RTBU (Rail, Tram & Bus Union) Strike 29th Jan, What Say You?

[Deactivated] on 18/01/2018 - 10:32
Last edited 25/01/2018 - 16:34 by 2 other users

NSW RTBU (Rail Tram & Bus Union) is planning a strike on Monday 29th of Jan, the first day of school this year, and the first working day after the Australia Day long weekend.

Union tells Sydney commuters to stay at home during the strike.

The strike announced merely a week after they took sickie, blamed the timetable and the storm

"The trains will go to bed on Sunday night and won't come back out on Monday," union secretary said.

The union wants its workers to get a 6 per cent annual pay increase, but the Government is refusing to budge on its offer of a 2.5 per cent rise.

Update 1

Despite today's talks, the Rail, Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) NSW secretary Alex Claassens said that at this stage, the planned 24-hour strike would still go ahead on Monday, January 29.

Update 2

Possible pre-strike on Thursday 25th after failed 3% payrise negotiation

Confirmed pre-strike:
train services will be significantly reduced from Thursday 25 January and through the Australia Day long weekend.

Update 3

On Monday 29 January all stations will be closed and no trains will run across NSW.

Update 4

The planned industrial action impacting train services has been suspended by the Fair Work Commission.

Poll Options expired

  • 134
    They deserve 6% pay rise each year over the next 4 years, for what reason?
  • 586
    They already lucky with gov offer of 2.5% pay rise.
  • 21
    They should get 1% pay rise or pay freeze like some of us.
  • 78
    They better off live in a dream world with fairies and unicorns.
  • 42
    I don't care, I drive my $80k investment car.
Travel

Related Stores

Rail, Tram, and Bus Union
Rail, Tram, and Bus Union

Comments

      • counterbargainglobal on 23/01/2018 - 22:57
        +1

        Where is the outrage at the CEO (mod: removed inappropriate language) who's earning millions? Now that's sickening and they aren't even dealing with criminals.

  • Lord Fart Bucket on 23/01/2018 - 08:58
    +1

    How about a counter argument from the government: "Take 2.5% or in 5 years you'll all be replaced by computers."
    Trains can be retrofitted to run driverless. Stops them from crashing too.

    • thetrain on 23/01/2018 - 10:01

      If it was cost effective they would convert them all.

      Unfortunately it isn't feasible to implement that on a suburban train network where a mix of suburban/intercity/freight trains share the same tracks. The new Metro being a dedicated line will be driverless

      Single driver operation (no guard) is coming soon though

  • Hipsi on 23/01/2018 - 12:13
    +1

    They chose to do the job. When you or I chose to do a job is the pay rate a consideration? Abso bloody lutely. They knew the conditions when they started. Under what circumstance is it okay to accept a role and then make demands about how much they get paid, by holding the system to ransom. It seems no different to me to people that buy a house and then complain about the noise from the business across the road when they knew all along that it was there and still bought in this knowledge.
    Media is giving the transport minister hell over this but isn’t the union the one that should be copping it? Government doesn’t negotiate with terrorrists, so why should it negotiate with unions?

  • neonlight on 23/01/2018 - 13:02

    My payrise was less than 1% so they should shut their mouth and get on with their work.

    Scrap the new timetable use the old. It was a mistake

    • cameldownunder on 23/01/2018 - 14:43

      My train home got moved 1 minute, no other change, great new timetable !

    • CLoSeR on 23/01/2018 - 15:40

      New timetable is great, weekend service in our area is now every 15 minutes compared to old timetable being every 30 minutes.

      • smuggler on 23/01/2018 - 22:26

        It's actually shit house for the majority of people who fund the network in sydney.

  • DarthAntz on 23/01/2018 - 13:53
    +5

    A union strike of this scale only gives relevance to the need for management positions, which should be the first role to go. There would be less than 300 train drivers, and you can only assume excessive people above the driver level unessential to the system.

    Give the drivers their payrise and cut the fat from the top. Unaccountable, ineffective management should not be able to thrive in these situations.

    • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2018 - 16:43
      +2

      I agree with your entire first paragraph but disagree with the second.

      Just because management is ineffective does not immediately concede weight of argument pro union. The workers are still demanding too much and they are certainly replaceable. The union is "negotiating" by withholding labour without sufficient notice (ie. Being completely replaced) and legalities (ie. Financial protection via redundancy/termination payouts), and leveraging potential government cost via welfare.

      There's the other option of sacking the lot and going through the growing pains of a reformed system.

      • DarthAntz on 23/01/2018 - 17:52
        +1

        i didnt even mention the unions, youve corrected this very well. thank you. i think the option of sacking and starting again would be most beneficial.

        • [Deactivated] on 23/01/2018 - 20:07

          The train drivers are being represented by the union, so that's why I'm mentioning union by representation.

      • counterbargainglobal on 23/01/2018 - 22:59

        One week is within the notice period.

        • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 08:47

          I clarified - notice period for replacement. Not minimum legal requirement.

  • some123 on 23/01/2018 - 17:50
    +13

    Well everyone here is saying 6% is too much per year. If they were to get that (and they won't) it would only mean that they're on par with what commuter train drivers get in other cities of Australia. Even if there was no industrial action, I don't see how this can go on long term.

    The government wants more drivers, however everyone is jumping interstate the first chance they get for an extra $20000 or so. And I don't blame them, lose your weekends and other overtime hours and get paid the same as a train driver working normal hours? No brainer. Especially if the cost of living is way lower. The problem here is that NSW is basically providing the training for every other state/private company in Australia. And this has been shown by the lack of drivers for the new timetable.

    Bring them in line with the rest of Australia and give them 2.5% would be a reasonable offer. Otherwise you'll be forever haemorrhaging drivers.

    And for people who say just automate it with a metro to automate the whole network you would need an extra 2 pairs of tracks on:

    1) Macarthur -> Panania to join up with the Revesby quad
    2) Glenfield -> Granville
    3) Duplicate the SSFL.
    4) Central to Waterfall
    5) Northern line via Epping
    6) Western line

    and that's not even including the need to basically rebuild every station on the lines.

    Other options are:

    • Get rid of NSW trainlink and remove all stations or
    • metro everything (countrylink and NSW trainlink included)
      and
    • remove the freight network

    All three are equally ridiculous and I don't think I would see that happening if ever…

    because well, get back to me when you figure out how to run trains/metro on the same track pair.

    • counterbargainglobal on 23/01/2018 - 23:02
      +5

      Finally, someone who is not an idiot and is rational thinking.

      I am tired of hearing everyone here complain about them trying to get a better wage when in reality every single a$shole here wants the same thing (a better salary).

      They are already underpaid compared to other states so there is no argument here as to why they shouldn't get the pay rise.

      Automating everything won't help because you're still legally obliged to have someone there incase there is a malfunction or the programming goes wrong. Countries without drivers behind automated vehicles are unethical (E.g. questionable Asian countries, and yes I am saying China is unethical, you can't say they are). I'd like to see who gets blamed when there was noone there to stop an obvious fault in the system that ran over your mom or granny because of a programming anomaly.

      • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 11:27
        -1

        The difference between every "arsehole" here and the train drivers is that we don't drop the ball and hold the company ransom because of that same greed.

        Your argument vs automation can be turned the other way - if a driver hits a person, the driver goes through a review but blame isn't assigned based on who is in the seat. If automation fails and causes damages, it is still human negligence. The programmers would still be under review and may be held responsible.

        Legalities of having a driver behind the automation is arbitrary. Senate decides that. If that requirement is removed, will it be okay to have a driverless train?

        You say unethical because blame is harder to allocate. Ethics is a human construct of conscience. Blame is litigious.

        I think your ability to identify rational thinking is impaired by the lack there of.

  • kolorijo on 23/01/2018 - 23:08

    I will sleep over in the office on Sunday so I will be the only one working on Monday 🤓🤓🤓

    • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 06:40
      +1

      Great idea, beat the system by sleeping in the office!

    • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 20:43
      +1

      Like the union said, the train will go to sleep on Sunday night and won't wake up on Monday, except you mate.

      • kolorijo on 24/01/2018 - 20:57

        I am lucky enough to be told to work from home by my boss today 🤓😎

        • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 20:59
          +1

          As did I, and hopefully 6% payrise on my next yearly review lol.

        • kolorijo on 24/01/2018 - 21:40

          @blaccdong: Amen to that. Although it is easier for me to find a higher level job than waiting for the elusive 6% 😁

  • newbie12345 on 24/01/2018 - 09:51
    +2

    Its a everyone lose situation. Regardless of whether the train drivers get their demands or nothing.

    Sydney trains will still be overcrowded and unable to cope in peak hour.

    The whole Sydney train network is piecemeal of different trains, tracks and the government is spending money on those ancient Tram things (sorry, light rail as they spin it), which got removed for a reason in 1961, which the government doesn't remember.

    Trams benefits the people that live closer to the city, who already have bus services, train services and close enough to ride to work.

    And even if the government does decide to spend money on public transport in Sydney in the next decade, it won't be a proper train system. They'll probably bring up another great idea, may be even the Monorail idea again. LOL

  • ESEMCE on 24/01/2018 - 10:20
    +7

    I think OP misunderstand the point of a strike….
    It's supposed to be inconvenient. If nobody was upset, then they have no negotiating power.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 11:18
      +2

      "negotiating".

      Give us a pay rise, or else…

      Extortion.

      • ESEMCE on 24/01/2018 - 11:31
        +1

        WHat's the alternative position?
        "Give us a pay rise, please"

        • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 12:34
          +1

          I'm not paid to represent them but since they are defiantly and definitively unable to think, I'll offer some thought. Pro Bono.

          1. They strike because there allegedly aren't enough workers because there allegedly aren't enough applicants. For a higher wage, they can include service to local training centres to train more potential recruits.

          2. Review the recruitment policy to increase number of recruits.

          3. Pay adjustment but remove some responsibilities so the pay expectation matches the workload. I don't have examples for this industry, but for doctors, it can be dictating notes and having someone else convert and do the data entry.

          These are just examples of of ideas that directly addresses their supposed chief complaint. The union is trying to paint a picture of "overworked" employees but their demands just seem to be money. Money isn't the solution. It rarely is.

      • Munki on 24/01/2018 - 12:12

        Negotiation or hostage situation? Hmmm…Fine line.

  • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 11:28

    They are entitled to strike, and pay-rises, but they should be merit-based.

  • Haha Hihi Hoho on 24/01/2018 - 14:49

    anyone knows how much these guys are getting paid for? like drivers? guards? etc?

  • Lionmaru-G on 24/01/2018 - 15:26
    +1

    Pretty good pay if you ask me! Stop with the stupid pay rise!

    https://au.indeed.com/cmp/Sydney-Trains/salaries

  • Welcometosydney on 24/01/2018 - 15:34
    +4

    Time to give the jobs to so called foreigners. I believe people from Asia or around the world, will work their ass off for base salary of $75k. We, Australians are getting lazy and lazier. We whinge and complain a lot. Just suck it up, get the job done. Or you can always resign.

    • ClintonL on 24/01/2018 - 16:24
      +2

      Make it a skilled job and give visa's to skilled immigrants. Watch the pendulum swing the other way and all the workers complain that the new workers took all the overtime and that they relied on overtime to make money.

    • kev98 on 24/01/2018 - 17:31
      -5

      You’re an idiot mate. How about you give up your job to a foreigner, I’m sure there’s someone over in Vietnam who is willing to do it for less money than you earn.

      • Welcometosydney on 27/01/2018 - 12:06
        -1

        Hi Kev,

        I will give up my job to anyone including the foreigner. If I whinged a lot and asking for 6 percent rise for the next 4 years, I deserved to be sacked and get my a** whooped by my boss. Just find another job, simple as that. They already have sick leave, annual leave for 5 bloody weeks, compassionate leave, long service leave.
        What else do you want???? I guess, all the NSW should go training in thirld world country for a wake up call.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 20:41

      With the rate of immigration keep climbing each year, we'll soon to have a 2nd class citizens, those who're willing to work for peanuts, this will drive wages down, corporations will squeezed you out and put up the job vacancies to the lowest bidder. The gap between the super rich and middle class will be getting bigger, and the middle class will struggle and become the bottom of the food chain along with the peanuts migrants.
      The feds is doing a really good job to make Australia a 3rd world country in the next decade.

      • abc on 24/01/2018 - 22:39

        Sounds like that South Park ep Goobacks.

  • ClintonL on 24/01/2018 - 16:13

    Should give them a pay hike but take away their 5 weeks annual leave, railworkers having 20% more annual leave than other workers enables them to take more which adds to the staffing issues.

    • rooon on 24/01/2018 - 21:05
      +3

      Most shift workers get 5 weeks leave, in all sectors. Not just railworkers.

  • thord on 24/01/2018 - 16:42

    None of the above?

    The train drivers deserve a bit of a raise, probably not 6% (although the executives are getting 9% raises so frankly I can't blame them for asking).

    What needs to happen is the idiot state government given the boot, and more trains and more drivers hired. Christ this country needs to invest in public transport right now. It's insane how behind the rest of the world we are.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 17:41

      Investing in public transport - good.

      Using the money (that can be used to invest in public transport) to pay workers more for doing the same job? Bad.

  • [Deactivated] on 24/01/2018 - 17:55

    Seem like there are 2 key issues here:
    1. Pushing for 6% rise over 4 years
    2. Better working condition (less overtime).

    1. Invalid, it's a lot. 75k base is fair for relatively low skill task (sorry if this is offensive, factual). Engineers earn about the same, or less in their first few years of work.

    2. Valid. Poor management. Heads should roll at management level and rework the timetable to aligning to available resource.

    Additionally. The usual, pathetic government at a senior level. Not only very short sighted, but also selfish. No sound infrastructure project to cater for the population boom for the past ten years. No, a low capacity tram network is good as nothing.

    • some123 on 24/01/2018 - 19:19
      +1
      1. Invalid, it's a lot. 75k base is fair for relatively low skill task (sorry if this is offensive, factual). Engineers earn about the same, or less in their first few years of work.

      Well to be honest, how "skilled" or "unskilled" a job is (and this is subjective) does not play into it. I for one may consider myself "skilled" however I do not look down on train drivers or whatever the profession may be, we're just all using different skill sets.

      The real questions to ask is:

      a) What is the market rate for drivers (i.e. what are your competitors paying?). It can be the easiest skilled job but if your competitors are paying say $100000 dollars very unlikely going to get them for even $80000.

      In any case skilled or unskilled is subjective, I'm sure you won't be able to do any other job without training, people are trained up to do the job, noone comes in knowing everything.

      1. Well the problem is that they can't get the resourcing level they want. From what I heard their attrition level (people bailing) is either at level or higher than the drivers they are training. This comes back to 1). Alot of drivers are bailing to Brisbane and Melbourne (so NSW taxpayers money is spent training them) and we're not seeing any benefits in doing so because they don't stick around.

      If the NSW Government want to make the timetable workable, they would have to either:

      a) give them the raise
      b) Somehow convince interstate governments / private companies to cut their pay of their drivers around 75000 base.

    • syousef on 25/01/2018 - 09:55

      You don't understand the job at all. You think it's just pushing a couple of buttons: "Go" and "Stop". It doesn't take a year to train to do that. There is much MUCH more to operating a train safely without impacting other trains and the timetable. You also will be asked to work in different places at different hours at a moment's notice. And that's the tip of the iceberg. How many engineers regularly get called out at 2am to start a shift at 3am or 4am?

      People who have only a child's understanding of what it takes to do a job really shouldn't comment.

  • zzzsianzzz on 24/01/2018 - 20:13
    +1

    I am very interested to see how long this will last. The longer the debacle and more disruption the better, it will force the current government to do more changes and shake the transport NSW even harder. Its going to be exciting.. Short term gain for a long term loss ..

  • ozlab on 25/01/2018 - 08:07

    This is the side effect of a country having minimum salary that is too high. Everyone wants to earn more and more because everything becomes more and more expensive. Everyone wants to be treated like a baby and cry when not having enough money. I'm not sure who is responsible in driving the minimum salary too high.

    • syousef on 25/01/2018 - 09:51
      +6

      Other way around mate. People want to be able to afford the basics. When electricity and gas prices double, and a lot of necessities go up by much more than inflation, failing to get an increase in minimum wage equates to becoming the working poor. If you want to blame anything, take a good look at privitisation. Now instead of being run inefficiently by government, services are being run inefficiently by the private sector who then take a huge cut on top.

  • thetrain on 25/01/2018 - 09:54
    +2

    To everyone who thinks that train drivers have it good or think they can do it better:

    Apply here, no prior experience required

    https://iworkfor.nsw.gov.au/job/trainee-train-driver-98834

  • nothommus on 25/01/2018 - 13:51

    SBS is reporting this strike is no longer going ahead by order of the fair work commission?

    • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2018 - 17:57
      -1

      That's right, they can kiss their pay rise good bye for good.

  • testert on 25/01/2018 - 14:21
    +2

    http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/fair-work-commis…

    Fair Work Commission calls off Sydney train strike - "The order comes into effect at 6pm tonight."

    • kev98 on 25/01/2018 - 15:55

      Didn’t realise we were living in communist China 🇨🇳

      • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2018 - 17:38
        -1

        Pretty sure the demand for a higher pay to reflect what everyone else is getting (including their superiors) is fundamentally communist.

        Striking (anarchist) for equal outcomes (communist).

      • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2018 - 17:56

        What do you expect? refusing to go to work and get 6% pay rise?? I would fire my staff on the spot if they behave like that.

        We are living in a real world, not a dream world. Don't give a damn about commies, democrats, socialists, fascists.

        • linkii on 25/01/2018 - 20:31

          Most train drivers have moved interstate to QLD and Victora where the pay is 30% higher for train drivers.

          There has also been a hiring freeze for the past year, cutting by the NSW government to make the budget look better. There is now a shortage of drivers and all of them must work overtime just to service the current timetable.

          Services cut to Saturday timetable just cause workers refuse to work overtime. So all workers must work overtime just to services a normal timetable.
          http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-rail-strike-commuters-warne…

          Shows how under staff Sydney trains is. Everyone is quitting now.

        • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2018 - 20:47
          -3

          @ko0l: They got paid for overtime. Most office work, especially IT don't get overtime, not even a thank you when you work your ar*e off trying to meet project deadline.

  • AbsX on 25/01/2018 - 15:09

    Suck it up princesses and get to work on Monday like the rest of us. The welfare of Sydneys citizens is not a bargaining chip for your pay disputes. Hope the RBTU can reach a peaceful resolution with the government during the 6 week stike ban.

    • zzzsianzzz on 25/01/2018 - 17:15

      time for other unions to come out of the woods.. whatever rail has, the same should go for other government services unions..thats when the parties start.. try closing emergency services, police stations and hospitals.. :D

      • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2018 - 17:45
        +1

        Hospitals will never strike the same way the RTBU has.

        Look at recent SA public doctor's strike. They ensured the continued operations and care for patients before they executed the strike. Only a small number of elective surgeries we're cancelled. Emergency staff did not walk out.

        The doctors were rejecting a 1.5% wage increase and was referencing 2.5% that their ancillary team members were receiving. They were indexing against inflation, and those working beneath their level of authority and responsibility.

  • [Deactivated] on 25/01/2018 - 17:53
    -2

    They should have voted Yes on the SMS polling. Now I hope they get nothing!!

    Those who planning the strikes should learn their place at the bottom of the food chains, soon train drivers jobs will be obsolete, you should work hard while you can and enjoy 1% pay rise like the rest of us, its better than pay freeze.

    Now suck it up and go back to work on Monday, or else!!

  • R1ngSt1nger on 26/01/2018 - 08:27
    +2

    There's something severely wrong with our country if it becomes illegal to withdraw labour.

    • Cartman2530 on 27/01/2018 - 10:15

      The government could only do it in this instance because of the Essential Services Act 1988. If it were another sector such as manufacturing, it most likely wouldn't be able to suspend a strike, unless the governor has declared it an "essential service".

      https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/act/1988/41/full

      Excerpt:

      An Act to protect the community from disruption to essential services; and for related purposes.

      4 Essential services
      (1) For the purposes of this Act, a service is an essential service if it consists of any of the following:
      (a) the production, supply or distribution of any form of energy, power or fuel or of energy, power or fuel resources,
      (b) the public transportation of persons or the transportation of freight (including the provision of rail infrastructure for those purposes),
      (c) the provision of fire-fighting services,
      (d) the provision of public health services (including hospital or medical services),
      (e) the provision of ambulance services,
      (f) the production, supply or distribution of pharmaceutical products,
      (g) the provision of garbage, sanitary cleaning or sewerage services,
      (h) the supply or distribution of water,
      (i) the conduct of a welfare institution,
      (j) the conduct of a prison,
      (k) a service declared to be an essential service under subsection (2),
      (l) a service comprising the supply of goods or services necessary for providing any service referred to in paragraphs (a)–(k).
      (2) The Governor may, by order published on the NSW legislation website, declare any service to be an essential service for the purposes of this Act.
      (2A) To avoid doubt, the regulation of bulk water supply by the Water Administration Ministerial Corporation in the exercise of its rights to the control, use and flow of water is capable of being declared to be an essential service for the purposes of this Act.
      (3) Such an order may not be made unless the Minister has certified to the Governor that the service is essential in the public interest.
      (4) Any such order takes effect on the day on which it is published on the NSW legislation website.

      You would think that the union would know that the government had this ace up their sleeve considering its been in force for 30 years.

      • R1ngSt1nger on 27/01/2018 - 11:48

        But why did they approve the action in the first place then?

        • Cartman2530 on 27/01/2018 - 12:08
          +1

          Dunno, govt probably thought it would be resolved before the strike happened and wouldn't get to this point. As soon as the strike action was announced its possible the govt may have already applied to the fair work commission to suspend the strike, its just taken this long to move through the legal process. I assume they only invoke the act as a last resort though.

          The union is being unreasonable, if it wasn't about the money as they claim, they should be pushing for the old timetable to be reinstated to reduce overtime and settle for 2.5% over 3 years.

          If the train drivers think they can get better pay and conditions elsewhere, do what everyone else does and either resign and move or put up and shut up.

    • [Deactivated] on 28/01/2018 - 17:17

      Same can be said if employment conditions (ie showing for work) can be breached without consequence.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join