London 2012: RMT Union rejects Tube pay offer

[El Pibe]

I trust that post is dripping with irony.

You don't think Torres' ?7m odd a year is rewarding failure?

I'm obviously being a little facetious to make a point which is of course that by and large the market determines the pay.

It's about the price and conditions to attract the talent, and the lengths those that support are willing to go to see that.

Now I'll take my analogy slowly so you can follow...

Fans pay over the odds for their tickets and accept these huge sums paid to players and managers in order to produce results.

WHen things are going well noone complains. When things go badly they don't undermine the system, they ask for a change, the manager gets a huge golden handshake for termination of contract, and subsequently so will many players as the fresh sweep is employed. Things wobble a bit and either result improve or the whole thing happens again.

Now read shareholders for supporters and you might finally get it.

Factor in to this that the big bonuses are not rewards for failure but salaries, done as such a way to get around loopholes limiting the size of the salaries, probably put in place by ham-fisted attempts at regulators to appease the baying mob last time things got a little shaky.

If this happens again, expect new loopholes to be exploited in a bid to get the talent in.

Hester has a proven track record, he's the business equivalent of Mourinho except that he costs about a quarter as much to employ!!

[El Pibe]

"I can't see Cameron scoring for England, can you?"

I can't see Bent scoring for England either frankly.

[Chippy Minton]

I hope Bent is never even given a chance to try and score for England

[Loz]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I can't see Cameron scoring for England, can you?

Well John Major scored. If Edwina Currie counts, anyway.

[*Bob*]

I'd like to see Darren Bent try his hand at PM. Whoever he is.

[katie1997]

If I'm being entirely honest, i'd like to see Darren Bent, whoever he is, try his hand at driving a tube train whilst tackling the problem that is prevalent nowadays of rewarding boardroom failure.

[*Bob*]

It's a culture of rewarding a race to the bottom, that's what it is.

[katie1997]

Indeed. Of which the symptoms of this socio-economic concept has for some time served as an important metaphor to illustrate that the banking system is vulnerable to competition. The "race to the bottom" implies that the banks compete with each other as each tries to underbid the others...so as to make itself more attractive to outside financial interests or unattractive to unwanted outsiders.

The alternative implies a more sanguine system in which [banks] use their authority and discretion to develop innovative and creative solutions to common problems which can be then adopted by other banks.

I know which I prefer.

[maxxi]

Say "socio-economic concept" again.

Seems clear to me - The DLR and London Overground have accepted there WILL BE added work/stress etc. during the Olympics which is why they have awarded their workers bonuses.

Bob Rook is doing his job (as has been discussed elsewhere on the Forum) by trying to get his members the same deal - whether he believes in it or not.

The fact that an offer (?100) was made to them demonstrates that LU agree with the idea of a bonus so now it's only wrangling over the amount (c/f the old Churchill gag about sleepping with him for ?5m).

And Darren Bent can't run RBS or any bank because to dyslexic spoonerists his name reads as Barren Debt.

[katie1997]

Darn you maxxi, are you calling my copy&pastefromwiki skills into question here?

Or are you trying to bring this back on topic?

Or perhaps both.

[Undisputedtruth]

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "I can't see Cameron scoring for England, can

> you?"

> I can't see Bent scoring for England either

> frankly.

Well Darren Bent has already four goals in eleven games for England and nine goals for the under 21s.

[Otta]

Well that's that then.

[boosboss]

Chippy Minton Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Once again, this dispute is nothing to do with

tube drivers!!!!!!

Not quite CM. Any deal agreed has only been made by ASLEF, who represent some drivers. The RMT have not agreed a deal for any LU staff, including drivers.

The ASLEF/LU deal is also partially optional, with drivers opting whether or not to work extended shifts. Shifts extended beyond previously agreed safe working parameters. Currently, drivers are not permitted to work voluntary overtime.

[*Bob*]

So everyone's agreed:

Bent to become the first serving Darren at number ten.

General public to conveniently forget the leading part they played in global financial meltdown and meander aimlessly with glazed expressions mumbling "the bankers.. the bankers.."

Tube drivers to get continually lambasted for getting paid for a job which very few people - if they thought about it for more than two minutes properly - would actually want to do.

Hester to roll eyes and quietly collect massive pay packet during an extended Argos sale.

[Husker]

.

[Loz]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Tube drivers to get continually lambasted for getting paid for a job which very few people - if

> they thought about it for more than two minutes properly - would actually want to do.

Why the heck not? There a hell of a lot of bad jobs that pay rubbish out there. Why not sit in the dark pressing buttons and making announcements for ?45K a year plus some pretty tasty benefits. If my career went up the spout it would actually be pretty high up on my list as a replacement, if tube driver jobs were ever made publicly available (which they aren't).

[Chippy Minton]

boosbosss - you are wrong. That is not how industrial relations work i.e. ASLEF has agreed a deal for tube drivers. They negotiated the deal on behalf of their tube driver members, but it will not be exclusive to ASLEF members. All tube drivers will get this deal regardless of whether they are in ASLEF, RMT or not even in a union. There is no way LU know which of their employees are members of ASLEF, which are members of the RMT or which of them aren't in a union so they will give the payment to all of them.

Once again, this dispute is nothing to do with tube drivers!!!!!! (I have now saved this phrase as a keyboard shortcut ;-)).

Loz - I can't quite work out whether you do really think drivers just push buttons and make announcements or whether it's some sort assuming Alan B'stard type goading that Huguenot seems to find so funny. Anyway, as people on this forum are so fond of pointing out, people are paid the market rate for the skills that they bring to the job. There will always be someone that will do a job for less money than the person that is actually doing the job. You complain about how much tube drivers are paid, but how much are you paid? There will be plenty of people out there that, no matter what you are paid, will say they would do it for less.

*Bob* - agreed, except I would put Bent in number 11 rather than number 10 given the number of whopping signing-on pay cheques he's managed to procure throughout his very average, mercenary career.

[*Bob*]

Sitting in a metal box, alone, at unsociable hours, staring down a dirty hole, with only two buttons for company and the potential 'thrill' of an track suicide to look forward to? I'm sure they are enough mentalists to fill any vacancies, but good god.. who in their right mind would want to do that after the initial novelty has worn-off?

It's better paid because it combines brain-numbing monotony with serious consequences if something goes wrong. All the challenge of stuffing envelopes.. only potentially 800 people don't get hurt if you accidentally put two green ones in instead of one red and one blue.

Only ?45k?! Not worth it. I'd rather pick fruit.

[Loz]

Chippy Minton Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz - I can't quite work out whether you do really think drivers just push buttons and make

> announcements or whether it's some sort assuming Alan B'stard type goading that Huguenot seems to

> find so funny. Anyway, as people on this forum are so fond of pointing out, people are paid the

> market rate for the skills that they bring to the job. There will always be someone that will do a

> job for less money than the person that is actually doing the job. You complain about how

> much tube drivers are paid, but how much are you paid? There will be plenty of people out there

> that, no matter what you are paid, will say they would do it for less.

Nope, I really think that that is the bulk of their working day. Considering the Jubilee and Victoria line trains are designed as driverless systems, I'd be surprised if they do as much as that. There is, of course, the time when a train goes out of service where they walk v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y up to check the train and then back v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y closing all the doors. I admit I missed that bit.

As for me, I am paid what my company thinks I am worth, reviewed every year (and unchanged for the past three years). If I don't like it, I can ask for more, but I probably wouldn't get it. At that point I would have two options, put up with it or find another employer. If I were to go on strike, that decision would be taken out of my hands. If someone else could do my job for less and management thought that was worth it, I'd be managed out the company. I've seen that happen quite a few times. That's market forces.

Tube drivers don't have such market forces; there is no market rate. A member of the general public cannot apply to be a tube driver. A member of the general public could apply to join the company I work for, to do the job I do.

[*Bob*]

It's a cult thing, isn't it?

You have to be able to recite all the stations, stop by stop, on all lines, one way then the other, blindfold, whilst being waterboarded. You must memorise all the possible permutations of signalling and line switching. You immerse yourself in the history of the underground from origins to present day. Then comes a myriad of theory and detail behind the engineering; studying the schematics.. hydraulics, electrics, mechanics.

It is only when these challenges have been overcome that are you finally allowed to push the stop and go buttons and open and close the doors.

[Chippy Minton]

Of course there are market forces, it's just tube drivers have the backing of strong unions (which you seem to resent). If there weren't market forces, why wouldn't the RMT/ASLEF "hold them to ransom" for even more and say we won't do it for ?45K, we want ?46K or ?50K or ?55K etc etc?

"Two options" - or the third way - get your company unionised.

"If I were to go on strike" - you can't. You're not in a union, so if you did "strike" you'd probably be fired instantly for gross misconduct.

"Managed out the company" - that's constructive dismissal. You should def join a union ;-)

As for "the general public cannot apply to be a tube driver" that isn't strictly true because if it was, it would be illegal. Yes, it's true that currently you have to work for LU to apply, however this policy is no different to thousands of other companies that recruit and fill their positions through internal processes.