Disgusted at the amount of people jealous of tube drivers pay

[Itsawd]

They do a job dealing with the public, unsociable hours and god knows what when they get a jumper. We should congratulate them on doing well, not look at them with green eyes.

Its a free market so if anyone wants a job as one they are welcome to apply!

Except being a tube driver is totally different from a customer role in a station. I would like to be a tube driver, and have been looking to apply to be a train driver. I do not want to do a job that is customer facing day-in-and-out.

Aye I won't be 'telling my H' which job to apply for, that's his decision.

I was merely correcting your mistakes about bus driving, of which there are many.
'everyone with a licence knows the rules of the road'.
Yes, but not everyone with a licence can drive an 11 tonne vehicle with up to 100 people on it, safely and skilfully. You are aware that if you apply the air brakes as well as the manual brake to do a 'sudden stop' then you will cause serious injury to all of your (80+) on board passengers to avoid hitting 1 pedestrian? Decision such as you may have to make daily?
Not quite like driving a car then, really, is it?

Glad to see you could be a cook on an oil rig too.
You is multi-talented (but not at listening to anyone else!)

Average salary in Scotland is 27k, average London Salary is 41.5k

That might be a factor worth considering in your apples and oranges comparison of Edinburgh bus drivers and London tube drivers.

YANBU. They are paid on OK salary for unsociable hours in a very expensive place. Nurses and teachers should be on the same pay, is all.

Average salary in Scotland is 27k, average London Salary is 41.5k

And the bus driver gets paid £23k and tube drivers £50k. So what's your point here?

How much do you think a fully packed rush hour train weighs? How many people do you think are on it?

It takes a MILE to stop. Not a few bus lengths.

If you hit the buffers at the station Wakerley at 5mph you'll kill people.

I would much rather have a train driver driving my bus tomorrow than a bus driver driving my train.

Goodnight.

Oh, one last thing Dopey -here's an interesting fact about bus drivers in Scotland for you.

The reason their pay is so crap is because the bus drivers who were already employed accepted a better deal for themselves at the expense of new recruits, there's a two-tier bus driver pay scale now so the old guard have better conditions than the newbies.

Now that was First bus, not sure it happened with Edinburgh buses, but just shows you what happens when the workforce doesn't stick together, a gradual eroding away of the pay and conditions and an completely ineffective union.

Divide and Conquer. Very effective Tory strategy.

Just like everyone here saying "I could be a train driver, there's nothing to it" doesn't know what they are talking about, because they haven't done the job to know the reality.

it's clearly more difficult than doing nothing. But what we do know is that given the pay, the are relatively few qualifications. They know this too, which is why they don't open positions to the public.

The reason average pay in London is so high, is because of people there who earn megabucks. If you look at the median salary you get a much much lower figure.

Tfl is about 80% male, so it is overwhelmingly jobs for the boys.

I don't feel at all divided. I don't think most people feel some kind of workers' solidarity with people being paid 50k.

I do think there should be parity of pay between male and female dominated professions, which does require comparing skills, qualifications and responsibilities.

Aye
That is the same system with cabin crew according to a charming member of cabin crew who came on and gracefully answered questions. She had a very good contract but new recruits had far worse t and c.

'Charming' - not sarcastic

"And you could apply for Tube, you'd just need to apply for a lower unrelated job first."

You only have to look at the RMT's response when London Underground said they had to recruit externally because there weren't suitable candidates internally to see its all a load of bollocks.

I thought the average in London was £35k which is not much considering.

Tube drivers are overpaid IMO - plenty of professions are more deserving. The faster they tighten the strike rules the better IMO.

I know a couple of people who work at TFL - the words "fucking, take, piss, it's, a" all come to mind. If Carlsberg made jobs...

Lots of people want to be a driver, going straight in at the top, so they make you work for it, and?

Why recruit an internal candidate working in customer services over an external candidate who is a train driver?

If people know so much about tube drivers why do they keep mentioning the RMT as being their union?

Qualifications are very useful when recruiting in certain industries, no doubt about it. I don't see train driving as being a profession which requires qualifications, but rather aptitude. I'm sure that some rubbish university or college could come up with a course in train driving and future train drivers could be forced to study for 3 years, incurring large student debt, would that honestly make people more comfortable with the salary? I'm really shocked that some of you cannot move past the fact that people can earn a decent salary despite having no (or no relevant) qualifications. It doesn't equate to them being stupid.

My OH has previously earned 6 figures in recruitment, he's got pretty much no qualifications either, worked 9-5.30 and spent a frankly stupid amount of that time at swanky lunches. Yes, he didn't have the pension that railway staff have, but the salary was double.

If people genuinely want to work as a train driver, most mainline TOCs/FOCs recruit externally from time to time. They do sometimes recruit internally only, as countless other organisations do, but jobs go to external candidates too, we have plenty of off the street drivers. If you want to work in the industry I suggest subscribing to their websites for job alerts.

Well, any job that doesn't need a degree is blatantly full of muppets who aren't smart enough to get a degree.

Like an airline pilot:

Entry requirements
The usual qualifications needed to begin training as a pilot are a minimum of five GCSEs and two A-levels.

Required skills for an airline pilot include:

-an understanding of maths and physics;
-an ability to understand technical information, as pilots need to know how their aircraft works;
-excellent spatial awareness and coordination;
-good communication skills;
team-working skills;
-the ability to think quickly and make decisions in difficult situations;
the capacity to remain calm under pressure;
-discipline, self-confidence and commitment;
-leadership skills, with the ability to give clear commands to cabin crew and passengers.

Which actually sounds quite like the requirements of another joke of a job... Oh aye, that train driving malarkey.

Railwayworker is right, it's about aptitude rather than qualifications.

I haven't really seen negative comments about the educational attainment of train drivers here. My impression is the that posters are discussing the length of time it takes to train for different roles.

So it seems it takes around six months to train to be a tube driver and achieve a salary of around £50,000, but around four years to train to be a teacher or nurse and achieve a lower salary. It takes six years to train to be a vet, they earn an average of £31,000. It takes eleven years to train to be a barrister and they earn between £20,000 and £40,000 (a bit more in commercial) in their first year post qualification.

It's the length of training not the name of the qualification that is relevant.

Most posters have felt that other workers' pay should improve rather than wanting tube drivers' pay to be cut, although some posters have explained why across the board wage increases are not a good idea.

I think what is making people frustrated is tube drivers appearing to not appreciate that their pay and conditions are pretty good in the general scheme of things.

Saying that everyone who comments should become a tube driver is daft because there are a finite number of driver jobs.

Saying everyone else should improve their own unions and take action is not a realistic argument. Nurses simply can't walk out on their patients for 24 hours, the police have no industrial rights, vets would have to refuse to treat sick animals. It's just not that easy for other occupations to withdraw labour.

So, is everyone just going to ignore the fact that's it's not tube drivers striking anymore? Or that they only make up 3000 of about 20,000 people who striked?

The fact that posters are still going on about drivers and their salary (when that's not even what the strike is about) shows that it's mostly jealousy. Quite sad.

I fail to understand why people become some het up over how much people earn, if you want more money or better working conditions then go join a union and fight or go and negotiate with the appropriate person/people..

People need to stop being so entitled whether it be the benefits system handing out money or the green eyed monster over another earnings..

Life is about the now and the future, go grab what you can..

Bereal tube driver pay is being discussed here because that's what the op is about.

I don't think everyone should be a train driver and apologise if that's the impression I gave. There are posters on this thread though who have made comments that they would do it if they could/they'd be happy with the job for that salary. If they genuinely want to do it, they can and my post was supposed to be encouraging that.

As for the length of time it takes to qualify, if a job is partly awarded on aptitude I'm afraid I still don't see the relevance. I don't know about tube drivers but mainline drivers are not usually considered fully qualified for 3 years, in any case, and many of them earn the same or more at qualification as a tube driver.

In terms of teaching, well I'd argue that primary teachers don't train for 4 years. A PGCE is a year and the original degree is an entry requirement, not specifically part of their teacher training. That's just me being devil's advocate though since I still don't believe salary should be exclusively awarded on length of training required.

I do agree that there are posters who have been clear that they want other salaries to rise rather than drivers' salaries to reduce; there have also been posters who have called for all the drivers to be sacked.

Finally, apart from the general moaning and groaning that occurs in every workplace across the land, I think most drivers realise they do have a good deal, at the moment. The objection is to those terms and conditions being changed.

So can I ask why they don't just employ night drivers and not change the existing drivers conditions (or pay) at all. I'm sure a lot of people would be happy to do the job on the salary so seems an easy solution for everyone.

That I don't know, I don't work for tfl so not privy to internal discussions on the subject.

railwayworker

"In terms of teaching, well I'd argue that primary teachers don't train for 4 years. A PGCE is a year and the original degree is an entry requirement, not specifically part of their teacher training. That's just me being devil's advocate though since I still don't believe salary should be exclusively awarded on length of training required."

In terms of teaching if you go in "straight from school" the entry requirements would be A levels, leading to a 4 year degree in education (in relevant area) with QTS followed by a NQT year (in England) Probationary year (in Scotland), So 5 years, not including A levels.

In terms of a PGCE if you do a conversion course the course is 2 years, if you have relevant qualifications the PGCE is 1 year but both still require a NQT/Probationary year, so 2-3 years before you are fully qualified.

So to be a teacher even with the "original degree" as "an entry requirement" and a one year PGCE its still 2 years.