These rail strikes then…

I'm getting pee'd off with the bbc and some of the tabloids, especially the mail.

The bbc are the worst though as theyre clearly asking a large number in thee street, then filtering out most of the supportive interviews, popping in one or two but the vast majority are negative. But ive watched lots of other 'man in the street' and most are in support of the unions.

We know the journalists both newspaper and television are part of a union, but i wonder how that union would react if the tv or paper companies suddenly came out with mass sackings, or well below inflation pay increases. I'd expect to see them go out on strike pretty rapidly.

The free travel on strike days thing is secondary action and it's illegal in the UK.

My take:

- it seems modernisation of the railway employment contracts is well overdue, and I support change there.

- I think we need to ignore the headlines about pay, most reporting the (generous IMO) driver pay, not the cleaners etc who do need more. Why not give the lower paid a bigger payrise?

- the unions will serve thier members now and win the battle - but long term I wonder if it will be a disservice.

- the underlying issue of huge inflation isn't the railway workers fault, and the government & Brexshit should be taking a kicking for it (again).
.
I also think this is the summer of discontent starting. Much, much more to come.

This "modernisation" of contracts? Thats rarely used in a positive way but more a lets reduce conditions sense.
The reason the train drivers shouldnt be included is that they arent included in the strike.
They are mostly in a different union which isnt taking action.

Don't worry Boris the public sector pay review is published soon, you can keep up the fight after this has died down!!

Mick Lynch was very good on Newsnight this evening.

I think he was sort of saying that he didn't believe what Chris Phillips had to say

https://twitter.com/MccarthyFintan/status/1539083696116047874?s=20&t=jav4DZKKPjKoDMp7eLlxoA

I also think this is the summer of discontent starting. Much, much more to come.

Its being engineered by the Tory's to be just that

A representative of the rail operators is on Five Live this morning, pointing out that they haven’t asked for a relaxation of the laws about agency workers and would not want to do that even if the government did change the law.

He’s pointed out that it would just poison relations, simply dragging out the dispute which will inevitably need a negotiated settlement, it simply won’t work and on a practical level; where on earth do the government think all these trained rail workers are going to suddenly materialise from?

He’s saying that he government hasn’t even consulted the rail industry, aren’t interested what they want anyway and they’re just going ahead and doing it because they want to start a fight with the unions for political reasons, so they can water down workers rights across the board. Overall they think it will be counterproductive and the rail operators have no intention of using agency workers

And that is coming from a representative for the rail operators, that renowned hotbed of revolutionary socialism

– the unions will serve thier members now and win the battle – but long term I wonder if it will be a disservice.

This could be true, but people said the same all through the Bob Crow era.

But, is there a chance that our employment laws would prevent that somehow?

Undoubtedly. Doing anything other than slaving night and day until you rest in your grave in order to make the rich richer is how the English like it, judging from their behaviour at the ballot box.

I fully support them in terms of inflation and pay rises.

The cost of everything is flying upwards and 2% just doesn’t cover it.

I've just heard Boris Johnsons statement

"Blah, blah, blah.... disruption to the travelling public, blah, blah, blah.... need to modernise"

Then somewhat inexplicably, he finished with...

"It'll also massively benefit the railway workers themselves, and their families"

He didn't elaborate on why being made redundant or effectively taking a huge pay cut would benefit them and their families.

Any suggestions?

Any suggestions?

As he doesn't understand a word that comes out of his mouth, I doubt any of us can hazard a guess.

I still enjoy his regurgitated 'High skilled, high paid workforce' line – like the entire nation can be in high skilled jobs and earn loads (but not too much as we've been told that will just fuel inflation).

And then you have the Bank of England governor, who’s on £575k a year and undoubtedly a millionaire, asking for pay restraints.

They just don’t live in the world the majority of us does.

Conservatives trying very hard to pin this on Labour…

https://twitter.com/chrisclarksonmp/status/1539029591259549696?s=21

If only the Conservatives were in government, the rail services and cost of living would all be… oh, hang on…

[ don’t get me started on the BBC coverage of this so far … proper shouting at the tv stuff ]

Mick Lynch is awesome!

It would be simpler if the pension companies took a big slice of the rail ownership.

Next to mortgages, it’s a guaranteed earner. Less risky than investing in Bolivian tin mines.

On the condition that some portion of their revenue went into a fund for elderly care, local to that part of the rail line.

We still need to ease overcrowding in the south east of the country.

Plenty of room ‘oop north.
It’s just a question of moving all those art galleries, etc, out of London.
Government too. It’s pretty inevitable that London is going to end up being flooded.

It’s a question of building new towns with an infrastructure that doesn’t rely on people having to drive everywhere and having a diverse economic base that isn’t subject to the vissiscitudes of the Kondratiev cycle.

I still enjoy his regurgitated ‘High skilled, high paid workforce’ line – like the entire nation can be in high skilled jobs and earn loads (but not too much as we’ve been told that will just fuel inflation).

High skilled/high paid - except for rail workers, not you, that's too high and not skilled enough.

So I did something the media dont want to do and had a look at the published Annual Accounts for Network Rail to see how they were doing and what their financial position was. It was a bit of an eye opener

For financial year ending march 2021 they had

Revenue £9.618billion

Operating Profit £3.282Biillion

Profit before Tax £1.613Billion

That Profit before tax is £1.238Billion more than the prior year

Not surprisingly pay was their biggest cost at £2.802Billion including pensions NI etc

So if they paid a 10% pay award it would cost them £280million so even without any efficiency improvements attached to it then the company would still make £958Million which is 105 on revenue so still a good margin.

... possibly one of the main underlying issues is that the railway has been massively underfunded in the past, the cost of everything involved in trying to get it somewhere near any kind of totally reliable state - and I'm not just on about timetables here - is huge and it (the money) has to come from somewhere.

Striking in my mind is just making that harder, yes I understand that there is a cost of living crisis / issue going on with absolutely all of your day to day consumables increasing in cost on an almost daily basis, but shut a revenue stream down for 5 days, then add a few on the back end to get it running at full tilt again is going to cost hundreds of millions of pounds, which the DfT is going to have to find from somewhere.

The offer of a 2% rise or whatever the offer is, it's a bit rubbish, it's no where near inflation, but if you suddenly pile in an inflation matching pay-rise across the board then I'd imagine the DfT would be properly up shit street.

What people earn at the very top of the tree doesn't really come into it from a wider perspective, across industry (not just rail) for every person on £2-300k per year, there's dozens of people just about doing enough not to get the sack, tossing it off on some kind of dubious long term leave of absence - no issue with people who are actually in need of this - or things of a similar ilk, contributing naff all or very little to the "wage" they collect every month.

But in all honesty this country is bolloxed, I've been told of adverts for cleaners on the likes of office building types on up to £19ph yet we can't figure out how to pay a Railway maintenance person that as a basic wage.

But Network Rail is a publicly listed company making over £1billion in profit. What has it got to do with DfT?

A representative of the rail operators is on Five Live this morning, pointing out that they haven’t asked for a relaxation of the laws about agency workers and would not want to do that even if the government did change the law.

Ah yes, the same government who want cheap agency workers for trains but spat the dummy over similar with P&O ferries...

What has it got to do with DfT?

Funding.

Regulation.

Ultimate guarantor of rail provision.

Mick Lynch is awesome!

Have to agree. He's made it feel like the real world has found a way of penetrating the media bubble this week. I'd like to shake his hand.

I hadn't realised that Network Rail handed over some local lines to TfW. Making it a slightly different story over the border, as there's no dispute for those lines (Wales still hid hard though where Network Rail still have their role).

All of Wales (except 3 valley lines) is also closed. It's the lack of long-term strategy that is causing a problem.
We need:
A more resilient network (investment in track, electrification and signalling)
Better capacity (ie. better arrangements for leasing rolling stock to TOCs)
Simpler, regulated fares to promote usage

Have to agree. He’s made it feel like the real world has found a way of penetrating the media bubble this week. I’d like to shake his hand.

Yeah he's great with media, keeping them in check

Because the alternatives are also expensive. Going into central London by car would be horrendously expensive in terms of parking

I've been doing this recently and it's a pig dog, and stressful.

Park at the hotel near potters bar and taxi all the kit in.

A Lynch compilation… a breath of fresh air…

Hmmmmm… Mick Lynch has made this statement and in reply Grant Schapps (or whatever he’s calling himself this week) has referred to it as ‘a complete lie’

I wonder which one of them is telling the truth? 🤷‍♂️

https://twitter.com/pippacrerar/status/1539619355130056707?s=21&t=z9APU74qoWRGpBzOwy841Q

Between 7 and 8pm I must have heard at least 4 maybe 5 trains on the Dundee to Edinburgh line or other way about, what's the betting they'd be empty of passengers

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/04402220/persons-with-significant-control

A Lynch compilation… a breath of fresh air…

Thanks for that kelvin. That Lynch man is truly a god.

Oh, and whilst I'm here, this warrants saying again:

Doing anything other than slaving night and day until you rest in your grave in order to make the rich richer is how the English like it, judging from their behaviour at the ballot box.

Why are rail fares going up by RPI but not wages?

https://twitter.com/Rachael_Swindon/status/1539706505846464513

Nice sensible questioning of the Baron Marxist.

https://twitter.com/mrdanwalker/status/1539707071997923331

The best bit about that Peston clip of Mick Lynch taking Honest Bob Jenrick apart is the look on Emily Thorberry's face. Priceless!

The points he make are pretty much indefensible by the government.

I bet theres going to be some excuses produced when number 10 asks for any volunteers to go into a studio when Mick Lynch is on. I note its all been underlings, and no senior frontbenchers will go anywhere near him, certainly not Boris, who's probably in a fridge somewhere, just in case

Anyone care to tell me the difference between Mick Lynch and Len McCluskey?

Hmmmm... let's see....

Has Mick Lynch recently given a £100 million of his union members money to one of his mates for construction of a hotel presently valued at £20 million?

Is he regularly pictured at his table at the Ivy?

Has he got his union to buy him a half million pound bolthole in Chelsea?

Until we know the answers to those questions, I think the main difference I can see is that he seems to be actually interested in representing his members interests rather than spending all his time on self-promotion, shopping in Selfridges or having long lunches at expensive London eateries

Anyway... just listening to the news this morning and it sounds like the government may have massively misjudged the public mood on this one if they're seeking a re-run of the miners strike.

The train operators are sounding like they're welcoming government interference about as much as the unions are, and they'd rather negotiate a solution rather than be used as pawns in the Tory's culture war. Merseyrail have just negotiated a settlement without any drama.

A representative from the recruitment agencies was on saying that there is no way they'd want to get involved in providing workers to break picket lines, and they don't need to anyway as they can't get enough workers to fill the available positions they already have, so they certainly don't need to be dragged into any political mither.

They also pointed out that these are skilled positions and you can't just get anybody to rock up and do the job, even if they could find anyone inclined to do so

It’s a bonkers policy, the agency workers as strike breakers one that is, as if the public won’t notice the huge “we want to turn workers against workers” label attached to all the Daily Mail front pages and low level government members’ media appearances surrounding it. Not really a policy for government, it’s not meant to create any actual change on the ground, it’s just another signal… more red meat. Always campaigning, never actually governing. Same old.

I heard on the radio yesterday that it wasn’t external agencies that they were trying to get in to cover work, it’s the movement of staff within the company to cover striking roles.
Apparantely at present they aren’t allowed to get someone sitting in a office to cover an operational role for a day even if they are qualified and experienced. More stupid archaic union rules.

They can if the employee agrees… what they can’t do is make an ex-guard, now working on back room duties, go back onto the trains without their agreement unless it’s in their contract. So they can’t make people step into a safety critical role that is literally not their job without their agreement. Seem obvious to me why.

I heard on the radio yesterday that it wasn’t external agencies that they were trying to get in to cover work, it’s the movement of staff within the company to cover striking roles.

I'd not heard that. If thats the case then why are the government trying to change the law so they can use agency workers to cover strikers jobs? That is a very specific and significant change to a law thats been in place since the 70's. Surely if what you're saying was the desired outcome then they wouldn't need a change a law, just a change in terms and conditions? But thats not what they've said they want to do.

Sounds to me like they're just using it as an excuse to change the law across the board to free up all employers to be able to do what P&O just did?

A representative from the recruitment agencies was on saying that there is no way they’d want to get involved in providing workers to break picket lines, and they don’t need to anyway as they can’t get enough workers to fill the available positions they already have, so they certainly don’t need to be dragged into any political mither.

Bloke representing recruitment agencies on Radio 4 the other day said that there's already an unofficial agreement in place not to provide scabs to replace striking workers.

And what a breath of fresh air Mick Lynch is, a proper contrast to Laughing Len as pointed out so succinctly above.
His logical dismantling of Tory lies and bullshit is what we've needed for years now.
Why SKS can't do this is beyond comprehension.

Lynch even got a plaudit from old Etonian Hugh Laurie.
B2 you are James Goad. I claim my £5.

I’d not heard that. If thats the case then why are the government trying to change the law so they can use agency workers to cover strikers jobs.

That isn't about this dispute, mainly low payed unskilled jobs are the ones that can be quickly covered by agency staff. There are a lot more of people who are now going into working poverty because of rising costs. The tories need to take away the effectiveness of industrial action now before it gathers pace. The theoretical threat that you can be replaced easily, just lose days of pay without winning anything should be enough to keep them in their place, downtrodden and in constant fear. Psychological intimidation as government policy has always been at the heart of the tories policy.

Twas ever thus.

Never trust a Tory.

Anyone care to tell me the difference between Mick Lynch and Len McCluskey?

The obvious difference is related to each union's relationship with the Labour Party- Unite is affiliated to the Labour Party whilst RMT withdrew their affiliation a long time ago.

Consequently Unite pumps £millions into Labour's coffers and understandably expects value for money from that investment and for it to be used to achieve the union's aims and for the benefit of its members.

In contrast RMT has no vested interest in the Labour Party and couldn't give a monkeys about the internal politics of the party. A point which was made very clear when Wes Streeting publicly came out in support of the RMT only to be forced by Starmer to apologise and withdraw his support.

The RMT's reaction to that political summersault was to state that they weren't in the least bit bothered as the opinions of an organisation which they aren't even affiliated to is of no concern to them.

IMO time is overdue for the Unite to disaffiliate from the Labour Party, let Labour rely on the wealthy donors who Starmer treats with far more respect than he does the trade unions.

Why SKS can’t do this is beyond comprehension.

Because he has no interest in it. He's not on the side of rail workers or any other workers. He's on the side of the professional managerial classes who see themselves as the most important thing in our economy. These people won't challenge the higher echelons of the establishment because they want to be like them. Starmer with his knighthood and membership of the privy council is already one of them, so is hardly likely to want to rock the boat.

Yeah I don't think that the former head of the Crown Prosecution Service could really present himself as a straight talking anti-establishment figure in the way that a trade union leader might.

Maybe if the Labour Party had chosen someone with different credentials to be leader challenging the status quo might have been more realistic.

But today's Labour Party places its faith in establishment figures, preferably, it would appear based on their dominance within the party, lawyers. The sort of people who know what working people should vote for.

But today’s Labour Party places its faith in establishment figures, preferably, it would appear based on their dominance within the party, lawyers.

An old mate of mine used to be active in Lewisham CLP and all he ever went on about was how the labour party would be a much better place if they just got rid of all the lawyers within it. Can't say I disagree. I'd probably add anyone in a directorship position of anything other than a small business or voluntary organisation.

I think I’ll give BBCQT a watch tonight. Haven’t watched in a while but would be nice to see Lynch hand the panel’s arses to them on a plate. I can only imagine how the production company is loading the audience. 😀

Good call on catching tonight's QT

I've just seen Eddie Dempsey Assistant RMT General Secretary being interviewed by the BBC and imo he spoke even more eloquently than Mick Lynch has been recently.

He directly answered every question put to him and seamlessly went through each point knocking the nail on the head every time.

I genuinely can't remember the last time I heard anyone handle a political interview so effectively. Obviously the positions are well-rehearsed after majority decisions have been made, RMT officials are not making it up as they go along, but it is nevertheless impressive and is clearly driven by genuine belief and passion.

Why SKS can’t do this is beyond comprehension.

Because he has no interest in it. He’s not on the side of rail workers or any other workers. He’s on the side of the professional managerial classes who see themselves as the most important thing in our economy. These people won’t challenge the higher echelons of the establishment because they want to be like them. Starmer with his knighthood and membership of the privy council is already one of them, so is hardly likely to want to rock the boat.

Exactly. I've said this for 10 years plus to a Labour fanatic friend. It doesnt matter which party are in power, they do nothing for the low paid Workers, but do whatever it takes to keep rich people rich. They are the 'Establishment' and want to stay that way, whatever party they belong to. There are few politicians who keep their feet on the ground when they become MPS, most seem to think they are a step above 'normal' people and do as little as possible to help people. How many politicians turn down a knighthood or promotion to the Lords - very few, as they want to be the establishment, and do just a few little things to keep the plebs on their side. How many MPs voted against their latest ( and all previous) inflation busting payrises? Why didnt the minimum wage go up the same amount?