Train strikes: Why the numbers don’t add up to a rail deal

Published

2 years ago

January 6, 2023

admin

Rail minister Huw Merriman will meet union leaders including Mick Lynch of the RMT on Monday after three weeks of unseasonal disruption left the two sides apparently as far apart as ever.

While both say they are ready to talk, unions remain committed to further strikes if required and the government is legislating to limit industrial action, an inauspicious background to the first direct talks between ministers and bosses since November.

Ultimately, progress will depend on concessions on both sides, but at its heart are financial considerations that have changed radically in the three years since COVID-19.

These changes, driven by necessity and government strategy, have fundamentally altered the incentives for the constituent parts of the fiendishly complex rail network to do a deal.

Understanding those changes may help explain why a dispute that began in high summer seems no closer to resolution in the depths of the following winter.

The pandemic has dramatically and perhaps permanently changed the financial model. In 2019-20, the last full year before COVID struck, there were 1.74 billion passenger journeys generating £10.4bn in fares. Government subsidy amounted to £6.5bn.

The following year COVID lockdowns and working from home saw the position flip, with a meagre 388 million passenger journeys producing just £1.8bn in fares, and government support to keep the wheels turning rising to £16.5bn.

Even in the year to March 2022, with the pandemic in abeyance and recovery under way, there were fewer than a billion journeys, fares revenue was still below £6bn, and the government was putting in £13.3bn, more than double the pre-COVID cost to taxpayers.

So when Network Rail says the railways no longer have the revenue to meet inflation-matching wage demands they are at least half right.

Passenger fares revenue has plummeted.

Yet the most recent pay offers, of 5% plus 4% over two years from Network Rail, and 4% plus 4% from the train operators, are below the 5.9% fare rise that will apply from March.

But there is another equally important change underlying this dispute; where that revenue goes.

Revenue risk from train operators removed

In response to the pandemic the government tore up franchise agreements with privately owned train operators and replaced them with service contracts, removing at a stroke the revenue risk from train operators.

Instead of fares going to train operators who paid guaranteed revenue to the government, fares now go directly to the Department for Transport, which pays the operator to run services.

Crucially though, the train operators still get paid when workers are on strike, receiving compensation for lost revenue of £20m-£25m a day. The RMT claims that adds up to £340m paid by the government to private companies since the dispute began.

The Department of Transport would not provide a figure for total compensation paid but did say: “We do not tend to penalise the train operators for failing to run a full service on a strike day given it’s not the train operators who have opted to strike.”

A changed calculation for Network Rail

While the new contracts have reduced the incentive for train companies to do a deal by removing their risk, the restructuring has also changed the calculation for Network Rail, involved in its own dispute with the RMT.

Under the old franchise system, if trains could not run because Network Rail signalling and station staff were on strike, it compensated the operators for lost fares.

That meant that for train operators, Network Rail and the unions there was a basic calculation when considering a pay deal.

If the pay demand from workers was cheaper in the long run than the lost revenue or compensation cost of strike action, a deal could, and usually would, be done.

That basic calculation has helped rail workers remain one of the few public sector groups whose pay has kept track with inflation since 2010. With revenues collapsing since COVID that balance of incentives has changed.

Cost of industrial action

Taxpayers are now the ones bearing the overwhelming cost of industrial action, not the employers, meaning it is ministers and the Treasury whose appetite for financial pain is being tested.

On the union’s side it is still workers who pay for strike action in lost pay and their resolve will be weighing on the minds of bosses and ministers this weekend.

Rail workers are paid on four-week shift cycles and each of the six waves of strike action so far has taken place in a separate cycle limiting the loss of wages from a single wage slip.

The cost is adding up for RMT members even with support from strike funds that ease the blow. They have lost up to 19 days pay since the first strikes in June, and at least four days pay in each of December and January, a significant hit for anyone.

As Mick Lynch considers his next move he will be weighing up how much more his members can bear. They have shown remarkable solidarity since the dispute began but in a cost of living squeeze it may not be infinite.

Barriers to a deal

There are many issues that could prevent a deal, not least the new demands to change certain working practices unions believe have been deliberately introduced to derail progress.

The planned restructuring of the entire network under a new body ‘Great British Railways’ is also muddying the waters.

Political support for the Boris Johnson-Grant Shapps reform has fluctuated with the political chaos in Downing Street, leaving the industry uncertain if and when permanent change will come, and the railways effectively being run and paid for by ministers who claim to oppose nationalisation.

In the short term though this dispute may come down to who has the higher threshold for the financial pain: the Treasury paying hundreds of millions in compensation, or rail workers sacrificing their pay.

Business

Reynolds to hold talks with bosses amid business budget backlash

Published

3 hours ago

November 1, 2024

admin

Reynolds to hold talks with bosses amid business budget backlash

The business secretary will next week hold talks with dozens of private sector bosses as the government contends with a significant corporate backlash to Labour’s first fiscal event in nearly 15 years.

Sky News has learnt that executives have been invited to join a conference call on Monday with Jonathan Reynolds, in what will represent his first meaningful engagement with employers since Wednesday’s budget statement.

Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, unsettled financial markets with plans for billions of pounds in extra borrowing, and unnerved business leaders by saying she would raise an additional £25bn annually by hiking their national insurance contributions.

An increase in employer NICs had been trailed by officials in advance of the budget, but the lowering of the threshold to just £5,000 has triggered forecasts of a wave of redundancies and even insolvencies across labour-intensive industries.

Sectors such as retail and hospitality, which employ substantial numbers of part-time workers, have been particularly vocal in their condemnation of the move.

On Friday, the Financial Times published comments made by the chief executive of Barclays in which he defended Ms Reeves.

“I think they’ve done an admirable job of balancing spending, borrowing and taxation in order to drive the fundamental objective of growth,” CS Venkatakrishnan said.

His was a rare voice among prominent business figures in backing the chancellor, however, with many questioning whether the government had a meaningful plan to grow the economy.

Mr Reynolds held a similar call with business leaders within days of general election victory, and over 100 bosses are understood to have been invited to Monday’s discussion.

A spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade declined to comment ahead of Monday’s call.

Business

Markets react on second open after budget – as traders concerned over some announcements

Published

10 hours ago

November 1, 2024

admin

Markets react on second open after budget - as traders concerned over some announcements

The cost of government borrowing has jumped, while UK stocks and the pound are up, as markets digest the news of billions in borrowing and tax rises announced in the budget.

While there was no panic, there had been concern about the scale of borrowing and changes to Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules.

At the market open on Friday, the interest rate on government borrowing stood at 4.476% on its 10-year bonds – the benchmark for state borrowing costs.

It’s down from the high of yesterday afternoon – 4.525% – but a solid upward tick.

The pound also rose to buy $1.29 or €1.1873 after yesterday experiencing the biggest two-day fall in trade-weighted sterling in 18 months.

On the stock market front, the benchmark index, the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) 100 list of most valuable companies was up 0.36%.

The larger and more UK-focused FTSE 250 also went up by 0.1%.

While there was a definite reaction to the budget, uniquely impacting UK borrowing costs, the response is far smaller than after the UK mini-budget.

Many forces are affecting markets with the upcoming US election on a knife edge and interest rate decisions in both the UK and the US coming on Thursday.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow @SkyNews on X or subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

Business

Budget: Hostile market response as chancellor suffers Halloween nightmare

Published

22 hours ago

October 31, 2024

admin

Budget: Hostile market response as chancellor suffers Halloween nightmare

First things first: don’t panic.

What you need to know is this. The budget has not gone down well in financial markets. Indeed, it’s gone down about as badly as any budget in recent years, save for Liz Truss’s mini-budget.

The pound is weaker. Government bond yields (essentially, the interest rate the exchequer pays on its debt) have gone up.

That’s precisely the opposite market reaction to the one chancellors like to see after they commend their fiscal statements to the house.

In hindsight, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised.

After all, the new government just committed itself to considerably more borrowing than its predecessors – about £140bn more borrowing in the coming years. And that money has to be borrowed from someone – namely, financial markets.

But those financial markets are now reassessing how keen they are to lend to the UK.

The upshot is that the pound has fallen quite sharply (the biggest two-day fall in trade-weighted sterling in 18 months) and gilt yields – the interest rate paid by the government – have risen quite sharply.

This was all beginning to crystallise shortly after the budget speech, with yields beginning to rise and the pound beginning to weaken, the moment investors and economists got their hands on the budget documentation.

But the falls in the pound and the rises in the bond yields accelerated today.

This is not, to be absolutely clear, the kind of response any chancellor wants to see after a budget – let alone their first budget in office.

Indeed, I can’t remember another budget which saw as hostile a market response as this one in many years – save for one.

That exception is, of course, the Liz Truss/Kwasi Kwarteng mini-budget of 2022. And here is where you’ll find the silver lining for Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves.

The rises in gilt yields and falls in sterling in recent hours and days are still far shy of what took place in the run up and aftermath of the mini-budget. This does not yet feel like a crisis moment for UK markets.

But nor is it anything like good news for the government. In fact, it’s pretty awful. Because higher borrowing rates for UK debt mean it (well, us) will end up paying considerably more to service our debt in the coming years.

And that debt is about to balloon dramatically because of the plans laid down by the chancellor this week.

And this is where things get particularly sticky for Ms Reeves.

In that budget documentation, the Office for Budget Responsibility said the chancellor could afford to see those gilt yields rise by about 1.3 percentage points, but then when they exceeded this level, the so-called “headroom” she had against her fiscal rules would evaporate.

In other words, she’d break those rules – which, recall, are considerably less strict than the ones she inherited from Jeremy Hunt.

Which raises the question: where are those gilt yields right now? How close are they to the danger zone where the chancellor ends up breaking her rules?

Short answer: worryingly close. Because, right now, the yield on five-year government debt (which is the maturity the OBR focuses on most) is more than halfway towards that danger zone – only 56 basis points away from hitting the point where debt interest costs eat up any leeway the chancellor has to avoid breaking her rules.

Now, we are not in crisis territory yet. Nor can every move in currencies and bonds be attributed to this budget.

Markets are volatile right now. There’s lots going on: a US election next week and a Bank of England decision on interest rates next week.

The chancellor could get lucky. Gilt yields could settle in the coming days. But, right now, the UK, with its high level of public and private debt, with its new government which has just pledged to borrow many billions more in the coming years, is being closely scrutinised by the “bond vigilantes”.

A Halloween nightmare for any chancellor.