Should Tube leaders go to prison?

[Stumpy Tim]

It is drivel. Inaccurate drivel. You're claiming the change in hours will have hardly any impact, It will. It's not opinion nor is it open for debate, it will massively affect their working life. Now, whether or not you agree with the decision to strike, that IS a matter of opinion and you quite reasonably argue a point. But to claim that it wont affect their lives much is inaccurate drivel.

When I say clueless, don't imagine someone being aggressive or snarky, pointing a finger and sneering. Imagine someone shaking their head and strolling off.

I said it won't affect their lives as much as people think. Big difference. I've also said countless times that the unions job is to minimise that impact. This is all opinion which just happens not to be your opinion. All you have done is name call and sneer at people who disagree with you. Unfortunately you're not alone on this thread

 

[Nibble]

I said it won't affect their lives as much as people think. Big difference. I've also said countless times that the unions job is to minimise that impact. This is all opinion which just happens not to be your opinion. All you have done is name call and sneer at people who disagree with you. Unfortunately you're not alone on this thread

Again, inaccurate drivel. I haven't sneered or name called. I described you as clueless. I don't think you know what you're talking about. I think you're being too thin skinned. But i'm not gonna get into derailing a thread again so I'll leave it there.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Again, inaccurate drivel. I haven't sneered or name called. I described you as clueless. I don't think you know what you're talking about. I think you're being too thin skinned. But i'm not gonna get into derailing a thread again so I'll leave it there.

You haven't name called, you've just called me clueless. Now who is the one spouting inaccurate drivel? Let's leave it shall we

 

[beorhthelm]

It is drivel. Inaccurate drivel. You're claiming the change in hours will have hardly any impact, It will. It's not opinion nor is it open for debate, it will massively affect their working life.

honestly, how much do you think covering an extra 1-2hours is going to affect working life? we arent talking about change from a shift ending at 10pm to 2am, we're talking change from 1:30am to say 2:30am. unless you have some information that the whole structure of the shift pattern is changing? and in doing so that there is no upside (like finishing earlier - i'd rather do 10pm to 6am than 2am to 10am-ish.)

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

Cracking debating skills there Nibble. You've really won the argument. What is it about the left who resort to name calling during a perfectly reasonable debate. It's a bit sad

Without wanting to sound like the player picked last in PE, you seem to have forgotten (or not noticed) my own points made slightly before you and Lord Nibblington got a bit derailed (admire my topical phrasing there).

Pretty sure I didn't name call and managed to raise a genuine point for debate, fancy a crack at it?

No worries if not, I can go and pretend to be a sheep in another thread instead.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Without wanting to sound like the player picked last in PE, you seem to have forgotten (or not noticed) my own points made slightly before you and Lord Nibblington got a bit derailed (admire my topical phrasing there).

Pretty sure I didn't name call and managed to raise a genuine point for debate, fancy a crack at it?

No worries if not, I can go and pretend to be a sheep in another thread instead.

Sorry - missed it. I'm out the office... Can you repeat?!

 

[Stumpy Tim]

It's pretty drastic for those that would now, presumably, be working through the night?

As it is, the latest you'll finish is 1:30am and the earliest you could start is 4:45am, which I'm guessing is on some sort of rota. Neither of those times are particularly unreasonable if you're doing them every now and again.

If you then move it to 24hr operations, you could suddenly find that you'll start a shift at 11pm, work all the way through the night and finish at 8am (or something). That's not a small change by any standard.

That's an unknown though so it's hard to comment. I think that is down to the union to negotiate, which is perfectly reasonable. I disagree with their current negotiation tactic of striking

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

That's an unknown though so it's hard to comment. I think that is down to the union to negotiate, which is perfectly reasonable. I disagree with their current negotiation tactic of striking

If I were to try and boil down your argument, would I be right in saying it's along the lines of;

You have no issue with striking as a rule, but think that it may have been used prematurely in this case. The drivers are correct to raise their grievances regarding the impact on their work/life balance via the union and should continue to do so, whilst working their current shift patterns until an amicable agreement is reached via negotiations, rather than walk out?

If that's the case, I still disagree with you as I can't imagine that relying solely on negotiation will result in a quick or happy resolution, but, I can see where you're coming from.

Edit; By all means tell me I've got your argument wrong if I have, not trying to put words in mouths.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

If I were to try and boil down your argument, would I be right in saying it's along the lines of;

You have no issue with striking as a rule, but think that it may have been used prematurely in this case. The drivers are correct to raise their grievances regarding the impact on their work/life balance via the union and should continue to do so, whilst working their current shift patterns until an amicable agreement is reached via negotiations, rather than walk out?

If that's the case, I still disagree with you as I can't imagine that relying solely on negotiation will result in a quick or happy resolution, but, I can see where you're coming from.

Nailed it. I don't think I'm being unreasonable & some of the nonsense being served up towards my point of view is ridiculous. You are a rare exception

 

[alfredmizen]

Nice post. I disagree with you on this strike, but it's good to know you enjoy the job and are proud of it

Try to sound a bit more patronising

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Try to sound a bit more patronising [emoji38]ol: [emoji38]ol: [emoji38]ol:

Can't win[emoji3]

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

Nailed it. I don't think I'm being unreasonable & some of the nonsense being served up towards my point of view is ridiculous. You are a rare exception

I get that a lot, being cursed with such brilliance can be a real burden sometimes.

Genuinely though, considering how quickly things get politcal on here, and how deeply entrenched some supporters of both sides are, it can't be that surprising the way your view has been taken? Not that I think you've been treated particularly fairly but agreeing to disagree seems something of a rarity on the old t'interweb.

 

[Hamilton]

Is £49,673 a fair salary?

A Tube driver's starting salary - which follows about six months of training - is £49,673, according to Transport for London (TfL), which adds that this "doesn't alter depending on length of time in role". They typically work a 36-hour week and get 43 days of leave every year, including bank holidays. Six of the days off are compensation for working 36, rather than 35, hours a week throughout the year.

Now, is this enough?

My concern is with those working in conditions where we aren't even paying the living wage. My concern is with those in nursing and teaching where salaries are both a deterrent to attracting the talent we need and basically unfair. My concern is about us penalising the poorest in society whilst the HMRC fails to collect tax from Major Corporates that are raking in millions.

I'm finding it hard to drum up much sympathy for the drivers at this stage.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I assume this thread - http://www.northstandchat.com/showthread.php?324061-Should-Tube-leaders-go-to-prison - wasn't a big enough binfest for you then ?

 

[Hotchilidog]

The strike isn't about pay. It's about the changes to working conditions resulting from the move to an all night service.

 

[Norman Potting]

But I assume the either have to live in London with its high housing costs, or commute in? The latter may not work if they are doing shifts.

 

[Simster]

I assume this thread - http://www.northstandchat.com/showthread.php?324061-Should-Tube-leaders-go-to-prison - wasn't a big enough binfest for you then ?

You really should realise that some people are FAR too important to contribute to an existing thread when they could simply start their own.

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

If only there was a thread already in existence where this has been, and could continue to be, discussed...why have you forsaken us NSC? Why?!

 

[Hamilton]

I assume this thread - http://www.northstandchat.com/showthread.php?324061-Should-Tube-leaders-go-to-prison - wasn't a big enough binfest for you then ?

Missed it. Apologies. Mods, feel free to delete.

 

[The Spanish]

A Tube driver's starting salary - which follows about six months of training - is £49,673, according to Transport for London (TfL), which adds that this "doesn't alter depending on length of time in role". They typically work a 36-hour week and get 43 days of leave every year, including bank holidays. Six of the days off are compensation for working 36, rather than 35, hours a week throughout the year.

Now, is this enough?

My concern is with those working in conditions where we aren't even paying the living wage. My concern is with those in nursing and teaching where salaries are both a deterrent to attracting the talent we need and basically unfair. My concern is about us penalising the poorest in society whilst the HMRC fails to collect tax from Major Corporates that are raking in millions.

I'm finding it hard to drum up much sympathy for the drivers at this stage.

you could argue that the stance of the tube drivers fighting a rear guard action against the vast culture of envy and like it or lump it prevelant in Britain, does something indirectly to help other low waged and exploited.

the unspoken know your place attitude very thinly veiled on here by some, is so depressing. Why should train drivers get 50k a year? Why the f shouldnt they in one of the most expensive cities on earth, keeping it moving shuttling thousands of frankly less economically vital but similarly paid drones to their desks.

Back to nursing and teaching, teaching pays well but should it be paid more as its more middle class and requires higher qualifications? Yes if its the latter arguably, but the former somewhat clouds peoples judgement. Are teaching salaries really that much of a deterrent?

Nursing. Fantastically emotive and not a great benchmark to measure the relative worth of salaries on. You could put forward pretty much any salary level over the currents for a nurse and its hard to argue it would be excessive.

I dont have any difficulty supporting the tube drivers while people get paid less than them, or while GB Plc cannot raise taxes effectively, either from corporations or the fact that raising personal taxation will not be tolerated by the UK population, effectively them refusing to pay for an increase in nurses salaries themselves. IF the BRitish public created a culture where they were pro taxation for public services, arguably that would create a culture where there was pressure on more corporate responsibility.

Why should I pay when the Man doesnt is a cop out, irrespective of how much we are taken for a ride.