RMT announce Rail strikes are on for this week

Originally Posted by ianch99

It is clear now that this whole strike story is actively welcomed by the Government. Imagine deliberately encouraging pain & disruption for partisan political purposes.

The Transport Secretary has refused to get involved in the discussions leading up to this strike. I would argue he has a duty of obligation to do so and to actively pursue a route of mediation.

… which very neatly demonstrates the narrative the RMT is trying to manufacture.

Demand the participation of someone external to the process, then when they (obviously) refuse, claim the whole situation is their fault. Network Rail is not British Rail.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

I addressed the railways management structure and political oversight in an earlier post. In brief, Network Rail and its regulator are designed to keep politicians at arms length, with input only at the strategic planning level. No cabinet minister has a place at the pay bargaining table and Mick Lynch is just trying to rock it like the 1970s by pretending otherwise. Network Rail is not British Rail.

A red herring.

Public sector pay (including that of employees of publicly funded regulators) is directed by Government at all levels who set the overarching parameters for each body to adhere to. I suspect you know this, however as always are keen to absolve the Government of any responsibility for any of it’s failings.

You may have believed you addressed the point above, however inadequately so.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

A two tier economy then, high profits offshored while everyone left has meagre pay rises eroded by eye watering levels of inflation. Gotcha.

Everything is mythical in the Lib Dem manifesto. I’m not sure you’re point it’s the Government’s job to govern and deliver on it’s commitments. It’s just really hard to see how they plan to achieve it as they drive down real terms wages and living standards by the fastest amount in decades.

Which politician or political party, has EVER said that "high wage, high skill" means simply paying everybody more? You're misquoting everybody. Are the various Labour manifestos mythical? Are the SNP government in Scotland mythical?

High profits? Where? You're talking about individual wages, not businesses. The costs os the businesses have increased, thereby reducing what little profits they may have.


You're just spouting nonsense.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Which politician or political party, has EVER said that "high wage, high skill" means simply paying everybody more? You're misquoting everybody. Are the various Labour manifestos mythical? Are the SNP government in Scotland mythical?

High profits? Where? You're talking about individual wages, not businesses. The costs os the businesses have increased, thereby reducing what little profits they may have.


You're just spouting nonsense.

Corporate Profits in the United Kingdom increased to 139210 GBP Million in the first quarter of 2022 from 128935 GBP Million in the fourth quarter of 2021. source: Office for National Statistics

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...porate-profits

Originally Posted by ianch99

It is clear now that this whole strike story is actively welcomed by the Government. Imagine deliberately encouraging pain & disruption for partisan political purposes.

The Transport Secretary has refused to get involved in the discussions leading up to this strike. I would argue he has a duty of obligation to do so and to actively pursue a route of mediation.

Why?

He’s not, nor is the government, their employer?

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Chris

… which very neatly demonstrates the narrative the RMT is trying to manufacture.

Demand the participation of someone external to the process, then when they (obviously) refuse, claim the whole situation is their fault. Network Rail is not British Rail.

...which very neatly demonstrates the narrative the Government has sucked you in to.

The Government have gone to great lengths over the last few days to stay neutral, I mean I've only heard the £600 per household to fund the railways during the pandemic muttered by whichever government mouthpiece they drag out that day. If they're as external to the process as you say, then why is their involvement mentioned so many times on the Network Rail How we're funded page?

I think we all know the Government could expedite an end to the current dispute if they so wanted with little more than a phonecall.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...porate-profits

Meaningless, unless there's a breakdown by industry sector. Now take off the proposed windfall tax. Still nothing to do with the wages of individuals in individual businesses.

Strange considering people are claiming the UK economy is tanking.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Mick

Why?

He’s not, nor is the government, their employer?

Network Rail is Government-owned and, as a major national Infrastructure component, the smooth running of said operation is in the national interest.

Originally Posted by ianch99

Network Rail is Government-owned and, as a major national Infrastructure component, the smooth running of said operation is in the national interest.

Making it an obvious political target for union militancy, and explaining why Network Rail and its regulator are structured as they are - so as to make clear that it is not under daily political influence and unions looking for pay rises should be talking to the employer, not trying to score cheap points off the government.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

If the working conditions of the members of trade union in either publicly owned, or heavily subsidised, industries aren’t political what is?

If the Government want a high skilled, high wage economy why is the intention for public sector workers to be exempt from enjoying the benefits?

What you are missing is that the high wages are dependent on high productivity.

It has been made perfectly clear to the RMT that their members will get higher wages if they accept modernisation, and that only voluntary redundancies are proposed to achieve this.

So what's the problem? I tell you what it is - the union is spoiling for a fight with the government and has no problem with lying to their members to achieve this. It is a blatant attempt to bring down the government. We saw this before with Scargill.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:26 ----------

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Are you a people manager ?

That seems to indicate that you have been presented with a question you cannot answer.

Noted.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

Making it an obvious political target for union militancy, and explaining why Network Rail and its regulator are structured as they are - so as to make clear that it is not under daily political influence and unions looking for pay rises should be talking to the employer, not trying to score cheap points off the government.

That's just paranoia.

It's quite simple: the Rail network is a national infrastructure asset and should be treated as such.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

It is clear now that this whole strike story is actively welcomed by the Government. Imagine deliberately encouraging pain & disruption for partisan political purposes.

The Transport Secretary has refused to get involved in the discussions leading up to this strike. I would argue he has a duty of obligation to do so and to actively pursue a route of mediation.

Completely off the wall!

This is a matter between the employers and the employees.

Of course you want to turn this into another intervention by the government - why wouldn't you? You want a Labour government.

Good luck with that, you will find when the next General Election is held that most people disagree with you.

These tactics are a gift to the Conservative Party, just as Corbyn was.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Completely off the wall!

This is a matter between the employers and the employees.

Of course you want to turn this into another intervention by the government - why wouldn't you? You want a Labour government.

Good luck with that, you will find when the next General Election is held that most people disagree with you.

These tactics are a gift to the Conservative Party, just as Corbyn was.

Yes but your recent posts re: Johnson and his parties were so divorced from reality that I am inclined to put this one in that pot also

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

That's just paranoia.

It's quite simple: the Rail network is a national infrastructure asset and should be treated as such.

Anyone can see the game you are playing here.

The government is keeping clear of the pay negotiations, and rightly so.

The money the RMT want for their members is available, but they must accept the modernisation of working practices to achieve that.

Employee contracts are with their employers.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Meaningless, unless there's a breakdown by industry sector. Now take off the proposed windfall tax. Still nothing to do with the wages of individuals in individual businesses.

Strange considering people are claiming the UK economy is tanking.

Strange how you keep moving the goalposts…

I have provided evidence to answer your point

The costs os the businesses have increased, thereby reducing what little profits they may have.

Your response is "meaningless", but with no evidence to support that statement…

You are the perfect example of Gish galloping and Brandolini’s Law.