• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

London underground strike

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tom B

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Messages
4,602
Could be a case under the Unfair Terms Contract Act 1977?

I certainly think it unfair that TfL refuse to refund passengers who are disrupted. This is especially galling when, to try and avoid embarrassment, they put up statuses like "severe delays due to non availability of staff" or "severe delays due to overcrowding" when these are side-effects of strike action.

The passenger has been delayed due to TfL being unable to run services because insufficient staff turned up to work. It is the responsibility of TfL to arrange sufficient staff to run services. Any issue between TfL and its staff is not an issue for the passenger - the passenger should be entitled to a refund if his journey is delayed.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

philthetube

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2016
Messages
3,749
industrial negotiations concerning groups like train drivers, doctors, firemen etc, should be available for public viewing, that way there would be no doubt as to what the dispute was about, if anyone was backtracking on promises and if either side was being unreasonable
.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
industrial negotiations concerning groups like train drivers, doctors, firemen etc, should be available for public viewing, that way there would be no doubt as to what the dispute was about, if anyone was backtracking on promises and if either side was being unreasonable
.


I agree but only to a point. People won't read this info, they will read the bits of the info that the right wing Murdoch owned anti union press want them to read. It won't make much difference.
 

philthetube

Established Member
Joined
5 Jan 2016
Messages
3,749
I agree but only to a point. People won't read this info, they will read the bits of the info that the right wing Murdoch owned anti union press want them to read. It won't make much difference.

If negotiations were make public there are plenty of people such as London Reconnections, Huffington Post and the rail press to cause sufficient trouble. People holding these sort of positions, (management or union) cannot afford to be caught lying by the public. Politicians cannot afford to be seen employing managers who cause disputes and if union leaders/negotiators are seen to be unnecessarily costing their members money they will not be re-elected
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
If negotiations were make public there are plenty of people such as London Reconnections, Huffington Post and the rail press to cause sufficient trouble. People holding these sort of positions, (management or union) cannot afford to be caught lying by the public. Politicians cannot afford to be seen employing managers who cause disputes and if union leaders/negotiators are seen to be unnecessarily costing their members money they will not be re-elected


None of those publications you describe, even combined, have even a fraction of the readership or 'believer-ship' (made up word but you get my drift!) of an individual publication like the sun, times, mail, standard, metro or sky news etc...it wouldn't begin to scratch the surface. Nice suggestion but won't work in the way you suggest.
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,332
If negotiations were make public there are plenty of people such as London Reconnections, Huffington Post and the rail press to cause sufficient trouble. People holding these sort of positions, (management or union) cannot afford to be caught lying by the public. Politicians cannot afford to be seen employing managers who cause disputes and if union leaders/negotiators are seen to be unnecessarily costing their members money they will not be re-elected
Newspapers don't lie, they merely tell you which part of the truth they want you to know, just because they omit to tell you half the story doesnt mean they are lying does it!
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Newspapers don't lie, they merely tell you which part of the truth they want you to know, just because they omit to tell you half the story doesnt mean they are lying does it!


Absolutely. One of the biggest 'fibs' of the August strikes was the report that tube drivers would be asked to work 'on average' 7 extra nights a year. The entire population went round saying "no big deal, they need to get over themselves" etc.

The truth is that that average took the number of night shifts needed for night tube and divided them amongst all 2-3000 drivers TfL employ and came up with 7. Considering only about a quarter of lines are going to run 24hr at this point it means 3/4s of drivers won't work ANY extra nights so straight away those 7 nights become closer to 30. Add in that (what the unions wanted all along to know but TfL point blank refused to discuss) there was no agreement to share out all work equally amongst depots you could find only 1 northern line depot, for example, picking up 100% of the extra night work meaning it effectively becomes an entirely night shift depot.

But hey, people believed the press that TfL only wanted an extra 7 nights a year per driver!

And then there is the extra money. The unions never started discussing money. But TfL offered the original bonus without being asked. The unions had to reject the entire deal as TfL wouldn't negotiate on individual points and so ended up being forced to reject the money part to. TfL offered even more money in the next deal but all other points (which were originally rejected) were the same. Once again the unions were forced to reject that. The press once again had a field day as they could say the unions had rejected £259 (I think that's roughly the original figure) and then closer to 2k. The truth is the money wasn't being rejected and they didn't want any more. They wanted the other points addressed which TfL refused to do.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I agree but only to a point. People won't read this info, they will read the bits of the info that the right wing Murdoch owned anti union press want them to read. It won't make much difference.

Just as a matter of interest, I wonder how many people really read the newspapers nowadays - possibly nothing like as many as some years ago ?

For news, my family/friends seem to watch the TV (BBC, ITV or loads of others), or listen to the radio (BBC or local independents).

I'm not questioning that Murdoch owns a lot of media, I just wonder how much of an impact he really makes nowadays.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
Just as a matter of interest, I wonder how many people really read the newspapers nowadays - possibly nothing like as many as some years ago ?



For news, my family/friends seem to watch the TV (BBC, ITV or loads of others), or listen to the radio (BBC or local independents).



I'm not questioning that Murdoch owns a lot of media, I just wonder how much of an impact he really makes nowadays.


The only slight shift in readership is from physical newspapers to online subscriptions and tablet editions.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
I know plenty of people who still buy newspapers, and a large proportion of those still believe that what they read in them is the absolute truth.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I know plenty of people who still buy newspapers, and a large proportion of those still believe that what they read in them is the absolute truth.

Yes, I know plenty too but my query was whether it was as many as in days gone by.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,542
Location
Redcar
I know plenty of people who still buy newspapers, and a large proportion of those still believe that what they read in them is the absolute truth.

A lot of it might well be the absolute truth. It's just not usually the whole truth and I think in many cases that's the main issue ;)
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
Yes, I know plenty too but my query was whether it was as many as in days gone by.

I think that given the way the web has impacted on our lives, I think it's pretty clear that fewer people read newspapers now than before the internet age.

A lot of it might well be the absolute truth. It's just not usually the whole truth and I think in many cases that's the main issue ;)

Is there a difference between absolute truth and whole truth? Maybe I chose the wrong one if there is :lol:
 

chris11256

Member
Joined
27 Dec 2012
Messages
734
I've just read that Unite have suspended strike action while talks are taking place. No word from aslef or the RMT yet.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
For anyone interested, quite a good account of how Aslef were approached re night tube and how this dispute has been allowed to escalate in the way that it has...

http://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-1503-Management-just-refused-to-listen#.Vpvif_EzTm0

Can't copy text as I'm on my phone but will try later.

FINN BRENNAN explains the background to the long-running dispute between drivers and Transport for London over the introduction of the Night Tube service.

Just over two years ago, in November 2013, Transport for London invited the general secretaries of the recognised trade unions — Aslef, RMT, TSSA and Unite — to a meeting at London Underground’s headquarters.

To be honest, a summons — rather than an invitation — would be a more accurate description because we were told this was the only possible time and place for this meeting and that an important announcement would be made.

It soon became clear that this was part of a carefully co-ordinated media spin operation.

Two announcements were made. First, that every single booking office across the London Underground network was to close — with the loss of 1,000 jobs — in a flagrant breach of the pledge that Boris Johnson made during his election campaign, and second, that an all-night service was to be introduced on Friday and Saturday on some Tube lines.

No prizes for guessing which of those two stories ended up as the front-page splash in the Evening Standard that afternoon and was trumpeted as “good news for London” across the evening TV news bulletins.

And that’s exactly why Night Tube was announced the way it was. The mayor and TfL wanted a good news story to distract attention away from his latest broken promise to Londoners.

Right from the start we made it clear that we are, in principle, in favour of an all-night service. Because, as a forward-looking trade union, we believe that a world-class capital city like London deserves a world-class public transport system.

We know there is a demand and we know it could create jobs.

We said to the company: “Come and talk to us, let’s find a way to do this that means all-night services can be introduced in a way that is safe and brings benefits to passengers and the hard-working staff who will have to deliver the service.”

But, for more than a year, management simply weren’t prepared to talk to us about Night Tube. Their real agenda was booking office closures and job cuts with Night Tube a convenient distraction.
One senior manager ruefully admitted to me that their total preparations amounted to producing a copy of the Underground map with a few of the lines rubbed out!

In fact, it was only towards the end of 2014 that management started to discuss the implications of Night Tube.

It was immediately clear that they saw this as simply telling the unions about their plans rather than negotiating over the impact they would have on staff.

They wanted to introduce new rosters which would have meant a huge increase in the number of weekend and night shifts each driver was expected to work.

As drivers are paid on a salary basis they would receive no shift enhancements or overtime payments for all the extra anti-social hours they would have to work. The management also insisted on tying their pay offer for 2015 to the introduction of the Night Tube.

All that they were prepared to offer was a pay rise of 0.75 per cent, below the RPI inflation rate on which pay settlements and fare rises are based.

They also offered a one-off payment of £500 to all staff and a further £250 to drivers on Night Tube lines. This payment would not be consolidated into salary and would be non-pensionable.

This meant our members were being asked to sign up to unlimited weekend and night working, for the rest of their careers, for a one-off payment of £250 before deductions.

They knew it was an offer we would not accept.

When it became clear that further talks were futile, Aslef and the other trade unions went into official dispute.

Emboldened by the election of a new Tory government in May, the mayor instructed management to push ahead with the launch of the all-night services in September with or without union agreement.

The catalyst for our ballot for industrial action was the production of new rosters on the Victoria Line that broke current agreements which made clear that management were determined to provoke a confrontation in the hope of imposing their will.

The response from our members was magnificent. They voted by 97.3 per cent on an 87 per cent turnout to take strike action, smashing through the threshold proposed in the Trade Union Bill — a piece of legislation in which we are a specific target.

Each of our sister unions also delivered a big Yes vote. This result didn’t happen by accident, our reps and activists worked hard to deliver every vote, checking addresses were correct and that ballot papers had been received and filled in.

The key was making sure members understood the issues and just how important the battle is. Regular newsletters, emails, texts and Facebook posts were used to counteract management propaganda and the deluge of “greedy drivers holding the city to ransom” stories that filled the right-wing press.

We also did our best to make our case to the public and to fellow workers who rely on public transport, through briefings, interviews and meetings.

We took strike action on July 9 and August 6. The entire Underground system was closed, with all four trade unions standing shoulder to shoulder in solidarity on the picket lines.

Despite some hostile — and in some cases downright false — media coverage, opinion polls showed that a majority of Londoners supported our stance.

Millions of working people, tired of pay freezes and employers who change working conditions on a whim, were glad to see that someone was fighting back.

We argued that, far from being greedy, Aslef is proud of the fact that we negotiate a decent salary for our members. The ones who should be ashamed are those who support anti-union legislation that entrenches low pay and forces so many workers to rely on benefits and tax credits to get by.

Fighting to protect and improve working conditions is exactly what trade unions were set up to do.

Our strikes forced the mayor to drop his plans to impose the all-night service last September. It was a major victory — we forced the company to concede that changes must come by agreement.

The negotiating process was a difficult one as each time we were close to an agreement a new obstacle was put in the way.

Management seemed to only want to offer “talks about talks” on improving conditions and not reach agreements that would actually do so.

Although they have made some improvements on the original offer, last November management ended the talks and announced that they intended to employ part-time drivers to work the Night Tube without any agreement with the unions.

That is why we have been forced to respond with more strike action — London Underground simply stopped negotiating. The sad truth is it seems they are only prepared to seriously engage with us when there is the prospect of industrial action.

Aslef is not opposed to part-time staff being recruited, but we believe it must only be done by agreement that ensures the working conditions of existing full-time staff are not undermined and that a zero-hours culture is not allowed to creep in the back door.

A decision to strike is never taken lightly. Our members don’t want to lose pay unnecessarily, nor do we want to have to cause disruption to people who rely on public transport. But when an employer ignores existing agreements and tries to force through — rather than negotiate — changes we know we have no other option.

Our announcement of new strikes has brought London Underground back to the negotiating table and we met at Acas yesterday for the first time since November 10.

It will quickly become clear if they are simply going through the motions or really want to work with us to find a solution.

It is always our intention to try to reach an agreement. But we are ready to strike again on January 27, if necessary, and I am absolutely confident that our members will be as solid and determined as they were last summer.

Finn Brennan is Aslef organiser for Tube drivers on London Underground.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
Thanks for that, it's clear and well written. My only concern is the reference to the 'zero hours culture' which just seems to be unnecessarily emotive.
 

FordFocus

Member
Joined
15 Apr 2015
Messages
918
The point he makes about zero hours is for the potential misuse of part time staff. It needs to be properly managed, none of this contracted to do only 8 hours a week and then work 30 hours overtime in a week to cover other staff because it's cheaper for LUL than to recruit full time drivers.

I have nothing against part time at all provided that they are on the same contract, conditions and travel concessions as full time staff just at a reduced wage and hours with written and signed agreements from both LUL and the unions.
 

chris11256

Member
Joined
27 Dec 2012
Messages
734
The point he makes about zero hours is for the potential misuse of part time staff. It needs to be properly managed, none of this contracted to do only 8 hours a week and then work 30 hours overtime in a week to cover other staff because it's cheaper for LUL than to recruit full time drivers.

I have nothing against part time at all provided that they are on the same contract, conditions and travel concessions as full time staff just at a reduced wage and hours with written and signed agreements from both LUL and the unions.

This was partly in the FAQ listed with the job posting. One question was 'is there the opportunity to do more than 15 hours a week'. The response was worded along the lines of no, you're contracted for 15 hours a week.

I haven't got my TFL job site login on my work pc, so can't quote word for word.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just seen on BBC news aslef recommend suspending strike action.
 
Last edited:

Tubeboy

Member
Joined
9 May 2009
Messages
470
Location
London
ASLEF suspended their proposed action due to some concessions. These included, the part time drivers being recruited are to do only their contracted hours, Ie 15 hours spread over Friday and Saturday nights only. Also a transfer of their licence so they could (in theory) move to tfl concessions like Lorol and TFL Rail and drive trains. How this would happen in practice, I don't know. LU T/ops don't do the assessments that mainline prospective trainees have to do,and it's not to RSSB levels.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,557
ASLEF suspended their proposed action due to some concessions. These included, the part time drivers being recruited are to do only their contracted hours, Ie 15 hours spread over Friday and Saturday nights only. Also a transfer of their licence so they could (in theory) move to tfl concessions like Lorol and TFL Rail and drive trains. How this would happen in practice, I don't know. LU T/ops don't do the assessments that mainline prospective trainees have to do,and it's not to RSSB levels.
I wonder why it's taken so long to agree these concessions. If they had agreed them months ago, perhaps there would have been less strike action, assuming this is enough to avert strike action and resolve the issue. I don't know if it is of course.
 

Dstock7080

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2010
Messages
2,741
Location
West London
Instead of offering concessions to the Unions, LU were more recently interesting in advertising externally for drivers on different contracts/hours/wages/salary to existing T/Ops and bypassing the Framework Agreement for filling driver positions from promotional station staff. That certainly helped the negotiations along!
 

gavin

Member
Joined
25 Dec 2006
Messages
1,006
The RMT union has announced a new 48 hour Tube strike, starting 9pm Sat 6 Feb, over jobs.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,098
Location
Somewhere, not in London
FFtFS related?

AP JNP have apparently also now been balloted.

Not surprising since Northfeilds seems to really be struggling with the 73TS at the moment.
 

Rup

Member
Joined
27 Nov 2015
Messages
64
Location
Wiltshire
Anyone got a feeling for how badly services will be affected this weekend? I'm in London this weekend.
 

westv

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2013
Messages
4,203
The RMT union has announced a new 48 hour Tube strike, starting 9pm Sat 6 Feb, over jobs.

So presumably it'll affect services Monday morning too. Flippin' pain in the rear if it does. Just seems like there's a new strike called every week at the moment.
 

Dstock7080

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2010
Messages
2,741
Location
West London
Anyone got a feeling for how badly services will be affected this weekend? I'm in London this weekend.
The last time RMT station staff only went on strike, a reasonable train service operated although several stations were non-stopped.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top