I think he's suggesting the jobs they had to do before they were Tube Drivers (because you can't apply externally) were underpaid. Not sure there's any truth to this.
Salary of tube and train drivers - why so high?
- Thread starter TS7
- Start date
I think he's suggesting the jobs they had to do before they were Tube Drivers (because you can't apply externally) were underpaid. Not sure there's any truth to this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,388
- Location
- Birmingham
What I'm saying is you have to take a crap job to progress into the good one. So if you were earning 30k you'd have to take a pretty hefty drop to get your foot in the door with no guarantee of ever getting the train driver role. The high salary in some way remunerates/incentivises this risk you would take.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,808
- Location
- Falling...
I think footballers win that one to be fair.
While it is nice that they get a high salary after getting a low salary that they previously get a low salary has nothing to do with the resulting high salary.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,388
- Location
- Birmingham
Maybe you are right maybe you are not. What criteria does one use to evaluate how much one should be paid? It's the age old argument. Care workers have horrible jobs but it is fairly low skill (sorry if that sounds horrible it's not meant to insult). Should investment bankers be paid the millions they are for generating pseudo wealth? How much should midwives be paid for bringing new humans into the world?
The question is unanswerable.
The jobs they did before were more open to competition, it is the other way around in that without the competition and with a strong, militant union the driver pay has been inflated higher than it would have been otherwise.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,388
- Location
- Birmingham
It does matter because it factors into your decision making if choosing that career. It's the same as teacher bursaries. Incentives to bring you in.
Hardly, it isn't like there is a shortage of people wanting that job.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,388
- Location
- Birmingham
The number of people wanting the job doesn't matter. It's the hurdles you need to go through to get it. We have here a role with a degree of exclusivity, rightly or wrongly. Like being a footballer the early sacrifice is higher than some other roles (eg bus driver), hence the salary premium.
Footballers are paid a lot of money because not many footballers are good enough to play at a high level, and there is a high demand for the one's that are. Clubs literally enter a bidding war for the best players, and with the amount of money in football due to how popular it is, you end up with clubs paying ridiculous money for players. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they didn't earn much when they were 16.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,388
- Location
- Birmingham
I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. It's not that that were paid poorly earlier so they get more now in compensation. It's the sacrifices that are made early on to allow one to get into the progression path for these roles because the roles are comparatively rare. The higher salary incentivises people to do this, otherwise people wouldn't bother. I'm not saying it's the only factor, but it's one of them.
It isn't comparable to being a footballer, in football you need to exceed the competition, be better than the rest, if you don't keep on performing at the highest levels you go down the ranks. You can be worth many multiples more than another footballer and if you're really good more people will bid for you.
To be a tube driver you've got a barrier to overcome but it is something achievable for plenty of people. If they recruited openly and couldn't hold TfL to ransom so easily then you could easily employ them for much less. So long as they can perform adequately in the role then that is all that is required.
Last edited:
The higher salary has nothing to do with what they get paid before hand. The pay is the result of a strong union, you'd still have sufficient applicants at lower pay... even more so if directly recruited.
LMAO, no just no.
A much better comparison is a lift attendant. The lift attendant is in charge of moving the lift up/down, and has a button to press in emergency. Train drivers are basically the same it's just their job functions on a different axis, oh and they get quadruple the pay because their union extorts their employer/passengers.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 24
Moronic post of the day congratulations
Driving a tube train requires slightly more training, granted but his point remains. The pay has absolutely nothing to do with 'risk', it's completely down to how unionised they are.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 24
It has everything to with risk and responsibility. I know it's popular at the moment to bash train drivers but that don't make it right. You do them a great diservice frankly