4 Network Rail - TSSA

Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association Claim for Improvements to Pay & Conditions of Service for Bands 1 - 4 Network Rail April 2016

Page 1

Introduction This document sets out TSSA’s claim for improvements to rates of pay and various other conditions of service for Bands 1 - 4 employed by Network Rail in respect of the forthcoming negotiations. 1) A substantial increase to basic pay With effect from the pay anniversary date 1 July 2016, TSSA is seeking a substantive increase in the basic rates of pay and other allowances that will lead to a material improvement in the standard of living of our members. Pay is obviously the main element of this claim; however we are also asking Network Rail to meet TSSA members’ aspirations in further areas as set out below: 2) To increase all pay zone limits by the same percentage as the agreed average increase in pay from this negotiation. 3) Extension of the non-compulsory redundancies commitment to include Bands 1-4 bargaining group. 4) Increase the basic annual leave entitlement by 2 days 5) Review and substantially improve London and South East Allowances 6) Address the ever increasing cost of travel with improvements to travel facilities 7) Change pay anniversary date from 1st July 2017 to 1st Jan 2017

1) A substantial increase to basic pay It is clear that there are very significant skill shortages of railway skills. Increases in market value of these roles have considerably increased over recent years which Network Rail annual pay agreements have not matched. TSSA believes that Network Rail needs to significantly increase rates of pay and conditions in order to recover the relative decline in pay in comparison with successive more favourable pay agreements for Band 5-8 roles which has closed

Page 2

the gap (and in some cases overlapped) in the pay Bands. We are looking for a substantial increase above the rate of the annual increase in the Retail Prices Index (RPI), taking into account current pressures on household expenditure and other settlements in the industry. 2) To increase all pay zone limits by the same percentage as the agreed increase in pay from this negotiation. Fundamental to our pay claim is the requirement that all of the Zone limits of all Bands and Ranges are increased by the percentage figure in pay from this negotiation. These pay ranges were set at market rates in 2014. Network Rail refused to increase these pay ranges at the delayed introduction of Your Pay or in pay negotiations last year. It will not be acceptable for these pay ranges to remain static and fall further behind market rates. 3) Extension of the non-compulsory redundancies commitment to include Bands 1-4 bargaining group. In this period of growing uncertainty for our members, both within Network Rail and within the country as a whole, the primary concern for our members, along with the value of their salary, is continued job security. We require that current agreements to guarantee no compulsory redundancies for Bands 5-8 and equivalent staff are extended to Bands 1 – 4 also. Doing so will mitigate against the negative impact of uncertainty and demonstrate the importance that the company places on employing experienced staff who are productive and focussed rather than preoccupied with uncertainty, instability and insecurity. Our members have been growing increasingly concerned by the surrounding climate of insecurity facing Network Rail colleagues as well as friends and family outside the industry. There are still concerns presented by the Shaw report and other reviews into

Page 3

Network Rail structure which can only increase anxiety and stress. The company has correctly identified the value to the business of making this commitment to Band 5-8 staff the same should be realised for Band 1-4 employees. 4) Increase the basic annual leave entitlement by 2 days Over successive years Network Rail has allowed remuneration for Band 1-4 to fall significantly in comparison with Band 5-8 colleagues and outside industry. Our members have ever increasing workloads and are regularly expected to work beyond their contacted hours often with no overtime payment. Network Rail’s goal is for a better work life balance for employees; this would go a significant way to achieve this. 5) Review and substantially improve London and South East Allowances With regard to employees working in London and the South-East of England, TSSA considers that the current allowance/weighting does not reflect the additional cost of living and working in the region and needs to be increased substantially. There is absolutely no doubt that London still is, and for the foreseeable future will remain by far the most expensive area of the UK to live and work. Comparison of the Network Rail rate with other public sector regional allowances: Network Rail - £2400 * Metropolitan Police

£6663

NHS Inner London

Inner £4117 - £6342, outer £3483 - £4439

ACAS

£4040

British Gas inner London

£4800

(Source LRD Income Data Services) *The London and South East Allowance has not increased since 2009. Within the same period there has been an increase in the cost of living by 19.5% (Ref – Ave Annual RPI figures from 2010 – 2015 http://documents.hants.gov.uk/finance/rpiannual.pdf )

Page 4

“Your Pay” was introduced as base pay only. The additional cost of living impact of living or working in London and the South East are solely met by this allowance. We expect the South East Allowance to increase at the same level of London Allowance reflecting the cost of living and working in the region which has risen to the same extent due to the lack of affordable housing with London. In addition we are also seeking South East Allowance to be applicable to Milton Keynes; The Quadrant as this office clearly remains in the South East zone. 6) Address the ever increasing cost of travel with Improvements to travel facilities As outlined in previous pay submissions, TSSA members continue to feel very strongly with regard to the erosion of the value of their travel facilities and the persistence of a two-tier entitlement structure that is unfair and divisive. In previous years Network Rail began a dialogue with ATOC to explore the costs of providing travel facilities for all staff. We seek a commitment from Network Rail to approach ATOC with appropriate proposals which would work towards the removal of this artificial divide. We see the increasing closer working between Train Operators and Network Rail as an opportunity to bring travel facilities in line with a more integrated railway approach and once again move towards providing a valuable and attractive benefit to those who work for Network Rail. As a minimum we believe that free travel to/from work is something which could be provided. TSSA welcomes the provision by Network Rail of partial subsidy of season ticket travel, but believe there are crucial improvements in the provision of support which can be made. In particular we seek the removal of the cap on the subsidised amount, which unfairly penalises staff travelling on more expensive routes. In previous years TSSA has been informed by Network Rail that this does not affect a large number of staff, and as such we believe that it is all the more important that this unfairness be rectified. TSSA considers that these problems are not going

Page 5

to go away and urges Network Rail to seek to resolve the issue as part of these negotiations. TSSA also seeks improvements in the support given to those who are required to move location as a result of re-organisations and office closures. Currently travel support is only given for two years after which time the full cost (less any season ticket subsidy) must be borne by the individual despite in many cases there being no suitable roles at a closer location. TSSA is of the view that it would be fairer and beneficial to staff retention to have a longer period of travel support, and consideration be given to a gradual reduction over later years. 7) Change pay anniversary date from 1st July 2017 to 1st Jan 2017 It was apparent from last year’s meetings that Network Rail was unwilling to submit an offer to start negotiations until the conclusion of the Band 5-8 negotiation. This created unnecessary frustration and a potential breakdown of industrial relations for the Band 1-4 bargaining group. We can see no logical reason why different negotiations with different benchmarks and outcomes are required for these bargaining groups. To ensure a sense of parity and fairness in comparison to these negotiations for the different bargaining groups we are seeking to align the anniversary dates and period of negotiations for both groups.

Page 6