Northern Rail conductors vote on strike action

[whhistle]

I imagine it would be written...

... but you don't know.

While I suspect your suspicions are correct, we cannot judge Northern Rail without seeing a copy of the letter.

 

[northwichcat]

... but you don't know.

While I suspect your suspicions are correct, we cannot judge Northern Rail without seeing a copy of the letter.

Neither does Nym who suggested Northern have breached terms by sending out the letter. I was suggesting how the letter could have been written to not breach terms, given they have recently signed a contract with employment legal specialists I would be surprised if Northern have actually breached employee law or the terms and conditions of a contract.

 

[driver_m]

How am I a freeloader? I have always negotiated my contract if need be. Go away and take your left wing rubbish with you. It's about time the Unions were clamped down on again like Thatcher did in the 80's.

Exactly what needs clamping down? Just as you say you have no problem with people joining a union, why do you suddenly have a problem with those same people deciding to protest about something by withdrawing their labour?

Oh and one more point, your employers appreciate you for showing loyalty. If you truly believe that then good luck with that! You are nothing more to your employer than a statistic, it doesn't matter whether the public face of the company is cute n cuddly or efficient or whatever. They do what benefits themselves. As right wing people tend to do a lot.

 

[Moonshot]

So if your boss has a bad day tomorrow and decides to suspend and/ or dismiss you for what you may consider a trivial or made up issue you will just say ok fine in this democracy of individuals it's your personal choice to do that I'll clear my locker now

Unless I m very much mistaken, there are employment laws and tribunals etc which prevent this sort of action. HR departments tend to step on eggshells when dealing with matters of this nature. There are also disciplinary procedures set in stone in most companies.

Im pretty sure most rail employees on this forum will know of someone who has been dismissed for a breach of contract terms.

 

[313103]

Post deleted

 

[plastictaffy]

I have no problems with people wanting to be in a union, and conversely they should have no problems with me not wanting to be in one for the reasons I have already outlined. Yet it seems most do have a problem with that for some reason. That's partly the reason I don't like them.

I don't agree with everything the RMT do, and certainly, some of the policies that are in place because of stuff that the union have done are ridiculous. However, I pay my 18 quid a month to the RMT purely as insurance. If I cock-up, I'll need protection.
Recently, my TOC should have allocated me a job that they then decided to put out to another depot. I should have had it, but didn't get it, and that was that. However, because I am a member of my union, it was pushed for that I should have had it based on counts and things, so they are going to pay me it. When I originally put the letter in to my boss, (on advice from my Rep) I was told "you're wasting your time, I'm not going to pay it". Of course, as a non-union employee, you'd have had to accept that. In my case, a sunday is worth the thick end of 200 notes. Makes my 18 quid a month into the union all of a sudden seem worthwhile!!

I have no problem with anyone being non-union, you have your choice and I respect that. But the moment anyone at my depot works extra to cover the rest of us out on dispute, forget it. One of the very first guys at met at my depot is non-union, and one of the nicest blokes you could wish to meet. But if he scabs, I'll never pass the time of day with him again.

TOCDriver - I should imagine you're one of these that moans about union reps being released a couple of days a month for stuff, are you?? Well, they're out there trying to make everyone's lives better. Without a union, you lot certainly wouldn't be on the thick end of 50k a year. You wouldn't have the fantastic pension scheme you have, you wouldn't be able to refuse a job because it's 3 minutes over your day, you wouldn't be able to refuse to take a train further because you're due a PNB. The list could go on.
Next time you have an incident, (and I hope you don't) you'll not be able to have an ASLEF rep there. Why?? Because you're non-union.
Your colleagues won't have a barbeque for you because you've been sacked as they see it, unfairly. Why?? Because you're non-union.

 

[northwichcat]

Calling someone a scab is bullying? I thought it was the truth but never mind, I just hope when those people cross a picket line their conscience is clear when those on the picket line lose there jobs.

You can't sack someone for going on strike or recruit extra employees to cover for people who have gone on strike so I'm not sure what your point is.

The legal ways Northern could cover the strike are for crews based at other depots to work their rest day (which they won't want to do every week) and for managers to work trains (a last resort - managers have other work to do and it's more costly to have managers doing non-managerial roles.)

BBC journalists are set to go on strike for 12 hours on Wednesday. They are set to bring in all their regular freelancers to cover the main bulletins and to use producers to provide a regional news summary. If you were a freelance journalist who would have worked for the BBC on Wednesday regardless of whether or not the contracted journalists went on strike then how would it be appropriate to direct any rude word at the person in question for crossing a picket line? That'd be like directing rude words at TPE staff for working on a day when Northern Rail staff have called a strike.

 

[ComUtoR]

Morning Guys and Gals.

Irrespective of my personal views on Unions and strikes etc. I am confused about the term Scab.

My local TOC have Drivers in ASLEF and RMT as well as Non Union members. There have been ballots for strikes, although I haven't heard of a Drivers strike in many years now. If ASLEF take a stance on something and decide to strike then I would expect all ASLEF members to strike and if an ASLEF member crosses the picket line then 100% they are considered to be a 'Scab'

However; non union and RMT members are certainly not expected to strike and, I believe, aren't even allowed to. If they were not to turn up to work then they would be 'Absent' and the company can take whatever action set down by the T&C's But; and here is were I am confused. How are they a 'Scab' ? They have little to no choice in attending work.

What happens to RMT Drivers if RMT Guards call for a strike ? Do ALL RMT Union members have to strike irrespective of the department they work for ? Again, are you considered a 'Scab' if your department isn't in dispute but your Union is ? (this actually happened)

Are you only 'On Strike' whilst you are booked to work that day ? I would certainly take umbrage with anyone (Union or not) if they worked a rest day during a strike. Personally I would consider that disrespectful but I still wouldn't see them as 'Scab' Other names certainly but not 'Scab'

I have tried to keep personal thoughts out of the above questions (other than the last comment) I am mostly seeking what people consider 'Scabbing' or 'Crossing the picket line'

Cheers in advance.

 

[313103]

Post deleted

 

[JohnB57]

Perhaps you could furnish us with the correct details then!
I assume by your post that you are aware of the exact details in this potential dispute.

Roll out the strawman argument...

No, I'm not aware of the details, hence the question mark (for the avoidance of doubt - "?").

But, if I can put my point in a different way, to help you understand it, here goes.

IF, the union member was "upset" because he/she was spoken to "aggressively", then he/she should fight that battle themselves through normal grievance procedures that are available to all, just like the vast majority of people would have to, rather than rely on a band of brothers to go in heavy. Of course, if their initial case was so weak, they may not have had the ammunition to do that...

 

[Moonshot]

Roll out the strawman argument...

No, I'm not aware of the details, hence the question mark (for the avoidance of doubt - "?").

But, if I can put my point in a different way, to help you understand it, here goes.

IF, the union member was "upset" because he/she was spoken to "aggressively", then he/she should fight that battle themselves through normal grievance procedures that are available to all, just like the vast majority of people would have to, rather than rely on a band of brothers to go in heavy. Of course, if their initial case was so weak, they may not have had the ammunition to do that...

Which then begs the question......Do Unions only support members in disputes that they think they have a chance of winning?

 

[DarloRich]

Roll out the strawman argument...

No, I'm not aware of the details, hence the question mark (for the avoidance of doubt - "?").

But, if I can put my point in a different way, to help you understand it, here goes.

IF, the union member was "upset" because he/she was spoken to "aggressively", then he/she should fight that battle themselves through normal grievance procedures that are available to all, just like the vast majority of people would have to, rather than rely on a band of brothers to go in heavy. Of course, if their initial case was so weak, they may not have had the ammunition to do that...

You seem to assume that such actions HAVENT happened?

Many of these issues come about because of a refusal by managers to follow their own processes! These processes are designed to protect managers as much as staff and are agreed by all. I would imagine you have little first hand knowledge of union activities and base your assumptions on media reporting or third hand anecdotes.

 

[Moonshot]

Just going back to the OP, from what I can see, the last time that Northerns RMT members voted in a ballot ended up with results as below....

Dear Colleague

BREAKDOWN IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS – NORTHERN RAIL

Further to previous correspondence regarding the above, the ballot has now concluded with the following result:-

Question: Are you prepared to take strike action?

Total Votes Cast… 1467

Number Voting ‘Yes’… 839

Number Voting ‘No’… 627

Spoilt Papers… 1

This matter is currently being considered by your union’s Executive Committee and I will write again shortly.

Best wishes.

Bob Crow

General Secretary

 

[Beveridges]

No need to edit it. I know the unions for what they are and I don't like them. I'm not a member of any union and I plan for it to stay that way. I have worked in both the public and private sectors without union membership and have shown loyality to my paymaster, and they have appreciated that. It has done me no harm so far.

You don't like Unions despite the fact that your pay would be a lot lower if we didn't have them ?

 

[Carlisle]

Unless I m very much mistaken, there are employment laws and tribunals etc which prevent this sort of action. HR departments tend to step on eggshells when dealing with matters of this nature. There are also disciplinary procedures set in stone .

Yes in theory you are totally correct , however in practice there can be considerable abuse of the above systems plus there are a variety of short term,temporary roiling ,zero hours or agency contracts etc that in reality give less desirable bosses the right to simply hire and fire at will ,the fact that all this is rare or non existent in your line of work is more down to the unions than anything else

 

[Moonshot]

Yes in theory you are totally correct , however in practice there are a variety of short term,temporary roiling ,zero hours or agency contracts etc that in reality give less desirable bosses the right to hire and fire at will ,the fact it's rare or non existent in your line of work is more down to the unions than anything else

But of course the very fact that temp or short term workers are entitled to a contract in the first place surely sets in stone what is expected from each side party to that contract? If one side breaches any terms of that, litigation is a possibility anyway?

In my past , I have had rolling contracts which had a bonus built in IF the work specified was delivered on time.....

 

[muz379]

If you dont want to join a union dont , that's completely your right. You are lucky that you benefit from the pay and conditions that union folk have campaigned for

But dont try and take away from those that have joined A union. I have been in a union in all of my jobs even with employers that didn't recognize a union because the way I see it is that legal protection on its own is worth its weight in gold , there might be laws in place to protect against unfair dismissal and unlawful dismissal but who is going to be able to afford to draft a lawyer in when they have just lost their job . Sure there is legal aid but that is being cut in vast swaths and now barely scratches the surface on funding for a narrow range of employment cases .

If £18 a month one day saves me from thousands of pounds of legal costs as well as the other more immediate protections then so be it .


I dont know the exact facts in this case but if the guard concerned really was being a "wimp" I am under no illusion that his fellow guards in the mess room at wigan would be the first one to tell him/her . if they are prepared to go on strike and loose a days pay over the way one of their colleagues has been treated then that is for them to decide and that to me seems a reasonably high standard to meet .
There is protection in place from this kind of thing , and HR departments are usually good with dealing with employment matters because it is their everyday job but as I understand it this dispute is about the way a manager has treated a conductor and managers dont always get it right , they dont deal with employment matters and arent qualified HR officers and so will sometimes overstep the mark .

As for guards from other depots covering their work ,no problem with people who are spare or people being pulled off other jobs to cover the work which is most likely what will happen to try and make the strike pass(if there is one ) with as little disruption as possible .You will get people who also regularly work rest days and who forget to sign that rest day off who will also get sent to cover the work .

But of course the very fact that temp or short term workers are entitled to a contract in the first place surely sets in stone what is expected from each side party to that contract? If one side breaches any terms of that, litigation is a possibility anyway?

In my past , I have had rolling contracts which had a bonus built in IF the work specified was delivered on time.....

Litigation might not necessarily be possible


Under English law there is a one year qualifying period for claims of unfair dismissal . That is an employer cant engage in litigation against the employer for unfair dismissal unless they have at least one years service , notwithstanding cases were the employer has engaged in discrimination .

If you are employed on a temporary contract you might not even be employed to work there for a year which means you wont satisfy this qualifying period .

And if you are on a zero hours contract your hours can be withdrawn completely with no redress whatsoever unless the employer has done so in a discriminatory fashion (which they have no reason to do as there is no obligation for them to give reasons for their withdrawal of hours ) .

As for your anecdotal story about being employed on a temp contract with bonus's , I know someone who was employed on a temporary summer contract whilst he was a student and never received payment for 3 weeks of the work that he did , and was then arbitrarily sacked with no redress because he argued this fact with the owner of the business , so not all temporary contract stories end well

 

[Moonshot]

Litigation might not necessarily be possible


Under English law there is a one year qualifying period for claims for unfair dismissal . That is an employer cant engage in litigation against the employer for unfair dismissal unless they have at least one years service , notwithstanding cases were the employer has engaged in discrimination .

If you are employed on a temporary contract you might not even be employed to work there for a year which means you wont satisfy this qualifying period .

And if you are on a zero hours contract your hours can be withdrawn completely with no redress whatsoever unless the employer has done so in a discriminatory fashion (which they have no reason to do as there is no obligation for them to give reasons for their withdrawal of hours ) .

As for your anecdotal story about being employed on a temp contract with bonus's , I know someone who was employed on a temporary summer contract whilst he was a student and never received payment for 3 weeks of the work that he did , and was then arbitrarily sacked with no redress because he argued this fact with the owner of the business , so not all temporary contract stories end well

of course we havent got the side of the story from the business owner.....i m also aware of staff on temp contracts who were asked to leave early as they were not delivering their side of the bargain.

 

[muz379]

of course we havent got the side of the story from the business owner.....i m also aware of staff on temp contracts who were asked to leave early as they were not delivering their side of the bargain.

Even if the business owner was right in getting rid of him , he should still have paid him for the 3 weeks he did not pay him for , and imo firing someone should never be the first resort


Like ive said before about zero hours and temporary contracts , they are open to abuse by the employer , both temporary ones because as I have said you are not protected from unfair dismissal for under a years service unless it is discrimination , and you are not guaranteed hours with a zero hour contract .Employers can and do use your hours in a carrot and stick based approach to getting you to work longer or do more work than you should be doing .


Ive seen a good reliable security guard who was subcontracted by a company that I was a manager for have his hours completely removed for two weeks as a "punishment" because he refused to work a 14 hour day

Is that him not delivering his side of the bargain ?
or is that his employer trying to use the power of taking away his hours to bully him into doing something he doesn't and shouldn't have to do ?

I dont think anybody should be sacked in first instance for not delivering their side of the bargain but it does and can go on with temporary and zero hour contracts .

 

[Moonshot]

Even if the business owner was right in getting rid of him , he should still have paid him for the 3 weeks he did not pay him for , and imo firing someone should never be the first resort


Like ive said before about zero hours and temporary contracts , they are open to abuse by the employer , both temporary ones because as I have said you are not protected from unfair dismissal for under a years service unless it is discrimination , and you are not guaranteed hours with a zero hour contract .Employers can and do use your hours in a carrot and stick based approach to getting you to work longer or do more work than you should be doing .


Ive seen a good reliable security guard who was subcontracted by a company that I was a manager for have his hours completely removed for two weeks as a "punishment" because he refused to work a 14 hour day

Is that him not delivering his side of the bargain ?
or is that his employer trying to use the power of taking away his hours to bully him into doing something he doesn't and shouldn't have to do ?

I dont think anybody should be sacked in first instance for not delivering their side of the bargain but it does and can go on with temporary and zero hour contracts .

Surely employers should be named and shamed then if this was the case. isnt it true that a number of Labour MPs ( and Tory ones as well ) have , or are doing , employed staff on zero hours contracts?

 

[muz379]

Surely employers should be named and shamed then if this was the case. isnt it true that a number of Labour MPs ( and Tory ones as well ) have , or are doing , employed staff on zero hours contracts?

I agree they should be named and shamed , but often it is too late when they get to the point of being named and shamed , they have already bullied numerous members of staff . It is not like the privileges you or I have as guards employed by a TOC to whistle blow on unsafe practices or raise issue with unfair working practices of other situations we are unhappy with at work . In a zero hour contract job if you raise issue or cause trouble they can just withdraw your hours .

I am aware that a number of MP's across the spectrum are involved in businesses or themselves employ people on zero hour contracts . However just because MP's do it does not make it right , look at the expenses scandal , mp's are hardly the type of people we should be taking guidance from are they ?

 

[Moonshot]

I agree they should be named and shamed , but often it is too late when they get to the point of being named and shamed , they have already bullied numerous members of staff . It is not like the privileges you or I have as guards employed by a TOC to whistle blow on unsafe practices or raise issue with unfair working practices of other situations we are unhappy with at work . In a zero hour contract job if you raise issue or cause trouble they can just withdraw your hours .

I am aware that a number of MP's across the spectrum are involved in businesses or themselves employ people on zero hour contracts . However just because MP's do it does not make it right , look at the expenses scandal , mp's are hardly the type of people we should be taking guidance from are they ?

In which case, maybe we should invoke a recall system where MPs can be sacked by voters inbetween elections if it was felt they were not carrying out their duties to the scrupolous demands of the electorate?

 

[muz379]

In which case, maybe we should invoke a recall system where MPs can be sacked by voters inbetween elections if it was felt they were not carrying out their duties to the scrupolous demands of the electorate?

Going off topic , But I fully agree with proposals for that

Don't know if it would bring about MP's getting recalled for things that are lesser known about them such as them using zero hour contracts but as a general thing some constitutional reform is needed in this country

A friend of mine at uni wrote his dissertation on this exact thing (recalling MP's) , there are problems to some of the methods of doing it but I fully agree it needs to happen

The coalition did shelve plans for such an idea earlier this year did they not ?

 

[Moonshot]

Going off topic , But I fully agree with proposals for that

Don't know if it would bring about MP's getting recalled for things that are lesser known about them such as them using zero hour contracts but as a general thing some constitutional reform is needed in this country

A friend of mine at uni wrote his dissertation on this exact thing (recalling MP's) , there are problems to some of the methods of doing it but I fully agree it needs to happen

The coalition did shelve plans for such an idea earlier this year did they not ?

Not sure....thought it was introduced as a Private Members Bill IIRC....no idea where its up to, but its an excellent idea. if that appears in a party manifesto, I ll defo vote for them!!

 

[muz379]

Not sure....thought it was introduced as a Private Members Bill IIRC....no idea where its up to, but its an excellent idea. if that appears in a party manifesto, I ll defo vote for them!!

Yeah last I heard it got shelved wasn't in the queens speech in may so wont happen before the next general election

It was in the last lib dem manifesto and will most likely feature in their manifesto this time round , they are the party of constitutional reform afterall .

 

[Tom B]

And if you are on a zero hours contract your hours can be withdrawn completely with no redress whatsoever unless the employer has done so in a discriminatory fashion (which they have no reason to do as there is no obligation for them to give reasons for their withdrawal of hours ) .

Precisely - practically all laws can be flouted with zero hours contracts - as the employer will merely 'alter' the hours of whoever they don't want to zero!

 

[Moonshot]

Precisely - practically all laws can be flouted with zero hours contracts - as the employer will merely 'alter' the hours of whoever they don't want to zero!

I made a point earlier about the naming and shaming of employers who abuse zero hour contracts......suprisingly given some of the passion shown by forumites against these, no one has actually managed to do this.

 

[muz379]

I made a point earlier about the naming and shaming of employers who abuse zero hour contracts......suprisingly given some of the passion shown by forumites against these, no one has actually managed to do this.

And I made a point earlier that you as a guard (and other railway employees on here )with a secure employment with a TOC have a perfect secure platform from which to "whistle blow" on safety issues , or address vocally with your employer any issues you are not happy with in your working life . However people who work for zero hour employees would rightfully be more cautious when expressing dissatisfaction with their place of work or working practices because they can easily be done away with being that there is no union protection for them and their employer can just refuse them hours at will . If I was in a zero hour employment I wouldn't really name and shame my employer either verbally at work or on a forum because as we know employers do monitor these sites

If you or a close member of family were sick and you couldn't physically make it to work tomorrow what would the DSM say to you when you rung them ?
If you had a child and they had an accident at school so you had to leave to collect them what would the DSM say and do about that ?
If you were asked to work a 14 hour shift by the DSM tmr what would you say ?
If you were 10 minutes late to work tomorrow because of the traffic what would the DSM say or do about it ?
If you were verbally or physically assaulted at work tomorrow and too traumatized to continue your shift how would the situation pan out , what support would be available for you ?

Now think how these situations would pan out if you were in a zero hour contract job .

Maybe you have never had a job with a manager who holds a grudge because you refused overtime or refused to do something unreasonably outside of your normally expected job description , or where late on one occasion by 5 minutes because of a crash on a major road you take to work ,or had to have a hospital or doctors appointment during work hours because it was the only time you could schedule an appointment for . You must have seen some shoddy bullying management in your working life at some point .Now imagine that manager had complete control over your livelihood how would that make you feel ? . We have a body of employment law which must be in place to protect employees from what is a foreseeable risk of management bullying and unlawful dismissal , now imagine what it is like for the number of employees out there not protected in such a way , imagine how one of these manipulative bullying managers could use having control over your livelihood against you . Still think zero hour contracts are a good thing ?


If you want the naming and shaming to commence though lets start with G4s who majorly cocked up at the Olympics and are a well known zero hour employer ,last year the guardian run a couple of stories about zero hour contracts , one specifically referring to their use in G4s , and then we could talk about Boris Johnson who got in a whole lot of trouble with the media last year when it emerged that city hall in London had employees on zero hour contracts ,not to mention the other Mp's you have talked about who I have seen stories in the press about . Then there is the university in Edinburgh (Napier University ) which has recently advertised a zero hour post which has taken a lot of criticism .

The naming and shaming will go on , just as it has done in the past and present with employers who pay below the minimum wage , however that wont stop zero hour employers cropping up and managers at local level going mad with the power/nobody at senior level caring enough and nobody in the lower levels getting the rubbish treatment dares say anything because they will be back in the dole queue . its the reality of 2014 in Britain for 1.4m workers ladies and gents .

Naming and shaming is not in my view the solution because my problem isn't with certain zero hour employers and their practices , it is with the idea as a whole .It places the power of someone Else's livelihood in the hands of some manager whose only motivation is getting the job done and pleasing their bosses ,its just like a variation on the Stanford prison experiment .A lot of us placed in the position of managers over zero hour workers would all resort to the same means of threatening to cut someones much needed hours to get them to agree to something we needed them to do eventually if we where in the situation of these managers who are getting it in the neck from above .I dont blame the middle managers I blame the same upper management culture that exists in a lot of places coupled with the system which actually allows them total control over another persons livelihood

yes sure I never had any problems working on a zero hour contract when I was at uni and I didn't rely on the money/loved the flexibility of being able to turn down working however when it comes to adult life I would not want to earn my living in such an insecure job and I dont think anybody wants to .

 

[Carlisle]

I made a point earlier about the naming and shaming of employers who abuse zero hour contracts......suprisingly given some of the passion shown by forumites against these, no one has actually managed to do this.

Many middle/line managers etc that abuse these things on a daily basis are probably too thick skinned and obsessed with their own results (mainly to impress their seniors and safeguard their own higher pay and conditions) to really care about being named and shamed (they're also probably fully aware most of their staff don't have access to a well organised union presence either so it won't be easy to challenge them in any meaningful way),only a serious fine, court appearance of threat of dismissal would get through to them however if they work for a well known brand/company , the higher management may eventually want to protect their image and take action

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

RMT are balloting Wigan based Northern Rail conductors for strike action after they claim managers were aggressive in dealing with a member who was genuinely sick. Northern Rail have reportedly sent letters to Wigan based conductors saying to ignore what the RMT is telling them about the incident, which has angered the RMT further.

What exactly is the current state of play on this matter that was reported in the very first posting on this thread ?