Should Whelan Resign?

[BestWestern]

So, a genuine canvassing of thoughts here then, given recent events.

During the GTR dispute Mick Whelan led his membership out on strike, backed similar action by RMT members, and of course made his, shortly to be infamous no doubt, "We will not undermine the RMT" statement. He then emerges from talks, after months of industrial action, with what can only be described as a shocking result - he agrees to a vote on a poor deal, closely resembling exactly what GTR wanted all along. Who has gained, other than GTR, looks difficult to fathom.

Now then, there will of course be more detail to follow, but based on events so far, Whelan appears to look a fool. So, thoughts from Drivers, Guards, and other interested parties - after what looks a humiliating climbdown, despite his victory speech, has his position become untenable? Does he still have his members' respect? Does he need to go?

 

[Robertj21a]

So, a genuine canvassing of thoughts here then, given recent events.

During the GTR dispute Mick Whelan led his membership out on strike, backed similar action by RMT members, and of course made his, shortly to be infamous no doubt, "We will not undermine the RMT" statement. He then emerges from talks, after months of industrial action, with what can only be described as a shocking result - he agrees to a vote on a poor deal, closely resembling exactly what GTR wanted all along. Who has gained, other than GTR, looks difficult to fathom.

Now then, there will of course be more detail to follow, but based on events so far, Whelan appears to look a fool. So, thoughts from Drivers, Guards, and other interested parties - after what looks a humiliating climbdown, despite his victory speech, has his position become untenable? Does he still have his members' respect? Does he need to go?

To a total outsider, not employed in the industry, he will come over as a pragmatic leader with a common sense approach to the current situation. Many will appreciate that coming from a Rail Union boss.

Of course, that may well not be the view of RMT members !

 

[BestWestern]

To a total outsider, not employed in the industry, he will come over as a pragmatic leader with a common sense approach to the current situation. Many will appreciate that coming from a Rail Union boss.

Of course, that may well not be the view of RMT members !

He looks like he's caved in, I would imagine. Althought as you say, to an outsider his victory speech - whilst so far seemingly rather hollow - might give the impression that he negotiated rather better than he did.

Feedback this far seems to suggest it isn't just RMT members who aren't impressed...

 

[SS4]

To a total outsider, not employed in the industry, he will come over as a pragmatic leader with a common sense approach to the current situation. Many will appreciate that coming from a Rail Union boss.

Of course, that may well not be the view of RMT members !

I don't think said outsider will care what the outcome is so long as the dispute is resolved and everything returns to normal.

Whelan's position is tough as he must know he can expect little support and much hostility from those who control the flow of information. Management also know this so can play hard ball.

 

[coppercapped]

Au contraire.

If any of the two Trades Union leaders should resign it is Mr Cash. GTR employs some 6,500 people. The RMT identified an issue that affected some 300 of them but which it hoped could be used to reverse a long term trend in train manning. It took action which has now cost these 300 some four weeks pay, inconvenienced hundreds of thousands of people over many months and achieved precisely nothing. It didn't even bring down the Government.

The mark of a successful general I would say.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

My view is that Aslef leadership have misled their own membership, misled the RMT, misled the public and made false statements in the media and public.

The whole dispute quite clearly wasn't about safety.

Whether those statements made earlier were deliberate lies, or not, I suspect we will never know.

Whatever your view of Mr Cash - and I have to say I don't particularly like him or his attitude either - he has always gone along the same line, said the same things. He hasn't gone into negotiations saying and doing something different to what he says he in public and to the media.

 

[Domh245]

I think it depends on how he and his union fare in the Northern Dispute. Southern was a bit of an unwinnable case in that there was already DOO on that network, and there were Thameslink trains running in parallel with large parts of the route, so it was always going to be difficult to prevent DOO rollout so the agreement reached were about as much as could have been expected (although I am surprised by the amount of "where possibles" in it). With a clean slate on Northern, there should be more opportunity for ASLEF to prove themselves.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I think it depends on how he and his union fare in the Northern Dispute. Southern was a bit of an unwinnable case in that there was already DOO on that network, and there were Thameslink trains running in parallel with large parts of the route, so it was always going to be difficult to prevent DOO rollout so the agreement reached were about as much as could have been expected (although I am surprised by the amount of "where possibles" in it). With a clean slate on Northern, there should be more opportunity for ASLEF to prove themselves.

But how can they? This agreement, if accepted, proves that Aslef and it's members are happy with DOO, happy with DOO on long busy trains and stations (far busier and bigger than any on the Northern network), happy with DOO on rural routes with unmanned stations, happy to have a multitude of reasons where the 2nd person isn't present, happy for that person to not have any safety training at all. If accepted how on earth can they refuse to adopt the same policy elsewhere? The whole "it was different 30 years ago when we first agreed to it" argument is completely washed away.

 

[Robertj21a]

Whatever your view of Mr Cash - and I have to say I don't particularly like him or his attitude either - he has always gone along the same line, said the same things. He hasn't gone into negotiations saying and doing something different to what he says he in public and to the media.

True, but the sign of a good leader is when he recognises the need to change tactics. Mr Cash is more like the 'old school' Union leaders (Scargill etc) who get too easily stuck in just the one rut.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

True, but the sign of a good leader is when he recognises the need to change tactics. Mr Cash is more like the 'old school' Union leaders (Scargill etc) who get too easily stuck in just the one rut.

There is a difference between changing tactics and changing your whole point of view, throwing away your whole argument, and going off in a different direction.

 

[furnessvale]

So, a genuine canvassing of thoughts here then, given recent events.

During the GTR dispute Mick Whelan led his membership out on strike, backed similar action by RMT members, and of course made his, shortly to be infamous no doubt, "We will not undermine the RMT" statement. He then emerges from talks, after months of industrial action, with what can only be described as a shocking result - he agrees to a vote on a poor deal, closely resembling exactly what GTR wanted all along. Who has gained, other than GTR, looks difficult to fathom.

Now then, there will of course be more detail to follow, but based on events so far, Whelan appears to look a fool. So, thoughts from Drivers, Guards, and other interested parties - after what looks a humiliating climbdown, despite his victory speech, has his position become untenable? Does he still have his members' respect? Does he need to go?

Of course, it could well be the case that he HAS been getting feedback from his members that they are no longer prepared to sacrifice themselves on the RMT altar.

 

[deltic]

This is very much like the miners strike. The Government cannot lose and therefore Mr Cash will. Mr Whelan is far more pragmatic and his primary concern is protecting his members position and not those of the RMT. How many times would Aslef drivers be prepared to strike and lose money to protect other union member's jobs.

 

[Andrew1395]

There was not a lot that ASLEF had to fight over though was there? No jobs to be lost, so no long term reduction in membership, plus they had accepted similar work instructions on other lines, so no new points of principle. The independent review said if small changes and routine improvements and maintenance of the supporting infrastructure were put in place then the DOO working was safe. So again no game changer there for ASLEF to use in the negotiation. As the dispute is principally about retaining a particular sort of job which is not one undertaken by ASLEF members, it is RMT that need to reverse the management proposal. The ASLEF leadership do not need to "win" this particular battle. I suspect though that the TUC leadership had some strategic concerns about the growing public support for more legislation to restrict the potential for Industrial action on the back of the massive disruption to London commuting, (especially in the BREXIT context of the potential changes to U.K law over the next few years). The TUC may therefore have been keen to see a resolution through a negotiation they brokered.

 

[aylesbury]

Most certainly agree that there has not been a great deal to argue over but they have and made many peoples lives a misery and for that they need to be held to account for this.Surely a class action could be brought against Whelan and Cash this would have a good chance of success .Unions do have a place when wrongs are commited against workers (have been on the end of this during my life at work) but sadly they are not doing this today.I feel sorry for Nortern as they have trouble coming there way and DAFT will be no help,

 

[BestWestern]

Of course, it could well be the case that he HAS been getting feedback from his members that they are no longer prepared to sacrifice themselves on the RMT altar.

That is of course a very good point. But should he have been up front, or would he have been right to use the tactics that he did? The ballot will tell if that was indeed the case.

 

[Bald Rick]

Of course, it could well be the case that he HAS been getting feedback from his members that they are no longer prepared to sacrifice themselves on the RMT altar.

On the Momentum altar more like. Perhaps ASLEF members realised they were the front line foot soldiers in a political battle that someone else was pushing. At least, that's my take on it.

 

[O L Leigh]

I'm not sure what Mick ought to do, if I'm honest. Realistically what could he have done to prevent conductors from being downgraded to OBSs?

But then, he doesn't represent that guard's grade. He represents drivers, and it seems that the negotiations have been conducted along lines suggested by other forum members. If DOO could not be prevented then ASLEF's concerns have to be what can be done to make DOO as safe as possible in order to assuage its members concerns, and it seems that ASLEF have achieved that. OBSs have been guaranteed as has their staffing ratios, and upgrades have been promised for both stations and stock. To me this seems like the best possible outcome under the circumstances.

I'm sorry that the RMT members feel so let down, but perhaps their disappointment would be better directed at their own union. Neither union was likely to stop the DOO juggernaut completely and it is unrealistic of them to have expected ASLEF to have done more.

O L Leigh

 

[jon0844]

When disputes drag on, isn't it often the case that the solution is about saving face, and coming out looking like you won something?

That's what will be remembered in the long run, whatever individual members think at the time.

The RMT must be wondering about its end game now.

 

[BestWestern]

I'm sorry that the RMT members feel so let down, but perhaps their disappointment would be better directed at their own union. Neither union was likely to stop the DOO juggernaut completely and it is unrealistic of them to have expected ASLEF to have done more.

O L Leigh

I can't help but take issue with Whelan's conduct in all of this. He made a grand statement about not undermining the RMT right at the start. That was unwise. It was a blanket promise, fighting talk, that in all honesty was always at risk of being contradicted. Worse though, is the manner in which the final set of talks was concluded. The first person to be told of events once hands had been shaken should have been Mick Cash. A discreet phone call between colleagues. The RMT were putting out a statement that they had no news beyond what they'd seen in the press. If true, that is nothing short of disgraceful. You couldn't undermine more effectively if you tried. To just turn your heels and pretend your fellow union no longer exists would seem to strike at the very heart of what trades unions should be all about.

Alas, we only have the soundbites and the snippets. But I'm afraid, for many - Drivers included, by the looks of it - Whelan is viewed now as firmly in the management pocket. No union leader can go on for long in that predicament.

 

[kevconnor]

There was not a lot that ASLEF had to fight over though was there? No jobs to be lost, so no long term reduction in membership, plus they had accepted similar work instructions on other lines, so no new points of principle. The independent review said if small changes and routine improvements and maintenance of the supporting infrastructure were put in place then the DOO working was safe. So again no game changer there for ASLEF to use in the negotiation. As the dispute is principally about retaining a particular sort of job which is not one undertaken by ASLEF members, it is RMT that need to reverse the management proposal. The ASLEF leadership do not need to "win" this particular battle. I suspect though that the TUC leadership had some strategic concerns about the growing public support for more legislation to restrict the potential for Industrial action on the back of the massive disruption to London commuting, (especially in the BREXIT context of the potential changes to U.K law over the next few years). The TUC may therefore have been keen to see a resolution through a negotiation they brokered.

There maybe some more wider points of BREXIT, such as the WTR, at stake but there are very few laws emanating from the EU which impact on specifically the employer/trade union relationship. Most are contained in either TULR1992, ERA1999 and TUA2016 all of which have little influence from EU.

 

[313103]

I see the Southern drivers have now been put between a rock and a hard place, do they accept the document and vote yes therefore allowing staff they know, some possibly on personal terms to go to the wall? Or do they vote No and therefore allowing their fellow drivers in the now decimated freight sector be put out of a job?
Its a difficult one to ponder, and i would be annoyed and dismayed if the RMT ever put me in this position.

I have my personal views on M Whelan having been his Guard for the short time he was driving and i will not air those views here, it is also not for me to comment about the incumbent General Secretary of another trade union as to whether he should be removed or not.

I wonder if he will be invited this years RMT agm, where last year he got a standing ovation from the conference delegates with the exception of me.

 

[Busaholic]

I have my personal views on M Whelan having been his Guard for the short time he was driving and i will not air those views here, it is also not for me to comment about the incumbent General Secretary of another trade union as to whether he should be removed or not.

I wonder if he will be invited this years RMT agm, where last year he got a standing ovation from the conference delegates with the exception of me.

There's an old phrase (you can tell by the language) 'No man is a hero to his valet', sometimes amended to 'No man is a hero to his batman' and I think you are proving the point rather well.

 

[WatcherZero]

I think it depends on how he and his union fare in the Northern Dispute. Southern was a bit of an unwinnable case in that there was already DOO on that network, and there were Thameslink trains running in parallel with large parts of the route, so it was always going to be difficult to prevent DOO rollout so the agreement reached were about as much as could have been expected (although I am surprised by the amount of "where possibles" in it). With a clean slate on Northern, there should be more opportunity for ASLEF to prove themselves.

Expect a Northern Connect agreement will be DOO will only operate from stations with platform dispatch staff and where possible there will continue to be a second member of staff on the train.

 

[O L Leigh]

I can't help but take issue with Whelan's conduct in all of this. He made a grand statement about not undermining the RMT right at the start. That was unwise. It was a blanket promise, fighting talk, that in all honesty was always at risk of being contradicted. Worse though, is the manner in which the final set of talks was concluded. The first person to be told of events once hands had been shaken should have been Mick Cash. A discreet phone call between colleagues. The RMT were putting out a statement that they had no news beyond what they'd seen in the press. If true, that is nothing short of disgraceful. You couldn't undermine more effectively if you tried. To just turn your heels and pretend your fellow union no longer exists would seem to strike at the very heart of what trades unions should be all about.

Alas, we only have the soundbites and the snippets. But I'm afraid, for many - Drivers included, by the looks of it - Whelan is viewed now as firmly in the management pocket. No union leader can go on for long in that predicament.

You must be seeing something that I am not, because I'm not sure I can see in what way the ASLEF agreement has undermined RMT.

It is codified in the agreement that the normal method of working will be DOO with driver and OBS, that OBS depot establishments will be based on a ratio of 2:1 OBS to running turns and that OBSs can retain or be trained to attain additional competencies with regards to despatch. While I agree that I would have preferred for conductors to have been retained and DOO be kicked into the long grass, this agreement doesn't particularly look like a charter for mass redundancies among the OBS grade. I concede that it's not exactly a cast-iron guarantee of job security and that the OBS grade doesn't look like a good long-term prospect, but for the short to medium term at least it does give some reassurance.

It has become increasingly clear over the past few months that GTR were never going to be able to back away from it's commitment to DOO no matter what opposition they faced. As such, there had to be some sort of exit strategy that assuages the concerns of each union's members, and ASLEF has, whether willingly or under coercion from the TUC over the course of several days, reached a position that it feels is at least palatable to put to it's members.

What I'm still struggling to see is how this undermines RMT. I would hope that RMT will be accorded the same facilities to sit down with GTR and discuss the concerns of their members to help them arrive at their own exit position. I don't see how the agreement reached with ASLEF is prejudicial to that. If RMT are still in dispute with GTR then surely the opportunity still exists.

But I come back again to my earlier point, which is that it is for RMT to negotiate for their own members and not to rely on ASLEF to do that for them.

O L Leigh

 

[the sniper]

He's done what he believes is best for his members at this point in time. We'll see from the vote whether that is the case, but if the deal is accepted, I can't see why he'd resign.

At the end of the day, this wasn't ASLEF's hill to die on. They've been undermined by the state partly trying to save RMT members. Only time will tell how committed ASLEF are to this and the anti-DOO cause, but this deal doesn't help at least the latter at all...

 

[sarahj]

There is a certain feeling down on the coast that he may not be welcome here and whispers that ASLEF membership may drop and RMT's may climb. I've never seen such an angry bunch.

 

[Richard1960]

There is a certain feeling down on the coast that he may not be welcome here and whispers that ASLEF membership may drop and RMT's may climb. I've never seen such an angry bunch.

I can see why as a trade union rep in another industry what ASLEF have done is to give carte blanche to southern to run trains without an OBS if there is not one , undermining the safety case it was making, and in a few years they will look and say well we are running ex amount of trains with no OBS , with no problem is that role really necessary, leaving another possible operator to junk that role completely.

Unless of course the RMT can get a solid deal going beyond this current franchise .

 

[LowLevel]

I'm probably going to surprise people here by saying isn't this kind of agreement that you expected for this particular dispute eventually? What it's done is ratchet up the cost through disruption and appalling PR to far more than the DfT in all it's forms likely anticipated which hopefully may have ripples and ramifications around the country. They went in hard with this and the outcome was always going to be painful.

The real test will be with Northern.

What the above doesn't change however is

a) the potential strength of feeling from drivers on the issue - from their behaviour the Coastway depots in particular seemed less than keen on DOO full stop and recent experience with ASLEF is that dodgy deals hurt it. A ballot rejection probably would be the end for EC.

b) it's relationship with the RMT. It's set itself up as anti DOO. If it's now going to back away from this without saying a word about it it's going to look very poor and lots of drivers I know are chuntering about it already.

c) if they do take this approach with them elsewhere it's going to bite in more ways than one.

So the ballot result will be the tale that starts to tell.

 

[Robertj21a]

I can't help but take issue with Whelan's conduct in all of this. He made a grand statement about not undermining the RMT right at the start. That was unwise. It was a blanket promise, fighting talk, that in all honesty was always at risk of being contradicted. Worse though, is the manner in which the final set of talks was concluded. The first person to be told of events once hands had been shaken should have been Mick Cash. A discreet phone call between colleagues. The RMT were putting out a statement that they had no news beyond what they'd seen in the press. If true, that is nothing short of disgraceful. You couldn't undermine more effectively if you tried. To just turn your heels and pretend your fellow union no longer exists would seem to strike at the very heart of what trades unions should be all about.

Alas, we only have the soundbites and the snippets. But I'm afraid, for many - Drivers included, by the looks of it - Whelan is viewed now as firmly in the management pocket. No union leader can go on for long in that predicament.

I would liken it more to the fact that a Union boss has recognised the need for good staff/management relations, as applies in most other modern industries. Some Union leaders, such as those running the RMT, still come over very much as having just the one 'old school' confrontational approach to everything [the 'you agree or we strike' view of life].

I find it all rather refreshing.

 

[BestWestern]

I would liken it more to the fact that a Union boss has recognised the need for good staff/management relations, as applies in most other modern industries. Some Union leaders, such as those running the RMT, still come over very much as having just the one 'old school' confrontational approach to everything [the 'you agree or we strike' view of life].

I find it all rather refreshing.

I'm not sure I'd go for 'refreshing'. It isn't as if he came out and said "You know what, I was wrong". What he did was make his case, lead the fight, then give in, abandon his comrades and try to hide his failure by making a laughable 'victory speech' which, when the details emerged, makes you wonder if he was sitting in the same room. It's shown him to be a weak leader, in my opinion. I don't doubt it will be welcome if you're a Southern commuter of course, provided you don't value on board staff.