Network Rail Signallers: Strike Action

[Metroland]

Which is the crux of this dispute you 3, but hey dont bother doing any research or let the truth get in the way of a good rant will you!

I'd appreciate it if someone would post up what the dispute is about, including the proposals for the new practices in detail - of you don't want to PM them. I've done as much research as I can from the internet and asking people who work for the railways, because no longer working for the industry it is impossible to obtain any further information.

All we have is one side saying one this, and other saying the opposite. The typical 'them and us' that I know goes on and everyone complains about, with no real explanation to customers what it's about.

=======================

What I did find is this on the T3 side:

'Now at last it is about to happen! Essentially Network Rail have reviewed the existing T2 arrangements and revamped them into new T3 arrangements as T3A, T3D, T3P, and T3T. A uses T-CODs, D-signal disconnections, P uses the PICOP or his agent to go to the signal box and ensure the signalling protection, and T relates to block indicators, tokenless block arrangements and keeping the token on single lines.

There is a general requirement that someone other than the signaller checks that the relevant signals are set to danger and reminder devices are in place. Work Site Boards must always be used and their positioning has to be publicised in advance, with the first one at least 200 metres from the protecting signal. However the actual work site must be at least 300 metres from that signal.

I believe these changes represent a step forward in safety. The practice of sending someone to walk out, often in darkness on a filthy night to a remote spot to place protection including detonators on the track is intrinsically hazardous. I am surprised that a zealous health and safety “expert” has not banned their use on safety grounds before now.

When a train accidentally runs over one it could go off and the fragments can easily cause injury! Are there any regular possession workers who have not worked in a possession where the detonators were stolen? The plan is for briefing to begin in February next year with full implementation following in June. The sooner the better, I say!'

Personally I would say with the exception of the PICOP going to the controlling box, that's safer. But only TIII protection using PICOPs was mentioned to me.

http://www.railwaypeople.com/rail-n...fewer-bangs-and-more-orange-to-come-1645.html

The only other thing I could find was this

http://www.rmtsoutheast.org.uk/Vote YES for industrial action.pdf

Personally I think Rosters and PTR&R is a local issue, and should not be a national dispute.

 

[yorksrob]

I'll agree some rail workers will. As a fare-paying customer and tax payer, I know which I prefer!

I’ve never worked on the railway either, suffice to say that in my experience BR was never as bad as some would try to make out. Yes, I had the odd shocker with regards to customer service, but then again I’ve had a few since then as well.

[*]Investment - excluding Chiltern Railways, which as far as I can see is only a privatisation success story, the investment has been paid for by the Government (WCML upgrade) or by Network Rail, a QUANGO acting on behalf of the Government as an autonomous but otherwise nationalised (Government underwritten and funded) structure. There is little evidence that there would have been less investment had the railways not been privatised.

Chiltern was the beneficiary of a total route modernisation under Network SouthEast so it’s improvement can be said at least in part to be a success of BR as well.

I'd appreciate it if someone would post up what the dispute is about, including the proposals for the new practices in detail - of you don't want to PM them.

I agree, the details in the papers seem to be hazy. I’ve heard mention of engineering workers contracts more heavily focused around weekends and something about keeping the railway open later but nothing very concrete so it’s difficult to form an informed opinion either way. Some might say it's none of my business, but as I will be affected by the proposed action it would be interesting to know more of what it's about.

 

[Metroland]

Indeed, that is the problem. The current regulations on TII and TIII are here

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Rule_Book/Forms/Live_Documents.aspx?RootFolder=%2fRule_Book%2fRule%20Book%20Modules%2fT%20-%20Track%20and%20Signalling%20Work&FolderCTID=0x01200060B274261602B94B84F5B3E1E95DE5C8&View={0007ACA4-12EA-4EC3-B2B7-0810CA434F46}

But its not really something the public or journalists are really going to be able to make an informed opinion on, the same as detailed arrangements of the airline, nuclear, health or postal industries, to use some examples. Well yes, I think it is our business as users and taxpayers, or at least the resolution of a dispute.

 

[313103]

I doubt you will get a signal-man/woman on here speaking about something that is hot at the moment. The reason being is the clause on your contract that says you must not talk about anything of your company that could affect the companies business interests in a negative way.

The argument over privatisation over nationalisation could be done as part of another thread. Ive have seen good and bad in both. For me the Good of BR was to and as someone else mentioned totally rebuilding the Chiltern Line completed in 1993. Virtually completed the re-signalling of the Midland main Line are just two good things that happened under BR. I saw both these transformations being based at St Pancras until 1985 and then being based at Marylebone until Jan 1993. The bad points of BR was wholesale sale of their properties, and the virtually wholesale DOO plans of passenger trains in the South east which was done not on the basis of safety but on costs. I was directly affected by DOO but i had to pick my chin up of the floor and start again. Of course in the last years of BR and in order to make the railway a good seller many of the overnight services were withdrawn and have yet to be replaced.

The good points of Privatisation are Most companies initially throw money at the scheme in order to make it work, again in some companies investment in new rolling stock, some companies have also sought out different routes and opened up new horizons. Again i am personally witnessing yet another transformation and that is the Forty four billion pound investment into the London Overground network running services over the heavy used but until now under funded North London Line. These are a couple of good points.

At the other end of the scale is the bad points and these are Some companies who took over certain franchises just for the subsidy they got from Government to put in the shareholders pocket whilst starving the company of investment a la Siverlink Metro. Companies who over budgeted to get franchises then found out all was not well and then wanted out a la NEG EC. Railway companies became top heavy with Managers nearly three times as much as BR but with a dwindling workforce. the other negative thing is that most companies seem intent in getting staff to work to conditions that were ok in the late 19th century for running a railway in the 21st century.

You see there is good and bad in both schemes.

 

[90019]

At least with the road system, the government has its eye on the ball and delivers investment and with it better safety practices.

Do you genuinely believe that?! :?

 

[Maxfly]

well as a signaller i can say that not all of us agree with our unions stance and along with many maintenance i have spoken are fed up with the only idea the rmt ever have - to threaten strike and go for it. Pretty poor when thats all they do tbh. Personally speaking the new T3's were in general an improvement over the **** poor protection which is the current one tbh, 3 dets aye just ****ing magic, they aint this magic train stopper everyone seems to think they are.
Yep some ptr&r needs looked at but on a national strike level...no. this should have been reported to those involved's reps when it happened for the rmt to deal with it properly without getting folk to walk out.
Also they harp on that seniority should count in this job, so your telling me that some signaller who may have been in the job 25-20yrs plus should get a new post instead of me or the next signaller even though he is utter crap at his job??? Doesn't sound right to me.
Hey i might have voted yes if the union had not rolled so much rubbish in as reason for strike along with valid reasons.

Am I walking out, yes because even though it did not go the way i voted i am in the union and go with the majority vote, the same way i would have expected yes voters to get on with the job in hand if the vote went to the no's!!

 

[GB]

Personally speaking the new T3's were in general an improvement over the **** poor protection which is the current one tbh, 3 dets aye just ****ing magic, they aint this magic train stopper everyone seems to think they are.

So how is some bloke in a white van who may or may not have a thorough knowledge of the area/panel/workstation/frame making sure the siggie has placed his protection correctly an improvement?

Of course dets will not stop a train instantly but if the driver goes over one (or three) then that is a pretty clear indication that something is wrong. By removing this last line of defense all that is being done is transfering the risk to other areas....and lets not forget that its not just the dets that are being removed but also the PLB.

 

[thegrich37423]

I genuinely believe that the government has its eye on the ball with the road system because it is top priority to them.

I have made my point here and there's nothing else for me to add.

 

[CosherB]

I was going to reply to all the errors in the craptains and grichs posts but I just cant be bothered.

In my case, I think you should. Resorting to personal abuse by the way (Craptain instead of Captain) is not only against the ethos of this forum and rather juvenile, but is indicative of an admission of having a weak or non-existant case which you can't argue on its own strengths.

I'm not aware of any 'errors' (that is, facts I got wrong, not things Roak doesn't agree with) in any of my posts. Perhaps you would be kind enough to point out the ones you think you've seen?

 

[90019]

I have made my point here and there's nothing else for me to add.

No you haven't.
You've stated an opinion and backed it up with no evidence whatsoever.

 

[Maxfly]

So how is some bloke in a white van who may or may not have a thorough knowledge of the area/panel/workstation/frame making sure the siggie has placed his protection correctly an improvement?

Of course dets will not stop a train instantly but if the driver goes over one (or three) then that is a pretty clear indication that something is wrong. By removing this last line of defense all that is being done is transfering the risk to other areas....and lets not forget that its not just the dets that are being removed but also the PLB.

Maybe not, but i know my patch and i would personally be happier providing the protection than some guy in a white van who may or may not know the area going out to lay/lift det protection and getting melted by a train. As said it's not perfect and needs further looking at but rmt stance that nmr should give assurance that T3's will never be touched is more than a tad blinkered

 

[royaloak]

No you haven't.
You've stated an opinion and backed it up with no evidence whatsoever.

My point exactly, thank you!

Captain,
How many people died on the rails yesterday, how many accidents, personal injuries etc, is it more or less than on the roads!

 

[jon0844]

I find the comparisons to the road network quite laughable. Anyone who drives will know that the roads are in a horrid state. Yes, some roads are being widened and improved, but as a whole they're a mess.

And it only goes to show that despite all the record taxes we pay, we're getting a raw deal on all forms of transportation.

 

[CosherB]

Captain,
How many people died on the rails yesterday, how many accidents, personal injuries etc, is it more or less than on the roads!

I think you've got the wrong poster (you do seem a bit confused about many things, so no surprise there). I've already said it's thousands a year dead on the roads, 1 passenger death in the last 5 years on rail.

Do try to keep up! :roll:

And would you please answer my question in my post above? Or do you now realise there were no errors in my posts? If so, be man enough to admit it.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

BBC News:
Network Rail is taking legal action in a bid to avert planned strikes by signallers, the company has said.

I'm presuming that they will request an injuction, based on the legitimacy of the ballot

 

[merlodlliw]

BBC News:
Network Rail is taking legal action in a bid to avert planned strikes by signallers, the company has said.

I'm presuming that they will request an injuction, based on the legitimacy of the ballot

NR took there time on this one, if the ballot was thought iffy.

 

[northernrail2009]

BBC News:
Network Rail is taking legal action in a bid to avert planned strikes by signallers, the company has said.

I'm presuming that they will request an injuction, based on the legitimacy of the ballot

What is the Chance that NR will Win in Court tomorrow?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I am not claiming that the ballot of members was in anyway improper.

I am only guessing that the most likely avenue open to NR (other than simply agreeing with the 2 Unions, of course!), would be to request a High Court Judge to serve an injunction, and that would require them to show that a strike would be unlawful. To succeed, they will have to persuade the Judge, on firm evidential grounds, that it would be unlawful.
If I'm right, then their legal team would have to produce some convincing evidence. And all I can think of is that their greatest prospects of success would be if they could show that the ballot does not provide an adequate mandate for a strike.
I'd also guess that their advice this afternoon is that they can do so - its a very expensive way to go to Court! So I'd expect them to be very confident in the legal advice they've been given - NR would be very very stupid not to take the best advice on such an action! If the best advice is that they will receive the injunction then they probably will.

I repeat - I have no reason to doubt the legitimacy of the mandate - and I have no reason to challenge the strike. I'm simply trying to unravel what could be behind this tiny sliver of information produced after 2 days of "talks"

Perhaps anyone with a couple of hours to spare tomorrow morning might want to go up to the Royal Palace of Justice in the Strand and look on the boards to see in which Court the request will be heard (presumably it will be heard in a Court there. The Court lists for tomorrow were published at 4:30pm and it wasn't listed by then). (and then let us all know what's said!)

The Unions will have been informed of the hearing.

Meanwhile, and if an injunction is granted, then the Unions will then have the right to Appeal that the Judge was wrong in law to have issued the Injunction and have it lifted. So they, too, will be taking legal advice and will be very keen to hear what reasons are argued tomorrow in the claim that the strike is unlawful.
I'll keep updating this if I find out any more this evening

 

[the sniper]

That's a very inward-looking post, moggie, and not untypical of some others on here who seem only to view the railway as a work place, not a national service for others to use, which is what it is actually in place and funded for. May I suggest you stand back and take a wider view.

When I was working, our customers judged our services on their quaulity and their price, not on whether I enjoyed my working conditions or not. And our customers continuing to buy from us rather from our competition is what kept us in a job!

You need to put yourself in the customer's shoes.

Yes moggie, what an incredibly inward-looking post. You think us customers should care about the risk of track worker being killed? We judge the railways on it's quality of service and price, if a couple of boys in orange have to cop it in the pursuit of a cheaper railway, why should we care? You really should put yourself in the customers shoes. :roll:

I have made my point here and there's nothing else for me to add.

Well, some evidence to back up those points would have been nice... oh well.

 

[merlodlliw]

Again Dave Newcastle, your info is very informative, NR may not be the
pushover some thought, and about time NR got its house in order as a N F P Company.

Hate to think of the legal cost of this, a signallers PA salary an hour for some legal top notch lawyer, on both sides.
Mr Crow should be looking at unrestricted reserves, certainly the RMT treasurer will if costs go to appeal on this.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

at 19:27 the BBC reported:
NR "said the legal papers served on the RMT highlighted "scores of discrepancies and inaccuracies" in the signallers' ballot and would be raised at a hearing on Wednesday. " so some of my reasoning has been confirmed!

EDIT 20:05
I've leaned of a technicality concerning the membership - nothing improper, but apparently relevant to the mandate received by the ballot. I think it would be improper of me to provide details in this public forum. The Unions will have to prepare a solid rebuttal, on legal grounds.

 

[TDK]

NR took there time on this one, if the ballot was thought iffy.

They probably wanted to cover all possibilities of a union climb down first before forking out the collosal legal costs involved in a judgement. If NR are going to court I would be surprised if the unions will win this one. Discepencies in the ballot is quite a serious allegation, if proved correct some heads may roll including the top man.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

At least with the road system, the government has its eye on the ball and delivers investment and with it better safety practices. This is because there is much less red tape involved. Why can't it do the same with the railways?
The answer is simple. There are too many 'fat cats' running the railways, private investors et al too interested in making a quick buck than ensuring we have a railway fit for the 21st century.

Well, all the money from the road tax goes into the trasury, all the tax on fuel goes into the treasury and only 2% of any duty goes back into the roads, the biggest fat cat is Mr.Brown. What safety systems have the Government got in place for the roads? Nowhere near as much for the railways. Todays government have wasted billions of our money over the last 10 years none to the roads, none to the railway but a lot in corruption, you tell me who the fat cats are, who actually runs Network Rail? Whoever has the final say on expenditure is the person to blame, I bet your bottom dollar the last say comes from Government.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Reuters
legal move over rail action
Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:15pm BST
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE62T1F420100330?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

Adding to the threat of industrial action, the RMT union said on Tuesday it would be balloting London underground staff for strike action over job cuts and ticket office closures.

"Network Rail has a responsibility to all our passengers and freight users, and to the country as a whole, to do everything we can to avert a strike," a spokesman said.

"Talks continue and our aim is a negotiated settlement, but we must explore all avenues at our disposal and that includes legal ones."

This appears to be escalating - In my opinion, the introduction of the LU issues at this time dilutes the potency of some of the RMT's stronger arguments with NR.

- EDIT -
More re LU ballot :

RMT general secretary Bob Crow said: "We have already warned that the cuts that are being planned by Transport for London will turn Tube stations into a muggers' paradise.
"We now have concrete evidence that the company are speeding up the process and are already leaving stations unstaffed, or with just one member of staff, without any consultation.
"That is a scandalous dereliction of duty and it is only a matter of time now before TfL and (London Mayor) Boris Johnson have a tragedy on their hands as a result of their cavalier disregard for public safety.

"The Mayor gave assurances to the public on ticket offices and Tube staffing in the run-up to his election and it's down to him to pull London Underground back from the brink."

- EDIT -
BBC 22:16pm

The RMT said it would "fight this assault on our union to the hilt".
The union's general secretary Bob Crow said: "I can confirm tonight that RMT is putting together an experienced legal team, including some of the most high-profile employment law experts in the country.
"We will be mounting the most robust defence possible in the High Court tomorrow against this attack by Network Rail on our internal democracy.

"This is a scandalous attempt by Network Rail to use the full weight of the anti-union laws to deny our members their basic human right to withdraw their labour and we will fight this assault on our union to the hilt."
An RMT spokesman earlier said the ballot of its members had been "perfectly above-board".
The spokesman added: "We have spent two days in talks making some significant progress, only to find the progress has been sabotaged by a threat of Network Rail to use anti-trade union laws to drag us into court tomorrow."

The conciliation service Acas, which is brokering talks between Network Rail and the unions, said discussions would resume on Wednesday morning.

 

[CosherB]

Discepencies in the ballot is quite a serious allegation, if proved correct some heads may roll including the top man.

If, by 'the top man', you are referring to that incoherant throwback to the 1970s, Bob Crow (there's an oxymoron - Crow as a 'top man' ) then his removal from the nation's TV screens would do the RMT's public image no harm at all.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There's a lot of debate 'out there' tonight over this.
Some see it as a "last stand" for the RMT.
And some equally see it as a "last stand" for NR.
Some are even expecting that the underlying merits and faults in changes to the PTR&R agreement and T3 proposals will be argued and fought in front of a Judge. They will not.

Tomorrow's Court appearance will be on the very limited argument by NR that the strike would not be fully and absolutely compliant with the legal pre-requisites for a strike.
If NR gain their injuction tomorrow, then we will wait to see what counter-arguments the RMT launch in a few days.
If the injunction IS granted, and if the Unions cannot succeed in an Appeal in the next few days, then there will be no strike. (I don't believe that NR have delayed in this attack. It has been well timed to give the Unions too little time to prepare a fully mandated response. They may try a second ballot next week, but with the holiday and the (alledged) defects in membership records, it will be tough to arrange "lawfully"). Either way, the real and serious issues will remain to be argued - one way or another - later

What is NOT helping is the introduction of new issues - such as RMT's ballot of LU staff and NR's threat of cancelling bonuses of strikers. Surely the merits of the real issues should stand in their own right?

What does appear to have happened, as I see it, is that both parties have become polarised into an irresolvable either-or dispute with all arguments, relevant & spurious, brought in to the fight.
You probably have a better understanding than I do of the long-term consequences of loosing this battle, by whichever side. Members, stakeholders, politicians, travellers, employees, contractors, hacks, academics and armchair commentators will all draw their conclusions. But its clear to me that the losses will be profound. And we'll all feel the consequences.

 

[turbo mick]

ok then guys work out how many signallers work in these signal boxes during a 12hr shift now during the hours of disruption if it goes ahead just to give you a idea from paddington to reading 11 signalman as a guess to safely operate now do you think there is enough managers to cover that for 4hrs at the am peak and pm peak if any train is involved in a safety related incident caused by a manager then the drivers union will become invoved

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . if any train is involved in a safety related incident caused by a manager . . .

or in any degraded working?

What driver will accept instructions from a temporary manager signaller - and at whose risk?

 

[TW7]

It has been nice to see how quickly Iain Coucher & Co are willing to smear the name of signalling staff, they fed false information to the papers regarding signallers who get paid £50-60k for 3 days of work a week....Anyone inside the industry knows this is S**T.

Nice to also see how Mr Coucher has spunked christ knows how much money by putting full page letters in most tabloid papers in a desperate attempt to gain public support....funny how they dont mention this though....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/5183465/Network-Rail-spends-millions-on-payouts-for-race-and-sex-claims.html

 

[CarterUSM]

The spin involved in disputes these days amazes me, i'd go as far to say it is absolutely deplorable. And I mean from all sides.

 

[swissrailpassion]

Signallers will be in their boxes, drivers ready to drive, trains ready to roll, but nothing will move for 4 days in Hull, Scarborough, Grimsby, Barrow, Harrogate, Whitby, Middlesborough and much more.
This is a catastrophe.
Northern and TPE have simply given up trying to run any trains at all between late Monday and Saturday morning yet staff will be available and paid to work from mid-morning until just before six.

Where is the fighting spirit to operate some sort of service on all lines for at least part of the day?
A handful of trains running shuttles would at least enable people to get around.
The south seems to be fairing better than the north where it seems they have simply given up on most of the network.