London 2012: RMT Union rejects Tube pay offer

[Chippy Minton]

requiring our valiant drivers to push on the stick with slightly increased pressure

Side-splittingly funny, but....THIS DISPUTE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TUBE DRIVERS!!!

[Lost Yorkshire Man]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Can you imagine the pressure of watching the

> automatic gates open more often than usual???

.....and the endless beeps.....

....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....beep....sorry we are closing London Bridge Station due to overcrowding.

[*Bob*]

Aslef, NUT, whatever.

Commies, the lorravem.

[Chippy Minton]

Quite the opposite - Bob Crow actually works for the government as an MI5 agent destroying the commies from within.

[*Bob*]

Why do these people want more money anyway?!

It's downright disgraceful! It's not like the rest of us want more money and would love to get our chiseling hands on it if only the opportunity were to present itself; especially if someone else offered to do the dirty work and get it on our behalf.

[Chippy Minton]

Because there will be an extra 3 million journeys on the tube, people will be required to work addtional shifts, therefore they want more money.

Pretty straightforward really, although there are some people that will obviously be opposed to this simply for the sake of being contrary.

[Huguenot]

That's your guess at the moment Chippy - there's been nothing in the open about what these frigthening, almost Victorian overtime requirements actually are?

If the demands were so heavy, surely the RMT would already have been all over this no?

[*Bob*]

I for one do not want any more money.

And if someone tries to get some for me (without involving too much of an effort on my part) I shall certainly be refusing to accept it - for the greater good of the country.

And I sure that most people in Britain agree with me.

[Chippy Minton]

I think the RMT are all over it, hence the reason for the rejection of the ?100 offer and the whole dispute in the first place.

[Huguenot]

"Wildcat lil-lets jingle writer strike grinds London to a halt"

From the Daily Bigot

London ground to a halt yesterday at a cost of $1bn a day as Lil-lets jingle writers demanded an Olympic bonus. Spokepeople confirmed that the jingle writers were struggling under a considerably higher workload and additional pressure as an estimated 1m more people anticipated to be in London for the Olympics may overhear their jingles on Capital Radio.

[Undisputedtruth]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> EDITED

>

> Sorry katie1997, it was UDT who was talking RBS.

>

> He listed RBS share price and general problems

> with business banking as reasons why Hester

> shouldn't get his bonus.

>

> The first was undoubtedly part of his targets (but

> don't leap to any conclusions about what that

> target was, if he was under instructions to

> downsize the business the share price target may

> not have been higher).

>

> The second as a general cause would not have been

> part of his target, although I understand there

> was an RBS specific target related to this, and

> that he achieved it.

>

> There were also targets about shedding staff and

> cutting costs which he achieved. It may be that

> the public don't agree with these targets, but

> then that's why the public aren't running the

> bank.

LOL Hester is even behind in his disposal targets.

Anymore excuses for rewarding failure, hey Hugo?

[Huguenot]

I wasn't aware that you knew Hester's targets too UDT?

Good heaven, yet another thing were going to have to add to the list about your accepetional skills:

Board Executive and Cheif Negotiator for RBS?

[Jeremy]

When it comes to RBS and Hester (and pretty much anybody's salary), what you think is fair is not relevant. They have to pay people competitive rates if they are to have any hope of attracting/retaining reasonably capable staff. It may stick in the throat because they're largely govt owned, but the more important issue is getting the company back to health so that us, the taxpayers, can get our ?45bn back. The hysterical media, naive general public, and disingenuous opposition are crippling them as a company.

It is daft to suggest that ?1m basic + ?1m bonus is excessive for a CEO of a major company, especially one who now has such a large responsibility to deliver.

[El Pibe]

This is often portrayed as an absolute moral issue, but what cracks me up is a common-or-garden utility player in the premiership will be on more than ?1M with a huge bonus for coming fourth in the title race, and yet this garners little or no comment.

We have to look at our own hypocrisy before demanding behaviour of others.

Nowt to do with the RMT mind you, but that conversation had become old and tired hadn't it.

What shall we talk about next then George......

[*Bob*]

That's just crazy talk, Pibe.

A twenty year-old footballer is worth every penny and fully deserves his lifestyle to be maintained without complaint or thought by the banker-moaning masses by their season tickets and Sky subscriptions.

This is in direct contrast to some landed-on-his-feet fifty year-old banker who just happened to spend most of his professional life working his way to the top of the career tree - the lucky sod.

[Otta]

What Jeremy said.

UDT, serious question, would you describe yourself as a socialist, who believes in the redistribution of wealth?

[Loz]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> When it comes to RBS and Hester (and pretty much

> anybody's salary), what you think is fair is not

> relevant. They have to pay people competitive

> rates if they are to have any hope of

> attracting/retaining reasonably capable staff.

And this is a major difference between a CEO and a tube driver. There is an open market for a CEO position for the people with the right skills and experience. The position of trainee tube driver is only offered to TFL staff/union members.

A CEO says 'pay me what I think I'm worth or I'll leave'. You have the option of paying that rate or finding someone else.

A tube driver says 'pay me what I think I'm worth or I'll stop work and cripple your business'. You have no option but to succumb or else the tube does not run.

[Chippy Minton]

Once again, this dispute is nothing to do with tube drivers!!!!!!

A tube driver says 'pay me what I think I'm worth or I'll stop work and cripple your business'.

Not really Loz - why don't LU just get some temps in? Some people that have contributed to this thread will tell you that you that it only takes five days training to be a tube driver. ;-)

[Loz]

Chippy, if LU trained up a bunch of people as strike breakers then all hell would break loose with the unions.

[Chippy Minton]

And your point is?

Companies always do whatever they can to break strikes - get agency staff in, get management to cover staff roles, actively encourage striking breaking (AKA scabbing) etc. Why is LU any different?

In your previous post, you seem to suggest you have to be a union member to get a job as a trainee driver - this is just completely facutally incorrect.

[Undisputedtruth]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

>

> It is daft to suggest that ?1m basic + ?1m bonus

> is excessive for a CEO of a major company,

> especially one who now has such a large

> responsibility to deliver.

A Prime Minister gets ?150,000 to run this country. So are you seriously saying that running a bank is more difficult to run than a country, Jeremy?

RBS has a workforce of only 26,000 and yet you think it's right for the RBS Chief Executive to earn 20 times more than the Prime Minister. The NHS employs 1.3m people while their Chief Executives receives a ?150,000.

The going rate for a bank's Chief Executive is excessively high considering the bank's sector share performances. And I wonder how much commissions goes to the headhunters for suggesting higher pay to Chief Executives.

Edited to add the word than

[El Pibe]

Darren Bent kicks a football round a park, are you seriously saying that kicking a football in a park is more difficult than running a bank?

Average permiership player pay is over 1.5 million pounds and there are currently over 400 players earning this sort of cash.

I couldn't give a shit about the fortunes of Aston Hotspur, but I think getting someone to recoup the 20 billion we've lost in our RBS investment is proabaly worth chucking some hard cash at.

I think we've got our moral compass all wrong, where's the tabloid outrage about Wayne Rooney's ?8M a year?

I also don't get this yard stick about Prime-ministerial pay. For starters the pay is kept artificially low for political purposes, and secondly ex prime ministers become very rich off the back of their stint of service thak you very much. (not that cameron needs it mind)

[Undisputedtruth]

Darren Bent gets paid for scoring goals and so he deserve his pay.

The problem here is that there is a culture of rewarding boardroom failure.

[Otta]

I don't think Jeremy ever said running a bank was more difficult than running a country.

Are you saying scoring goals is more difficult than running a country?

[Undisputedtruth]

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