Incoming : Tube strike dates (Londoncentric)

sketchley

From http://www.21stcenturynurse.com/UKSalary.htm

Senior Nurse - From £19,585 to £24,455

Now tell me Tube drivers are worth the money.

davmaggs

In most strikes you find a fair amount of people who'll voice support in the pub or in the media for the workers. I noticed that with the Tube this doesn't seem to happen. Bob Crow appears to even annoyed Guardian commentators.

sketchley

And by the way, I do not have a problem with Tube Drivers. I just have massive problem with Bob Crow (as you may of guessed). I happen to think he is less concerned about his members and much more concerned about his own media image. Fact is though there are a lot of people on a lot less money than tube drivers, and it's not exactly a highly skilled job.

DonDaddyD

Sketchley wrote:

From http://www.21stcenturynurse.com/UKSalary.htm

Senior Nurse - From £19,585 to £24,455

Now tell me Tube driver are worth the money.

You cannot compare a Nurse's job to a Tube driver. The skill sets are different. That's like comparing the salary of a surgeon to a chef. Or a Lawyer to a Banker.

Nurses jobs differ dependant on the role, amount of patients they have to deal with, location and what area of health they are in: acute, mental, community health, sexual health, neonatal etc. Then you factor in things like risk, working hours, environment etc.

Fact is the two are not directly comparable and is akin to the type of misinformation bullsh*t Cameron's Tories tried pull when he complained about public sector wages (the public sector is huge and not just the NHS and Transport). He considered nothing of the job itself just the salary and job title.

You cannot run a comparison without considering the variables.

You cannot claim that Tube workers aren't worth the money as a statement unto itself without considering the variables and circumstances of the job itself.

Depending on the field some nurses can make up to £40,000 without London weighting:

http://www.jobs.nhs.uk/cgi-bin/advsearc ... layrows=10

Edit: Oh and NHS payscales.

Greg T

DonDaddyD wrote:

You cannot claim that Tube workers aren't worth the money as a statement unto itself without considering the variables and circumstances of the job itself

Sitting on your bum pushing buttons....

They only have 2 I've got 26 just with letters on them!

Am i worth 10 tube drivers?????

Hayfever, medical leave arf arf arf

They get the pay they earn as they have the capital by the nuts....fact.

sketchley

The original comment was about automatic train operation, which has been in place on Victoria line since 1968. See link above. This basically means the drivers job is reduced to pressing a button to open the door when arriving at a platform then pressing again to say train is ready to leave. If on green it then moves automatically to next station. Hardly a highly skill qualified job like nursing.

The only reason, in my opinion why a tube driver gets more than a nurse is the attitude and action of the unions backing them. The RMT particularly being prepared to hold commuters, London Transport and the tax payer to ransom to get there demands met. Something Nurses are unlikely to do.

Nurses are worth more than they get paid, tube drivers worth less. Sorry for having an opinion.

DonDaddyD

Well London Underground, hell the dust at Liverpool Street rail station sends my hayfever into overdrive. That's a personal observation.

Working in an enclosed environment with no natural light or air for 8hrs (possibly more) a day as well as unsocialable hours. I wouldn't be surprised if the higher than average annual leave was justified on medical grounds.

The job also probably needs to be made attractive by other means (attractive package - we've all heard of that surely) given the job.

sketchley

Do you really think if the adverse health effect as you state are present on the tube line the RMT would be happy to have their members sit in it, or would they be out on strike demanding air filtering in the cabs?

W1

DonDaddyD wrote:

If the company is willing to pay them that and offer that then fine. It's a job and people will take it.

Would they be so "willing" to pay if the Union didn't threaten to bring London to it's knees when a member gets sacked for what seems to be fairly obvious incompetence?

What they should do is sack the ones who don't appear to want to work given any spurious reason, and fill those vacancies with people who value their jobs more than their union membership.

Like the police and the army, I think the tube drivers should be banned from striking, because they are clearly a "key" part of the country and use this position to lever completely absurd demands......

EKE_38BPM

DonDaddyD wrote:

Sketchley wrote:

So how do you fancy 30k a year and 45 days holiday a year, plus paid for taxi to and from work, free travel around London, just for pressing 2 buttons.....

Working in an environment that is murder on my hayfever, muder on my lungs and no natural light. Unsociable hours. Not much human interaction. Abuse and rudeness from commuters.

No thanks.

I think the annual leave is supported on medical grounds given the working environment.

Doesn't paint such a rosey picture when you see the other side of the perspective does it. I hate when people gripe about other peoples jobs. If the company is willing to pay them that and offer that then fine. It's a job and people will take it.

Free transport. It's a perk for working for a transport company. How the hell can you begrudge them that FFS.

I'm not saying the strikes are right or the demands are right. But lets not start bashing people for doing a job without first considering all aspects of the job.

I think we can all agree that its a horrible job, but the pay they receive (I won't say earn) is ridiculous for the job they do.
I've been told only one tube line is completely underground (Victoria) but the Waterloo and City line (all two stops of it) must be completely subterranean too. Working in a spray painting booth has a lot of the downsides (unpleasant/toxic atmosphere, little human interraction, little/no natural light etc) but I doubt they make as much money as a tube driver. Tube drivers don't usually have to deal with irate passengers. They don't usually have to deal with passengers at all.

Being a tube driver is a rubbish job, but they are seriously overpaid and this explains the waiting list to become one.
A friend of a friend (so it must be true) has passed all the the tests to become a Victoria line driver and has been offered a job when they have an opening. He's been on the waiting list for almost five years now.
Once you have a job that pays so well for sitting on your behind and pressing a few buttons (stop, go, door open, door close) and occassionally have to make an incomprehensible announcement on the PA system, you hold on to it with both hands and you back your union who want to keep the status quo.

Personally, I think being a bus driver is a harder job. You have to deal with the great unwashed and traffic. The pay is slightly less, but not by much.

rick_chasey

I've never understood people complaining about really cushy well paid jobs.

You have to think to yourself, why don't you do it then?

Either the answer will become very clear to you why they are well looked after, or you'll realise you should go after that job because you'll love it.

DonDaddyD

Sketchley wrote:

Hardly a highly skill qualified job like nursing.

Do you know what skills a nurse requires. There are different types of nurses needing skills of various levels.

I thought I explained that. Given the monumental chasm between the skills and training to be a nurse or a tube driver the comparison is a rather silly one.

The only reason, in my opinion why a tube driver gets more than a nurse is the attitude and action of the unions backing them.

You are now either choosing not to read my post or ignore it. I explained that nurses salaries vary. Are you deliberately choosing to ignore my post (with evidence - NHS Jobs link FFS) simply to force feed your point.

The RMT particularly being prepared to hold commuters, London Transport and the tax payer to ransom to get there demands met. Something Nurses are unlikely to do.

Again with the bullsh*t comparison using nurses.

If the issue is they are striking over pay then I think we need to look at as an entity unto itself reasons why they should be paid more or less.

Nurses are worth more than they get paid, tube drivers worth less. Sorry for having an opinion.

See above.

DonDaddyD

Sketchley wrote:

Do you really think if the adverse health effect as you state are present on the tube line the RMT would be happy to have their members sit in it, or would they be out on strike demanding air filtering in the cabs?

Short answer, YES.

W1 wrote:

Would they be so "willing" to pay if the Union didn't threaten to bring London to it's knees when a member gets sacked for what seems to be fairly obvious incompetence?

Conjecture, I can't answer that. Neither can you we can only speculate and that would prove fruitless.

W1 wrote:

Like the police and the army, I think the tube drivers should be banned from striking, because they are clearly a "key" part of the country and use this position to lever completely absurd demands......

I actually agree - but then where does that stop should we put a ban on all public sector workers from striking?

EKE wrote:

I think we can all agree that its a horrible job, but the pay they receive (I won't say earn) is ridiculous for the job they do.

My point is that the pay is likely to be based on more things than just the job that they do. Like most jobs really, pay takes into consideration other circumstances like environment, location, responsibility and skills. Dare I say they aren't simply getting paid £30k to push two buttons without anything else taken into consideration.

EKE_38BPM

I think the only people who don't think Tube drivers are overpaid are:
1) Tube drivers and their dependants
2) The RMT
3) DDD

DonDaddyD

I don't think they're overpaid but I don't think they should be paid any more.

Taking into consideration the working environment, hours, health risks and overall risk/responsiblity (collectively - some aspects are more poignant than others) I think the package they get: pay, holiday, free travel is generous. But I don't think they should get more and I don't think they should get less.

What I think is that teachers should be paid more. I haven't really looked at police, firefighters etc to comment.

jamesco

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I think we can all agree that its a horrible job

Not me! I think it would be worse to work in the ticket booths (e.g. at Ealing Broadway) where the employees get vile abuse. The drivers are in a cosy carriage and while it may often be underground, punters don't see them and generally don't harass them.

EKE_38BPM wrote:

Personally, I think being a bus driver is a harder job. You have to deal with the great unwashed and traffic. The pay is slightly less, but not by much.

Completely agree. The roads are a much more dynamic environment and they have to put up with abuse from punters (see above) for less money, as well as all those whinging cyclists

jamesco

Rick Chasey wrote:

I've never understood people complaining about really cushy well paid jobs.

You have to think to yourself, why don't you do it then?

Either the answer will become very clear to you why they are well looked after, or you'll realise you should go after that job because you'll love it.

They're well looked after because they can put a gun to Londoners head whenever they like...

notsoblue

jamesco wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I've never understood people complaining about really cushy well paid jobs.

You have to think to yourself, why don't you do it then?

Either the answer will become very clear to you why they are well looked after, or you'll realise you should go after that job because you'll love it.

They're well looked after because they can put a gun to Londoners head whenever they like...

I think its sad that London is a city in which a certain class of people can only earn a living wage if circumstance is such that they can "put a gun to Londoner's heads".

jamesco

notsoblue wrote:

I think its sad that London is a city in which a certain class of people can only earn a living wage if circumstance is such that they can "put a gun to Londoner's heads".

It's rather more than a "living wage", and given the required skills it's only that high because of the ease and affect of striking. Don't expect Londoners to have solidarity with the drivers when the strikes affect those who depend on public transport the most.

I wonder if London Underground has done a cost/benefit analysis of implementing driverless trains? That might focus Bob Crow's mind on how far he is willing to push things.

W1

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1 wrote:

Would they be so "willing" to pay if the Union didn't threaten to bring London to it's knees when a member gets sacked for what seems to be fairly obvious incompetence?

Conjecture, I can't answer that. Neither can you we can only speculate and that would prove fruitless.

I think that the fact that there is a waiting list for jobs would indicate that the employer is seriously overpaying for the work required.

I agree that bus drivers have a much worse time, but as they don't have such bully-boy unions they haven't managed to blackmail better pay and conditions from their employers, unlike the tube drivers.

Drysuitdiver

the strikes this time are not over money, they are over the "UNFAIR" dismissal of 2 employees.

one for a safety breach and one for abusive behaviour. the union are claiming victimisation as they are union members.

Bob Crow is just an arrogant arse.

DonDaddyD

More thoughts on this.

If it can be proven that you can get the same level (performance) of work from an employee on less money then it's possible that overall tube drivers could be paid less.

However, in London its not unreasonable for a person want to earn a living wage.

notsoblue

jamesco wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

I think its sad that London is a city in which a certain class of people can only earn a living wage if circumstance is such that they can "put a gun to Londoner's heads".

It's rather more than a "living wage", and given the required skills it's only that high because of the ease and affect of striking. Don't expect Londoners to have solidarity with the drivers when the strikes affect those who depend on public transport the most.

I'm not specifically defending tube driver's pay. The fact is that workers in London that don't have union representation have terrible remuneration that doesn't amount to a living wage. Employers will pay their staff as little as they can get away with. Its sad that only those with leverage can represent themselves.

jamesco wrote:

I wonder if London Underground has done a cost/benefit analysis of implementing driverless trains? That might focus Bob Crow's mind on how far he is willing to push things.

Why is it that people choose to imply that this is all just Bob Crow? He represents the 80,000 odd members of his union, and he only got to his position because he has the attitude that they want in a union leader. He's acting in their interest. I guess he's a convenient straw man. No need to actually discuss what the union wants if you can just paint their leader as a pr*ck.

Blandiblub

The chap sacked for the safety breach has WON his tribunal so I'd assume he'll have to be reinstated.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13306339