Seemingly trivial things that annoy you

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

Train services in Britain will continue to be disrupted on Wednesday as talks resume in a bid to resolve a dispute over jobs, pay and conditions.
Millions of passengers were affected on Tuesday after rail workers walked out in the largest rail strike in decades.
While strikes are not being held on Wednesday, only 60% of trains are expected to be running.

Yeah. It’s a clever ruse. Work half the day and get paid full.

Anyway update - I bagged a seat as it’s not my first rodeo but I reckon 40% of passengers are indeed standing.

pblakeney

Confident of getting home?

monkimark

It was always scheduled to knock on until this morning .
I don't think the tube was due to restart until 8am.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

Confident of getting home?

If they can’t get me home as scheduled they’ll pay for my taxi via delay repay. ✌🏻

First.Aspect

Sorry if I missed the debate, but who actually supports this strike?

The union and government news soundbites could have been recorded at any tike in the past 50 years, so aren't informative.

pblakeney

First.Aspect said:

Sorry if I missed the debate, but who actually supports this strike?

The union and government news soundbites could have been recorded at any tike in the past 50 years, so aren't informative.

Biggest niggle that I've heard is that Sunday working is optional (which was silly on the part of the operators). Obviously the operators want the contracts changed, and equally employees want recompense for the inconvenience. A compromise has to be met.
Trouble being that whatever is being proposed isn't satisfactory to both sides.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

Sorry if I missed the debate, but who actually supports this strike?

The union and government news soundbites could have been recorded at any tike in the past 50 years, so aren't informative.

I think the government supports the strike judging by their response.

rick_chasey

Have to say, the gall to strike when they provide such a terrible service aside, it is a tough nut to crack.

You've got between 20-30% fewer passengers, which amounts around 15-20% lost revenue (because of the extortionate pricing, but anyway).

You've also got massive debts from having to run a service with virtually no passengers (and so no passenger revenue) for 12-18 months.

Then you've got your employees who are about as militant as they get in an environment of 9-10% inflation.

So how do you square that? Massive debts, declining revenue, and then your employees are demanding a 10% pay rise just to stand still?

First.Aspect

What I'm hearing is a general "no" because the unions are being unrealistic.

From what I can tell, 2% is typical in the private sector, which is my baseline for assessing reasonableness of strike action (which isn't to say one shouldn't be grumpy about 2%, but grumpy isn't a threshold for withholding labour, imo).

What have the rail unions asked for? I heard a rumour of 11%, but I suspect that's from the Torygraph or something.

rick_chasey

We don't know what is typical in the private sector as we've not had a comp round yet in the inflationary environment.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

We don't know what is typical in the private sector as we've not had a comp round yet in the inflationary environment.

You must be getting early indications, since the double digit projections were issued. We've had a payroubd since, for example, when inflation was at 7.

rick_chasey

Nah comp rounds happen in Feb March, and the City is not really representative, as it accounted for a ridiculous proportion of the actual wage growth in the country.

RMT is asking for a minimum of 7% btw, which is still 2% below the current rate.

pblakeney

First.Aspect said:

What I'm hearing is a general "no" because the unions are being unrealistic.

From what I can tell, 2% is typical in the private sector, which is my baseline for assessing reasonableness of strike action (which isn't to say one shouldn't be grumpy about 2%, but grumpy isn't a threshold for withholding labour, imo).

What have the rail unions asked for? I heard a rumour of 11%, but I suspect that's from the Torygraph or something.

Torygraph and government etc say it is about inflation increases.
Union says it is about terms & conditions. Truth probably lies elsewhere.

monkimark

Is the terrible service the fault of the people going on strike (aside form on strike days obviously)?

rick_chasey said:

Have to say, the gall to strike when they provide such a terrible service aside, it is a tough nut to crack.

First.Aspect

Fwiw 4-5% seems reasonable to me, and not unrealistic.

Joining a 7 day a week industry and griping about having to work weekends sometimes seems not to be reasonable to me. Is rather like long distance lorry drivers complaining about spending nights away from home.

rick_chasey

monkimark said:

Is the terrible service the fault of the people going on strike (aside form on strike days obviously)?

rick_chasey said:

Have to say, the gall to strike when they provide such a terrible service aside, it is a tough nut to crack.

Are the people running the rail network not part of the RMT?

monkimark

I doubt a rail maintenance worker or ticket collectors can do much to improve the service and I suspect that the management level people with the (theoretical) ability to change things for the better are not on strike.
I worked in rail maintenance (for a private company) for a short while and the management was flawed to say the least.

The whole rail franchising system seems like a complete mess to me. Are the train operating companies still making a profit?

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

Have to say, the gall to strike when they provide such a terrible service aside, it is a tough nut to crack.

You've got between 20-30% fewer passengers, which amounts around 15-20% lost revenue (because of the extortionate pricing, but anyway).

You've also got massive debts from having to run a service with virtually no passengers (and so no passenger revenue) for 12-18 months.

Then you've got your employees who are about as militant as they get in an environment of 9-10% inflation.

So how do you square that? Massive debts, declining revenue, and then your employees are demanding a 10% pay rise just to stand still?

You are muddling up at least two or more groups. The RMT don't provide you with a service. The rail operators aren't on strike. Neither of them control spending on the rail infrastructure which is likely a significant cause of the delays you experience (which by the way is not common to all routes).

rick_chasey

Shortage of drivers doesn’t count?

monkimark

Who hires the drivers?

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

monkimark said:

Is the terrible service the fault of the people going on strike (aside form on strike days obviously)?

rick_chasey said:

Have to say, the gall to strike when they provide such a terrible service aside, it is a tough nut to crack.

Are the people running the rail network not part of the RMT?

No.

rick_chasey

So who the f@ck are the RMT?

Whoever is striking across the national rail system - whatever they're doing when they are working is plainly not good enough.

They charge a f*cking fortune for a terrible service. Shortage of drivers, appalling infrastructure that cannot handle the load, shortage of carriages, over-busy trains in poor condition - broken AC, broken doors, smelly, dirty, the lot.

Even the newer trains don't always work and they've created them to be as uncomfortable as possible to ram you in. It would be nice to be able to sit on a train without having to be constantly in physical contact with the other person sitting either next to you or opposite because the space is so small - and I'm hardly tall, so if I find it difficult, god knows what it's like for tall people.

monkimark

Rail, maritime and transport union.

pblakeney

First.Aspect said:

Fwiw 4-5% seems reasonable to me, and not unrealistic.

Joining a 7 day a week industry and griping about having to work weekends sometimes seems not to be reasonable to me. Is rather like long distance lorry drivers complaining about spending nights away from home.

While you are 100% correct the error is with those offering contracts stating Sundays are optional. The outcome is inevitable.
My contract says I don't have to work a Friday (compressed hours) so I don't.
If they expect me to then I will want enhanced conditions. Logical, to me.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

So who the f@ck are the RMT?

Whoever is striking across the national rail system - whatever they're doing when they are working is plainly not good enough.

They charge a f*cking fortune for a terrible service. Shortage of drivers, appalling infrastructure that cannot handle the load, shortage of carriages, over-busy trains in poor condition - broken AC, broken doors, smelly, dirty, the lot.

Even the newer trains don't always work and they've created them to be as uncomfortable as possible to ram you in.

The RMT don't charge you anything. They represent drivers and other rail staff, who are employed by the rail operators. The terms of the operators' franchises are set by government. Infrastructure is owned and maintained by a separate organisation. It is not that complicated so not sure why you are refusing to understand.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

So who the f@ck are the RMT?

Whoever is striking across the national rail system - whatever they're doing when they are working is plainly not good enough.

They charge a f*cking fortune for a terrible service. Shortage of drivers, appalling infrastructure that cannot handle the load, shortage of carriages, over-busy trains in poor condition - broken AC, broken doors, smelly, dirty, the lot.

Even the newer trains don't always work and they've created them to be as uncomfortable as possible to ram you in.

The RMT don't charge you anything. They represent drivers and other rail staff, who are employed by the rail operators. The terms of the operators' franchises are set by government. Infrastructure is owned and maintained by a separate organisation. It is not that complicated so not sure why you are refusing to understand.

Because the service is f*cking appalling, doubly so given the price, and no-one ever takes f*cking responsibility for it.

It's always the same. It's just everyone pointing at everyone else going "not my fault".

Every part of the rail experience needs improvement. From availability of drivers, to the maintenance of the carriages, to the actual track, the whole f*cking lot.

They're all sh!t and they charge a fortune for it.

I'm the customer, right? In a critical service over which they have a monopoly.

When my car breaks down because of a faulty part, that's VW's fault. They don't turn around and say "actually, it was a parts supplier who we have problems with, go moan to them" and then they in turn say "well, our material supplier has had quality problems, go complain to them".

Same sh!t. They're all sh!t at their job at some point, else the whole rail service wouldn't be so utterly sh!t, right?

I don't give a f*ck how it's structured. It needs to be sorted and someone needs to take responsibility for the outcome, which is sh!t.

monkimark

I think the people you have a problem with are the same people that the RMT are in dispute with.
None of the people striking can control ticket prices, change staff levels, change timetables, buy new trains etc.

rick_chasey said:

So who the f@ck are the RMT?

Whoever is striking across the national rail system - whatever they're doing when they are working is plainly not good enough.

They charge a f*cking fortune for a terrible service. Shortage of drivers, appalling infrastructure that cannot handle the load, shortage of carriages, over-busy trains in poor condition - broken AC, broken doors, smelly, dirty, the lot.

Even the newer trains don't always work and they've created them to be as uncomfortable as possible to ram you in. It would be nice to be able to sit on a train without having to be constantly in physical contact with the other person sitting either next to you or opposite because the space is so small - and I'm hardly tall, so if I find it difficult, god knows what it's like for tall people.

First.Aspect

I don't think the narrative that the industry was hugely propped up during covid has had enough emphasis. The position of a union doesn't seem to reflect much give and take.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

So who the f@ck are the RMT?

Whoever is striking across the national rail system - whatever they're doing when they are working is plainly not good enough.

They charge a f*cking fortune for a terrible service. Shortage of drivers, appalling infrastructure that cannot handle the load, shortage of carriages, over-busy trains in poor condition - broken AC, broken doors, smelly, dirty, the lot.

Even the newer trains don't always work and they've created them to be as uncomfortable as possible to ram you in.

The RMT don't charge you anything. They represent drivers and other rail staff, who are employed by the rail operators. The terms of the operators' franchises are set by government. Infrastructure is owned and maintained by a separate organisation. It is not that complicated so not sure why you are refusing to understand.

Because the service is f*cking appalling, doubly so given the price, and no-one ever takes f*cking responsibility for it.

It's always the same. It's just everyone pointing at everyone else going "not my fault".

Every part of the rail experience needs improvement. From availability of drivers, to the maintenance of the carriages, to the actual track, the whole f*cking lot.

They're all sh!t and they charge a fortune for it.

I'm the customer, right? In a critical service over which they have a monopoly.

When my car breaks down because of a faulty part, that's VW's fault. They don't turn around and say "actually, it was a parts supplier who we have problems with, go moan to them" and then they in turn say "well, our material supplier has had quality problems, go complain to them".

Same sh!t. They're all sh!t at their job at some point, else the whole rail service wouldn't be so utterly sh!t, right?

I don't give a f*ck how it's structured. It needs to be sorted and someone needs to take responsibility for the outcome, which is sh!t.

in simple terms the RMT represents the workers whereas your gripe is with the Bosses.

First.Aspect

Stoopid question du jour.

If the services are franchised, why is the dispute between the RMT and the government, not the private companies running the franchises?