Messages

Cant see the union being cooperative untill nx have offered every penny/cent they have available as unite seem to think nx bus has access to finances from the others branches of nx group

Remember though it only needs another 21% or so of drivers to vote for an offer to get the >50% for acceptance - I don't think a massive increase is required, probably just a token pay increase gesture on the previous offer coupled with some updated driving conditions that the drivers seem to be particularly focused on.

I've always found that split shifts have an attraction for certain types of drivers, particularly those who live near the garage or a changeover point. Some people like being able to go home for lunch or to see the wife, go shopping, to the bank etc etc and it suits them.

Some drivers also like not having to drive for 8-10 hours straight through too. I never was a fan but they could be useful shifts to swap a duty on if you needed to do something in the daytime that a normal shift wouldn't allow.

I think management are meeting Union on Thursday

I hope for a successful outcome, they've made their point now so hopefully the union will be cooperative.

I have said this from the beginning of the strike talks. In an ideal world all duties would be paid book on to book off

Very few jobs have paid lunch breaks though so I can't see this being realistic on a large scale. Also, how would split shifts work unless you're suggesting the company should pay drivers an additional 4-5 hours pay for not doing anything.

Any news on new negotiations or possible compromise over the last couple of days? 

Now the strike is in full swing I haven't missed catching regular buses but it as highlighted how heavy we rely on them and when we have one operator dominating 93% of routes it's shows something is wrong as not every area is covered during strikes.

Hopefully somethings can change like an overall of routes so other operating companies can have a fair share of the routes

What a ridiculous statement. When was the last major bus strike in the West Midlands? Like 20+ years ago. It's hardly a common occurrence.

The vast majority of time, the West Midlands has a very good network of services run mostly by NX. Having one operator here has meant travel cards and fares have traditionally always been cheaper than other similar metropolitan areas with multiple operators. Try living in Worcestershire with the increasingly poor service from multiple operators there - you don't know how lucky you are in the West Midlands.

You no doubt support a franchising system with those views, which would shout from the rooftops 'guaranteed cheap fares' but quickly bury the fact EVERY council tax payer (bus user and non-bus user) would be subsidising it at great cost and EVERYONE would be paying far more for such a system than they do now.

Don't let a once in a generation problem like this strike blind you to the reality - bus travel in the West Midlands is far superior to many other areas in this country. 

Striking in sympathy isn't legal anymore so they would be powerless until they had created a dispute of their own and balloted successfully. The ill feeling between NX drivers and management comes down to far more than pay. Other companies have better relationships with their Unite members and reps and reps don't tend to concern themselves too much with other peoples' disputes as to do so removes leverage for them when they need it.

The difference here though is that those union drivers at other companies would be being asked to drive routes not on their normal rota. Now this is something the union reps at those companies would be involved with as no company could force their drivers on to new rotas without the necessary consultation process.

I obviously agree with the points about that these drivers couldn't refuse to work their own allocated shifts in support of NX drivers, but they certainly could refuse to drive on new routes covering for those striking NX drivers as, if their companies have union representation, then these new routes couldn't be foisted on drivers. There is no way any decent union rep in another local company would go against other union action in their locality. How can they justify union values if they don't support their union's actions?

But the Unite members at other operators are not in a dispute with their employers.

True but the point of the union is as a 'collective' - everyone seen as one whole, not individuals. Local Unite drivers from other companies undermining their fellow members at NX affects that mentality and ultimately severely weakens the union.

I cannot see Unite reps at other companies encouraging their drivers to cover routes affected by strikes. Strikes are meant to disrupt, the union will look incredibly weak if it's own members are minimising that disruption!

Registering a service under those provisions means it must be during a period not exceeding 21 days. In other words, temporary.

What other operators has Unite members? I don't think any do, bar the big boys.

Simon mentioned that Diamond have Unite reps at their West Midlands garages so it does narrow down the potential operators.

Also, plenty of pitfalls for operators like Green Bus doing this between school journeys- what happens if a bus breaks down doing these extra runs or is caught in heavy traffic? - we all know hour or more delays are possible when the roads in Brum become gridlocked. It would potentially miss the school journey it is contracted to run.

Also, I still can't see many of their drivers (who clearly have chosen this style of school bus driving as a career choice) to suddenly want to drive buses through inner city Birmingham dealing with all the riff raff that entails, no matter what they are being paid. Is the stress worth it for a few extra £100 over the 21 or what ever days it would run for?

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that.

Would be an interesting situation created here if those operators also had Unite members.

Unite would look pretty impotent if their own members from other local companies were undermining the NX drivers action. I don't think people here are thinking about the massive repercussions that such a situation would create. Taking advantage of NX issues in the short term may seem like a good plan but what happens when all this is over - those companies will be a target of NX retaliation longer term which would likely further degrade the operating situation in the West Midlands.

Strike hasn't achieved a result for the train drivers and I doubt this one will, once the reality of earning £75 a day takes hold and the mortgage is due they'll start drifting back to work.
Someone needs to ask unions what hardship their leaders are encountering on full pay.
If I were N.X. Id remove the offer off the table and let them get on with it, short term pain, long term gain.
If the drivers don't like the T & C's leave and get another job, there's plenty about.

That's a daft idea, why antagonise a sizeable chunk of the work force by doing that and removing the offer. Long term that will just destroy working relations even more.
Hopefully, NX and Unite come to a quick compromise now and relationships can be built up again quickly, it's a long time since this situation occurred in the West Mids previously so things clearly haven't been too bad in past years.

That example of working 13 hour days is an extreme and can't be the norm. When driving for various companies with First, only those drivers who did split shifts would work for that long over a day, it would be impossible to do otherwise.

The longest shift we could do was 10 hours paid in a day (+/- a few mins either side). Long shifts like that always had 2 breaks that were less than an 1 hour each. We weren't paid for the first 1hour 15 mins of the total break length but anything over that was paid. Therefore total shift length was about 11.5 hours with 10ths 15 mins paid. I know Stagecoach and Diamond have similar paid duty structures to this. Do NX not do this?

In an average working week with First, I'd get a couple of those long shifts with 3 shorter 6-8 hour shifts to make it up to 39-40 paid hours. Any driver could also apply to go onto the 4 day rota where each day had the 9-10 hour longer shifts but you got an extra day off every week. These sort of shifts also appealed to drivers doing overtime as you could then get paid up to 50 paid hours in a 5 fmday week and still have 2 days off. Trust me, First are not always a. great employer either but I can't see how NX are any worse.

I just am struggling to see how this NX driver could have been working those shift lengths EVERYDAY and only been paid 7 hours (35 hours for 5 days). That doesn't add up as no one would work 30 additional hours unpaid and I do not believe NX drivers are doing that either EVERYDAY. Perhaps the odd shift may reflect this but that must be an exaggeration of the situation otherwise NX would have no driver at all. The fact they have thousands suggests this is not the reality for every NX driver unless they are on a split shift rota with these longer days.

John's previous post I completely relate to about the deterioration in passenger and other driver's behaviour in recent years, so I can understand if your transport managers are giving you grief too then that is definitely a reason to want better conditions but that is not mentioned in this case by that driver. I am not saying that long working days don't happen, of course they do but I do not believe any NX driver is forced to work 12-13 hour shifts for 7 hours pay on a daily basis. 

Suddenly everybody experts on strike action

Could you explain then from a NX drivers point of view just what the sticking points are in these negotiations? That has not been clear in any of these comments from NX drivers so far, it's all just the 'terms and conditions' are wrong. But what do you actually want compared with what has actually been offered? What are these 'no go' terms and conditions?

This is not meant to be antagonistic but it seems unclear actually what the main issue is here. Is it a higher % wage increase? Different shift timings or length? How far away is the current offer from what you want?

I would expect they would still support their union and as such not work

True but this isn't the 1980s anymore and if those members don't think it's worth their hassle fighting for more, then they will likely work as normal. Why would you miss out on wages, pension, etc for something you don't agree with?

20% yes
48% rejected it
32% didn't bother voting

I'm sure if enough drivers felt they did not have a realistic chance to vote by the union, it may be possible to take legal action to delay the strike until all members have been able to have their vote. I am sure this happened last year with the Royal Mail strikes. Also, aren't their thresholds for total % of members having to vote for action that with only 48% of union members voting for may not have been reached?

As I suggested in a previous post, if the 29% against the strike plus this 32% (of members) who didn't feel like voting turn up for work on Monday, that will potentially be half the work force available to drive. More routes could then be run on a low lee frequency basis. I think the union are on increasingly dodgy ground now too with your stated statistics, I think it is in their interest to conclude a deal sooner than later if less than half their members are voting for what they want.