EMT Strikes

[johncas]

I herd On the news today that EMT East Midlands Trains have a very limited service Due to virtually no drivers being available for work they BBC say this may be due to industrial action about the ongoing pay negotiations

So don't EMT have contracted sunday staff I don't work sundays where I work but they have staff that are contracted to work sundays.
So should the railways or every sunday you could have staff saying I don't want to work it and then no trains running

[gswindale]

From the statement by EMT (http://www.eastmidlandstrains.co.uk/EMT ... 17May_.htm)

it appears that although drivers should be contracted to work, they've simply said they won't.

It is cases like these that put people off using public transport. People simply won't use the network if they cannot rely on it.
On the face of it, it seems to be driver's greed in these uncertain times causing the problems.
I probably won't be getting a payrise this year due to the economic climate, so don't see why people who cannot provide a service should get one either.

[jbilton]

Hi
I don't know the reasons behind this .... but it is always a last ditch for working people, who need their wages, to give those wages up.
I'm sure they have tried all other means to persuade Management to the table.
I don't know ... can EMT managers be personally heavily fined for failing to run services.
I'm sure those individuals would be straight back round the table.... otherwise they'd only get three foreign holidays this year.... and the new yacht would have to be put on hold etc.

Cheers
Jon

PS
Doesn't effect Lincoln too much ... only a couple of trains on a Sunday these days, since the wonderful privatisation of the railways.

[arabiandisco]

I suspect this is because the original NatEx operations all had Sunday working as overtime, and most of what is now EMT was originally MML & Central - both of which were NatEx. EMT will be wanting to have Sundays as normal rostered days.

In the world of 2009, I think it's perfectly acceptable to have Sundays as normal rostered days. But maybe the East Midlands are closed on sundays...

[Easilyconfused]

Welcome to the world of industrial relations. When companies are taken over there is the small matter of a piece of law known as T.U.P.E. - which I believe means the "transfer of undertakings and protection of employment" act. This basically means your existing terms and conditions stand apart from pension arrangements. I know a bit about this having been affected by it twice.

The new management can offer inducements to give up some of your old terms etc. so if Sunday working was overtime under the old management and the new management wants Sundays to be normal working days on a rota basis then they have to stump up the cash to buy out that term of employment.

Having been a union health & safety rep in my previous employment I did get a fair bit of information copied to me for interest and education about other union matters such as TUPE and I am about to be TUPE transferred to a new employer on 1st June.

[danielw2599]

I suspect this is because the original NatEx operations all had Sunday working as overtime, and most of what is now EMT was originally MML & Central - both of which were NatEx. EMT will be wanting to have Sundays as normal rostered days.

In the world of 2009, I think it's perfectly acceptable to have Sundays as normal rostered days. But maybe the East Midlands are closed on sundays...

And that is fine, but the operating companies should compensate staff for loss of wages/overtime.

Sunday working in the railway industry generally means time and a half or double time...would you suddenly roll over and give that up becuase managment ask you to??? Would you not want something in return...ie higher basic?

[arabiandisco]

I'm not saying they should just impose it without making compensatory changes to the terms & conditions (quite the opposite - if you employ someone for 6 days, you pay them for 6 days, if you employ them for 7, pay them for 7. Simple.)

But I believe that the unions, particularly Comrade Crow, often try to make a big fuss and have a strike just to remind the world that they're there. Sometimes they have a point, sometimes they don't. In this case, don't know any more about the matter than what I posted earlier, so I pass no judgement.

Incidentally, As a salaried railway employee, I have worked over night and at weekend (including over christmas), and they don't pay me for the overtime. (Fortunately these are rare events!). And no, I am not management, I am an engineer and noone reports to me. And I don't have a yacht. And my idea of a foreign holiday for the last 5 years has been a weekend in a tent in Hainault.

[jbilton]

Hi
I believe that is often standard practise for salaried posts, offset by usually by being permanently better paid.
Its certainly something you would have agreed to at sometime.
I'm not sure you would be too happy if management suddenly decided to roster you every other weekend and a couple of nights every week, without additional compensation.
Presumably because the company just have the motive of making more profit.
I agree Unions can be a pain, but just imagine what conditions you would be forced to work in, if they didn't exist.
At its basic level a union is a collective of workers, who support each other, and obtain better and protect their conditions through that combined negotiation.
Cheers
Jon

[arabiandisco]

When I have had to work overnight, it's generally been consensual. And I was told about there being a risk of having to do that at my interview. The job I do is almost entirely 9-5, so the whole rostering thing is alien to me. But it's not about me (I'm not a member of a union, as it happens, largely because I get to choose between the RMT, whose unnecessary provocativeness I can't stand, and the TSSA, who as far as I can see don't do anything apart from take your money).

Generally speaking, unions do a lot of good, but sometimes they forget that they are there to serve their members, not to use their members as pawns in the leadership's political battles, but the good work they do is buried under the stupid fights they pick that serve no-ones interests, and it's those battles - the days when I've not been able to get to work - which stick in the mind.

[jbilton]

Hi
In this case I would suggest they are protecting the longterm future earnings of their members.
Who presumably are not highly paid in the first place, and rely on the extra to feed their families.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
Cheers
Jon

[arabiandisco]

I'm sure that's what they'd say they are doing. And no doubt the management would say they are being totally unreasonable.

We don't know what the details of the drivers existing contracts are, and nor do we know what they are being offered. Maybe they're justified, maybe they aren't. I pass no judgement...

However, as a principle, every employee should be fairly compensated for the work they do.

[allypally]

Hi
In this case I would suggest they are protecting the longterm future earnings of their members.
Who presumably are not highly paid in the first place, and rely on the extra to feed their families.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
Cheers
Jon

Not highly paid? Train drivers even in local TOCs these days are pretty much all in the higher tax bracket.

I'm fairly sure at Virgin for example the basic rate is around 40 grand.

That's a hell of a lot more than the driver's salary under BR.

[jbilton]

Hi
In this case I would suggest they are protecting the longterm future earnings of their members.
Who presumably are not highly paid in the first place, and rely on the extra to feed their families.
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
Cheers
Jon

Not highly paid? Train drivers even in local TOCs these days are pretty much all in the higher tax bracket.

I'm fairly sure at Virgin for example the basic rate is around 40 grand.

That's a hell of a lot more than the driver's salary under BR.

Agreed.....not bad..... but why should they take a cut from what they already earn.
If they are over paid.... then I'm afraid thats previous bad management.
So presumably that earlier management got paid for work ( and well I expect) they didn't actually do.
Cheers
Jon

[jbilton]

I'm sure that's what they'd say they are doing. And no doubt the management would say they are being totally unreasonable.

We don't know what the details of the drivers existing contracts are, and nor do we know what they are being offered. Maybe they're justified, maybe they aren't. I pass no judgement...

However, as a principle, every employee should be fairly compensated for the work they do.

Yes ..... there's always two sides.
The EMT management announcement does say they can't run Sunday services because staff have made themselves unavailable .... not that EMT are refusing to pay the agreed rate of pay.

Cheers
Jon

[allypally]

EMT will pay them what they are currently contractually entitled to if they work Sundays.

What they are doing here is holding a strike without having to go to the inconvenience of telling people in advance.