Jump to content

National rail strikes planned by RMT


IronJambo
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

There would be no profit if subsidies and grants weren't given to rail companies.

If they had to depend on fares from customers, personal and freight, they wouldn't survive.

The profit is an illusion of tax payers money.

But there are profits. They may be due to subsidies, but they are there. So the question is, where are these profits going? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 955
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Malinga the Swinga

    69

  • IronJambo

    65

  • Riccarton3

    61

  • Ked

    62

10 minutes ago, Ked said:

If there are profits why is there 16 billion subsidies?

And if there's been a fall if 25% of usage it doesn't bode well.

I dunno why they're recording profits when they're subsidised. But they are. So again, where are those profits going? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dobmisterdobster
16 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

There would be no profit if subsidies and grants weren't given to rail companies.

If they had to depend on fares from customers, personal and freight, they wouldn't survive.

The profit is an illusion of tax payers money.

 

Most people don't realise how much of a money sink the railways are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Norm said:

I dunno why they're recording profits when they're subsidised. But they are. So again, where are those profits going? 

2% profit they made .

16 billion of subsistence.

Rail fares account for 2.5 billion.

So let's say for arguments sake that 2% of the actual fares are profit.

Share that with the 7 hundred thousand employees plus their generous pension contribution.

You do know that in general railway employees are above average earners already?

So you tell me what should be done with any profits?

Reinvested in the network to improve stock?

Shared with employees?

Or used to offset the massive taxpayer input ?

 

Where do you think this profit goes?

Because I don't see any profit.

You are asking me where it goes where there is none.

So you tell me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IronJambo
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

There would be no profit if subsidies and grants weren't given to rail companies.

If they had to depend on fares from customers, personal and freight, they wouldn't survive.

The profit is an illusion of tax payers money.

There would barely be any businesses left in the country if the government hadn't subsidised them throughout covid. Many thousands would've lost their homes if they hadn't been given free money from the government in the form of furlough. Most of them that have returned to work will still have had a payrise.  You've had a payrise, and at who's expense?

 

First group, whom I work for and operate several TOCs returned £500m to shareholders this year. There's no money to offer a pay rise for the first time in 3 years though? Customer numbers are 80% of pre covid figures. Trains are bursting at the seams again. But there's no customers and no money? Gives a break!

Edited by IronJambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IronJambo
7 minutes ago, Ked said:

2% profit they made .

16 billion of subsistence.

Rail fares account for 2.5 billion.

So let's say for arguments sake that 2% of the actual fares are profit.

Share that with the 7 hundred thousand employees plus their generous pension contribution.

You do know that in general railway employees are above average earners already?

So you tell me what should be done with any profits?

Reinvested in the network to improve stock?

Shared with employees?

Or used to offset the massive taxpayer input ?

 

Where do you think this profit goes?

Because I don't see any profit.

You are asking me where it goes where there is none.

So you tell me.

First Groups accounts say there's profit. It's no secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IronJambo said:

There would barely be any businesses left in the country if the government hadn't subsidised them throughout covid. Many thousands would've lost their homes if they hadn't been given free money from the government in the form of furlough. Most of them that have returned to work will still have had a payrise.  You've had a payrise, and at who's expense?

 

First group, whom I work for and operate several TOCs returned £500m to shareholders this year. There's no money to offer a pay rise for the first time in 3 years though? Customer numbers are 80% of pre covid figures. Trains are bursting at the seams again. But there's no customers and no money? Gives a break!

700 thousand x average of 40 grand wanting How much %  is your union after?

Let's say 5% 

That's 1.4 billion.

So take away the shareholder payouts that another 1 billion from the taxpayer who already subsidises at 600 pounds per household.

That will be another 60 quid on top of that to above average wage earners in an industry with a falling customer base.

Barry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IronJambo said:

First Groups accounts say there's profit. It's no secret.

How much tax money made that possible?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IronJambo said:

There would barely be any businesses left in the country if the government hadn't subsidised them throughout covid. Many thousands would've lost their homes if they hadn't been given free money from the government in the form of furlough. Most of them that have returned to work will still have had a payrise.  You've had a payrise, and at who's expense?

 

First group, whom I work for and operate several TOCs returned £500m to shareholders this year. There's no money to offer a pay rise for the first time in 3 years though? Customer numbers are 80% of pre covid figures. Trains are bursting at the seams again. But there's no customers and no money? Gives a break!

The rail network was subsidised pre covid and has been for years previous to that.

If the market dictated your pay and employee numbers as you want to suggest with the profits made then you wouldn't be on the wage you are getting at the moment.

Nor would you have the generous pension sick pay and good working conditions you presently have.

So think it's best if you leave the profit margin in the quiet corner.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IronJambo
10 minutes ago, Ked said:

The rail network was subsidised pre covid and has been for years previous to that.

 

This is only partially correct. GWR has always made profit. Trans Pennine however, has been making a loss for years. First Group have been taking a hit for £100m for years there. You don't know as much as you think you know and most of what you say is nonsense.

 

10 minutes ago, Ked said:

If the market dictated your pay and employee numbers as you want to suggest with the profits made then you wouldn't be on the wage you are getting at the moment.

Nor would you have the generous pension sick pay and good working conditions you presently have.

So think it's best if you leave the profit margin in the quiet corner.

 

You don't have any idea of my pay or pension. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dobmisterdobster
26 minutes ago, Ked said:

How much tax money made that possible?

 

 

Good point. FirstGroup makes it's money from bus subsidies from local authorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IronJambo
10 minutes ago, dobmisterdobster said:

 

Good point. FirstGroup makes it's money from bus subsidies from local authorities.

First rail made £103.1m profit last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Ked said:

2% profit they made .

16 billion of subsistence.

Rail fares account for 2.5 billion.

So let's say for arguments sake that 2% of the actual fares are profit.

Share that with the 7 hundred thousand employees plus their generous pension contribution.

You do know that in general railway employees are above average earners already?

So you tell me what should be done with any profits?

Reinvested in the network to improve stock?

Shared with employees?

Or used to offset the massive taxpayer input ?

 

Where do you think this profit goes?

Because I don't see any profit.

You are asking me where it goes where there is none.

So you tell me.

I don't know where the profit goes either, because I also don't see why they should post any. But their accounts say they have. So, again, where did the half a billion profits that they've declared, go? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shooter McGavin
10 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Treated like shit. Their own union admits their T&C's are good. No need for strikes at such an early stage of negotiation, but the union isn't interested in settling, it's leaders are simply shit stirring.


The rail companies haven’t given employees a pay rise to keep up with inflation. That equals a pay cut.

 

Striking is probably the quickest route to get what they deserve, so fair play to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambo-Jimbo

All starting to look and feel like the 1970's/80's all over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
1 hour ago, Shooter McGavin said:


The rail companies haven’t given employees a pay rise to keep up with inflation. That equals a pay cut.

 

Striking is probably the quickest route to get what they deserve, so fair play to them.

:spoton:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ked said:

The rail network was subsidised pre covid and has been for years previous to that.

If the market dictated your pay and employee numbers as you want to suggest with the profits made then you wouldn't be on the wage you are getting at the moment.

Nor would you have the generous pension sick pay and good working conditions you presently have.

So think it's best if you leave the profit margin in the quiet corner.

 

Why should they leave it in a corner? That £500 million has to have gone somewhere. So where and to whom did that money go? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
7 minutes ago, Norm said:

Why should they leave it in a corner? That £500 million has to have gone somewhere. So where and to whom did that money go? 

shareholders got some and rest reinvested into operations. That's what always happens with profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So shareholders either need to give up their dividends and pay the staff more money, or the staff don't work. The ball is in the shareholders court. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
5 minutes ago, Norm said:

So shareholders either need to give up their dividends and pay the staff more money, or the staff don't work. The ball is in the shareholders court. 

Or they remove their investment, the industry goes under and the staff lose their jobs. Ball in staffs court

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nookie Bear
9 minutes ago, Norm said:

So shareholders either need to give up their dividends and pay the staff more money, or the staff don't work. The ball is in the shareholders court. 

 

Operating a company for the benefit of the shareholders is always a dangerous thing. It promotes short term thinking that reflects quickly in the markets.

 

Shareholders don't give s atuff about workers' pay, pensions and conditions or about the quality of the service. Just keep the profit up and costs down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have the investors removed their money due to the increased costs in everything else? If not, why is it okay to remove their money due to increased costs of labour? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
14 minutes ago, Norm said:

Have the investors removed their money due to the increased costs in everything else? If not, why is it okay to remove their money due to increased costs of labour? 

 

 

You would be better asking shareholders. Other than that, just keep paying whatever workers ask. Great way to keep them happy. You will go bust eventually but with happy staff so all good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Japan Jambo
12 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Not my man. Boris is a complete clown and a dead man walking.

Deflect away though. You might not have noticed but there's been a pandemic, workers already reducing their use of rail travel, yet your lot are demanding unrealistic wage rises and no redundancies.

Strikes will just drive more people away from using trains and into other ways of transport. Once they do that, they will never come back.

If numbers drop, then requirements for trains will drop and redundancies will follow as not as many trains will run. You can't expect jobs to be maintained if demand not there.

You want jobs maintained, then don't strike and stop customers from going elsewhere.

 

👍

 

12 hours ago, IronJambo said:

Mostly backed by the public. Not everyone's a tory 😁

 

Not sure how much sympathy you'll garner with these gangster tactics. The RMT have abused it's negotiating position for way too long - when even the likes of @Smithee can see that RMT members are being disproportionately rewarded for what they believe is an acceptable service then they really are out of touch with reality.

 

Average nurse salary in London is 36k, bus driver 28k, The majority of London Underground train drivers, approximately 3,000 of them, made £70,000-£80,000 last year when overtime and benefits is included (basic is £55k).

 

Boris is a cornered rat and badly needs a cause, if he's half awake he'll focus his guns on the RMT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Japan Jambo said:

 

👍

 

 

Not sure how much sympathy you'll garner with these gangster tactics. The RMT have abused it's negotiating position for way too long - when even the likes of @Smithee can see that RMT members are being disproportionately rewarded for what they believe is an acceptable service then they really are out of touch with reality.

 

Average nurse salary in London is 36k, bus driver 28k, The majority of London Underground train drivers, approximately 3,000 of them, made £70,000-£80,000 last year when overtime and benefits is included (basic is £55k).

 

Boris is a cornered rat and badly needs a cause, if he's half awake he'll focus his guns on the RMT.

Maybe, and hear me out here, nurses and bus drivers are underpaid and should be paid more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
3 minutes ago, Japan Jambo said:

 

👍

 

 

Not sure how much sympathy you'll garner with these gangster tactics. The RMT have abused it's negotiating position for way too long - when even the likes of @Smithee

 

Boris is a cornered rat and badly needs a cause, if he's half awake he'll focus his guns on the RMT.

Not sure Boris has ever been as much as half awake. Government and unions are only interested in themselves, neither gives a toss about anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
1 minute ago, Norm said:

Maybe, and hear me out here, nurses and bus drivers are underpaid and should be paid more. 

Your right, the majority of nurses do deserve pay rise. 

Can you imagine the outcry from rail workers if nurses went on strike and refused to treat their members and their members families. I'm sure they would be very supportive.

 

Alternatively, we could privatise health and transport and provide no public funding. Then the staff could feel free to negotiate the wages they believe they are due, and if they don't get them, then move to another industry or employer who will pay them what they want.

Is that what you want?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Japan Jambo
18 minutes ago, Norm said:

Maybe, and hear me out here, nurses and bus drivers are underpaid and should be paid more

 

I agree they should too.  I'd also argue though that tube drivers are overpaid, that their pension arrangements are way above market and that there ought to be a correction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SuperstarSteve

Train drivers earn between 50-70k a year do they not? That’s more than plenty. Surprised they are on strike for more money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Norm said:

So shareholders either need to give up their dividends and pay the staff more money, or the staff don't work. The ball is in the shareholders court. 

Shareholders giving up their dividends doesn't come close to the wage rise .

500 million profit.

100 million to share holders

@IronJambo says I've no idea what he earns.

It's on public record.

Average salary 40 k

He might earn more.

Pensions are amongst the best in the UK.

So let's take the 100 million from the dividends .

Let's say it's a 5% increase you are after.

That's a 1.4 billion shortfall.

Fling in the 400 million and have no investment that's a cool billion.

But there's talk of more than 5%.

If its 10% we are looking at 3 billion.

 

So again where shall we shave that money of to bulk up the above average pay of the rail workers.

 

Simple enough question .

 

Edited by Ked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
12 hours ago, IronJambo said:

There would barely be any businesses left in the country if the government hadn't subsidised them throughout covid. Many thousands would've lost their homes if they hadn't been given free money from the government in the form of furlough. Most of them that have returned to work will still have had a payrise.  You've had a payrise, and at who's expense?

 

First group, whom I work for and operate several TOCs returned £500m to shareholders this year. There's no money to offer a pay rise for the first time in 3 years though? Customer numbers are 80% of pre covid figures. Trains are bursting at the seams again. But there's no customers and no money? Gives a break!

My Mrs took the wean to Saltcoats at the weekend. The only reason they went to Saltcoats was, they were going to largs and the train was too mobbed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
1 hour ago, Ked said:

Shareholders giving up their dividends doesn't come close to the wage rise .

500 million profit.

100 million to share holders

@IronJambo says I've no idea what he earns.

It's on public record.

Average salary 40 k

He might earn more.

Pensions are amongst the best in the UK.

So let's take the 100 million from the dividends .

Let's say it's a 5% increase you are after.

That's a 1.4 billion shortfall.

Fling in the 400 million and have no investment that's a cool billion.

But there's talk of more than 5%.

If its 10% we are looking at 3 billion.

 

So again where shall we shave that money of to bulk up the above average pay of the rail workers.

 

Simple enough question .

 

Job cuts and Safety is the main reason I'd think for the strikes. The Union leader on GMB was fecking brilliant. Good luck to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
13 hours ago, dobmisterdobster said:

 

Most people don't realise how much of a money sink the railways are.

When you consider the rest of the economy and it's need for the railways, it really isn't. It's essential. My only moan , is the drivers wanting 10% payrises, when they're on 50 grand a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dawnrazor
Just now, ri Alban said:

When you consider the rest of the economy and it's need for the railways, it really isn't. It's essential. My only moan , is the drivers wanting 10% payrises, when they're on 50 grand a year.

Is the 50 + per year across the board for train drivers or is the figure for London?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
19 hours ago, Cade said:

I'm sure Arsehole Patel is rushing through new laws to make strikes illegal.

And ordering lots of new police horses.

 

It's already illegal to let everyone on the trains for free. Which is quite a good way to hit them where it hurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
Just now, Dawnrazor said:

Is the 50 + per year across the board for train drivers or is the figure for London?

I'm not sure, but I thought the London drivers were on more than that. Maybe I took the wrong end of the stick here. If I did, I apologise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dawnrazor
Just now, ri Alban said:

I'm not sure, but I thought the London drivers were on more than that. Maybe I took the wrong end of the stick here. If I did, I apologise.

Not having a go mate, just watching PMQ's and it was mentioned that some drivers outside London were on 20,000ish, I just wondered if anyone knew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Not having a go mate, just watching PMQ's and it was mentioned that some drivers outside London were on 20,000ish, I just wondered if anyone knew.

👍I'm sure the lads said £48000 was the going rate, in the other thread. Personally, I wouldn't put a milk bottle oot for £20,000. 

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
Posted (edited)

People should think about it. How are you supposed to enjoy life, struggling to make a living on poor wages. Why should you bother. Folk demonising folk because they might enjoy a a smoke, drink, go to the gym,  have a nice phone or telly. People should be able to afford the nice things in life, if you're out there working. 

 

Why do let them make us turn against ourselves. And it works, ever fecking time.

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

theshed
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Is the 50 + per year across the board for train drivers or is the figure for London?


52k-70k is the drivers wage depending on what company they work for so no it’s not London figures 

Edited by theshed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dawnrazor
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, theshed said:


52k-70k is the drivers wage depending on what company they work for 

Cheers, someone on the panel of Politics Live earlier said that the (or words to that effect) 50k + wage was for drivers in and around London and that drivers in other areas were in the 20k + wage bracket.

*edit*

I may have picked it up wrong but I'm pretty sure that was what was said.

Edited by Dawnrazor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ri Alban
Posted (edited)

Someone told me yesterday, that it's 8 quid a pint in London. Is that true. 

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

theshed
9 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

Cheers, someone on the panel of Politics Live earlier said that the (or words to that effect) 50k + wage was for drivers in and around London and that drivers in other areas were in the 20k + wage bracket.

*edit*

I may have picked it up wrong but I'm pretty sure that was what was said.


Must have picked him up wrong as no train driver in the uk is under 50k anywhere 

 

Might be 20k + for a railway worker but that could be someone who works on ticket barriers ect but deffo not driving trains on that wage 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, theshed said:


Must have picked him up wrong as no train driver in the uk is under 50k anywhere 

 

Might be 20k + for a railway worker but that could be someone who works on ticket barriers ect but deffo not driving trains on that wage 

That’s the thing though. There are thousands of RMT members looking for a decent rise and thousands of them are nowhere near the driver figures quoted.

Good luck to them in their fight.

Edited by Boab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wages on the railway range from 28 grand minimum to 70 for London drivers.

Average wage is 40 grand plus overtime plus generous pension.

For a company that's down 25% on custom with a 16 billion bail out.

If you want to support their strike fine.

But let's not pretend they're at the low paid downtrodden worker side of things.

And let's be clear it's tax money that will fund this wage demand to tune of anywhere between 1 and 3 billion.

With the train drivers also demanding 10% who already earn 64% above the average wage.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So whose getting the extra money taken away from their budget to fund these demands?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
2 minutes ago, Ked said:

So whose getting the extra money taken away from their budget to fund these demands?

Maybe MP's expenses and their subsidised canteen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

People should think about it. How are you supposed to enjoy life, struggling to make a living on poor wages. Why should you bother. Folk demonising folk because they might enjoy a a smoke, drink, go to the gym,  have a nice phone or telly. People should be able to afford the nice things in life, if you're out there working. 

 

Why do let them make us turn against ourselves. And it works, ever fecking time.

You were going of yer heid when the Scottish government were getting asked to cough up 10%.

Where are you magic treeing all this money?

You want more tax rises ?

Or benefit cuts?

5% of the population use the train to commute.

Won't be many left using it at this rate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Real Maroonblood said:

Maybe MP's expenses and their subsidised canteen.

As greedy as they are that won't cover the new uniforms they were greeting about not getting on the other thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...