London 2012: RMT Union rejects Tube pay offer

[Otta]

Is pay generally poor among tube

workers?

It depends what you compare it with.

A station supervisor earns ?35,000-

?39,000, while a tube driver's starting

salary is just over ?40,000, according

to TfL. Pay grades for station

assistants start at either ?24,000 or

?29,000 depending on the role and

responsibilities.

Now for a bus driver to earn ?40k+, they'd have to work every day, for long long hours. One could argue that q bus driver has a far harder job.

As I say though, this isn't about salaries, it's about asking for more money for being extra busy.

[Undisputedtruth]

Bus drivers do not have a strong union membership and their wage reflects that.

[Loz]

If I had to choose between driving a bus and tube I know what I'd pick. And salary wouldn't come into it. Bus driving the rude and unpleasant British public would just be hell. Give me nice comfy tube seat and two buttons.

[Undisputedtruth]

Otta Wrote:

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

> You hide behind the anonymity of an internet forum

> calling people fool, and loser, amongst other

> things.

Not true at all. It's only you that I've called a fool and loser.

If I was saw you on the streets then I would call you a fool and a loser as well. Sod all you can do BTW.

[Otta]

If I was saw you on the streets then I

would call you a fool and a loser as well.

Sod all you can do BTW.

You're such a man, I bet the ladies go weak at the knees. Shame your intellect doesn't match your machismo.

By the way, what does "if I was saw you on the streets" mean? Idiot.

Yours,

Otta

[Undisputedtruth]

Otta, you wouldn't know what the word intellect means.

I'm more than happy with my intellect. One day I hope you too can show some intellect but I suspect hell would be in deep freeze by then.

[Otta]

If you say so, oh wise one.

[Alan Medic]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

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

> Alan Medic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I don't understand why people should be paid

> more.

> > If they are doing overtime they will be paid.

> As

> > for working under more pressure, either you can

> do

> > the job or you can't. What are tube staff

> > expecting they will have to do that they

> wouldn't

> > expect to be doing as part of their job anyway?

> I

> > think they are looking for money 'for old rope'

> if

> > I understand this expression correctly.

>

> Obviously, you're pretty clueless about the

> dispute and just using "I don't know any better"

> logic. Best to stick playing 73's and 100's on the

> EDF.

>

> London Overground and Network Rail staff are

> getting five to six times more Olympic bonuses

> than what is being offered to RMT members.

>

> Just how far does a ?100 goes these days. Not even

> enough to buy Starbuck's coffee for every week of

> the year.

>

> I suspect TfL is trying provoke RMT into strike

> action in view of the pending Mayor's election

> this May.

Ah feck off UDT. If I'm clueless then at least refer to my comment and explain why you think I am clueless.

[Alan Medic]

Undisputedtruth Wrote:

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

> Bus drivers do not have a strong union membership

> and their wage reflects that.

If you have such a great intellect why do you need to edit your own posts UDT?

On the topic in question KPI's are given as an incentive for employee's to go the extra mile in terms of their work. A lot of people I have worked with do it to make a living and will do as little as they can reasonably get away with. Employers must know this as they can afford to pay themselves nice salaries but realise that if they want the plebs to do their bit, an extra incentive can be worthwhile.

[Undisputedtruth]

Oh dear, Otta & AM aka Laurel and Hardy ganging up.

[Otta]

Damn you got us. I PM'd AM and said I was being beaten down by the supreme intellect of UDT, and asked him to come and help me.

Oh hang on, no, that didn't happen at all.

In actual fact, two separate people have taken exception to the way you think it acceptable to speak to them, and have responded.

Anyway, enough of your UDT egowank, I imagine other posters are becoming a bit fed up with the thread being tit for tat, so I shall not respond to your personal nonsense anymore.

[Undisputedtruth]

Looking at the CPZ and controversy threads it's clear to me that you've got no idea how to debate issues and your responses degenerates into foul mouth abuse if someone disagrees with your views.

Moving on, I will not be dictated by you or anyone else for that matter, so playing your small minded games will be of no consequence to me. If someone has taken exception to what I've said to them then they need to look at their own behaviour first before pointing the finger at me.

[Otta]

Foul mouthed abuse?

[Undisputedtruth]

Otta Wrote:

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

> Anyway, enough of your UDT egowank,

[Otta]

That wasn't on any other thread to any other person, which is what you suggested.

Aaggghhhh, why am I bothering?

[Chippy Minton]

A fair deal has now been agreed for DLR staff - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16736446

Won't be long before one is agreed with the tube workers I'd guess.

The deal is also further evidence that the introduction of driverless tube trains will prevent industrial disputes and strikes.

[Huguenot]

The ?100 bonus is only payable to DLR staff who work an additional 45 hours of overtime across a two month period, workers will also get an additional uncapped incentive of overtime+25% for the same period to benefit those who work longer more proportionately.

Since the DLR requires a minimum of an additional 45,000 hours worked across the period to increase station staffing and train numbers this is a clear case of bonus linked to minimum performance increases.

If the tube drivers are expected to work similar additional hours to achieve performance targets than I'd expect a bonus to be created as incentive.

It remains to be seen whether their demands are as honest as the DLRs.

[Chippy Minton]

Nothing remains to be seen re tube drivers - they've already agreed a deal which means they'll get at least ?500.

Funny how you recognise the DLR will need an additional 45,000 hours, but can't seem to comprehend the extra three million journeys on the tube everyday will require more hours worked.

Even funnier you say the DLR demands are "honest" when the deal has been agreed with the "greedy, feckless extortionists" that are the RMT.

[Huguenot]

Extra journeys on the tube do not necessarily mean extra man hours.

Empty train = full train = 1 driver.

The DLR has been clear where the additional man hours are required in additional staff at 20 currently unstaffed stations, addtional trains and later services.

The RMT did not say that what extra hours had been requested (or that was what the payment was for), they said their guys were having to work under 'more pressure' and so deserved more money, which is not the same thing at all.

[Chippy Minton]

Why do you keep talking about tube drivers? They have nothing to do with this - their deal was agreed months ago.

The OP linked to the the story about the RMT wanting a deal for tube staff.

Are you actually saying you can see why the DLR will need additional man hours, but even with three million extra journeys a day on the tube extra hours won't be needed there?

[Huguenot]

No, I'm not saying that extra journeys don't mean extra man hours. I'm saying that nobody can claim that extra journeys DO mean extra man hours.

If 30 people go through your gate in an hour, or 300 people go through your gate in an hour, you've still only worked for an hour.

It would take a particular type of union dickhead to claim that if 10 times more people walked through your gate in an hour that means you've worked for 10 hours.

The DLR have explained why there are more hours - they need more staff at more stations and want the stations open for longer. Since the overall universe of staff remains the same, then even a mathematically challenged union shit stirrer can see that the hours must go up. The DLR have calculated not unreasonably that the total comes to 45,000 and incentivised workers to deliver that on their behalf through overtime.

Conversely, LU station staff in the time between getting out of their faces on piss smelling lager and hiding the empty cans in the air circulation ducts like 13 year old mentally defective schoolboys, have decided that they just want more money because of 'pressure' and are going to hold the city to ransom.

If the LU needs more man hours, then fine - but nobody has actually said that yet.

[Chippy Minton]

they just want more money because of 'pressure'

Errr....see page 1 of this read - they want more money for increased workload and pressures....deliberately missing the point again?

Still, you've convinced me. The DLR will obviously need more man hours and the tube won't. I hope no deal is reached. Quite right DLR staff and tube drivers should get something, but tube staff will not be affected so stuff 'em.

Although, I hope if the extremely remote chance of stories appearing in the press (and possibly a thread on here???) regarding 'transport chaos' actually come true, you'll be able to point out it's completely unnecessary to have more people working on the tube.

[Huguenot]

I don't see what manhours have got to do with the LU staff, Chippy? If they were working more hours then I'd expect them to get paid for it, and to get a bonus if they were pressured into it.

That's not what YOU said though:

"see page 1 of this read - they want more money for increased workload and pressures"

Those are your words Chippy, and you're hoist by them.

They've simply demanded money for working a bit harder. They're extorting money under menaces because they might have to get off their streaked undies twice in 8 hours.

They've said 'give me a big wad of cash or I'm going to fuck up your Olympics'.

[Chippy Minton]

Not my words, I was quoting the RMT.

I guess it comes down to whether "increased workloads" will mean they have to work increased hours. I'd say it does because if you go right back to the RMT's original rejection of LU's offer - it was a rejection of an offer for not only the ?100 flat rate extra payment but also allowances for additional shifts.

[Chippy Minton]

BTW...I think they'd settle for ?500 - do you think this constitutes a "big wad of cash?"