Railway strikes- I think they are overdoing it

[MushMonster]

So, many people in UK commutes for work, many take the trains. I am one of them.
I do love the service, the apps are great to buy tickets and find train timetables, they run really well, even if delayed tend to be just 30 min or so, it is comfy. Also, it is electric, so better for the environment. I walk from and to the station, so it keeps me fit.
When the strikes started I just ut up with the inconvenience thinking that they were facing some redundancies, so protesting against that or low pay, I support.
But it has turned since las set of strikedays and this week into a strike against the consumer, from my point of view.
When they walked out last time, I got stuck in the city I work for 4 hours. The buses were fully booked and ran with delays. There had cancelled all the trains, not even a single one was on the timetable. I witness a large amount of people stuck for hours on end after a full days work or travelling with huge cass and children. The buses were fully booked till after 12 at night! So what I witnessed was actually only a fraction of it. When I caught the coach next day, the driver was warning passengers that on Wednesday London was so packed that coaches were delayed for 5 hours to get into London.
This time aroud, they published a set of dates, then they changed them, but I have read that in London they have walked out one day early. Changing the dates was to accomodate a busy weekend in London. So there must be another huge amount of people left stranded.

Trains are a vital service to me.
But they are cancelling a huge amount of trains on week long strikes.
Changing dates means they affect people who had planned around the original dates. They cost the commuter more money and stress. People are using buses and coaches yamming roads and polluting. People arrive late to work or back home, missing important things.
Newspaper today mention 600 million of cost to this country, to the tax payer, us who struggle with the cost of living.
I do not see this affecting anyone else bit the user. The train company will only return the money from the train ticket, not cover for the cost of the bus or driving or other alternative.
If they were reducing services, like running one train per hour instead of 30 min, then nobody would be stuck for hours on end, it will be only an inconvenient. The train company will have to return the ticket price if you train is in the delayed lot. But they are cancelling all trains at some points in UK.

Now, they know very well what they are doing. They know what is happening to all those stranded passengers. They know that the buses cannot cope with the amount of people, let alone the traffic due to people driving.

I think they should not be allowed to cancel more than 10% of the services, that they should grant alternative routes within 60 min of the trains they cancel, that strikes should not last more than one day per week and they should publish the revised detailed timetables for each station as soon as the strike date is set, so we can plan our commute.
So, what do you think?

AIBU- You support the strikes as they are currently
AINBU- They need to calm it down and provide a good basic service on strike days

I bet you, if there was a fire, they would have turned up.
Minimum service does not mean anyone has to put up or shut up, just that strikes include a lesser amountt of the workforce in practice as someone needs to be there. Those professions still strike and claim improvements.
I have clearly said that I am willing to be inconvenienced. But I am not willing to be left stranded till past midnight in the middle of the street.
There is quite a difference!

I have not focused on drivers bar gor saying I do like the number published as their salary, I wish it was mine.
I have not inyended to ban anyone from striking.
You made that one up!

Er, no, thats not what happened. The army had to provide cover. They were on strike.

What you've described would be ridiculous, so there'd be a striking rota? I don't agree with all strikes but if it doesn't cause any disruption then it can't really make the point they want to make. And even if they did have some kind of skeleton staff agreement, there's no guarantee that your service wouldn't have been affected.

You are entitled to your opinion OP.

But don’t worry about the rail companies losing money. It is the staff that lose their wages during strikes for the privilege of trying to keep necessary jobs and not having their pension attacked.

If you think striking is for fun and just to mess the public about you are mistaken. They, like many others, worked through the pandemic. Operational staff cannot work from home and therefore kept accruing costs where others could save.

And for what? To be told that their terms and conditions are being attacked along with pensions, essential staff are being cut (when they are short now) and when they already run on goodwill?

No one wants to disadvantage the public. No one. Do they sit there and take it?

And they don’t all earn the money you read in the newspaper. Speak to those on a picket line. They’ll tell you.

I bet lots of drivers wish that salary was theirs as well. The media will always skew a figure or present the highest possible figure for dramatic effect.

As I understand it the rail strikes are about job cuts, changes to terms and conditions and pay - and rail workers include station staff and guards for example.

For insight into why pay fro train drivers may be higher than your salary read this thread www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4668635-anyone-a-train-driverneed-a-career-change

(for example 70% of drivers experiencing a person under their train and the trauma impact, and the rigorous selection process / level of knowledge and skill required )

and see here www.traindriver.org

Finally see here for a perspective on the strikes that contextualises the industrial action as beneficial / for all working people including the travelling public m.youtube.com/watch?v=QeXy-WxYG28&feature=youtu.be

I hope this gives some further background and context :)

No, but they do have the obligation to provide a reasonable minimum of service, enough not to put people at risk

At risk? Have you considered that getting rid of essential staff and changing the terms and conditions of operational and maintenance staff so that they are even more pressured might make a difference to ‘risk’?

Just a thought.

I agree that trains are essential and the strikes are a pain.

I think it’s the train company’s responsibility to invest and support their resource to ensure they provide a good service.

If they weren’t constantly trying to eek out further profit via reduced staff, T&C’s, pension arrangements, salaries then staff prob wouldn’t be striking.

You want to limit the numbers of people who can strike. If you're not allowed to strike to ensure the service levels you deem fit you're banned from striking...

And if driving is so attractive you should apply! Less flippantly, focusing so heavily on drivers salaries when the grades most affected are much lower paid staff is playing right into the government's hands.

If only there were a like function!

Try to leave work at 5 pm and find any kind of transport to go back home when buses are running up to 5 hours late and fully booked till after 12 pm. Be there with other hundreds of people around you in the same situation.
See how an ambulance can move around through the resulting traffic.
It is putting people at risk.

I did clearly say, but I repeat, that when strikes were an inconvenience of one or two hours, a bit more money spent, I was ok. I am against redundancies and poor working conditions.
But, to me, they took it too far by providing zero service (without any notice, of course, for higher impact), changing dates, walking on a day that they had agreed to work.

Almost all Train Drivers are in ASLEF not the RMT.

Please do a bit of research to see what they were striking about and most importantly the actual people who were striking and losing pay for standing up for their rights.

Stop believing the headlines.

@MushMonster Thank for clarifying your understandings which is helful :) Having looked at these links, what are your thoughts?

Oh, thanks for the links! I will have a look to them, but I cannot now as I am in a public place and have no headphones

Oops typos...

Thanks for clarifying your understandings which is helpful :) Having looked at these links, what are your thoughts?

Ah, we cross-posted. Hope the links are helpful and I wish you all the best :)

They've been called off, but too late. The trains still won't run.

I'm conflicted on this because I agree with the right to strike, but the collateral damage is immense - where do you draw the line? If I thought I wasn't being paid enough, I can't see myself inflicting massive inconvenience on complete strangers as part of my protest.

I do have another criticism actually!
There is not much information at all about the reasons for the strikes in newspapers like the Guardian, which I read. And not much follow up at all.
And, yes, one of the more extensive articles I read contained a pretty nice looking payscale. (Which I am not claiming it is what everyone is getting, I am saying it was there and looked good to me, with my rather modest wage in comparison)

There, the line!
I do suggest 10% of service or half of the trains on regular services or something like that... obviously, logistics professionals can calculate which services must be ran to avoid massive backlogs and stranded people.

There can be gaps in information in the newspapers and media :)

Perhaps going to the source - the unions themselves for information (their websites), searching "Mick Lynch" and "Eddie Dempsey" online and watching their interviews, and /or speaking to the workers on the picket lines and getting leaflets from them might help?

Of course you've done something smart already which is to ask for opinions and different perspectives from mumsnetters ;)

Look at the RMT website, it will tell you about the strikes and who is striking

www.rmt.org.uk

That's fair enough but your criticism there is aimed at the press then, surely?

You're quite right that most people will not be getting the money you've read about and thanks for acknowledging that but you do still keep coming back to it so again, why not apply for a driver's job? Of course, you have to make your own way to and from work in most locations given the shift times though, and that applies to far more people than just the drivers on those headline salaries you're attracted to.

A perspective on the strikes that contextualises the industrial action as beneficial / "for" all working people including the travelling public m.youtube.com/watch?v=QeXy-WxYG28&feature=youtu.be

I hope this gives some further background and context :)

What makes you think I was not in the same position as you OP? Do you not think I didn’t have to wait hours for transport home?

And as for those thinking it is really about not getting paid enough? It really isn’t. It is a consideration. Of course it is. But it isn’t why the talks have been protracted.

If someone told you you would have to work longer, pay more and receive less pension than forecast- would you be ok with that?

If someone told you your place of work or shift could change with little notice and little negotiation, would you be happy?

I absolutely get the frustration as I am affected too. But I stand by their decision to fight for the conditions they have.

Papers print what they like. The last strike I believe they said the average salary for certain staff was in the region of £40- £50k. They are saying that now. For a large number of staff? No. It isn’t the case.

They have also said Elvis is alive, someone called Freddie ate a hamster and the upper echelons of society may be lizard people 🤷🏻‍♀️ It doesn’t make it true.

And yes. Sometimes even the Guardian is mistaken.

The very fact that so many workers are striking and willing to lose wages during these hugely troubling economic times should suggest to you that there is a very real worry about the staff cuts and changes to terms and conditions and what it means not only for them but for the railway as a whole.

I am interested in the personal experience of fellow passengers. To hear about their own experiences and views, so I have posted on a public forum where many commute and I see nothing wrong with it.

I will be applying for the next post opening in the railway, thanks for the useful advice... like.... I do not have another JOB to do! Which may be useful to society too? but.... I will endevour to do better and try my luck with railway

Lack of papers cover has obviously(!) to do with the press, but I want to reply this to you: No, I am blaming the Gods of Time,just because I feel like it