Network Rail Signallers: Strike Action

[mickey]

An outside body, of which ERBS is the most commonly-used by unions, conducts the ballot, including the issue, collection and counting of ballot papers. The union, naturally, has to pay them to do so.

That's what I thought. They're the same people who run the voting for Nationwide, where they ballot what must be nearly half the country.

 

[68000]

I wonder how the relevant records can be maintained. OK, when I left work, I left the union, but let membership ride until they next asked for money. I suspect this is common enough. But, with regard to the signallers at Usk, did they leave the service, or were they redeployed elsewhere? If the latter, then their vote is simply registered at the wrong workplace, but it should still count. The most efficient way to keep records updated would be for the employers to notify the union of any changes directly - but, as in this case, it could be in the employers interests to supply out of date info. I suppose what I am saying is that, if the union dues have been paid, someone, somewhere was eligible to vote.
But history does suggest that strikes solve nothing.

Surely it is up to the union to ensure they hold accurate records of their membership.

 

[boing_uk]

Having been in a Union that has called for strike, and crossed picket lines to go to work, the option of striking is always called far too soon.

For my own union it was about pensions and local agreements. Now Unison stated that there was no other option but to strike; but in the end did this resolve the problem? No it didnt.

The local agreement was renegotiated and the pensions issue is still, four years later, at an impasse as far as I can tell. Moreover, the same issues were being argued the first time I was called to strike (fortunately I had already booked leave and had a meeting with my manager to say no I would not support the strike) in 2002!

Look at how many times the RMT is ballotting its members for strike action over the pettiest little things for political gain. The RMT leadership really isnt concerned about the safety of the railways; what it is concerned about is power for its members. That hold over the management.

Now, I am in no way a capitalist but I think its a great shame that militency in the country's essential services has to be tolerated. If only there was a Bruce Gyngell in the railway industry.

 

[CarterUSM]

I think that it's a great shame that employees are held in such low regard.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I know I'm not the first to say it, but its a sad day for the hard won Union Movement. Even a sad day for governance

 

[313103]

I am not going to bother reading the previous posts, as all i will say is all those that were against the strike have now got there wish. So now all those selfish, self centered, dinosaurs from the 1970s will have to work, or in a case of around 1500 collect their giro at the Labour exchange.

 

[jon0844]

I would hope that if there is a fresh vote, then it comes back with a majority so large that nobody can argue with it.

Not a problem if they're genuine votes. If they're not then someone should question the effectiveness of the union. The union, like Unite, has shot itself in the foot.

Bob Crow can't moan at all. It wasn't a true reflection of the opinion of union members. Only when everything is 100% accurate can that be known.

It's also a bit of a PR cock up, as it now puts doubt in the minds of others about what union members really feel. If the votes had to be manipulated, surely it's not the same level of support as Bob Crow suggested. Expect the media and NR management to take advantage of this!

 

[WatcherZero]

The maintenance workers strike has now been called off too and both groups will be reballoted at a date to be decided next wednesday.

 

[Metroland]

With such a narrow margin (54% of signallers in favour of striking), and 172 votes up for question, it's highly unlikely there will be strike action now IMHO, and even if there was it would be at least 6 weeks away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am not going to bother reading the previous posts, as all i will say is all those that were against the strike have now got there wish. So now all those selfish, self centered, dinosaurs from the 1970s will have to work, or in a case of around 1500 collect their giro at the Labour exchange.

I do wonder if there had been strikes whether some would be sacked and Jarvis people re-employed.

 

[Maxfly]

I am not going to bother reading the previous posts, as all i will say is all those that were against the strike have now got there wish. So now all those selfish, self centered, dinosaurs from the 1970s will have to work, or in a case of around 1500 collect their giro at the Labour exchange.

Do not like the thought of the maintenance staffs job cuts and wholeheartedly agree with their action, but now with that being called off brings into question were we siggies just being used as pawns?? I would quite happily support the action if it was made clear as to why we were strking but looking at it now the reasons for the signallers strike were just a smokescreen to get us out to cause maximum disruption as rmt knew maintenace alone would not stop most trains running. More than a touch underhand imo!!

Also it is not, at least imo RMT's fault about the ballot's, more the members who have not kept their details up to date, the union has sent out papers asking if the details they held were up to date and if not to update them. Though missing out whole in service locations is a bit careless and i know at least two workmates who did not get ballot papers and not through lack of trying either!!

 

[northernrail2009]

Do you think the RMT will go to the vote again or give up? and if so when could the 1st walk outs start?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Today's outcome was a serious blow to the RMT and the status of Trade Unions in 2010.

However, although that is a significant event in itself, I'm surprised that no one is asking about the underlying issues of disagreement that led to the ballot in the first place:-
Staff's PTR&R arrangements, the challenge to local rostering, the arrangments for T3 possessions.
THESE were the matters of dissagreement between members and the employer - so why are they not being discussed now?

If these chages mattered a few weeks ago, surely discussion of these matters is even more pressing now?

 

[F Great Eastern]

Bob Crow just been on tv when asked about the strike being cancelled, and all he was talking about was crash after crash after crash after crash on the railways to quote him, he claims he wants to do the best for the railways but he came across as nothing other than totally angry that the strike had got cancelled so would make a statement like that which was out of anger and yet another attempt to hide the real reasons for the strike behind the mask of safety issues.

Nobody can say they are supporting the railways with a quote like "Crash after crash after crash after crash" yes there have been incidents, but the way Bob Crow went on tonight was as if it is a regular occurance, simply because he couldn't get his own way and threw all his toys out of the pram.

 

[68000]

Why would the RMT cancel the maintenance strike? That vote was valid and was not part of the injunction today. Signallers being used by the RMT?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Do you think the RMT will go to the vote again or give up?

Surely the question should be "do Members believe that the issues concerning them are more likely to be resolved by a second attempt at a strike than they are by continued negotiation?".
If, and ONLY if, the answer to that is "yes", then they should require their Union to represent them by balloting members to find out if the majority favour a strike rather than negotiation.
If the answer is "no" (doesn't matter why. ie Any of the other options, ranging from "we're better off negotiating" all the way through to "I don't care but don't want to risk my job") then they should not be requiring a Union mandate for a strike.

Its missing the point to go straight from "we lost this time" to "so lets try to strike better the next time".
The point was, and still is : conditions of work and employment, plus a very specific concern about changes to safe working procedures during a possession.

And, sadly, its exactly such errors of reasoning such as "missing the point", that gets Unions into disrepute. Isn't it?

So, my request is, can we focus on exactly what the point(s) at issue is/are?
Please?

If we don't, then were having a philosophical chat about the decline of the trade union movement and the shifts in Labour's political values. Interesting, but that is a very different subject.

 

[jon0844]

Nobody can say they are supporting the railways with a quote like "Crash after crash after crash after crash" yes there have been incidents, but the way Bob Crow went on tonight was as if it is a regular occurance, simply because he couldn't get his own way and threw all his toys out of the pram.

He has to be quite careful given that accidents may well be down to the actions of his members. He can't blame management for everything, all the time.

I do think he needs to work a bit on his PR. Plenty of people now assume that he is only out for his own gain, and is as likely to lie as any politician. Thus, any genuine concern for safety runs the risk of being ignored or discounted, on the basis that it's just Bob Crow flexing his muscles.

 

[Tom C]

I do think he needs to work a bit on his PR. Plenty of people now assume that he is only out for his own gain, and is as likely to lie as any politician. Thus, any genuine concern for safety runs the risk of being ignored or discounted, on the basis that it's just Bob Crow flexing his muscles.

I cannot see how it can be taken as Bob Crow flexing his muscles.

At the moment the strength of feeling cannot be quantified as the ballot was deemed illegal however, as this is a national dispute, should another ballot be conducted with all the I's and T's crossed and a simular result returned then substantial number of workers will decide to take industrial action and if anyone has any idea of how a union works internally then the arguement about everything being about Bob Crow is complete nonsense. He is the the public face of the union but the heart of the union is always the membership and it is the men and women at Network Rail who will make the decision whether they think that industrial action is the right course of action. Bob Crow simply takes the message he gets from his members and puts is across to the media. Personally, the no nonsense approach that is given by the RMT is something that I support as it gives me the assurance that any issues that affect me are being taken seriously and there is no attempt to play the public or any other body. It is focused on giving me the protection at work that is the whole point in being a trade union member in the first place.

Whatever peoples opinion of Bob Crow, the RMT, ACAS or indeed Network Rail may be, there is now an opportunity for BOTH sides to return to the table and avoid the need for another ballot. Whichever side you fall on, nobody wants this to happen again and BOTH sides need to make a concerted effort to try and resolve this dispute.

 

[jon0844]

I meant to say 'on the assumption', not 'on the basis'. The point is, everyone will see Bob Crow as 'that communist who wants nothing else than complete renationalisation of the railway'.

Like the boy who cried wolf, nobody will believe anything he says about safety issues even if they're totally valid issues.

I know he can say he doesn't care, but that only helps prove the argument that he doesn't care - which once again doesn't help the cause.

As I said before, fix the ballot and get people to vote again. Then let's see what the results are and go from there.

I think (in my own opinion) it's fair to say that from every time I've seen him speak - and when he was on HIGNFY - he does seem very out of touch. If it's really about the members, I think the union needs another spokesperson that can be seen as more open minded. I have no doubt it would pay off for the members in the long run.

 

[Metroland]

Accidents are of course never black or white, and it rarely is, all one person's fault or staff, or management.

Take the recent derailment of a passenger train in Cumbria:

- There was poor track maintenance standards and many things were not picked up on the fortnightly track patrol.

- The driver was going too fast to be examining the line.

- The signaller should not have sent the train over the line, did not convey the severity of the track buckle, nor instructed the driver as to the maximum speed.

- Network rail itself, didn't develop a comprehensive guide for jointed track.

http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/100325_R062010_Cummersdale.pdf

It was recommended that:

As a consequence of this incident, the RAIB has made four recommendations targeted at Network Rail and one recommendation targeted at Northern Rail, the train operator. These cover the following areas:

* improved standards for the maintenance and repair of jointed track;
* identifying and monitoring sections of jointed track on the network which have similar characteristics to the track which buckled at Cummersdale;
* re-briefing of signallers on the correct actions to take when a track defect has been reported which could endanger a train; and
* introduction of a specific requirement in the Rule Book for train drivers to clarify with the signaller what the maximum speed should be when examining the line.

http://www.raib.gov.uk/latest_news/100325_pn_cummersdale.cfm

Despite this, the local RMT rep said

'Commenting on photographs of the buckled railway at Cummersdale, he said: “It’s like something from a Blackpool fairground.

“We’re waiting for answers from Network Rail about the state of the track and we’re still waiting for their answers regarding the Potters Bar and Grayrigg accidents.'

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/w...for-rail-users-1.690670?referrerPath=/1.50001

 

[the sniper]

Take the recent derailment of a passenger train in Cumbria:

Having read the report when it came out, I still can't understand how the first train didn't derail, considering that the guard was thrown to the floor when the train passed over the kink!

 

[boing_uk]

I would guess it depends on how the forces in the track were acting upon it at the time.

The driver and the front carriage passengers reported they didnt feel a thing, which would suggest that the failure started to occur as the train passed over the affected section and indeed during or after the second bogie had passed over.

As the track began to move I would guess it was still in motion to its final position after the trailing bogie passed over it? Thats my guess at it anyway.

 

[CosherB]

Radio 4, this morning, Crow interview with John Humphries...

The bobcrowasaurus is an interesting throwback............. Strange evolutionary backwater.

 

[Metroland]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8600000/8600475.stm

Here's the very interview with the LUL trackworker v the Ex teenage reporter for a small Welsh newspaper.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8600000/8600428.stm

also courts in industrial disputes

 

[GB]

The bobcrowasaurus is an interesting throwback............. Strange evolutionary backwater

Haven't you got anything new to say or are you just going to repeat the same old tired things?

 

[TW7]

Haven't you got anything new to say or are you just going to repeat the same old tired things?

Im sure he would be the first person to complain if a train he was on derailed etc, yet he cant seem to understand what the strike is about....

 

[Metroland]

Bob Crow’s performance on the steps of the High Court after losing the court case over the legality of the strike suggest that he does not have the interests of his members or the industry at heart. For him to say that there has been ‘accident after accident’ on the railways is quite simply a disgrace. Ill-informed members of the public may well take him at face value, and worry about travelling on the railways when, in fact, as he well knows, the railways are safer than at any time in their history and just one person has been killed in a railway accident in nearly eight years. Meanwhile, nine people a day die on the roads, to which Bob Crow’s fear tactics will send countless extra people.

He has really blown it this time, demonstrating that the strike is all about politics and narrow interests rather than about safety or even his members’ future in the industry.

I have been rebuked by a couple of RMT members for being sceptical about the union’s use of the safety card to garner support for their action. Having talked to people on all sides of the dispute, and having received emails from several railway workers, I still can’t see any justification for the fears expressed about safety.

Yes, the Office of Rail Regulation did express some concerns about the changes to the maintenance programme, but in a second letter to Iain Coucher, these have been allayed. As I have mentioned before, I am a union member, I write a column for a union newspaper and am totally supportive of workers’ rights to organise. Indeed, the maintenance workers may well have a good case for getting a better deal for the changes being foisted upon them by management.

But to speak, as Bob Crow did, is nothing short of scandalous. There has not been ‘accident after accident’ on the railways and, indeed, the series of accidents that did occur were not down to the lack of staff but, rather, the way the industry was privatised in a great rush, poor management and mistakes by individual workers.

If there are any RMT members who can point to dangerous changes being imposed by Network Rail, please comment on this blog.

http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/20...Feed:+feed/christianwolmar+(Christian+Wolmar)

 

[F Great Eastern]

Bob Crow’s performance on the steps of the High Court after losing the court case over the legality of the strike suggest that he does not have the interests of his members or the industry at heart. For him to say that there has been ‘accident after accident’ on the railways is quite simply a disgrace. Ill-informed members of the public may well take him at face value, and worry about travelling on the railways when, in fact, as he well knows, the railways are safer than at any time in their history and just one person has been killed in a railway accident in nearly eight years. Meanwhile, nine people a day die on the roads, to which Bob Crow’s fear tactics will send countless extra people.

He has really blown it this time, demonstrating that the strike is all about politics and narrow interests rather than about safety or even his members’ future in the industry.

I have been rebuked by a couple of RMT members for being sceptical about the union’s use of the safety card to garner support for their action. Having talked to people on all sides of the dispute, and having received emails from several railway workers, I still can’t see any justification for the fears expressed about safety.

Yes, the Office of Rail Regulation did express some concerns about the changes to the maintenance programme, but in a second letter to Iain Coucher, these have been allayed. As I have mentioned before, I am a union member, I write a column for a union newspaper and am totally supportive of workers’ rights to organise. Indeed, the maintenance workers may well have a good case for getting a better deal for the changes being foisted upon them by management.

But to speak, as Bob Crow did, is nothing short of scandalous. There has not been ‘accident after accident’ on the railways and, indeed, the series of accidents that did occur were not down to the lack of staff but, rather, the way the industry was privatised in a great rush, poor management and mistakes by individual workers.

If there are any RMT members who can point to dangerous changes being imposed by Network Rail, please comment on this blog.

http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/20...Feed:+feed/christianwolmar+(Christian+Wolmar)

Normally I disagree with what Wolmar has to say but in this instance he has it bang on.

 

[jon0844]

Bob Crow’s performance on the steps of the High Court after losin...

Are you Christian Wolmar? Shouldn't that have been a quote from him?!

 

[CosherB]

Im sure he would be the first person to complain if a train he was on derailed etc, yet he cant seem to understand what the strike is about....

Christian Woolmar's views are absolutely spot on. You lot on here who can't seem to see beyond your NR blinkers should read and take note - he is no fool and he has Crow off to a 'T'.

And at the risk of being a stuck record (but some on here still don't get it), whatever the rights and wrongs of the dispute (and it seems from Crow's performance that it is largely unfounded anyway), a strike helps nobody and hits folk who are not involved.

What's so hard to understand about that?

Now please stop whinging on about derailed trains and rail armageddon. Please try to look at this strike-or-not decision from an unselfish viewpoint. And read Woolmar's comments again!

By the way, did you know that Bob Crow wasn't born conventionally? He simply walked out after nine months!

 

[the sniper]

I would guess it depends on how the forces in the track were acting upon it at the time.

The driver and the front carriage passengers reported they didnt feel a thing, which would suggest that the failure started to occur as the train passed over the affected section and indeed during or after the second bogie had passed over.

As the track began to move I would guess it was still in motion to its final position after the trailing bogie passed over it? Thats my guess at it anyway.

Yeah, that's what I assumed too. That the rear trailing bogie didn't derail is what surprised me.

Radio 4, this morning, Crow interview with John Humphries...

It was embarrassing, John Humphrys definitely said it "raises suspicions that the vote was rigged", the way Bob Crow didn't drop the issue made it all the worse.

The bobcrowasaurus is an interesting throwback............. Strange evolutionary backwater.

It's comments like this that devalue your posts.

Im sure he would be the first person to complain if a train he was on derailed etc, yet he cant seem to understand what the strike is about....

Captain has made it quiet clear that even if the railways were being put in a perilous state safety wise he'd still want all staff to just get on with their jobs and bow to the superior knowledge of their pen pushing managers. Presumably when the first train crashes Captain's response will be 'oh well, **** happens...'. :roll:

By the way, you do know that Bob Crow wasn't born conventionally. He simply walked out after nine months!

These are the jokes, folks.