wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:53:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
It's also interesting that the headline focuses on the driverless feature
of the trains, even though this may not be used initially. Maybe a
not-very-subtle reminder to the existing strike-prone drivers that their
days may be numbered?

The drivers probably know there'll have to be someone on board and it doesn't
matter if they're at the front driving or wandering around like on the DLR.
They'll still be paid the same (or else) so I doubt they care.

I think the DLR PSAs are paid significantly less than LU drivers.


Lets hope the actual trains are somewhat less butt ugly than the mock up
shown there.

Yes, the designers of that model were trying just a bit too hard to
incorporate the LU roundel into the front-end design.

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:23:13 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:53:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
It's also interesting that the headline focuses on the driverless feature
of the trains, even though this may not be used initially. Maybe a
not-very-subtle reminder to the existing strike-prone drivers that their
days may be numbered?

The drivers probably know there'll have to be someone on board and it doesn't
matter if they're at the front driving or wandering around like on the DLR.
They'll still be paid the same (or else) so I doubt they care.

I think the DLR PSAs are paid significantly less than LU drivers.

Doesn't surprise me. But can you imagine what would happen if LU tried to cut
driver salaries or recruit new drivers on lower ones to operate these trains.
LU have made a rod for their own backs - the RMT know they always cave in the
end when faced with a strike.

--
Spud

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:06:57 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Doesn't surprise me. But can you imagine what would happen if LU tried to cut
driver salaries or recruit new drivers on lower ones to operate these trains.
LU have made a rod for their own backs - the RMT know they always cave in the
end when faced with a strike.

Several strikes have happened, so that's not the reality.

--
jhk

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:43:48 +0100
Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:06:57 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Doesn't surprise me. But can you imagine what would happen if LU tried to cut
driver salaries or recruit new drivers on lower ones to operate these trains.
LU have made a rod for their own backs - the RMT know they always cave in the
end when faced with a strike.

Several strikes have happened, so that's not the reality.

Point is the drivers always get what they want in the end. The law needs to be
changed so that if people go on strike for minor issues like salary disputes
then they can legally be sacked.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:43:48 +0100
Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:06:57 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Doesn't surprise me. But can you imagine what would happen if LU tried to cut
driver salaries or recruit new drivers on lower ones to operate these trains.
LU have made a rod for their own backs - the RMT know they always cave in the
end when faced with a strike.

Several strikes have happened, so that's not the reality.

Point is the drivers always get what they want in the end. The law needs to be
changed so that if people go on strike for minor issues like salary disputes
then they can legally be sacked.

So far the drivers haven't won with their Night Tube strikes (which are
presumably just disguised pay strikes).

Of course, the strikes will become even more effective if we get another
Labour mayor in May. Sadiq isn't a commie like Ken, but he's still unlikely
to stand up to the unions.

On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:52:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Of course, the strikes will become even more effective if we get another
Labour mayor in May. Sadiq isn't a commie like Ken, but he's still unlikely
to stand up to the unions.

Khan is a former human rights lawyer and was chairman of Liberty at one point
and spent a large amount of time bringing cases against the police so I
wouldn't **** on him if he was on fire and sitting in the only urinal.
Also his Ad Hominem attack on Zac Goldsmith a few weeks back shows his real
personality and style of politics.

If he's true to his type he'll be permanently opposed to anything the
government does regardless of merit but as you say will back down as soon as
the unions start flexing their muscle. Unfortunately Goldsmith is a bit of a
non-entity so Khan has a good chance of winning.

--
Spud

Semantic casuistry time: Mr. Goldsmith isn't a non-entity;
he's a non-event sitting on a pile of unearned money. He
has established a definite public persona: "committed", wimpish
and negative, and he has gained much media attention so he's
not - alas - a non-entity.

On 2016-01-19, d wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:43:48 +0100
Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:06:57 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Doesn't surprise me. But can you imagine what would happen if LU tried to cut
driver salaries or recruit new drivers on lower ones to operate these trains.
LU have made a rod for their own backs - the RMT know they always cave in the
end when faced with a strike.

Several strikes have happened, so that's not the reality.

Point is the drivers always get what they want in the end. The law needs to be
changed so that if people go on strike for minor issues like salary disputes
then they can legally be sacked.

A salary dispute is not a minor issue. If you need more money you might
still be reasonably certain of being able to go elsewhere almost
immediately. Tube drivers (and enormous numbers of people in a wide
variety of jobs) not so much. And since the current tendency is for the
value of wages to be eroded, why wouldn't they need more money?

Note the deliberate use of "need" rather than "want".

Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry

In message , at 18:16:49 on Tue, 19
Jan 2016, Eric remarked:
A salary dispute is not a minor issue. If you need more money you might
still be reasonably certain of being able to go elsewhere almost
immediately. Tube drivers (and enormous numbers of people in a wide
variety of jobs) not so much. And since the current tendency is for the
value of wages to be eroded, why wouldn't they need more money?

I agree about the lack of mobility of the rump of employees who aren't
C++ programmers, but most people agree that train drivers are overpaid
for their four day week.
--
Roland Perry

On 2016-01-19, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:16:49 on Tue, 19
Jan 2016, Eric remarked:
A salary dispute is not a minor issue. If you need more money you might
still be reasonably certain of being able to go elsewhere almost
immediately. Tube drivers (and enormous numbers of people in a wide
variety of jobs) not so much. And since the current tendency is for the
value of wages to be eroded, why wouldn't they need more money?

I agree about the lack of mobility of the rump of employees who aren't
C++ programmers, but most people agree that train drivers are overpaid
for their four day week.

Overpaid does not matter. Not only expenditure but committed expenditure
tend to increase with increasing income (for everybody). The only way
to reduce overpayment is with a long-term plan made up of very small
and carefully organised steps. Even then it might not work. In any case,
overpaid is a matter of opinion. And anyone who has that opinion should
spend a few full shifts in the cab.

Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry