?

[DA Baracus]

27 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Yeah, obviously. 

So are we adding "source of funds" to class distinction and salary as perceived by others to the list of reasons why certain unionised employees shouldn't ask for a higher annual wage increase than that offered by their employer?

Can someone please provide the definitive list of who is ok to ask for more, and who needs to first apply this moral code?

I'd like to see the earnings threshold too. Asked for it a few times but still no answer. 

[Loonytoons]

You say the public sector went years without a cost of living pay rise as if the public sector were on minimum wage, granted there was a few of the jobs within the public sector that were poorly paid, but lets not kid ourselves that for years and years the public sector have been better paid than a good chunk of the private sector

I said the public sector went years without a pay rise because you said the public sector get nice cushty payrises.
I've not seen one in my field in 25 years.

[Todd_is_God]

40 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Yeah, obviously. 

So are we adding "source of funds" to class distinction and salary as perceived by others to the list of reasons why certain unionised employees shouldn't ask for a higher annual wage increase than that offered by their employer?

Can someone please provide the definitive list of who is ok to ask for more, and who needs to first apply this moral code?

I don't think anyone is suggesting anyone can't ask for more, only that those who are right behind them in doing so acknowledge that these increases need to be paid for either by further increases to prices, increased taxes, or a reduction in services elsewhere.

[hk blues]

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

I don't think anyone is suggesting anyone can't ask for more, only that those who are right behind them in doing so acknowledge that these increases need to be paid for either by further increases to prices, increased taxes, or a reduction in services elsewhere.

I suppose for many that option has not been explored enough in recent years.  The idea that tax increases must automatically hit the poorer parts of society needs to be challenged.  

[Todd_is_God]

2 minutes ago, hk blues said:

I suppose for many that option has not been explored enough in recent years.  The idea that tax increases must automatically hit the poorer parts of society needs to be challenged.  

I agree, but we all know that won't happen.

[Left Back]

3 minutes ago, hk blues said:

I suppose for many that option has not been explored enough in recent years.  The idea that tax increases must automatically hit the poorer parts of society needs to be challenged.  

Look at the furore over the recent NI hike.

For years people have complained about NHS funding.  A tax rise is put in place ring-fenced for that.  Result is moans about tax rises.