Arriva Rail North DOO

[Shaw S Hunter]

We are forgetting culture here. Firstly conductors are as near as possible a closed shop. Yes closed shops are technically illegal BUT I think there is a lot of pressure internally for people to join and when they do there is a lot of resistance to demanding a change of negotiation tactic. What I am trying to say is there may be many that oppose the current process but dont want to be seen as arguing with the branch leadership but in a secret ballot would probably vote not to strike.

I'd be interested to know what you base this comment on because IME it's simply not true. The closed shop was outlawed in 1990 and union members are very much aware of this and the potential repercussions of attempting to enforce an unofficial closed shop. It may well be true that if those RMT members opposed to continuing with the strikes are small in number then they may not consider it worthwhile seeking to change their branch's position. But you may be sure that such people will certainly be talking about things with at least some of their colleagues. As such if members' support was to break down it would happen in a manner that from the outside would appear to be very sudden: in other words once a critical mass of opposition arises then branches will very quickly find resolutions to end the action being passed. There do not seem to be any signs that this is a likelihood right now, in fact quite the opposite.

 

[woodmally]

I'd be interested to know what you base this comment on because IME it's simply not true. The closed shop was outlawed in 1990 and union members are very much aware of this and the potential repercussions of attempting to enforce an unofficial closed shop. It may well be true that if those RMT members opposed to continuing with the strikes are small in number then they may not consider it worthwhile seeking to change their branch's position. But you may be sure that such people will certainly be talking about things with at least some of their colleagues. As such if members' support was to break down it would happen in a manner that from the outside would appear to be very sudden: in other words once a critical mass of opposition arises then branches will very quickly find resolutions to end the action being passed. There do not seem to be any signs that this is a likelihood right now, in fact quite the opposite.

There is limited evidence of this. Yes its not a closed shop because that would be illegal however I do believe there is pressure on new staff to join the RMT. It happens in all unionised workplaces especially ones where there is a high degree of industrial action. I cannot see how a majority of the staff would be supportive of this continued strike action unless they were pressured to A) join the RMT and B) comply with the strike action. Its just nonsensical. Its been going on for 2 years and now these people are losing money Every Saturday. I cannot see how this will end well for them. There is no signs either side is backing down and the RMT ar of the held belief that if you dont fight you give up, even though the fight was lost months ago. I could be wrong. The RMT could win the day but I am yet to see it.

 

[scrapy]

We are forgetting culture here. Firstly conductors are as near as possible a closed shop. Yes closed shops are technically illegal BUT I think there is a lot of pressure internally for people to join and when they do there is a lot of resistance to demanding a change of negotiation tactic. What I am trying to say is there may be many that oppose the current process but dont want to be seen as arguing with the branch leadership but in a secret ballot would probably vote not to strike.

I have been an RMT member and attended meetings. There is often quite constructive debate. The change of tact to striking in Saturdays has come from listening to members at branch meetings. If anyone believes that their should be another vote then they should go along. This doesn't have to be done individually. If as some claim the majority want action they should go along with like minded individuals. From my experience of Northern staff on the west their is no appetite for another ballot though.

 

[scrapy]

There is limited evidence of this. Yes its not a closed shop because that would be illegal however I do believe there is pressure on new staff to join the RMT. It happens in all unionised workplaces especially ones where there is a high degree of industrial action. I cannot see how a majority of the staff would be supportive of this continued strike action unless they were pressured to A) join the RMT and B) comply with the strike action. Its just nonsensical. Its been going on for 2 years and now these people are losing money Every Saturday. I cannot see how this will end well for them. There is no signs either side is backing down and the RMT ar of the held belief that if you dont fight you give up, even though the fight was lost months ago. I could be wrong. The RMT could win the day but I am yet to see it.

I'm not sure how the fight has been lost for the RMT?

I thought at this point last year the Merseyrail fight could have been lost but they seem close to a deal.

So far:-

No DOO passenger trains have run on Northern

No drivers have been trained on DOO procedures.

ASLEF have not agreed to work trains DOO
.
It is not in drivers contracts to work trains DOO.

A training package has been agreed for the class 195 and 331 for both drivers and guards. Drivers are not being trained on door procedures or selective door operation (selective door operation refused by ASLEF). Guards are being trained on door procedures and selective door operation.

RMT have agreed deals with other TOCs

There is growing public and political pressure for Arriva to loose the Northern franchise. This may see the quiet removal of the DOO clause, especially if there is a change of government. It's in the RMTs interests to drag this out.

 

[LOL The Irony]

It's in the RMTs interests to drag this out.

Oh how fun...

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

There is limited evidence of this. Yes its not a closed shop because that would be illegal however I do believe there is pressure on new staff to join the RMT. It happens in all unionised workplaces especially ones where there is a high degree of industrial action.

Firstly nobody is pressurised to join the RMT. Most depots have a small number of non-members but those people are not treated differently by their colleagues other than getting little sympathy if they should find themselves in some sort of disciplinary difficulty. Secondly it is also wrong to suggest that the railways suffer a high degree of industrial action. Do not mistake a willingness to ballot as a negotiating tactic with some undue readiness to take industrial action. The current dispute on Northern is the first significant dispute in many years.

I cannot see how a majority of the staff would be supportive of this continued strike action unless they were pressured to A) join the RMT and B) comply with the strike action. Its just nonsensical.

Nonsensical? Really? You clearly fail to understand that a union, any union, is its membership. It does not exist as some separate entity, decisions are taken by consulting the membership. And of course the law demands that ballots are held before any industrial action can take place. There are no shows of hands, they're secret ballots meaning strikes happen because members are willing to support them. So there can hardly be any question of members being forced to comply with strike action. If you choose to join a union (and it is a choice) then you accept that on such significant decisions as those regarding industrial action in furtherance of a serious dispute that you either accept the democratic decision or you resign. It's a basic principle of trade unionism. But equally there is nothing to stop anyone from seeking to reverse the decision through their branch.

Its been going on for 2 years and now these people are losing money Every Saturday. I cannot see how this will end well for them. There is no signs either side is backing down and the RMT ar of the held belief that if you dont fight you give up, even though the fight was lost months ago. I could be wrong. The RMT could win the day but I am yet to see it.

In what sense was the fight lost months ago? There are still no DOO services on Northern. It's clear from a previous post that your expectation of industrial action is that it will not go on for any length of time. But that is not because union members are lukewarm in their support for it, it's because normally employers recognise that it's in their interest to negotiate a settlement sooner rather than later. But in this case the employer has its hands tied by the DfT. You assume that should mean that a dispute is pointless, RMT members clearly disagree with you. That is their right. In terms of anyone backing down if the dispute goes on long enough then Northern will find it is in breach of its franchise agreement for failing to meet a target date for implementation of DOO. At that point would the DfT insist on prolonging the situation, would they terminate Arriva's contract or would they give it up as a bad job? Does anyone really believe the doomsday scenario being bandied around that rather than back down the DfT would sooner risk the political backlash and make cutbacks in rail services in the north?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does anyone really believe the doomsday scenario being bandied around that rather than back down the DfT would sooner risk the political backlash and make cutbacks in rail services in the north?

The issue there isn't them backing down. The issue is that the utter awfulness of Northern Rail over a prolonged period, of which this is just a contributing factor alongside the entirely predictable timetabling errors and the idiotic shoving of more services down Castlefield with the building of the white elephant Ordsall Chord in preference to the necessary building of Picc P15/16, will cause such a drop in passenger numbers that service cuts (and thus staffing cuts i.e. recruitment freezes or even redundancies) are inevitable. I do genuinely fear this.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The issue there isn't them backing down. The issue is that the utter awfulness of Northern Rail over a prolonged period, of which this is just a contributing factor alongside the entirely predictable timetabling errors and the idiotic shoving of more services down Castlefield with the building of the white elephant Ordsall Chord in preference to the necessary building of Picc P15/16, will cause such a drop in passenger numbers that service cuts (and thus staffing cuts i.e. recruitment freezes or even redundancies) are inevitable. I do genuinely fear this.

With so much overcrowding on Northern, even on a good day, a drop in passenger numbers might actually be a good thing, at least in the short term. Get the fleet up to a size that's actually capable of dealing with the obvious suppressed demand, run a few promotional fares schemes and things could soon be back on track. Though clearly not with the current lot of decision makers in the DfT. As negative as everything feels right now in railway terms it is but a moment. What's needed is people with faith and vision, both inside and outside the industry.

 

[Carlisle]

There is growing public and political pressure for Arriva to loose the Northern franchise. .

True ,but alongside that, also a much increased public awareness nowadays these RMT strikes are almost nothing to do with passanger safety, security or service levels, but I appreciate they still command some support.

 

[Carlisle]

Do not mistake a willingness to ballot as a negotiating tactic with some undue readiness to take industrial action. The current dispute on Northern is the first significant dispute in many years.
?

How can a workforce be so willing to ballot, if they’re not in all honesty also reasonably willing to carry out any strikes.?
This tactic (on rail anyway) only gained popularity in recent times due to fairly timid management regimes at the likes of the old Northern and some other TOCs always prepared to tip toe around unions.on anything remotely contentious, but given northern aren’t remotely profitable most will likley have been aware this style of relationship wouldn’t continue forever, and I’m sure you know BR wasn’t remotely as easily pushed around.so rarely suffered in a similar style

 

[HowardGWR]

In what sense was the fight lost months ago? There are still no DOO services on Northern.

I wasn't aware there could be any. They don't have the new trains yet do they? On trains that do have the facility already, I haven't read of any decisions to start running DOO, which would need an agreement with drivers to be made first, not to mention the installation of station equipment, etc.

I thought this (and other RMT disputes) was with the expectation of DCO /DOO being begun later? Please put me right someone, if I am wrong. Thanks.

 

[superkev]

So sad to see this dispute continuing seemingly for ever. Whatever the rights and wrongs the RMT have certainty done the people they supposed to represent a diservice by taking on a war that they had such a slim chance of winning.
As well as the unfortunate guards with is it 28 days pay plus pension lost I don't suppose they care about all the small businesses on stations who, with people taking to there cars, livelihood is under threat.
I heard that on strike days McDonalds at Leeds where down £6000. Not much of a problem for them but what about station buffets at places like Hebden Bridge, Sowerby, Stalybridge etc which may be forced out of business.
K

 

[DaveB10780]

So sad to see this dispute continuing seemingly for ever. Whatever the rights and wrongs the RMT have certainty done the people they supposed to represent a diservice by taking on a war that they had such a slim chance of winning.
As we as the poor guards with is it 28 days pay plus pension lost I don't suppose they care about all the small businesses on stations whos, with people taking to there cars, livelihood is under threat.
I heard that on strike days McDonalds at Leeds where down £6000. Not much of a problem for them but what about station buffets at places like Hebden Bridge, Sowerby, Stalybridge etc which may be forced out of business.
K

Very sad indeed, not a care in the world about the poor folk who just want a reliable service 7 days a week. No goodwill from me now whatsoever.

 

[hawk1911]

So sad to see this dispute continuing seemingly for ever. Whatever the rights and wrongs the RMT have certainty done the people they supposed to represent a diservice by taking on a war that they had such a slim chance of winning.
As well as the unfortunate guards with is it 28 days pay plus pension lost I don't suppose they care about all the small businesses on stations who, with people taking to there cars, livelihood is under threat.
I heard that on strike days McDonalds at Leeds where down £6000. Not much of a problem for them but what about station buffets at places like Hebden Bridge, Sowerby, Stalybridge etc which may be forced out of business.
K

The Hebden Bridge cafe is closed on Saturdays for the duration of the strike; I caught the one train that ran through from Manchester Victoria, last Saturday, and there was a sign on the door confirming that.

I would imagine that Saturday was their busiest day, if so, yes, this could easily send them under.

 

[yorksrob]

The issue there isn't them backing down. The issue is that the utter awfulness of Northern Rail over a prolonged period, of which this is just a contributing factor alongside the entirely predictable timetabling errors and the idiotic shoving of more services down Castlefield with the building of the white elephant Ordsall Chord in preference to the necessary building of Picc P15/16, will cause such a drop in passenger numbers that service cuts (and thus staffing cuts i.e. recruitment freezes or even redundancies) are inevitable. I do genuinely fear this.

Don't forget the lack of weekend train services between Manchester and Bolton/Wigan for around a year.

 

[yorksrob]

With so much overcrowding on Northern, even on a good day, a drop in passenger numbers might actually be a good thing, at least in the short term. Get the fleet up to a size that's actually capable of dealing with the obvious suppressed demand, run a few promotional fares schemes and things could soon be back on track. Though clearly not with the current lot of decision makers in the DfT. As negative as everything feels right now in railway terms it is but a moment. What's needed is people with faith and vision, both inside and outside the industry.

No, what is needed is for someone to run a train service before the people with a choice are turned off of rail travel forever, particularly as these are the very passengers being targeted by weekend strikes.

 

[Kite159]

I just think of any poor workers who work on Saturdays (i.e. in retail) who would normally use the train being put off due to either no service or a very limited service, having to pay extra for buses or use alternative means of travel. They might decide that that alternative means is actually better value for money or easier

For example someone who lives in Reddish working in central Manchester

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

How can a workforce be so willing to ballot, if they’re not in all honesty fairly willing to actually carry out any strikes.?

Ballots inevitably consist of two questions, answered separately. One is about strike action, the other is about action short of striking. It's unusual for the responses to these two questions to be very different. But if a ballot showed members were very keen on non-striking action but not at all keen on striking then union officials would act accordingly.

This tactic (on rail anyway) only really gained popularity in recent times because of fairly timid management regimes at the likes of the old Northern and some other TOCs always prepared to tip toe around unions.on anything remotely contentious, but given northern isn’t remotely profitable most were also probably well aware this style of relationship was extremely unlikely to continue forever and I’m sure you know BR wasn’t remotely as easily pushed around.so rarely suffered in a similar style

It also gained popularity because privatisation created so many smaller organisations it is now much easier to mobilise support for industrial action at a single TOC than it was for national action under BR. So while national rail strikes appear to be a thing of the past privatisation has all but guaranteed that more local disputes will occur. The question of profitability is less relevant than it might be as TOCs are nothing more than temporary creations which exist solely to deliver a fixed-term franchise: none of them have long-term business plans because there is no point. As such the costs of industrial action are less important (and in this case it seems Northern are receiving at least some recompense) and ultimately they have the option to hand in the keys knowing that there will be little backlash as trains will still keep running, just under an alternative operator (DOR or equivalent). What hasn't happened in this dispute, and indeed may not at all, is the travelling public understanding that the DfT is driving the dispute, not the TOC.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

No, what is needed is for someone to run a train service before the people with a choice are turned off of rail travel forever, particularly as these are the very passengers being targeted by weekend strikes.

So you think that RMT members should pretend that there is no threat from the imminent entry into service of DOO-capable trains? Or that the franchise doesn't include specific (partly redacted) targets for the wider use of such trains? Or that Peter Wilkinson never made his anti-rail-union speech? The issue exists whatever anyone's views may be. There are various potential solutions, and I doubt any of them will satisfy everyone, but as long as RMT members remain committed to their approach to the dispute it is for the DfT to decide how to bring a resolution to the dispute. It's absolutely clear by now that Northern's senior managers have no authority to do so themselves.

 

[yorksrob]

So you think that RMT members should pretend that there is no threat from the imminent entry into service of DOO-capable trains? Or that the franchise doesn't include specific (partly redacted) targets for the wider use of such trains? Or that Peter Wilkinson never made his anti-rail-union speech? The issue exists whatever anyone's views may be. There are various potential solutions, and I doubt any of them will satisfy everyone, but as long as RMT members remain committed to their approach to the dispute it is for the DfT to decide how to bring a resolution to the dispute. It's absolutely clear by now that Northern's senior managers have no authority to do so themselves.

Whatever approach RMT members take, I certainly don't think they should continue striking every Saturday indefinitely. I don't share your rosy view of everyone flocking back with the odd offer after such levels of disruption. I see no good coming from such a damaging campaign to the long term prospects for passenger rail travel in the North. What happens when the Goverment, which could well be in power for several years, doesn't back down ? Is the RMT going to carry on turning it into a weekday only railway until nobody bothers with the railway for anything other than commuting, or do they have some sort of an exit strategy ?

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Whatever approach RMT members take, I certainly don't think they should continue striking every Saturday indefinitely. I don't share your rosy view of everyone flocking back with the odd offer after such levels of disruption. I see no good coming from such a damaging campaign to the long term prospects for passenger rail travel in the North. What happens when the Goverment, which could well be in power for several years, doesn't back down ? Is the RMT going to carry on turning it into a weekday only railway until nobody bothers with the railway for anything other than commuting, or do they have some sort of an exit strategy ?

If it was ok for Greater Anglia to agree to a "guard guarantee" why is it not ok for Northern? At some point DfT will have to be more open with the public as to their intentions. Perhaps DfT would prefer Northern to be a commuter only railway with a higher proportion of passengers paying non-discounted fares. DfT provoked the dispute, what is their exit strategy? There's no doubt that the RMT could have done massively better on the PR front but when the other side (DfT) is staying silent it maybe doesn't matter so much. Perhaps it needs the likes of Andy Burnham (or whoever) to highlight the nonsense of Grayling's insistence that this is a dispute between a private sector employer and its employees. The employer exists solely to fulfill a government let franchise whose terms made a dispute inevitable. Where's the accountability in that? I don't pretend to know exactly how this dispute will be resolved. But I am sure that Grayling and his cohorts are being extremely disingenuous in their handling of all this.

Someone upthread suggested that in a case like this, where a notional public service is being disrupted, the two sides should be forced to hold negotiations in public. While that would not actually make a definitive settlement more likely it might make the underlying issues clearer to the public. So how about a Question Time special with Chris Grayling and Mick Cash as the only panelists?

 

[LOL The Irony]

So how about a Question Time special with Chris Grayling and Mick Cash as the only panelists?

Excellent idea. Just neither would be up for it because they'd both be lambasted. Although mick is the more likely of the 2.

 

[Robertj21a]

If it was ok for Greater Anglia to agree to a "guard guarantee" why is it not ok for Northern? At some point DfT will have to be more open with the public as to their intentions. Perhaps DfT would prefer Northern to be a commuter only railway with a higher proportion of passengers paying non-discounted fares. DfT provoked the dispute, what is their exit strategy? There's no doubt that the RMT could have done massively better on the PR front but when the other side (DfT) is staying silent it maybe doesn't matter so much. Perhaps it needs the likes of Andy Burnham (or whoever) to highlight the nonsense of Grayling's insistence that this is a dispute between a private sector employer and its employees. The employer exists solely to fulfill a government let franchise whose terms made a dispute inevitable. Where's the accountability in that? I don't pretend to know exactly how this dispute will be resolved. But I am sure that Grayling and his cohorts are being extremely disingenuous in their handling of all this.

Someone upthread suggested that in a case like this, where a notional public service is being disrupted, the two sides should be forced to hold negotiations in public. While that would not actually make a definitive settlement more likely it might make the underlying issues clearer to the public. So how about a Question Time special with Chris Grayling and Mick Cash as the only panelists?

It might have worked with Bob Crow, but not now. In any event, I'm not really sure why the DfT need to take part, it's for the TOC management to resolve it (or just ignore it). If the RMT want to carry on striking then they're entitled to do so, just as the public are entitled to use their cars, the bus, walk, or simply not bother. It's probably got many months still to run.

 

[yorksrob]

If it was ok for Greater Anglia to agree to a "guard guarantee" why is it not ok for Northern? At some point DfT will have to be more open with the public as to their intentions. Perhaps DfT would prefer Northern to be a commuter only railway with a higher proportion of passengers paying non-discounted fares. DfT provoked the dispute, what is their exit strategy? There's no doubt that the RMT could have done massively better on the PR front but when the other side (DfT) is staying silent it maybe doesn't matter so much. Perhaps it needs the likes of Andy Burnham (or whoever) to highlight the nonsense of Grayling's insistence that this is a dispute between a private sector employer and its employees. The employer exists solely to fulfill a government let franchise whose terms made a dispute inevitable. Where's the accountability in that? I don't pretend to know exactly how this dispute will be resolved. But I am sure that Grayling and his cohorts are being extremely disingenuous in their handling of all this.

Someone upthread suggested that in a case like this, where a notional public service is being disrupted, the two sides should be forced to hold negotiations in public. While that would not actually make a definitive settlement more likely it might make the underlying issues clearer to the public. So how about a Question Time special with Chris Grayling and Mick Cash as the only panelists?

I agree entirely with a guard guarantee. I've even suggested to my MP that she should investigate why agreements could be reached with Anglia but not Northern. That said, it does appear to me that the RMT has backed itself into a bit of a corner. In the absence of any concessions from the Government side, any withdrawal from striking on every Saturday from now on could be seen as a climb down, whereas previously it could pick and choose more or less any day to strike or not as suited.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

It might have worked with Bob Crow, but not now. In any event, I'm not really sure why the DfT need to take part, it's for the TOC management to resolve it (or just ignore it). If the RMT want to carry on striking then they're entitled to do so, just as the public are entitled to use their cars, the bus, walk, or simply not bother. It's probably got many months still to run.

As I said earlier it is by now obvious that Northern do not have the authority to resolve the dispute. If people want the dispute to end than they will have to understand and accept that this will only be achieved with DfT involvement. If you believe that the DfT position should be Victorian style laissez-faire then yes, it will be many more months before some sort of settlement, subject of course to ASLEF not being drawn into the dispute.

 

[Robertj21a]

As I said earlier it is by now obvious that Northern do not have the authority to resolve the dispute. If people want the dispute to end than they will have to understand and accept that this will only be achieved with DfT involvement. If you believe that the DfT position should be Victorian style laissez-faire then yes, it will be many more months before some sort of settlement, subject of course to ASLEF not being drawn into the dispute.

Yes, I read what you wrote earlier. The TOC is well aware of what they can/cannot do - it appears that, in practice, they choose to largely ignore the RMT. They are perfectly entitled to do that - as are the RMT perfectly entitled to strike.

Why does the TOC have to move when, as the management involved, they have made their requirements quite clear ?. You could just as easily ask why doesn't the RMT adjust it's position.

 

[Killingworth]

Times change. This train came to grief in 1907. 4 men on the footplates, 3 guards, two horse boxes, minor injuries, allegedly exceeded 20 mph speed limit over crossover, although all 7 crew said they hadn't, or at least they weren't going faster than usual. (Possibly a worn flange helped!) Trains are far safer today. We have to move forward. Full DOO may be too far, but drivers opening doors when the train stops in the platform surely is achievable?

Northern is a financial basket case, kept alive because of the inevitable furore that erupts whenever services are reduced, a station is threatened with closure, or a line abandoned. I take as an example the Barton-on-Humber to Cleethorpes line. Operated by a 2 hourly 153 but covered morning and evening by a TPE 185 using SDO.

There are few passengers and many level crossings. A crew of 2 is essential to collect minimal revenue as there aren't ticket machines on all stations. There are no bus alternatives for several stops. There is a dial up type bus in other parts of Lincolnshire. This line must surely be an economic nonsense, but all sorts of arguments would be deployed to fight closure. It's cut off from the rest of Northern and should be going to East Midlands next year. Perhaps it's no surprise that a Saturday service is being maintained - hardly anyone would notice if it weren't! A free taxi service would probably be cheaper and more flexible for users, even if more used them. Might it even be better to operate DOO and forget about fares! Aargh!!!

That's probably the most extreme line, but Whitby and the Cumbrian coast can't be so much different. Can't we at least get these settled and start moving forward?

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Yes, I read what you wrote earlier. The TOC is well aware of what they can/cannot do - it appears that, in practice, they choose to largely ignore the RMT. They are perfectly entitled to do that - as are the RMT perfectly entitled to strike.

Why does the TOC have to move when, as the management involved, they have made their requirements quite clear ?. You could just as easily ask why doesn't the RMT adjust it's position.

The only reason for the TOC to even consider moving is because they are the employer with a dispute on their hands. In a fully commercial environment it would be in their genuine interest to achieve a settlement at some point. But in this case however the reality is that the RMT is really in dispute with the DfT but the DfT would prefer that the wider public was not aware of this so are happy to let Northern continue to be caught in the middle. Of course the RMT has adjusted its position but was met with understandably continued intransigence from Northern so reverted to their original position. And so it goes on...

 

[yorksrob]

That's probably the most extreme line, but Whitby and the Cumbrian coast can't be so much different. Can't we at least get these settled and start moving forward?

It's ironic that I've seen trains on both of those lines far too busy for a guard or anyone else to get through !

 

[muz379]

What I am trying to say is there may be many that oppose the current process but dont want to be seen as arguing with the branch leadership but in a secret ballot would probably vote not to strike.

Firstly , its not Branch leadership that are making the decisions over how this dispute proceeds so anybody showing up to branch saying they would like a change of tact would not be arguing with Branch leadership . Besides which if someone canvassed opinion before going to that branch meeting and came along with enough support to win a vote then its irrelevant what the Branch leadership think .

Secondly is that a secret Ballot like the secret ballot we already have which gave a majority support for the strike action we are now having ?