‘Ave yer done?

I live close to the route of the LNER rail link to London from Scotland along the East Coast.  The franchise previously held by Virgin was nationalised four years ago. Like other rail lines, it has been in a long-running dispute over pay by the unions – RMT and ASLEF who have called intermittent strikes to exert pressure.  The previous government made offers of settlement but they were attached to conditions which were an attempt to get rid of some of the more archaic work practices which had been agreed over the years – for example, if a manager speaks to a train driver while the driver is having a break, the driver can start his break again from the beginning -  even if the manager just says: “Hello”.  The unions resisted any change.

The new Transport Secretary, Louise Haigh has offered ASLEF, which represents the train drivers, a three-year 15% overall settlement with no conditions attached to it.  ASLEF has recommended acceptance.  Haigh suggested that the cost of settling was less than the cost of the dispute.  Let me examine that.

First of all, it took less than a day before the leader of the RMT – the union representing most of the other rail workers - made it clear that anything less than an equal settlement would not be accepted.  Precedent is becoming an easily used tactic in the public sector amongst a workforce including doctors, teachers and civil servants all of whom have been offered unconditional above-inflation increases in pay in the last few weeks.

Next, ASLEF announced a prolonged weekend work to rule on LNER as it said that there had been a breakdown in agreements between the union and the rail operator.  This is a dispute apparently linked to bonuses paid to management for driving trains during the ASLEF strike amongst other things.  Morale is said by the union to be “in the gutter” amongst its members who will earn £69,000 a year for a four-day 35 hour week.

What can negotiators learn from this?

First, anyone who has been on a Scotwork course will always remember the concept of the “elk steak” – the concession made without conditions. They will also remember that this kind of open-handed generosity will rarely, if ever, be met with gratitude.  It is likely to lead to requests for more of the same.  It remains to be seen if the deals offered to junior doctors, civil servants and train drivers create more demand elsewhere when they might have been linked to changes in working practices in return for settlements. My prediction is that the tactic of conceding demands because it is cheaper than having industrial action will simply encourage more demands and more threats of action – “if they get something for nothing, we want it too” as the RMT have said.  However it works out, it is unlikely to be the cheap option.

Second, it is a very good practice when you negotiate to ensure that all issues are on the table and that, wherever possible, they are linked and resolved together. Using a simple expression like “Is that everything that we need to resolve between us” should flush out issues which have not emerged or are being held back to exert further pressure in the end game when the prospect of abandoning all the good work to get a consensus can and often lead to further, usually unconditional, concessions.  In Yorkshire where I am from, we say: “’Ave yer done?”.  The lesson here, of course is always to have a wish list to counter the tactic.

Government ministries littered with elk steaks and representatives getting to the end of negotiations and saying, like the fictional detective, Columbo, “just one more thing” does not bode well for future negotiations.