Letter: Rail dispute figures add up to confusion
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: In today's World At One, Jimmy Knapp claimed that 30 per cent of his members in signalling would be worse off under Railtrack's latest offer. In contrast, Robert Horton claimed that some signalmen would be 16 per cent better off, some people must lose under any package, and the losers would be compensated. How many will get 16 per cent more? Why must some lose under any package (or did Sir Robert mean lose relatively?). How and by how much will losers be compensated?
As so often in similar disputes, the public cannot make its own judgement in the absence of clear and authoritative figures. Why cannot Acas set down for all to see, as precisely as possible, what is involved for different groups of workers, gainers and losers, under Railtrack's proposals.
Yours faithfully,
B. A. WAINEWRIGHT
Pinner
21 June
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments