Scotrail Staff balloted for Industrial action!

[313103]

http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=154933

I suppose having a ballot for this is also wrong? No doubt Bob Crow will get the blame.

 

[Ferret]

http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=154933

I suppose having a ballot for this is also wrong? No doubt Bob Crow will get the blame.

Just what is going on at Scotrail?! That business with driver's annual leave and now this?!

 

[merlodlliw]

http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=154933

I suppose having a ballot for this is also wrong? No doubt Bob Crow will get the blame.

I would need to see the full context from both Union & management before I could make a comment on this. I wont comment on a press release to the *media. Has procedure been exhausted? no mention of a tribunal which is usually the next stage a Union takes its members.
Dismissal is as severe as it gets, the employer will have sought legal advice prior to dismissing.


Bob

 

[89-763-733]

I don't agree with a lot of things Crow and the RMT do but they are justified in balloting for a strike over this

 

[Ferret]

.
Dismissal is as severe as it gets, the employer will have sought legal advice prior to dismissing.

Agreed, but that does not mean they presented the full story when seeking that advice. Nor does it mean that advice was accurate.

 

[harz99]

Agreed, but that does not mean they presented the full story when seeking that advice. Nor does it mean that advice was accurate.

Equally, neither may the RMT have presented the full story in their press release, neither may their version be 100% accurate. No doubt a more complete version of events will out; until then we should try and keep an open mind.

 

[merlodlliw]

Agreed, but that does not mean they presented the full story when seeking that advice. Nor does it mean that advice was accurate.

I have to agree with you, a lot of things could have occurred, but if it goes to a tribunal and is heard, all the facts will out.
I don't know any of the lead up to dismissal, so I cant comment further.

Bob

 

[Bellwater]

I don't agree with a lot of things Crow and the RMT do but they are justified in balloting for a strike over this

Same Here.

Scotrail worried about image(see Big Man incident).
Scotrail Sack Staff.
RMT Ballot TEs for Strike.
Scotrail go whinging to Transportscotland about lost of revenue due to lack of availability of TEs.
Transportscotland cough up(again).

 

[jon0844]

If the story is accurate, then these are exactly the things a union is for. No doubt the mainstream media will have little interest in this, compared to a strike over pay!

 

[Ferret]

I have to agree with you, a lot of things could have occurred, but if it goes to a tribunal and is heard, all the facts will out.
I don't know any of the lead up to dismissal, so I cant comment further.

Bob

I totally agree here. What I will say is though that there had better be a damn good counter-argument for Scotrail to present because the case as presented by the RMT here is beyond damning.

 

[CarterUSM]

I totally agree here. What I will say is though that there had better be a damn good counter-argument for Scotrail to present because the case as presented by the RMT here is beyond damning.

What has been released by the RMT is very accurate. It also sums up the current disciplinary style within. Going for a tribunal is all very well, but I don't believe a good result at one of them forces the company to take you back anyway, it's just a recommendation.

 

[Ferret]

What has been released by the RMT is very accurate.

In which case that's a damning indictment of the Police also, assuming the two Scotrail staff made a complaint. I sense a can of worms being opened.

 

[Seacook]

When I read this story my immediate reaction was to search for a statement or press release from Scotrail, but found nothing at all. Since the RMT press release specifies that the incident on which the dismissal was based was in June 2010 and that an appeal and a review had been carried out, it is odd, to say the least, that there is nothing to deny or refute the union's version of events.

In the face of eighteen months of silence on the part of Scotrail management, it is not easy to see what other course is left to RMT.

 

[scotsman]

I can't see how the media can spin a negative story out of this, mainly because these facts can't be misconstrued. They were being abused by vicious neds, who were terrorising them on and off duty. I can't think of many people who would have acted differently to them.

 

[CarterUSM]

In which case that's a damning indictment of the Police also, assuming the two Scotrail staff made a complaint. I sense a can of worms being opened.

I'm not sure they made a complaint, as far as I know it was initiated by the other parties at the time.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Agreed, but that does not mean they presented the full story when seeking that advice. Nor does it mean that advice was accurate.

Are you saying that the legal advice given to ScotRail was flawed, for if so, the legal team acting for the union should raise an immediate legal challenge against this flawed legal information.

If this is the case, the legal firm acting for ScotRail have left themselves wide open to legal strictures. Can you look into this matter further and give your reasons on this forum for your worries on this legalistic matter.

 

[Ferret]

Are you saying that the legal advice given to ScotRail was flawed, for if so, the legal team acting for the union should raise an immediate legal challenge against this flawed legal information.

If this is the case, the legal firm acting for ScotRail have left themselves wide open to legal strictures. Can you look into this matter further and give your reasons on this forum for your worries on this legalistic matter.

No! I was just merely pointing out that if every bit of legal advice given was 100% accurate, nobody would ever take anything to Court to be tested! I'm saying that I'm sure Scotrail have taken legal advice - doesn't mean that they presented the full facts to get that advice, or that the lawyer concerned offered correct advice. Nor does it mean that RMT have presented the full story here either... Put simply - we don't know a great deal yet, other than what the RMT have said on the matter, and what they have said is pretty damning and may be quite hard to counter.