Londoners: PM 'not ruling out' Tube strike ban

Dunno why im so riled up about this.. The race to the bottom stuff i guess, the buzz words of the opposition politicians and my old man working 40+ years for London Underground.

Arriva Cross Country £44,388.00 35 hour, 4 day week.
Arriva Trains Wales £33,808.00 35 hour, 4 day week.
C2C £37,235.00 35 hours over week
Chiltern £40,465.00 35 hours, 5 day week
DRS £41,970.11 35 hours, 5 day week
DB Shenker £38,440.00 35 hours, 5 day week
East Midlands Trains £36,461.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Eurostar £47,707.00 35 hours, 4 day week
First Capital Connect £38,000.00 35 hours, 4 day week
First Great Western £39,760.00 35 hours, 4 day week
First Scot Rail £34,620.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Freightliner £35,175.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Freightliner Heavy Haul £42,545,00 35 hours, 4 day week
Gatwick Express £34,441.00 35 hours, average 4.3 day week
GB Railfreight £43,300.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Heathrow Express £33,961.00 38 hour week, 5 days
Hull Trains £40,978.00 35 hours, 4 day week
London Overground £40,000 35 hours, average 4.25 day week
Island Line £33,070.00 39 hours, 4 day week
London Midland £35,059.00 35 hours, 4 day week
London Underground £40,111.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Merseyrail £33,000.00 35 hours, 5 day week
Nexus £30,534.00 36 hours, 4 day week
Northern Rail £35,426.00 35 hours, 4.5 day week
National Express East Coast £46,228.00 35 hours, over average 4.33 day week
National Express East Anglia £35,321.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Serco Rail Operations £38,633.00 35 hours, 5 day week
South Eastern £39,350.00 35 hours, average 4.5 day week
Southern £37,545.00 35 hours, 4 day week
South West Trains £40,053.00 37 hours, 4.4 day week
Transpennine Express £37,408.00 35 hours, 4 day week
Tubelines £41,324.00 35 hours, average of 4 day week
Virgin West Coast £44,431.00 35 hours, 4 day week

I dunno how out of date these figures are, if woefully im sorry.

Consider thats living in or near London, one of the most expensive cities in Europe.

Need to start ****ging off Virgin railways, they pay their employees far too much.
 
Given the responsibilities/tasks involved with driving 125mph express trains and driving on the tube I'm not sure that table makes your point or whether it makes the point for the naysayers!

Driving a Class 1 Express Train quite obviously should pay more than driving a tube train, in much the same way that a First Officer on an widebody jet gets paid more than a first officer on a commuter jet.
 
Last edited:
I dunno why its obvious. To a trainspotter like you maybe? I use that term in an endearing fashion.

Both people sit in a cab responding to signals as requested, trying not to fall asleep :P
Both are responsible for passenger safety.
etc etc etc listing comparisons ad infinitum.

If anything the Tube driver has the greater passenger responsibility numbers than the Express driver.

Why are express trains not automated ? surely there are less variables to juggle.

Why do pilots of bigger planes get paid more? More passengers? More prestige? A computer flys most of the journey. Cant a computer land the thing if it wanted?

Are not all of these people paid to be there when the **** hits the fan and human decisions and judgement are needed? Should be a flat 40k rate.
 
Efour said:
Are not all of these people paid to be there when the **** hits the fan and human decisions and judgement are needed?
Click to expand...
This is what it boils down to. The worst case scenario for virtually all professionals is that they cost their company some dosh or damage its reputation by screwing up. They don't have responsibility for a single human life, let alone 1,300.

Accidents are extremely rare on the Underground, but when they do happen a computer or someone on the government's latest tenner-a-day work scheme is absolutely no use to anyone.
 
TJM said:
Accidents are extremely rare on the Underground, but when they do happen a computer or someone on the government's latest tenner-a-day work scheme is absolutely no use to anyone.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of all accidents, whether they be around cars/trains/planes/reactors/whatever, are caused by human error. Critical computing systems are so robust as to be virtually flawless compared to humans performing the same task.

I suspect that we entertain drivers purely for our own sense of well-being.
 
Last edited:
Efour said:
Come on you can do better than this?

I'm pretty sure i could be a Brain surgeon given enough time... If you regard that as more important.

So do you hold all "unskilled" people with contempt? Just Alienated 50% of the forum members id guess.
Click to expand...

Take your strawman and go shove it. I have no time for you.

But for the others who might mistakenly read your post and think it to hold any sort of truth, I shall clarify; driving a train does not require a significant amount of talent or aptitude. There are many other jobs, with the same skill-level, and worse working conditions, that would never see the kind of pay they have. Nor would they have the same ability to moan, whine and throw their rattle because they want more money. They should, like the rest of us are told, to go **** off and find a new job. Or raise the pay for other similarly skilled jobs.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;25024702 said:
Given the responsibilities/tasks involved with driving 125mph express trains and driving on the tube I'm not sure that table makes your point or whether it makes the point for the naysayers!

Driving a Class 1 Express Train quite obviously should pay more than driving a tube train, in much the same way that a First Officer on an widebody jet gets paid more than a first officer on a commuter jet.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, while the overall responsibilities are arguably greater on the Overland, the overall working environment is way below what an Overland Driver would have compared to an Underground Driver...so arguably to two would balance out to some degree.
 
Gackt said:
Take your strawman and go shove it. I have no time for you.

There are many other jobs, with the same skill-level, and worse working conditions, that would never see the kind of pay they have.
Click to expand...

Such as ? I think they do have a pretty unique position. Anyone can answer.

Gackt said:
Or raise the pay for other similarly skilled jobs.
Click to expand...
Thats better. I agree.
 
I am all for this. Like clockwork every year 'Strike on New years eve'

It's not as if they could pick any worse time and it makes them no friends!
 
Workers need the ability to fight back against the elite that would have them as slaves if they could.

yqDzQ.jpg
 
Energize said:
If people don't like their pay they can find a new job like any normal person, holding companies to ransom is unethical and should be a sackable offence.
Click to expand...

We are talking about mass labour markets where, unlike the employment status of the majority of us. The employer would in all likelyhood be the one acting unethically which leads to their workforce going on strike...issues such as a removal or alteration of agreed terms and conditions, unresolved grievances that the company refuses to acknowledge or any number of other issues whereby the workforce has no other choice but to remove their labour under a collective agreement. It is a integral part of the Collective Bargaining system where those in the Mass Employment to sectors are able to protect, improve and retain their agreed terms and conditions over time....where people like us would negotiate individually according to our skills and the companies need for us as individuals the mass employment sectors have to rely on their collective labour in which to negotiate....otherwise the risk is that employers (particularly the unscrupulous ones, of which there are many) would effectively have access to minimum statutory terms for all their employees...this would in turn depress the labour markets and create larger wage disparity and wealth divides in our society...

So while some strike actions are spurious and based on collective greed, many are not and are the only effective defence against unscrupulous employers exploiting their workforce and on that point alone we should endeavour to protect hard won employment rights while ensuring legislation, regulation and employment law combine to ensure that such rights are exercised less and less as the necessity of such reduces.
 
Last edited:
If a company is breaking contractual terms that can be acted upon by a court of law, vigilante actions where employees take the law into their own hands are unacceptable. Just as they are for any other offence. If you want to remove your Labor then quit the job.

Based on my observations it seems almost all strike actions are spurious ransom attempts anyway.
 
Last edited:
People seem to dislike unionisation, but in reality it's just because they don't get a good deal where they work and thus think the workplace should be joyless and everyone should just get on with it and be happy to have a job.
Jobs wouldn't be such a rarity if unions enforced employers to hire the requisite number of workers to do a job, instead of relying on unpaid/ forced overtime because they cut all the stuff. If you can't afford to hire that many staff then there's something wrong with your business model, tough ****.

I'm still of the opinion companies exist to serve us, not us to serve companies. Never been without a union and I'd strike tomorrow if they were trying to sell my ass down the river to boost their bottom line, or cut staff numbers, or give us a crappy employment deal.

I support workers rights, in light of company benefits I'd say working on the tubes is a bloody good job. And it's because the workers fight for it that it is.
Not many companies can you say you have a good job package any more, or even a job for life, I applaud anyone who fights for their own best interests when it comes to employment.

Because ultimately that is what you have to look out for, and if a few more people were prepared to engage in that then the world would be a better place. Greed wouldn't run rampant among the upper ranks in companies while the workers suffer.

If people don't like their pay they can find a new job like any normal person, holding companies to ransom is unethical and should be a sackable offence.
Click to expand...
Where is the accountability for companies holding workers to random, forcing unpaid overtime and longer working hours, underpaying, dispensing of staff as they see fit and never giving them anything except a measly paycheck.
It works both ways, why should anyone put up with being treated like crap in a firm by a bunch of greedy *******s at the top who wouldn't know a hard days work if it hit them on the head.
 
Last edited:
Thats rubbish, some of us are parts of the largest unions and still hate them. Got nothing to do with not getting a good deal at all. Unions are far more corrupt than most companies. And the leaders need to be sacked.
 
Energize said:
If a company is breaking contractual terms that can be acted upon by a court of law, vigilante actions where employees take the law into their own hands are unacceptable. Just as they are for any other offence. If you want to remove your Labor then quit the job.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Employment law is there to promote the efficient conduct of business. It is not there for the purpose of protecting employees.

Based on my observations it seems almost all strike actions are spurious ransom attempts anyway.
Click to expand...

And what observations would they be? Pop up pictures in the Daily Mail?
 
Glaucus said:
And the leaders need to be sacked.
Click to expand...

90% of union leaders have been voted there by thier membership. If they are going to be sacked, it's the members who decide.

You know, kinda like when a CEO does badly and the shareholders oust them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom