ASLEF votes for protection against far right

[telstarbox]

In other ASLEF news... (this was debated before the attack in Woolwich this afternoon and subsequent EDL reaction)

PROTECTION AGAINST FAR RIGHT
It is a sad fact that the railway provides transport for fascist and racist groups to take them to demonstrations. In many cases this means that train drivers of black or ethnic origin have to take them to locations where they often cause violence, and always bring hate and prejudice.
It is unacceptable that black and ethnic minority train drivers are put in a position of potential risk. The union will seek agreements with the train companies to accommodate these drivers when demonstrations take place.

http://www.aslef.org.uk/information/135589/the_third_day_of_the_aslef_conference/

ASLEF Conference have passed a motion refusing to transport EDL supporters and fascists on trains to demos

https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/337328956535607296

Should drivers be able to pick and choose who they transport? Would the same drivers presumably transport EDL members in plain clothes not carrying a St George's flag? Some football fans or people who've had too much drink are equally adept at causing violence and intimidation when they travel by train.

(To be clear I'm no fan of the EDL.)

 

[yorkie]

Absolutely right. And some football 'fans' (not really fans) have been refused carriage. Anyone acting in the way I've seen them behave on TV and on internet videos should not be allowed to travel by train.

 

[district]

It sounds like black/ethnic minority drivers will be the only ones to get the chance to not drive the affected trains. As a white person, I would certainly not want to either!

 

[tsr]

Anybody can be removed from the railway on the grounds that they are offending other passengers, or if they are interfering with their comfort or convenience. I would suggest that anyone who is on railway premises and openly identifying themselves as fascist or racist is likely to be liable to be removed on these grounds.

If EDL supporters cause themselves to be dealt with under any provisions which can lead to them being removed, so be it.

Byelaw 6:

6. Unacceptable behaviour
(1) No person shall use any threatening, abusive, obscene or offensive language on the railway.
(2) No person shall behave in a disorderly, indecent or offensive manner on the railway.
...
(8) No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway.

See the full Railway Byelaws here.

 

[soil]

Blatant political posturing by the far left, against the far right.

There are many groups of whom one could easily say 'cor don't fancy the look of that lot', and no doubt all things being equal you'd rather have a group of commuters on your train than the EDL membership.

I however see no reason to believe that they are any worse than football supporters, or many other groups.

Also, as I understand it, the EDL are an anti-Islamic group, rather than one opposed to any particular race, and this motion is intended to equate them with racists, which many of them will be, but not necessarily in any greater proportion than a random carriage of Millwall fans.

Conference day nonsense.

What are they going to say? 'You look a bit white and working class mate - not coming on my train, eff off back where you came from.'?

 

[johnnychips]

It'll be forgotten in a week. I'm proud to belong to a trade union (the NUT) but am unable and unwilling to give up my time to attend meetings or conferences, so when some members of my union come forth with strident views at the conference that I don't necessarily agree with, I respect them for taking the trouble to go and put their point of view, berate myself a bit for not being more active, then forget about it.

Existing race hate laws should be adequate for rail staff suffering abuse from the EDF if it happens.

 

[Matt Taylor]

I would never advocate transporting people who are breach of the byelaws or CoC, but it's rather a dangerous precedent to set if you start deciding who can and cannot travel on the basis of their political or idealogic persuasions.

Nevertheless the only EDL I want on my train was built by English Electric in the 1960s.

 

[chris89]

Shouldn't they carry it out for all groups though and not pick and choose?

Yes a majority of EDL supporters are not greatest of people in the world, but sure somewhere there are some form of decent ones.

Yes if I was in that situation I wouldn't want to take them, but I wouldn't either for UAF either as some of them are just as bad.

But then it is just my point if view though.

Note: No way in hell support the actions of any of these groups and never will, but can't have one rule for one and not for the other side of things.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What with this particular ASLEF campaign and noting the other thread of ASLEF also campaigning against Scottish independance, are we soon to see ASLEF used by the Labour party in opposition as a sounding board for policies that Labour in opposition seem unwilling to comit themselves upon when asked ?

Will new threads now begin to appear on here giving the ASLEF view on same-sex marriage, a referendum on staying in the EU,... etc, etc, etc ?

 

[yorkie]

I would never advocate transporting people who are breach of the byelaws or CoC, but it's rather a dangerous precedent to set if you start deciding who can and cannot travel on the basis of their political or idealogic persuasions..

But you can't decide on that basis and I don't think they are trying to. The fact is that the EDL pre-arranges acts of intimidation and provocation, and arranges rail travel as the method to get to wherever they want to intimidate people next. I am sure if there are similar groups arranging such events, that rail workers would not want them to be carried either!

Some football fans or people who've had too much drink are equally adept at causing violence and intimidation when they travel by train.

Agreed but these so-called "football fans" are really hooligans simply using football matches as an excuse to engage in intimidating and provoking people, and many of whom also attend EDL demos (so not surprising that they are equally adept at causing violence and intimidation!)

 

[Oswyntail]

How do they intend to identify EDL supporters? OK, I know they have horns and a tail, but they tend to keep these hidden. Or will it come down to good old St George? As has been said, if anyone has committed an offence, they can be refused, but, if they haven't they cannot.

 

[yorkie]

How do they intend to identify EDL supporters?

As said before, I hardly think it's a case of identifying individual EDL supporters! But, to answer the question, a Youtube search for EDL train may 'enlighten' you as to the sort of behaviour that goes on, during their train trips to whichever town they want to upset next. They don't seem to make their trips a secret anyway, do they?

 

[JohnB57]

What with this particular ASLEF campaign and noting the other thread of ASLEF also campaigning against Scottish independance, are we soon to see ASLEF used by the Labour party in opposition as a sounding board for policies that Labour in opposition seem unwilling to comit themselves upon when asked ?

Will new threads now begin to appear on here giving the ASLEF view on same-sex marriage, a referendum on staying in the EU,... etc, etc, etc ?

That's a huge leap of logic Paul, even by mid-Cheshire standards.

Most people find it pretty easy to distinguish democratic debate - even the sort perpetuated by certain union leaders - from incitement or intent to carry out acts of violence or terror. There's a massive void between jaw-jaw and war-war and, like it or not, unions are political entities with concomitant opinions.

 

[Vicpaul]

What about other far right groups

 

[maniacmartin]

ASLEF Conference have passed a motion refusing to transport EDL supporters and fascists on trains to demos

Is this legal? It sounds like discrimination to me.

Whilst I do not share the views or condone the actions of many EDL supporters, I don't support this motion. Why is the EDL specifically being singled out? If they are causing trouble then the existing bylaws and laws should be enough to remove them from the train

 

[yorkie]

Why is the EDL specifically being singled out?

There are other groups organising similar events by train?

If they are causing trouble then the existing bylaws and laws should be enough to remove them from the train

Yes, they should. But they aren't being used. The rail industry seems to be forced to carry people who are breaking numerous byelaws and intimidating other passengers!

 

[Lampshade]

This is dangerous, if they start refusing travel to one group how long will it be before they refuse travel to another, and another, and another?

 

[swt_passenger]

What about other far right groups

What about far left groups?

 

[yorkie]

This is dangerous, if they start refusing travel to one group how long will it be before they refuse travel to another, and another, and another?

If the byelaws were enforced, they would be refused travel anyway!

What other groups also organise similar regular trips?

 

[Lampshade]

If the byelaws were enforced, they would be refused travel anyway!

What other groups also organise similar regular trips?

None that I know of, though if you refuse travel to one group, it sets a precedent that other groups/individuals could be refused travel in the future just for belonging to a group that a Trade Union disagrees with, even if that group/individual has done nothing wrong (though in the case of the EDL, that's rarely the case).

 

[Vicpaul]

What about far left groups?

You can't single out one group of mindless idiots you have to do the same to all

 

[Oswyntail]

As said before, I hardly think it's a case of identifying individual EDL supporters! But, to answer the question, a Youtube search for EDL train may 'enlighten' you as to the sort of behaviour that goes on, during their train trips to whichever town they want to upset next. They don't seem to make their trips a secret anyway, do they?

I can understand that. But it is not only EDL supporters who behave like that. The real point, as with much of society, is that there are laws that are not being enforced, leaving bystanders vulnerable, and leading groups like ASLEF to make their own rules and, effectively, take the law into their own hands.

 

[O L Leigh]

There are lot of threads to this topic that are not necessarily limited to refusing to carry a troublesome group of people which, I agree, will be hard to enforce without the cooperation of other groups such as Police.

But there is more to this. As has already been stated, ASLEF, like other unions, is a political entity. This is as much a statement of political opposition as it is a statement of intent to withhold the right to travel. The movements of the EDL have become so associated with the railways that there might be a connection in the minds of the public with the EDL and the railways and an assumption of tacit support from within the industry. This statement is a way of one of the largest group of railway workers distancing themselves from the activities of the EDL.

Personally I support it. I will not be tracking the movements of the EDL from one place to the next, but if I become aware of a group of their members on my train I shall be exerting pressure on my controller to get them met by Police and ejected at the first (and, hopefully, least convenient) opportunity.

O L Leigh

 

[chris89]

You can't single out one group of mindless idiots you have to do the same to all

Exactly

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That's a huge leap of logic Paul, even by mid-Cheshire standards. Most people find it pretty easy to distinguish democratic debate - even the sort perpetuated by certain union leaders - from incitement or intent to carry out acts of violence or terror. There's a massive void between jaw-jaw and war-war and, like it or not, unions are political entities with concomitant opinions.

Be assured that I would be just feel the same if organisations such as Halfords or Marks and Spencer suddenly decided that they felt the need to have political campaigning abilities upon a range of issues unconnected with their retail wherewithal. Maybe it was just the case that it was the Labour opposition in Government not seeming to have any stated views upon certain political matters (well, none that they will give in cross-Chamber debates) that the matter of their using a trades union such as ASLEF to do their job for them as a sounding board of opinion seemed a logical assumption for me to make.

Perhaps reading this thread, and the other thread about ASLEF's campaigning against Scottish independence, at 0230 made me feel more heightened upon the matter. However, I now look forward to reading many more of these threads, after the launching of these first two, on what ASLEF will next be campaigning upon such as the Fisheries policy of the EC, the scandalous energy charges of the utility companies, the matter of racism in sport, etc, etc, etc.

Launching a new conspiracy theory, as is the want of some RailUK forum members on the "Football" thread, I wonder if one can draw a comparison between the UKIP emergence against the Conservative party and this new ASLEF emergence on the political scene against the Labour party.

 

[CC 72100]

Personally I support it. I will not be tracking the movements of the EDL from one place to the next, but if I become aware of a group of their members on my train I shall be exerting pressure on my controller to get them met by Police and ejected at the first (and, hopefully, least convenient) opportunity.

O L Leigh

Only if they are misbehaving and being a nuisance to other passengers though I would hope?

 

[O L Leigh]

I feel there is a point being missed.

If someone is committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance they can be ejected from the railway. Not a problem. If a group of people are travelling with the express purpose of committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance, I see no problem with ejecting them or refusing them entry to the railway in the first place. This is a different matter from football fans or others who are travelling and who may end up committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance as a matter of circumstance and not deliberate planning.

I see no reason why I should facilitate the commission of a criminal act or a nuisance, nor express views that are held to be generally abhorrent by the majority of society and myself.

O L Leigh

 

[CC 72100]

I feel there is a point being missed.

If someone is committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance they can be ejected from the railway. Not a problem. If a group of people are travelling with the express purpose of committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance, I see no problem with ejecting them or refusing them entry to the railway in the first place. This is a different matter from football fans or others who are travelling and who may end up committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance as a matter of circumstance and not deliberate planning.

I see no reason why I should facilitate the commission of a criminal act or a nuisance, nor express views that are held to be generally abhorrent by the majority of society and myself.

O L Leigh

So what you're saying is that you don't want to be involved with supporting (through your labour) the plans of the EDL when going to protest marches etc., as they are going with the purpose to behave in a criminal manner?

I understand your viewpoint and think 'fair enough', but I do worry that ASLEF's position could create a dangerous precedent.

 

[O L Leigh]

I understand your viewpoint and think 'fair enough', but I do worry that ASLEF's position could create a dangerous precedent.

There is already a precedent. A legal one.

Members of football hooligan "firms" who travel to games with the express purpose of fighting with opposing fans have their travel rights restricted and are often barred from travelling to matches entirely.

O L Leigh

 

[Gareth]

I feel there is a point being missed.

If someone is committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance they can be ejected from the railway. Not a problem. If a group of people are travelling with the express purpose of committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance, I see no problem with ejecting them or refusing them entry to the railway in the first place. This is a different matter from football fans or others who are travelling and who may end up committing a criminal act or causing a nuisance as a matter of circumstance and not deliberate planning.

I see no reason why I should facilitate the commission of a criminal act or a nuisance, nor express views that are held to be generally abhorrent by the majority of society and myself.

O L Leigh

You can't just decide that you happen to believe is an EDL member is automatically using that journey to break the law somewhere and by default is a criminal waiting to happen. For a start, despite being the meat heads that the EDL are, protesting isn't illegal in itself. If someone told you, or you had reason to believe, that a small group of people on your train were affiliated, would you eject them even if they happened to be minding their own business?

It sounds ideological to me. You don't like these people, so you don't want to provide a service to them.

As has been said by a few people on here, there must be a distinction between not serving the EDL (and whoever else) because they're being disruptive or intimidating to staff & other passengers, and not serving them purely because they're the EDL.

I find the intolerance of intolerance rather ironic. I'm glad the UAF have been mentioned. They're as bad as anyone when it comes to the 'rent a mob' genre. If I ever become a train driver or guard, I'll refuse carriage of anyone I believe to be a member of UAF, even if they're not doing anything untoward. I'll also ban Manchester United fans or any young person who thinks its cool to wear a flat cap.