Bus drivers turn down 12% pay rise
The Herald reports:
Auckland bus drivers turned their back on a $500 sweetener from the region’s public transport agency when they rejected advice from union leaders yesterday to accept a new company pay offer.
Emotions ran high at Alexandra Park racecourse after about 55 per cent of almost 650 drivers and cleaners voted by secret ballot to reject the offer from Infratil subsidiary NZ Bus of pay rises amounting to $2 an hour by the final stage of a three-year deal.
That would have lifted the top hourly wage for drivers with nine months’ service or more to $17.45 now, $18.15 next year, and $18.75 in February 2012.
Putting aside the $500, that is a 12% increase over three years. A full time salary of $39,100 for driving a bus.
At a time of low inflation and rising unemployment, their decision is regrettable. They even went against their own unions’ recommendation to accept.
If they think they can do better than $39,000 elsewhere, maybe they should offer their services to another company.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Fire the lot of them then list the vacancies with WINZ, anybody who is qualified and refuses a job driving the buses should have their benefit stopped immediately.
I wonder if Phool has a licence that allows him to drive a bus?
November 5th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
12% over 3 years is not much more than keeping up with inflation. So they have turned their back on not-a-pay-cut, I don’t blame them.
DPF: “If they think they can do better than $39,000 elsewhere, maybe they should offer their services to another company.”
Union members have the ability to negotiate hard for more, via the unions. So why wouldn’t they?
But as usual, quelle horreur when the little people band together so they can bring some actual power to the pay negotiations – how dare they!!
DPF: “A full time salary of $39,100 for driving a bus.”
And driving a bus is not a trivial operation. Sit up the front and watch sometime.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
I’d be quite happy if my employer offered me 12% over the next three years, as opposed to the 8% cut in base salary I accepted this year in order for our company to avoid redundancies.
I expect NZ Bus will have some vacancies opening up soon. Let’s hope the successful applicants will be more appreciative to have jobs in this climate of rising unemployment.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
I think the real story is why the fuck the ARC is stumping up with $500 a head of our rate money to hand over to these guys – they arent employees of the ARC. Roll on the termination of this cesspool of leftist crap.
November 5th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Almost an hour in, and still no champion of the freedom-loving right has emerged who can explain why the bus drivers should not have the freedom to carry out collective action for the betterment of themselves. Hmmm…
PS: and good to see big bruv STILL keeping PhilU’s flame alive, on a day when Phil himself doesn’t appear to be online AT ALL
November 5th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Big bruv, phool would be useless as a bus driver as he would take too many unneccessary stops…
November 5th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
I’m all about wages meeting the qualifications however here the only qualifications the majority of these people will have is a class 2 (maybe 4 licence) and a P endorsement! I suppose I have to take into consideration they have to keep sober for 8 hours…
Why are law clerks after 5 years university being paid less than bus drivers??
November 5th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
@ RRM for the same reason cartels are illegal. Unions can indeed drive up wages for their members above the market, but not forever, and generally at the expense of non-union members, both workers and consumers. In the western world the only maintenance/growth area for unions is with employers who arent subject to the market – i.e governments.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Capt. Neurotic – A bus driver who makes a mistake could probably rack up more $$$ worth of damage much more quickly than a law clerk who makes a mistake!
November 5th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Almost an hour in, and still no champion of the freedom-loving right has emerged who can explain why the bus drivers should not have the freedom to carry out collective action for the betterment of themselves. Hmmm…
RRM. No one here says they should not have the freedom to carry out collective action for better pay and conditions. But when that collective action (or singular action for that matter) starts getting greedy, carries on until some get their way and causing severe traffic disruption to NZ’s biggest city, then NZ Bus should be allowed to seek Employees who are willing to accept the pay increase and offer the remaining vacant positions to other prospective employees.
Frankly if the Bus drivers want more money, they should have paid more attention at school.
Why are law clerks after 5 years university being paid less than bus drivers??
Hell Captain, I was testing the structural integrity of bridges for less than these bus drivers are earning!
November 5th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Capt. Neurotic – A bus driver who makes a mistake could probably rack up more $$$ worth of damage much more quickly than a law clerk who makes a mistake!
Thats what insurance is for dumbarse.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Nice try RRM but we all know Bus drivers are morons. That is the reason they are bus drivers. Only toilet cleaners and Labour politicians sit lower in the career inteligence rankings.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Where’s Reagan when we need him? Sack them all, and bring in the military to do the job, I say.
…sit lower in the inteligence rankings.
Oh you’re good.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
“…sit lower in the inteligence rankings.
Oh you’re good.”
Apologies. I drive a bus.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Comparing wage movements across industries over time (as Marxist Minto does in his opinion piece) is plain crazy. Businesses change, economies change, people change how they consume product and services.
Public transport is one service where there is a ‘halo effect’ for passenger usage, eg drop one bus which carries 50 passengers and lose 51 passenger seats off the network. So if outlandishly increased operating costs (fuel, drivers etc) means cutting services, then there is a -ve impact on the cost efficiency of the services that remain. That’s a reverse halo.
Those that applaud this rejection do so not because it’s good for the drivers or their families or the long terms viability of the industry. They applaud because it’s a corporate being mauled.
As solution? Well perhaps it’s time to rethink remuneration structures completely. Implement a commissions/profit-share for drivers and tie this back to revenue, timeliness and fuel efficiency on each driver route. Allow drivers to put more of their basic pay at risk in return for higher ratios in the commission structure.
The expertise to model this exists. The technology to implement it exists. But the minds on both side of the dispute are stuck in last century’s thinking.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
^^^ “They applaud because it’s a corporate being mauled.”
I don’t know about that… but I do like your suggested solution!
November 5th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Brilliant idea GS (and nice to see RRM from the left applauds it) make them self employed contractors just like the Chorus employees (oh hang on I think that RRM has made a mistake here). Everybody out!!!
November 5th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I feel quite strongly about this.
I am an ACT voter. I am also the father of a 6 year old boy who goes to school by bus (I used to drive him but couldn’t because of a bad back).
He goes on one of those double-joined buses. There are 110 students on the bus. The driver has a similar responsibility to an airline pilot but without a co-driver and a ‘air bus controller’. I am happy to supplement the wages out of my own pocket to ensure the best possible driver.
/rant
November 5th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Good for them. A contract needs two willing parties. However on the flip-side the company must be able to employ those who want to work for that price (or any other price), and the union shouldn’t be permitted to employ stand-over tactics on those who do. Also if you don’t want to work for the new price, then the company should be able to fire you. Assuming the last contract has expired.
I don’t have any problem with people grouping together to negotiate with their employer. However they shouldn’t be able to stop a willing contract between another individual and the employer. I.e. Unions OK. Union monopoly not OK.
November 5th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
” The driver has a similar responsibility to an airline pilot but without a co-driver and a ‘air bus controller’.”
As an ex amateur pilot I beg to differ. The bus driver can pull over and park when he has a major failure the pilot has to get the fragile, explosive, high speed, crematorium back onto terra firma in a big enough piece (pieces) to ensure as many as possible live to fly again (if they have the bottle). Try it some time its the hardest work you can do sitting in a seat!
November 5th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
IIRC, when electronic ticketing was introduced to Wellington buses it was found that the drivers had previously been helping themselves to a fair proportion of the ticket money. Many were sacked.
Is it any coincidence that electronic ticketing was announced for Auckland buses just a few days ago? Maybe drivers need a rise to cover the expected reduction in income from theft?
November 5th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
2 were sacked IIRC.
November 5th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
12% over 3 years is not much more than keeping up with inflation.
Mmm…checked inflation forecasts lately?
November 5th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Have our CEO’s checked the inflation rate?
November 5th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Bloody Communists
November 5th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Absolute rubbish. You are just shooting blanks DPF.
In general , the ration between the employee salaries and the CEO salaries should remain relatively constant. I bet you that the bus drivers salaries have decreased majorly by comparison.
The guys at the top are taking a larger slice of the pie than ever before, encouraged on by an implicit agreement between the lot of them to use each others salaries as a comparison to ratchet up their own.
The public have had enough. Which is why I am on the side of the little guy on this occasion.
I think the general public has had enough of the great money grab by bureaucrats.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
So anyone know what the contract arrangement is between ARC and this company?
What if the ARC decided to look elsewhere?
Quelle horror.
Anyone looked into why the drivers decided against against the advice of their union? What games are afoot?
Quelle quelle horror + an emerald flame and a sparkler.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Why is it that if a non-Union person is unhappy with their job or working conditions they leave and get another one, but Union members just stay there bitching?
If the bus drivers were actually pleasant to their customers I would feel some sympathy.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Why is it that many Kiwiblog readers think that bus drivers are thick and deserve their role as lowly servants to the working class, and should be happy just to have a job?
November 5th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
If you’re comparing bus drivers with airline pilots, the problem is not that bus drivers are paid too little, it’s that pilots are paid too much. And don’t feed me that crap about having hundreds of lives upstairs to look after, planes fly themselves these days, to a great extent. Pilots are paid an extraordinary amount for the few skills they are required to employ.
Bus drivers on the other hand are probably paid commensurate to the skills they employ. The problem is at the union meetings they are held captive to the rantings of the militants, who are intent of fighting yesterday’s wars….
November 5th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
“it’s that pilots are paid too much”
Pilots and all professionals are not paid what they are, to do 90% of the work they perform, but rather, to successfully catch the 10% of times it goes wrong.
This applies to lawyers, doctors, dentists, plumbers, pilots, drivers, etc. They are trained to spot the road ahead, to pick the hidden flaw in the conveyancing deal that could render their client bankrupt without the house they thought they were buying, to spot the hidden reading in the diagnostic test that will kill their patient if not treated immediately, the accident forming 10 cars up ahead so their passengers aren’t subject to a 50kmh-0 stop in 0.1 secs.
That hardly ever happens but when it does, you’re glad you had a professional who knew what they were doing.
IMO 39k is lousy money for their responsibilities. But they chose to take on the job at that money so it’s their choice to work at that rate. But that’s not the point. The point is, why they refused such a bloody good offer.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
You’ll never figure this out by looking at skills. The correct pay rate is the one which is acceptable to both the employee and the employer. Supply and demand, market forces and all that good stuff will do the trick.
Which is why a cook on an oil-rig in the North Sea probably earns more than our PM.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
Talk about misleading 12% pay rise. How about 1.5%, that is the real pay rise per annum (4% – 2.5% inflation). Considering NZ Bus employees are considered among the most lowly paid for the equivalent level of skills I say go for it. The subsidiary on top of fares exceeds their entire employee cost considerably. Infratil’s required minimum rate of return of 20% on non risky assets like transport has more to do with it (and greed) than these drivers demands.
The fire them all mentality from half your readers shows why the “good employer” no need for employment law thing would never work.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:40 pm
Leaving market forces aside, I would imagine there is still a perception amongst the majority of the KiwiBlog readership that if you happen to drive a bus you’re thick, probably non-caucasian and not worthy of anything better.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
Not me. Some of the thickest people I’ve meet were people I meet at university. And one of the smartest, most knowledgeable people I know has worked as a fencer most of his life. You can judge a book by it’s cover, but you’ll miss some good ones.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
It has to be repeated: If $39,000 p/a isn’t good enough for the bus drivers…. I reckon we have a lot more people out there who would be desperate to do it at a cheaper price. We have a well skilled immigrant population who would love this opportunity. Plus, as an employer I’d pay them more if they didn’t join a Union – such as the drain unionised staff are on the bus network.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
“I would imagine there is still a perception amongst the majority of the KiwiBlog readership that if you happen to drive a bus you’re thick, probably non-caucasian and not worthy of anything better.”
Yeh well noskire, I imagine you’re one of those common-or-garden lefties that have this mistaken self-righteous prima donna impossibly naive childishly simplistic view of the world.
Such lefties appear to make up the predominate number of lefty Kiwiblog commenters although since I’m a conservative, I would never allege that because that would be stereotyping and stereotyping is wrong, m-kay?
I’m a good conservative who cares about the planet and everything in it and I’m not self-righteous at all about anything at all never ever so there. Furthermore because I’m a good conservative who loves people I’d like to say how hurtful your comment was in implying that myself and other conservatives aren’t fully aware of the human condition with respect to the tremendous sense of ethical responsibility that one needs when considering the plight of the poor downtrodden workers viciously oppressed by their unfair and indeed diabolical 11% offer. I mean what a pittance in a time of low inflation and high unemployment. How dare that organisation who puts the food on their table seek to impose such hardship on those poor oppressed workers who simply chose out of their own free will to take the job offer when it was made.
It’s a very good thing that lefties like you are there to support them in their battle and I fully expect that you are donating 100% of your wages to your brothers to help them in their struggle against their vicious oppressors.
You are doing that, aren’t you? Otherwise, you’re probably the worst person in the world.
November 6th, 2009 at 2:15 am
damn straight, bit like folk
who talk a good war, but would
never fight in one
November 6th, 2009 at 2:58 am
It would help if the people using the buses paid the full cost for them.
If they did, then besides giving ratepayers a bit of relief (higher wages means higher subsidies and higher rates), it would mean the ARC would no longer be too concerned, and the bus company would have to rely on fares paid, and would be incentivised for drivers to perform for the benefit of passengers – not standards set by the ARC.
It would then be clear, higher wages means higher fares or cuts elsewhere. Those on the left will always argue shareholders and management get too much, yet don’t line up to buy shares themselves (to share the risk or use property rights), and don’t compete for the management jobs. Neither does the union buy some buses and set up its own bus company to compete.
Some will argue for the “good old days” when the ARA ran its own buses, subsidised them through rates directly (no bother with competitive tenders), and Auckland bus patronage plummeted over a 20 year period whilst subsidies grew and grew.
Time for the ARC to end the contracts, tell Infratil to register services as commercial or it’s all out to tender – again. If the services are registered as commercial, then they are open to competition, so if Infratil doesn’t provide services, any other operator can fill the gap, assuming it is worth it.
November 6th, 2009 at 5:45 am
“I wonder if Phool has a licence that allows him to drive a bus?”
C’mon. The bludger is a Luddite, with a strong aversion to technology (except the PC he uses to write his addled thoughts). His daily routine is made of three Bs: Blog (stuff nobody reads), Bake (endlessly), Burn (weed).
On the subject of NZ Bus. Let the market decide: the company should fire the drivers and hire new ones.
I wonder how many of those sacked dare to reapply!
November 6th, 2009 at 7:14 am
So what? If they think they can do better elsewhere then is their prerogative too. The employers and unions both have misjudged the mood of their people. Boo hoo. Let them negotiate. Two weeks ago the employers got egg on their faces, now the drivers are having a turn. It’s all legal, and disappointing or not, it is a central plank of my philosophy that people are entitled to go to the market and get what the market eill pay for their services. Give me any of those bus-drivers with their input and the ’strains on their relationships’ they’ve been under against one ‘Rodney Hide’, any day. Now that’s a example of ‘disappointing’ in my book. . . . http://monkeyswithtypewriter.blogspot.com/
November 6th, 2009 at 7:24 am
@ libertscout – you nailed it. At the end of the day the ratepayers are going to wear the cost of any settlement (through the subsidy) not Infratil and not the bus passengers.
d
November 6th, 2009 at 7:32 am
November 6th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Do these rocket scientists ever sit down and calculate the amount of wages they lose by striking vs the difference between what they want and what the company is offering ? More than a couple of days strike probably eliminates the amount they’re striking for. Maybe there’s a reason they’re working for the employer of last resort….
November 6th, 2009 at 8:40 am
>>>If the bus drivers were actually pleasant to their customers I would feel some sympathy<<< That has two sides, if the passengers were pleasant too….I'd hate to drive a bus carrying Kiwiblog writers … or be a passenger in it.
In my book the drivers had all the brownie points following the lockout but they have lost some with the rejection. It is indeed puzzling that the vote was despite being a secret vote. Though fortunately I do not have to live and bring up a family in Auckland on 78% of the average wage, and only a bit more than the 'minimum wage'.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:42 am
You are correct ‘Put it away” but part of the bargaining balance is the amount the company loose due to failure to provide the service.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:11 am
But what is the point of striking if they will actually end up with less than if they’d accepted the company offer ? Pure maliciousness towards the company ?
November 6th, 2009 at 9:31 am
“But what is the point of striking if they will actually end up with less than if they’d accepted the company offer ? Pure maliciousness towards the company ?”
A threat you never use can cease to be credible. Sometimes you have to hurt yourself to show you are serious. Not supporting the drivers, just discussing negotiation strategy.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:50 am
In the environemnt of capitalism it is the name of the game isnt it?
Get waht you can get, charge what you can charge?
Isnt that how it works?
Ifa guy that can puch away at computer keys can make a hundred per hous or even more, sure a bus driver is worth more than 18 bucks an hour?
Can many of you here get far on 18 bucks an hour?
hell that aint even cloase to average wage is it?
I think anybody who consistantly get of thre arse for somebody 40 hours a week is worth more than most of them are payed these days,
Minimum wage of at least(AT LEAST) 15 bucks an hour.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Because they believe the extra they get *will* cover the lost wages. An extra $1 per hour is an extra $1920 gross per annum (say 40*48*1). But you get that extra for the next 10, 20, 30 years of your working life.
November 6th, 2009 at 10:20 am
I’m reminded of a converstaion between a lawyer and an accountant friend of mine a few years back. We had just had a few beers and the accountant turns to us and says,”That’s it, I’m off to catch the bus home”. My lawyer mate turns to him and says. “What? You’re catching a bus home? I reckon that anyone over 30 who still catches the bus to work has failed in life.” My accounting friend replied “Yep, I suppose that’s true ….. but only if you’re the bus driver.”
November 6th, 2009 at 10:23 am
Ifa guy that can puch away at computer keys can make a hundred per hous or even more, sure a bus driver is worth more than 18 bucks an hour?
How long does it take to learn to drive a bus?
hell that aint even cloase to average wage is it?
Not sure the average wage is important, as averages are distorted by extremes. The median (half earn more, half earn less) is about $25,000 I believe.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Stephen, dear boy, I could teach you to wheel a coach about in 30 minutes.
But, you pay bus drivers good money for when things go tits up and they have your kids in the back.
Lose the brakes in the wrong place you want that driver to make the right decision you do not want him driving to his $15 hr.
I amused how many experts there are on this board who would be lost if I asked them to take a low loader rig with a D6H on down the Auckland side of the Kaimais.
November 6th, 2009 at 11:36 am
“Minimum wage of at least(AT LEAST) 15 bucks an hour.”
Let’s make it $100/hour then everyone can afford to go to Paris.
Do you really thinik raising minimum wages by fiat (as opposed to getting more productive) is any way for a country to prosper?
November 6th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Lose the brakes in the wrong place you want that driver to make the right decision you do not want him driving to his $15 hr.
How much training would that need then? I’m not suggesting it’s half an hour whizzing around the block, but i would *guess* that it’s not so complex that they can’t just hire someone for $15, give them a bit of training and let’em go. The rate of giant bus accidents would suggest that whatever they’ve been doing works…
November 6th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Don’t accept a job if you don’t like the pay. Simple. Harden up.
November 6th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Yep i know of one driver on $15 bucks an hour, young fellow sod all experience, took the coach down a decent hill two gears too high, faded the brakes out, bloody lucky no one was killed.
Which is why I believe in intensive training for coach/ bus drivers, so they can sum up what needs to be done to keep the passengers safe.
Oh, what would you do if you lost the brakes on the Auckland side of the Kaimais ?
November 6th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
This is another example of greedy, selfish, ungrateful working class pigs robbing their employer blind; these grubs should be pleased to have employment in these times and stop moaning and annoying customers.
If it were up to me I would cut their pay to teach them a lesson in manners and their role at the bottom of the totem pole; cut their pay to $12-51 per hour until they beg for the current offer.
http://www.nightcitytrader.blogspot.com
November 6th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
it seems in the murky workings of a combined union that the drivers voted in favour but were overridden by non-driver comrades. The drivers have now withdrawn from the combined union and accepted the employer offer, if the offer is still open.
Let’s see if the company plays hardball. I trust not: the claim was eminently fair as was the settlement.