If RPI is not relevant, then why are GNE including it in an official statement? They can't have it both ways.

They are using the words of Unite against them

https://www.unitetheunion.org/news-event...tastrophe/

So in terms of meal breaks, on low cost which is what most new drivers, and low cost depots are on it’s an hour a day, if you get onto paid rota it’s 30 mins.

If you’re ex Arriva or similar and we’re tupe’d in you are on paid meal breaks. Historically tupe’d drivers have always tended to be an afterthought in pay talks as they want them off their tupe’d terms and conditions and onto standard contracts.

I’m just thankful I’m out of it now, but fair play to the lads and lasses sticking up for their rights. I’m not sure what standardisation they are talking about but it smacks of go aheads hatchet man Nigel’s previous attempts at GNW, and we knew this was coming 3-4 years ago, and other depots laughed at us saying it wouldn’t happen here.

So in terms of meal breaks, on low cost which is what most new drivers, and low cost depots are on it’s an hour a day, if you get onto paid rota it’s 30 mins.

If you’re ex Arriva or similar and we’re tupe’d in you are on paid meal breaks. Historically tupe’d drivers have always tended to be an afterthought in pay talks as they want them off their tupe’d terms and conditions and onto standard contracts.

I’m just thankful I’m out of it now, but fair play to the lads and lasses sticking up for their rights. I’m not sure what standardisation they are talking about but it smacks of go aheads hatchet man Nigel’s previous attempts at GNW, and we knew this was coming 3-4 years ago, and other depots laughed at us saying it wouldn’t happen here.

“Low cost” was abolished in last year’s pay deal where some drivers were given a 25%+ pay increase.

All the drivers on this rota were moved from 1hr unpaid to 30 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So in terms of meal breaks, on low cost which is what most new drivers, and low cost depots are on it’s an hour a day, if you get onto paid rota it’s 30 mins. 

If you’re ex Arriva or similar and we’re tupe’d in you are on paid meal breaks.  Historically tupe’d drivers have always tended to be an afterthought in pay talks as they want them off their tupe’d terms and conditions and onto standard contracts.

I’m just thankful I’m out of it now, but fair play to the lads and lasses sticking up for their rights.  I’m not sure what standardisation they are talking about but it smacks of go aheads hatchet man Nigel’s previous attempts at GNW, and we knew this was coming 3-4 years ago, and other depots laughed at us saying it wouldn’t happen here. 

To be honest, I thought this would be down to NF. But after reading all of the spin that's been put out, I'm of the definate opinion, this is all down to BM. 

There's no way NF would pin all this on to someone else after the shit shows in Employee Relations at both AY or GNW. 
I mean, what sort of person would do that to someone who has almost been a disciple to him for the last however many years? 
No, this has definitely got BM written all over it.

One thing that's always interested me is the low cost units surely are illegal.

It's literally the same problem which the councils are going through, I don't understand how legally someone can be paid a different wage for doing the exact same job as someone else in the same company.

Surprised there hasn't been a claim in for it and wanting money reimbursed. Would be a right hot mess aswell.

One thing that's always interested me is the low cost units surely are illegal.

It's literally the same problem which the councils are going through, I don't understand how legally someone can be paid a different wage for doing the exact same job as someone else in the same company.

Surprised there hasn't been a claim in for it and wanting money reimbursed. Would be a right hot mess aswell.

Because management love their employees infighting amongst themselves so it deflects some of the attention from the company. It used to be on the basis that some drivers/depots only ran council contracted routes so there wasn't enough money in the pot to pay them more money that drivers on commercially viable routes got.

@Dan - sorry I've been out of it for nearly 2 years now - at least a little has changed then.

@Andreos1 - Leopard changing his spots - Nah don't think so

Because management love their employees infighting amongst themselves so it deflects some of the attention from the company.  It used to be on the basis that some drivers/depots only ran council contracted routes so there wasn't enough money in the pot to pay them more money that drivers on commercially viable routes got.

@Dan - sorry I've been out of it for nearly 2 years now - at least a little has changed then.

@Andreos1 - Leopard changing his spots - Nah don't think so

Aye thought that was the case. Not sure how well that would stack up in court though mind. You drive this Streetlite and you drive that Streetlite but because this route is a council contract you're paid less. 

Sounds like a right equal pay problem to me, no wonder they ditched it before it with the stuff coming out now. 

They're doing exactly the same job without doubt imo

I think the equal pay thing is a red herring, I always thought it was only if there was discrimination against a protected characteristic? A well known case a few year ago involved Birmingham Council. The Bin Men, predominantly male, were paid more than Dinner Ladies, predominantly female. The Dinner Ladies argued that their work was of equal value to the Bin Men and so should be paid the same. They won.

It's not uncommon for companies in any industry to alter their contracts to new staff. I was always under the impression that a hangover of the split of Go Ahead Northern and then bringing it all back under GNE was that GNE were left with a dizzying amount of pay scales/terms/conditions etc which over the years they've moved to harmonise.

To be honest, I thought this would be down to NF. But after reading all of the spin that's been put out, I'm of the definate opinion, this is all down to BM. 

There's no way NF would pin all this on to someone else after the shit shows in Employee Relations at both AY or GNW. 
I mean, what sort of person would do that to someone who has almost been a disciple to him for the last however many years? 
No, this has definitely got BM written all over it.

I'm not so sure. After the GNW fiasco, it'd probably suit NF to have someone else willing to play bad cop. I'd suspect he's still the organ grinder.

One thing that's always interested me is the low cost units surely are illegal.

It's literally the same problem which the councils are going through, I don't understand how legally someone can be paid a different wage for doing the exact same job as someone else in the same company.

Surprised there hasn't been a claim in for it and wanting money reimbursed. Would be a right hot mess aswell.

It's not. The equal pay claims are based on women not only being paid less, but being employed on less favourable terms, e.g. being excluded from bonus and pension schemes.

Whilst having two tier workforces like low cost units is divisive, it's not outlawed. If it was only women employed to low cost units however, then there'd be an equal pay claim in that.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Also if they were working in a lower paid unit assuming that meant Peterlee Depot wasn't it there choice to work there, they could have moved

Also if they were working in a lower paid unit assuming that meant Peterlee Depot wasn't it there choice to work there, they could have moved

Easier said than done!

---

Potential strike dates:

7 full days from Saturday 30th Sept
Then
7 full days from Saturday 14th October

Easier said than done!

---

Potential strike dates:

7 full days from Saturday 30th Sept
Then
7 full days from Saturday 14th October

Due to the anti-Trade Union laws, they'll have had to have given notice for w/c 30th today.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Out of somewhat worried curiosity, are GNE National Express drivers affected by this?

Out of somewhat worried curiosity, are GNE National Express drivers affected by this?

No

No

Thank you. The in-laws fly from Gatwick that week. Get the coach down I suggest, change at VCS. Would have been definitely off the Christmas card list if all went sideways!

I wouldn't be suprised if the NatEx coaches are housed elsewhere during the strike to avoid the drivers of the NatEx coaches crossing picket lines.

Because management love their employees infighting amongst themselves so it deflects some of the attention from the company.  It used to be on the basis that some drivers/depots only ran council contracted routes so there wasn't enough money in the pot to pay them more money that drivers on commercially viable routes got.

@Dan - sorry I've been out of it for nearly 2 years now - at least a little has changed then.

@Andreos1 - Leopard changing his spots - Nah don't think so  

I'm not so sure. After the GNW fiasco, it'd probably suit NF to have someone else willing to play bad cop. I'd suspect he's still the organ grinder. 


It's not. The equal pay claims are based on women not only being paid less, but being employed on less favourable terms, e.g. being excluded from bonus and pension schemes.

Whilst having two tier workforces like low cost units is divisive, it's not outlawed. If it was only women employed to low cost units however, then there'd be an equal pay claim in that.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Sometimes sarcasm comes across in written format.
Other times it doesn't. 
This was one of those occasions. 

It's pretty obvious who is pulling the strings here and BM (willingly or not), is clearly the one attached to the end of those strings.

It's not. The equal pay claims are based on women not only being paid less, but being employed on less favourable terms, e.g. being excluded from bonus and pension schemes.

Whilst having two tier workforces like low cost units is divisive, it's not outlawed. If it was only women employed to low cost units however, then there'd be an equal pay claim in that.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

That's fair didn't realise it was women only. Mind there badly needs to be new rules imo where you can't have 2 people, in the same job, on different wages with the same experience and everything else been identical but that's for a politics thread.

I'm curious to know why GNE drivers think they can get a better outcome than Unite achieved for their Arriva neighbors (a one year barely above RPI rise, and without preventing major job losses) when that dispute had the advantage of drivers being able to say, well, we'll just go work for GNE if you don't give us what we want, and while inflation was already coming down, it was stil in the headline grabbing "double digits".

RPI was actually 13.4% in January when GMB laughably described their 11% outcome for Stagecoach Sunderland as a "massive" win, coming only after drivers had to strike for multiple days. I dare say GNE drivers won't be issuing the threat of saying they will go work for Stagecoach instead.

Unite did secure the very impressive 16% three year deal in the West Midlands in March, better even than London drivers despite rents being markedly lower, but it came at huge cost, in both the reputation of drivers and in the inevitable job losses, now and in the future, given this huge pay award is only sustainable with the fare rises and service cuts that followed.

Unite's argument that the cash rich owning group could well afford this rise was debunked immediately, because as everyone knows, unlike governments, capitalism is loath to funnel cash from profitable units to unprofitable ones unless there is a clear and obvious benefit. Paying West Midlands bus drivers more has no real benefit in these times of stagnation and cuts, even less now there is no other company in the region paying more.

That company will gradually bleed routes and drivers until the distorting effect of your costs not matching your revenues has abated, by which time several drivers will have defaulted on their mortgages and will be working in warehouses on minimum wage, wondering where the benefit to them was from that collective action.

While obviously GNE would rather drivers drove buses than stand on pocket lines, it isn't like they have any real reputation left as a company to protect, the network and service is already in disarray, but things would have to get so much worse before the shareholders worried about permanently losing their market and geographic dominance, the latter actually being more of a millstone when your costs are high and workers are the primary obstacles to efficiency savings.

I'm curious to know why GNE drivers think they can get a better outcome than Unite achieved for their Arriva neighbors (a one year barely above RPI rise, and without preventing major job losses) when that dispute had the advantage of drivers being able to say, well, we'll just go work for GNE if you don't give us what we want, and while inflation was already coming down, it was stil in the headline grabbing "double digits".

RPI was actually 13.4% in January when GMB laughably described their 11% outcome for Stagecoach Sunderland as a "massive" win, coming only after drivers had to strike for multiple days. I dare say GNE drivers won't be issuing the threat of saying they will go work for Stagecoach instead.

Unite did secure the very impressive 16% three year deal in the West Midlands in March, better even than London drivers despite rents being markedly lower, but it came at huge cost, in both the reputation of drivers and in the inevitable job losses, now and in the future, given this huge pay award is only sustainable with the fare rises and service cuts that followed.

Unite's argument that the cash rich owning group could well afford this rise was debunked immediately, because as everyone knows, unlike governments, capitalism is loath to funnel cash from profitable units to unprofitable ones unless there is a clear and obvious benefit. Paying West Midlands bus drivers more has no real benefit in these times of stagnation and cuts, even less now there is no other company in the region paying more.

That company will gradually bleed routes and drivers until the distorting effect of your costs not matching your revenues has abated, by which time several drivers will have defaulted on their mortgages and will be working in warehouses on minimum wage, wondering where the benefit to them was from that collective action.

While obviously GNE would rather drivers drove buses than stand on pocket lines, it isn't like they have any real reputation left as a company to protect, the network and service is already in disarray, but things would have to get so much worse before the shareholders worried about permanently losing their market and geographic dominance, the latter actually being more of a millstone when your costs are high and workers are the primary obstacles to efficiency savings.

I hate this argument. Bus drivers aren't loyal to GoNorthEast and have no reason to do so. If the work was actually good and they were treat with respect and good terms and conditions then that argument could be valid. 

In reality though they're treat like shit and are getting their terms eroded as part of this pay package. 

You're comparing to Arriva here but they're paid more than GNE still and their pay package was over 6 month ago and inflation has consistently been above 6% so using that metric GNE drivers should be 6% above Arriva not the other way. 

Also is there something wrong with warehouse work now as you've just snubbed them when arguably the work life balance for working in one is 10x better than being a bus driver with fixed shifts and not having to deal with customers alone. Money isn't everything to life.

Also again just to add we don't live in America so for some of the older employees a nice redundancy package would actually be quite attractive and the chance to escape and work somewhere else. They've got the skills to walk straight into Stagecoach or Arriva who are desperate for drivers...

Money isn't everything to life.

Then maybe they should just take the offer and get on with it...

I hate this argument. Bus drivers aren't loyal to GoNorthEast and have no reason to do so. If the work was actually good and they were treat with respect and good terms and conditions then that argument could be valid. 

In reality though they're treat like shit and are getting their terms eroded as part of this pay package. 

You're comparing to Arriva here but they're paid more than GNE still and their pay package was over 6 month ago and inflation has consistently been above 6% so using that metric GNE drivers should be 6% above Arriva not the other way. 

Also is there something wrong with warehouse work now as you've just snubbed them when arguably the work life balance for working in one is 10x better than being a bus driver with fixed shifts and not having to deal with customers alone. Money isn't everything to life.

Also again just to add we don't live in America so for some of the older employees a nice redundancy package would actually be quite attractive and the chance to escape and work somewhere else. They've got the skills to walk straight into Stagecoach or Arriva who are desperate for drivers...

Some drivers who got severance when Chester closed did exactly this. I know of at least one who is now driving for Arriva at Durham.

Then maybe they should just take the offer and get on with it...

I don't think the strike is purely money based. Believe they're being forced to sign worse terms and part of the package and that's as much of a stumbling block than anything else.

Some drivers who got severance when Chester closed did exactly this. I know of at least one who is now driving for Arriva at Durham.

Don't blame them for doing so either, I know a lot of people on here seem to think bus drivers should have some loyalty towards their employer but it clearly doesn't exist in the other way. If I could get a freebie and move elsewhere which potentially is a better location to do the same job, then why not. You're moving regardless.

I don't think the strike is purely money based. Believe they're being forced to sign worse terms and part of the package and that's as much of a stumbling block than anything else.

The strike is purely for theatre, and tbh I think the general public's perception of strikes is getting worse and worse.

The strike is purely for theatre, and tbh I think the general public's perception of strikes is getting worse and worse.

Not sure as people are sick of the government / the transport companies more than anything. Both just an interlinked mess. 

Usually I'd agree tho but other than Tory apologists I'd say most people generally support the strikes.

It is well known drivers are no longer loyal to their employer. It begs the question, why does Unite think workers in more profitable areas of a very large group should be subsidizing the less profitable workers in other parts? It is well known that money cannot buy loyalty and most certainly doesn't increase productivity, so what exactly is the employer actually getting for this above inflation pay increase?

It is well known drivers are no longer loyal to their employer. It begs the question, why does Unite think workers in more profitable areas of a very large group should be subsidizing the less profitable workers in other parts? It is well known that money cannot buy loyalty and most certainly doesn't increase productivity, so what exactly is the employer actually getting for this above inflation pay increase?

Because that is exactly what collective bargaining is?

I think GNE have to focus on retention as its just getting worse with the driver shortage, more and more are leaving at such a high rate and they had a massive pay rise in the past year and one upcoming.

Think about how much money they spent on Route Learning, Driver Training only to do it again, and again, and again.

If drivers are leaving at such a high rate its not just because customers (a lot of the time theyre not even that bad) yes they can be with the youths, however if I was in a position of management and im having 20 drivers (just a guesstimate) leave weekly i would be questioning what I can do better and that should have been asked 10 years ago

It is well known drivers are no longer loyal to their employer. It begs the question, why does Unite think workers in more profitable areas of a very large group should be subsidizing the less profitable workers in other parts? It is well known that money cannot buy loyalty and most certainly doesn't increase productivity, so what exactly is the employer actually getting for this above inflation pay increase?

Excellent point Ben. 

Put that in your next badly worded press release 

#betterthanever!

It is well known drivers are no longer loyal to their employer. It begs the question, why does Unite think workers in more profitable areas of a very large group should be subsidizing the less profitable workers in other parts? It is well known that money cannot buy loyalty and most certainly doesn't increase productivity, so what exactly is the employer actually getting for this above inflation pay increase?

Surely at the moment it all about supply and demand?  Demand for drivers is currently outstripping supply, therefore it is going to cost more to retain the ones you’ve got and to attract new ones.  It is not about loyalty at all. 

If GNE want to run a full service they need a full complement of drivers