Do you want to discuss boring politics? (148 Viewers)

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Our rail network has haemorrhaged money for years, we've spent billions of tax payers money bailing out failing franchises.
This money could have been used to give us a rail system that was fit for purpose and protecting workers pay and conditions.

Has anyone been to a country where the railways are worse than ours?
Mate of mine was in Morocco, not a country he had much good to say about but he said the railways which were his main mode of travel while there pissed all over the UK, Morocco FFS.

When we were in Italy over Easter it was a mixed bag but on the whole the high speed rail in particular was fantastic, frequent and as we booked in advance the prices were very good value.

Look here for how we still can’t get one high speed line built despite ploughing in tens of billions.

 

---

[PVA]

If you click on the list it's a who's who of absolute cunts. All the usual suspects in there.

How 67 Tories voted for motion saying asylum policy should be allowed to break international law​

Here is the full list of MPs who supported Jonathan Gullis’s motion. (See 2.42pm.) Some 67 Tory MPs voted for it, as well as the DUP MP Sammy Wilson and Rob Roberts, a former Tory MP who now sits as an independent.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

If you click on the list it's a who's who of absolute cunts. All the usual suspects in there.

How 67 Tories voted for motion saying asylum policy should be allowed to break international law​

Here is the full list of MPs who supported Jonathan Gullis’s motion. (See 2.42pm.) Some 67 Tory MPs voted for it, as well as the DUP MP Sammy Wilson and Rob Roberts, a former Tory MP who now sits as an independent.

Of course that prick Gullis proposed the motion. Of course he did.

 

[shmmeee]

Party of law and order dontchaknow

 

[rob9872]

If you click on the list it's a who's who of absolute cunts.

Couldn't see you on there

 

[skybluetony176]

Of course that prick Gullis proposed the motion. Of course he did.

As someone said on twitter. At least being an MP keeps him away from children.

 

[CCFCSteve]

It’s 4% for this year back dated to January 2022 and then another 4% from 01/01/2023. There’s no 9% pay increase. They’ve offered a 4% pay increase for the year they’ve just had and another 4% going forward next year. You don’t accumulate your annual pay rises, it’s 4%.

Scottish rail workers got 5% for this year backdated, I would assume that will be the RMT’s target for English rail workers on the issue of pay, as it would be their members. Why anyone thinks that either the RMT is going to say English workers are worth less than Scottish workers or English workers will accept they’re worth less than Scottish workers I don’t know.

I’d seen 9% (5% backdated) which was put to members Train strikes to continue as RMT workers reject 9 per cent pay rise offer from Network Rail

 

[skybluetony176]

Couldn't see you on there

Is your last name Goodwill by any chance?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I’d seen 9% (5% backdated) which was put to members Train strikes to continue as RMT workers reject 9 per cent pay rise offer from Network Rail

In other words 4.5% a year which is still considerably below inflation. If pay awards in line with inflation had been made for most of the last 12 years, this dispute wouldn't be happening. As it wouldn't be across many other parts of the workforce.

Trying to do things on the cheap for years was always going to come back and bite.

 

[PVA]

Couldn't see you on there

I'm not a xenophobic, law breaking, bigoted Tory MP.

Hope that helps, sorry you wasted your time looking.

 

[CCFCSteve]

In other words 4.5% a year which is still considerably below inflation. If pay awards in line with inflation had been made for most of the last 12 years, this dispute wouldn't be happening. As it wouldn't be across many other parts of the workforce.

Trying to do things on the cheap for years was always going to come back and bite.

I did mention that if inflation remains high members will obviously be disadvantaged as next year goes on. We don’t know what inflation will be next year though. The fact is it’s 9% increase on salary within three weeks, with 5% backdated, plus extra 1% for those on 25k or less plus massive travel savings for family (probably worth a percent or two) plus no compulsories when there’s been a 20% rise on year in year insolvencies in the real world (this will continue).

I looked back and they’ve also had above inflation pay deal in 2019. This is a sector that was running at 80% pre covid capacity/revenue, not to mention the costs of strike action.

Whichever way it’s cut, 37% of members wanted to accept even though they were advised to reject it. If you’re on 30k, that’s an immediate 1500 less tax payment and salary going up to pretty much 33k. Instead they’re losing cash every day they’re on strike….every 5 days they’re on strike that’s approximately 1.5% to 2% cost to the individual (appreciate it’s only one off one year cost). I don’t think Mick lynch wanted to answer that in the bbc interview which is why he got shitty with interviewer and instead started talking about redistribution of wealth in society, which isn’t his job.

For what it’s worth, I actually think he’s done a great job for members up the rejection of latest offer and continuing strikes over Xmas period. Now I’m not so sure but we’ll see what he gets members and how much it costs them to get there, as well as the public.

Ps appreciate that this won’t go down well on here but just trying to explain the other side of the coin

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I did mention that if inflation remains high members will obviously be disadvantaged as next year goes on. We don’t know what inflation will be next year though. The fact is it’s 9% increase on salary within three weeks, with 5% backdated, plus extra 1% for those on 25k or less plus massive travel savings for family (probably worth a percent or two) plus no compulsories when there’s been a 20% rise on year in year insolvencies in the real world (this will continue).

I looked back and they’ve also had above inflation pay deal in 2019. This is a sector that was running at 80% pre covid capacity/revenue, not to mention the costs of strike action.

Whichever way it’s cut, 37% of members wanted to accept even though they were advised to reject it. If you’re on 30k, that’s an immediate 1500 less tax payment and salary going up to pretty much 33k. Instead they’re losing cash every day they’re on strike….every 5 days they’re on strike that’s approximately 1.5% to 2% cost to the individual (appreciate it’s only one off one year cost). I don’t think Mick lynch wanted to answer that in the bbc interview which is why he got shitty with interviewer and instead started talking about redistribution of wealth in society, which isn’t his job.

For what it’s worth, I actually think he’s done a great job for members up the rejection of latest offer and continuing strikes over Xmas period. Now I’m not so sure but we’ll see what he gets members and how much it costs them to get there, as well as the public.

Ps appreciate that this won’t go down well on here but just trying to explain the other side of the coin

I think by and large we already see a lot more of the other side of the coin in the media coverage and lines of questioning. What I want to see acknowledged is that unions are the result of anywhere from a few thousand to a few million working people all pushing to collectively improve their working conditions. So as was said earlier when there's talk of 'the unions' it's a bit disingenuous.

They're also democratic-if enough members vote against Lynch he has to accept it. I don't think he'll win another ballot, personally and he will not want to risk driving members away.

 

[chiefdave]

In other words 4.5% a year which is still considerably below inflation. If pay awards in line with inflation had been made for most of the last 12 years, this dispute wouldn't be happening. As it wouldn't be across many other parts of the workforce.

Trying to do things on the cheap for years was always going to come back and bite.

This is the problem isn't it, not just on the railways but in pretty much everything. Over a decade of underfunding and stagnant wages means nothing is in a position to absorb a short term shock. You simply can't tell people to batten down the hatches for a couple of years when you've got nurses going to food banks and working people freezing because they can't afford to put the heating on.

That's before you consider pretty much every service, NHS, police, the list goes on, is already on its knees before another round of cuts.

In the case of the RMT it's not just about pay is it? There's changes which it is claimed will compromise safety such as a 50% reduction in maintenance, cuts to staffing meaning driver only trains, numerous unstaffed stations, none of which sounds great for passenger safety.

And even if you think the 9% pay offer over 2 years is good the devil is in the detail as to get that rise workers will need to agree to changes in their terms which means working significantly more nights and weekends, but of course they don't want to pay for those so there will also be a 15% pay cut for every night shift and a 40% pay cut for every weekend shift. The RMT would also be agreeing to some roles being subject to fire and rehire on 10K a year less. But despite that the RMT have reached agreement with several of the operating companies only to find those deals blocked by the government.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

This is the problem isn't it, not just on the railways but in pretty much everything. Over a decade of underfunding and stagnant wages means nothing is in a position to absorb a short term shock. You simply can't tell people to batten down the hatches for a couple of years when you've got nurses going to food banks and working people freezing because they can't afford to put the heating on.

That's before you consider pretty much every service, NHS, police, the list goes on, is already on its knees before another round of cuts.

In the case of the RMT it's not just about pay is it? There's changes which it is claimed will compromise safety such as a 50% reduction in maintenance, cuts to staffing meaning driver only trains, numerous unstaffed stations, none of which sounds great for passenger safety.

And even if you think the 9% pay offer over 2 years is good the devil is in the detail as to get that rise workers will need to agree to changes in their terms which means working significantly more nights and weekends, but of course they don't want to pay for those so there will also be a 15% pay cut for every night shift and a 40% pay cut for every weekend shift. The RMT would also be agreeing to some roles being subject to fire and rehire on 10K a year less. But despite that the RMT have reached agreement with several of the operating companies only to find those deals blocked by the government.

The government thinks it can beat the union and is willing to artificially prolong the strike action to do so. What Lynch and the RMT would be best advised to do is make it publicly clear (to the point where everyone knows) what they're after and thus what needs to be done to end the strike.

 

[rob9872]

The government thinks it can beat the union and is willing to artificially prolong the strike action to do so. What Lynch and the RMT would be best advised to do is make it publicly clear (to the point where everyone knows) what they're after and thus what needs to be done to end the strike.

We've already seen arguments on here that 4% backdated and 5% in Jan isn't 9% because its over 2 years, despite them being 12 months without, so surely worth prolonging for a few weeks. Give them 9% in January and would be more acceptable despite actually saving that 4% for this year!

 

[fernandopartridge]

 

[shmmeee]

Interesting thread. Don’t know much about the interest rate stuff, would be interested in someone tearing it apart.

This is public sector more than RMT he’s talking about.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I can’t believe the public fall for the myth of inflation busting pay rises. What has caused the inflation rate should be asked by the media cause it hasn’t been public sector pay rises

 

[shmmeee]

Maria Caulfield awful on R4

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Maria Caulfield awful on R4

And on bbc

 

[shmmeee]

Aside from anything else she went from 1% increase costing £700m to costing £800m in a matter of minutes. Talk about inflation!

 

[PVA]

I can’t believe the public fall for the myth of inflation busting pay rises. What has caused the inflation rate should be asked by the media cause it hasn’t been public sector pay rises

Truss and Kwarteng's budget has seemingly been wiped from existence by the media. They cost people thousands and thousands of pounds and ts like it never happened.

 

[shmmeee]

Truss and Kwarteng's budget has seemingly been wiped from existence by the media. They cost people thousands and thousands of pounds and ts like it never happened.

Not quite true, Caulfield said on R4 something along the lines of “we saw a few weeks ago what happens when a government borrows more than it can afford” Yes! Your govenrment!

No one does self opposition like the Tories. Constantly pretending to be a new party shocked at the incompetence of those that came before them.

 

[skybluetony176]

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

We've already seen arguments on here that 4% backdated and 5% in Jan isn't 9% because its over 2 years, despite them being 12 months without, so surely worth prolonging for a few weeks. Give them 9% in January and would be more acceptable despite actually saving that 4% for this year!

I can’t believe the public fall for the myth of inflation busting pay rises. What has caused the inflation rate should be asked by the media cause it hasn’t been public sector pay rises

The phrase is also a total misnomer. If it’s an inflation busting pay rise doesn’t that mean it would end inflation?

 

[shmmeee]

Or hold tax thresholds and earn more tax because prices and wages have gone up, like we have done. The fact we choose not to pass that on to budgets and therefore wages is entirely a political choice.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The phrase is also a total misnomer. If it’s an inflation busting pay rise doesn’t that mean it would end inflation?

That’s me misspeaking sorry

 

[Deleted member 9744]

Not quite true, Caulfield said on R4 something along the lines of “we saw a few weeks ago what happens when a government borrows more than it can afford” Yes! Your govenrment!

No one does self opposition like the Tories. Constantly pretending to be a new party shocked at the incompetence of those that came before them.

And whose policies and budgets they voted for.

 

[Nick]

On the topic of all the strikes, why is it if you mention them then it's "Meanwhile Conservatives pay shit loads for PPE". etc etc

Is a strike really going to bother those cunts at all as opposed to bothering other normal working people? I totally get that all of the millions and billions floating about between them for dodgy deals should be spent elsewhere so why not target them?

It's like the Royal Mail, all people are doing now is not using Royal Mail and using alternatives. They aren't the only show in town now so it will mean Royal Mail losses, job cuts etc.

 

[fernandopartridge]

On the topic of all the strikes, why is it if you mention them then it's "Meanwhile Conservatives pay shit loads for PPE". etc etc

Is a strike really going to bother those cunts at all as opposed to bothering other normal working people? I totally get that all of the millions and billions floating about between them for dodgy deals should be spent elsewhere so why not target them?

It's like the Royal Mail, all people are doing now is not using Royal Mail and using alternatives. They aren't the only show in town now so it will mean Royal Mail losses, job cuts etc.

I think you misunderstand the point of the strike, it's an action targeted solely at the employer to try to force its hand.

It's nothing to do with PPE or anything like that.

Re Royal Mail, Royal Mail's management can either sit by idly and lose market share or they can settle the dispute.

 

[Nick]

I think you misunderstand the point of the strike, it's an action targeted solely at the employer to try to force its hand.

It's nothing to do with PPE or anything like that.

Re Royal Mail, Royal Mail's management can either sit by idly and lose market share or they can settle the dispute.

I know it is nothing to do with PPE, I am just saying people who are just comparing it to tories giving themselves millions.

Their management can also just cut the jobs if it doesn't need as many people because there are plenty of other options now and plenty of businesses have moved over to using them for their shipping.

 

[skybluetony176]

I know it is nothing to do with PPE, I am just saying people who are just comparing it to tories giving themselves millions.

Their management can also just cut the jobs if it doesn't need as many people because there are plenty of other options now and plenty of businesses have moved over to using them for their shipping.

I think the point is they keep saying the country can’t afford it. Yet it can afford to wipe off billions of pounds in Covid fraud, Rishi Sunak literally decided to do that as chancellor, might have even been this year. I read last week that the government is also paying £7M a day for storage of the useless PPE their mates sold us. I can’t verify that amount but it’s certainly costing us a lot of money to store it while someone makes a decision on what to do with it. This has to be the most wasteful government I can remember, maybe if they got their act together money would be available to pay nurses.

Edit. Tell a lie, it’s £760k a day.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I know it is nothing to do with PPE, I am just saying people who are just comparing it to tories giving themselves millions.

Their management can also just cut the jobs if it doesn't need as many people because there are plenty of other options now and plenty of businesses have moved over to using them for their shipping.

It is a political choice to waste billions on one thing and decide that people like nurses don’t deserve better pay.

 

[Nick]

It is a political choice to waste billions on one thing and decide that people like nurses don’t deserve better pay.

I get it with nurses but with trains, royal mail etc surely it means people get laid off or prices go up? Passed on to normal people.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

I get it with nurses but with trains, royal mail etc surely it means people get laid off or prices go up? Passed on to normal people.

Workers aren’t normal people?