Tube Strike

[Neil H]

crankedup said:

ATG said:

crankedup said:

Same old stuff trotted out last time the Tories were in Government. The truth of the matter is that the Tories will not be satisfied until the last of the Unions has disappeared under a swamp of legislation. Zero worker representation is not the way forward imo.

Predicated on an out-dated "them and us" view of the world. The world has moved on.

This is true, the World has moved on, but not in a good way. Maybe time to turn back the clock a little.
Still the same old Tory ideology, whichever way you want to cut it. Even the German workers have had enough of the feeling of being 'under the thumb'.

Unions: helping people manage their inferiority complexes for a hundred years.

[Neil H]

legzr1 said:

I agree, it has nothing to do with the buffoon - all the more reason for him to have kept his mouth shut in the first place don't you agree?

No, as Mayor of London he has every right to comment on yet more disruption by the RMT.

[Slaav]

Let's face it? Public perception has definitely shifted AGAINST the poorly paid, over worked and bullied tube workers. I think that is a fact despite the word perception being in there

Once again it seems that the RMT are possibly the most militant, thieving chancers that ever existed as a legal organisation.

One quick question for the people on t'other side of this discussion:

"Are the Unions and workers milking this change in practices for all it is ducking worth to screw over their employer and feather their nest?"

And if that one is too hard; "How about making night shifts voluntary and if there are not enough to fill the rosters, LUL can employ 'night workers' from external candidates which/who are perfectly happy with the new contracts on offer at the rates of pay advertised? Open recruitment and no closed shop?"

Simple questions I would have thought?


I do fear that might be a little too simple though?

[walm]

I doubt the economics work if you have to hire and train a completely new bunch of operators.
Throwing the existing ones £200 is much cheaper.
"It's not about money" but they are still just "negotiating".

[Slaav]

walm said:

I doubt the economics work if you have to hire and train a completely new bunch of operators.
Throwing the existing ones £200 is much cheaper.
"It's not about money" but they are still just "negotiating".

As soon as LUL are 'allowed' to recruit externally for night shift operators (that will never ever be allowed by the RMT and most likely ASLEF also) and the option is given to existing workers to work those shifts, the rosters will be filled overnight (excuse the pun!)

I really don't think there is a refusal to work nights - just 'what can we get out of this leverage we have' type mentality....

[anonymous-user]

crankedup said:

blueg33 said:

crankedup said:

AMG Merc said:

blueg33 said:

...there is so much legislation protecting workers that in reality unions are irrelevant today, and the strikes we see are led by the dinosaurs gasping for their final breath.

Very true as mentioned earlier - comprehensive UK and EU employee protection has evolved on all levels - so unions have no place in 2015 and beyond

Quite an assertion! there will always be a place for worker representation so long as we have workers and bosses. The bosses will always want to extract the maximum output and quality from the workers whilst the workers will always want a better deal from the boss.
The current Governments rabid ideology for removing Unions from the work landscape is not forward thinking or democratic.

We employ 7000 people, we have no unions, we have an excellent staff retention rate, we comply with the law.

And the Company pay very good rates, generous holiday's, sick pay, good employee training, in-house promotions, health scheme, profit sharing and blah blah blah. Great, pity more Companies like this are not operating in a similar mode. And if all Companies acted like it we wouldn't need worker representation. Utopia sadly does not exist.

Just like the LU, eh, yet the 'workers' there still feel the need to have a union and to blackmail the company as often as they can.

[legzr1]

Neil H said:

No, as Mayor of London he has every right to comment on yet more disruption by the RMT.

Ironically enough, disruption caused by him being unable to keep his mouth shut in the first place.

He seems adept at wading in with his size 10s when his opinion isn't warranted or needed - a thoroughly helpful chap.

Neil H said:

Unions: helping people manage their inferiority complexes for a hundred years.

They've helped some of their members get some pretty good annual leave entitlement - judging by the bitterness on here I know some of you would love to be in that position

If you can't best them....

Slaav said:

"How about making night shifts voluntary and if there are not enough to fill the rosters, LUL can employ 'night workers' from external candidates which/who are perfectly happy with the new contracts on offer at the rates of pay advertised? Open recruitment and no closed shop?"

Simple questions I would have thought?


I do fear that might be a little too simple though?

Yes, so simple an idea that it's already been covered at some length earlier in the thread

Recap: Unions actually said over a month ago that this would be a good idea and that it needed discussing and formalising (naturally) - LUL, at the time, were only interested in forcing everything through by second week of September and to hell with the consequences.

It is my opinion that LUL management were put in this position by a flippant oaf in desperate need for a one-liner and fresh headlines.

Still, action has been suspended, ended or postponed so be thankful for that.
Perception will change with the wind and any hatred towards RMT (for example) will only matter to those feeling the hatred.



And the world spins....

[blueg33]

REALIST123 said:

crankedup said:

blueg33 said:

crankedup said:

AMG Merc said:

blueg33 said:

...there is so much legislation protecting workers that in reality unions are irrelevant today, and the strikes we see are led by the dinosaurs gasping for their final breath.

Very true as mentioned earlier - comprehensive UK and EU employee protection has evolved on all levels - so unions have no place in 2015 and beyond

Quite an assertion! there will always be a place for worker representation so long as we have workers and bosses. The bosses will always want to extract the maximum output and quality from the workers whilst the workers will always want a better deal from the boss.
The current Governments rabid ideology for removing Unions from the work landscape is not forward thinking or democratic.

We employ 7000 people, we have no unions, we have an excellent staff retention rate, we comply with the law.

And the Company pay very good rates, generous holiday's, sick pay, good employee training, in-house promotions, health scheme, profit sharing and blah blah blah. Great, pity more Companies like this are not operating in a similar mode. And if all Companies acted like it we wouldn't need worker representation. Utopia sadly does not exist.

Just like the LU, eh, yet the 'workers' there still feel the need to have a union and to blackmail the company as often as they can.

Exactly my point!

[Neil H]

legzr1 said:

Neil H said:

No, as Mayor of London he has every right to comment on yet more disruption by the RMT.

Ironically enough, disruption caused by him being unable to keep his mouth shut in the first place.

He seems adept at wading in with his size 10s when his opinion isn't warranted or needed - a thoroughly helpful chap.

OK I get it, you don’t like Boris. He’s got every right to wade in and give his opinion on matters that affect London, petulant Tube workers with delusions of grandeur being prime fodder.

Neil H said:

Unions: helping people manage their inferiority complexes for a hundred years.

They've helped some of their members get some pretty good annual leave entitlement - judging by the bitterness on here I know some of you would love to be in that position

If you can't best them....

Those are just short-term benefits, we all know they’re slowly but surely talking their members of out of jobs. The Tube will end up like the DLR, one person opening the doors and a couple of people in each station ushering the tourists around. Everyone else will be out of a job.

[legzr1]

Neil H said:

legzr1 said:

Neil H said:

No, as Mayor of London he has every right to comment on yet more disruption by the RMT.

Ironically enough, disruption caused by him being unable to keep his mouth shut in the first place.

He seems adept at wading in with his size 10s when his opinion isn't warranted or needed - a thoroughly helpful chap.

OK I get it, you don’t like Boris. He’s got every right to wade in and give his opinion on matters that affect London, petulant Tube workers with delusions of grandeur being prime fodder.

And leaves poor Londoners to pick up the pieces - they always say you get the politicians you deserve.

I get the feeling you're talking about his sound bites after the strikes were announced rather than the silly, silly comments actually causing the strike.

But,ignorance is bliss eh?

Neil H said:

Those are just short-term benefits, we all know they’re slowly but surely talking their members of out of jobs. The Tube will end up like the DLR, one person opening the doors and a couple of people in each station ushering the tourists around. Everyone else will be out of a job.

I've tidied up your messy quotes.

Unfortunately, I can't do much about the messy content.

Reply back in 50 years when you get your 25mph automated system - fingers crossed

[Neil H]

legzr1 said:

But,ignorance is bliss eh?

Judging by the abundance of smilies in your posts, it would appear so.

legzr1 said:

Reply back in 50 years when you get your 25mph automated system - fingers crossed

Try and keep at least one finger free so you can continue driving your train.

[legzr1]

Neil H said:

Try and keep at least one finger free so you can continue driving your train.

Confirmation.

Bye

[Slaav]

legzr1 said:

Neil H said:

Try and keep at least one finger free so you can continue driving your train.

Confirmation.

Bye

Even though I disagree with Neil and in my newer incarnation of trying not to generalise.... that was quite funny!

[Justayellowbadge]

legzr1 said:

I get the feeling you're talking about his sound bites after the strikes were announced rather than the silly, silly comments actually causing the strike.

What comments were these? Genuine question, I missed the background to the action last month so curious.

[Neil H]

legzr1 said:

Neil H said:

Try and keep at least one finger free so you can continue driving your train.

Confirmation.

Bye

Oh come on you can't expect me to pass by a cheap shot like that

[legzr1]

Justayellowbadge said:

What comments were these? Genuine question, I missed the background to the action last month so curious.

Jumping the gun announcing start dates for the Night Tube knowing full well that his own management and negotiating team hadn't even began discussions with unions or their members.

Some say it was deliberate and engineered to start a strike as he knew there was no way systems could be set up for maintenance procedures (let alone driver and station staff rostering) before that date.



http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/boris-johnson-unde...

Slaav said:

Even though I disagree with Neil and in my newer incarnation of trying not to generalise.... that was quite funny!

Getting a little repetitive though don't you think?

Each to their own I suppose

[jimmybobby]

legzr1 said:

jimmybobby said:

Incorrect. They are back at work temporarily until the new strikes in september which it is likely will happen as the present strikes will only have been called off due to the ever groweing public anger and hatred brewing over this fiasco and the fact that LU will have agreed to certain of the unin utterly unreasonable demands in principle yet again.

Yes, ok.

Hopefully there will be meaningful discussion between then and now - you seem to think you know what's going on in those talks, what has been negotiated and what is 'likely' - care to give a source or are you going to admit to guesswork?

jimmybobby said:

Also just to make you aware yet again that this has nothing to do with BJ. This is LU which he is not in charge of running.

I agree, it has nothing to do with the buffoon - all the more reason for him to have kept his mouth shut in the first place don't you agree?

No. He is mayor of London and LU is a major part of Londons transport infrastructure. As such he is entitled to wade in on the issue much as the union lovers may hate it and him for being a nasty Tory.

[jimmybobby]

legzr1 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

What comments were these? Genuine question, I missed the background to the action last month so curious.

Jumping the gun announcing start dates for the Night Tube knowing full well that his own management and negotiating team hadn't even began discussions with unions or their members.

Some say it was deliberate and engineered to start a strike as he knew there was no way systems could be set up for maintenance procedures (let alone driver and station staff rostering) before that date.



http://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/boris-johnson-unde...


Newsflash! Its a business NOT a playschool. It matters not if the employees were asked or more likely "Bribed". Yes I know you will argue their contracts state otherwise and that much is most likely true because LU is so poorly managed that when the unions throw a hissy fit and everyone goes on strike each month the LU caves in to their insane demands

The workers and unions going on strike due to Boris announcing the date the night tube will start shows nothing more than that the unions and workers were unhappy that they were not being given more time to force the LU into giving them massive pay and holiday increases behind closed doors

Slaav said:

Even though I disagree with Neil and in my newer incarnation of trying not to generalise.... that was quite funny!

Getting a little repetitive though don't you think?

Each to their own I suppose

[Chlamydia]

legzr1 said:

Chlamydia said:

I work on the Tube, (engineering by the way, not LU management), and my contract in the five years I've worked here has always said that shift timings may change but that I'd be given adequate notice and compensated in the form of overtime, weekend/nights uplift payments etc. Everyone I know who works on the Tube has similar wording in their contracts so I'm struggling to see what the strikers are moaning about. We get very well paid; I think I've said it before but I came over from the aviation sector and I got a massive increase in pay when I changed to the rail industry. From the inside looking out I can only agree with what others are saying - this is politics, pure and simple, it has nothing to do with 'bending over and taking it'. For that reason I won't strike, have never gone on strike, and am not likely to ever go on strike, and neither will any of my colleagues.

Yes, you've posted similar earlier in the thread.

Couple of points:

I can't remember anyone saying you must be a trade union member - some accused LUL of operating under an (illegal) closed-shop mentality - you're the proof this is PH BS.

The strikers were originally moaning about changes to T&Cs being forced through without adequate notice or discussion - notice made and discussions concluded now see Aslef cancelling action and others postponing.

It's interesting that you think you'll never strike - you've come from one trade to another for a significant pay rise. Do you wonder where that 'package' came from? You know, like union members using group bargaining to better the the conditions and pay for everyone? Then along comes you and your chums, accepting the favourable terms fought for by previous union members and you seem to wear your 'no Union for me' badge with pride.

The part I've put in bold I'd like to point out is absolutely not PH BS, I was told several times that I would have to join a union and when I declined I suddenly found that various tasks that I needed other people to do would not be done, resulting in me not being able to do my job properly. Nobody ever overtly said 'closed shop' but that's what it boiled down to. So I gave in and joined the RMT and miraculously the tasks that weren't being carried out were suddenly no longer a problem. There are jobs on the railways where being in a union is the exception rather than the rule but I have since found it useful - not in dealing with the bosses but in dealing with other union members who see it as their task in life to prevent work being carried out rather than assisting.
There was plenty of advanced notice about these working hours changes; you could say that in my case there was five years notice as it says it right there in my contract when I joined. Now admittedly I've not seen anyone else's contract but they can't be much different to mine. But the introduction of the night Tube itself was specifically highlighted to us long before it came to the general public's notice, just how much notice do you think is required - years?
The 'package' I get is very good yes but you saying that the pay and conditions are due to the unions is ridiculous - for a start most of the safety rules, hours we are allowed to work etc are set by the EU, and the pay is good because the industry brings in many millions of pounds. A similar industry is the other one I was looking at when I left aviation, that of the oil industry where the pay is also very good but where they are not heavily unionised.

And I don't think I'll never strike, I absolutely know that I'll never strike - I work in a service industry and my 'customers' if you will are the general public, how on earth does punishing them by going on strike work exactly? If my job got so bad that I didn't agree with the conditions or pay then I'd do what I've done in the past and look for another job.

[legzr1]

jimmybobby said:

No. He is mayor of London and LU is a major part of Londons transport infrastructure. As such he is entitled to wade in on the issue much as the union lovers may hate it and him for being a nasty Tory.

I don't hate him, he's just another transient Tory with little bearing on my life.

He is entitled to say wtf he likes as long as he lives with the consequences - seems this time it's bitten him on his ample arse.