National Rail strikes

[whole diary]

[Ollie]

If this is right, I think FGW^▸ (First Great Western) should try a bit harder to run something in the middle of the day, or am I missing something?

The point being missed is it is a Network Rail strike, FGW can only do so much to get a service, if Network Rail are not staffing boxes further west than Exeter then there is nothing FGW can do about it.

[The SprinterMeister]

Breaking news (15:47) is that the judge has found in Network Rail's favour regarding the injunction regarding the signallers strike..

[Brucey]

Currently on the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) News ticker: "High Court judge grants injunction blocking planned national rail strike next week"

[Timmer]

A good result for the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) and their passengers. A bad result for the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers). 54% in favour of a strike was hardly an overwhelming vote to strike by signal staff so I suspect quite a few will be pleased with this result from the High court.

[James Vertigan]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Easter-Train-Chaos-Averted-As-High-Court-Blocks-Rail-Strike/Article/201004115591012?lpos=Business_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15591012_Easter_Train_Chaos_Averted_As_High_Court_Blocks_Rail_Strike

[JayMac]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

A planned national rail strike by the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) union has been called off after it was challenged in the High Court.

Network Rail was granted an injunction after it alleged discrepancies in the RMT's ballot for industrial action.

It means a four-day strike over job cuts and working hours, due to start next Tuesday, will not go ahead.

Bob Crow, general secretary of the RMT, said the judgement was "an attack on the whole trade union movement" and the executive would recommend a re-ballot.

Mr Crow said: "Workers fighting for the principle of a safe railway have had the whole weight of the law thrown against them."

Earlier, a QC representing Network Rail told Judge Mrs Justice Sharp, who made the order, that "unlawful" strike action would cause "immense damage to the economy".

Robin Gisby, head of operations at Network Rail, said: "The signallers' strike is off and train services next week will run as normal.

"This is good news for the millions of passengers who rely on us every day, for our freight users and for the country. A dispute with the unions remains, however, and we have a responsibility to our people to continue talking to the unions to find a settlement that works for us all."

The RMT had planned to strike over Network Rail's plans to cut 1,500 jobs and increase evening and weekend maintenance work.

The union says the plans would affect rail safety.

'Huge relief'

Network Rail's legal challenge concerned only the ballot of signallers, and did not relate to the RMT's ballot of maintenance workers and the Transport Salaried Staffs' Association (TSSA^» (Transport Salaried Staffs' Association - about)) ballot of supervisors.

The company alleged that the RMT balloted 11 signal boxes that do not exist, and that in 67 locations the numbers of union members balloted exceeded the total number of employees working.

It also claimed that 26 workplaces were missed out, giving RMT members at these locations no opportunity to vote.

Responding to the strike cancellation, Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said the strike cancellation would be "a huge relief" to passengers.

"It is now vital that the two sides in this dispute get back round the table as soon as possible to negotiate a settlement and I call on them to do so," he said.

Shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers said the "unnecessary and irresponsible strike would have been bad for passengers, bad for business and bad for the economy" and "every effort should be made to negotiate a settlement".

"While Gordon Brown and his weak government were powerless in the face of growing union militancy, the strike laws passed by the last Conservative government have brought the country back from the brink of transport meltdown," she added.

Liberal Democrat transport spokesman Norman Baker welcomed the news, but warned it was "a temporary reprieve".

"It's time for Network Rail and the RMT to get back round the table. The RMT must put the problems of the railway ahead of political point-scoring," he said.

Rail customer watchdog Passenger Focus said passengers would be "relieved".

Chief executive Anthony Smith said passengers wanted to see renewed efforts to resolve the issue, "not just a postponement of the pain".

Michael Roberts, chief executive of the Association of Train Operating Companies, said train users could "breathe a sigh of relief" and "hope the unions will see sense by not re-balloting their members".

But TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said the decision would "simply drag the dispute out and make it more difficult to solve."

"It's becoming increasingly easy for employers, unhappy at the prospect of a dispute, to rely on the courts to intervene and nullify a democratic ballot for industrial action on a mere technicality.

"Unions will be disappointed by this latest decision. Disputes between employers and unions should be settled by negotiation," he said.

[John R]

Without wishing to get into the politics, it does seem careless that the union appeared to ballot signal boxes that were closed (including Chalford, according to The Times, which closed decades ago) and that their members in those boxes voted in favour of strike action.

 

[JayMac]

Particularly unedifying speech by Commie Bob on the steps of the High Court. Using words like 'hostilities' and 'crash after crash after crash' does the RMTs^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) cause no good whatsoever. Dinosaur.

[paul7575]

Apparently the maintenance staff action has been cancelled as well now. 

I wonder how the signallers will vote next time, when they realise they have really only been used as extra leverage in the maintenance staff dispute, where at the end of the day it is about a couple of hundred redundancies, as 1100 have already volunteered to go...

Paul

[Oxman]

They may also take note of the plans that were put in place to counter the strike. The idea of striking for 4 hours and then working for the next 8 (signallers generally work 12 hour shifts) must have seemed fairly attractive - maximum damage for minimum loss of wage. However, NR^» (Network Rail - home page) took the view that if you were to strike for part of your shift, you would not be allowed to work the rest. Signallers were looking at the loss of 4 days pay.

Hence why the emergency time tables started late and finished in the early evening. They were based on managers running the panels from 6 in the morning till 2200 at night, less in some places.

[Electric train]

They may also take note of the plans that were put in place to counter the strike. The idea of striking for 4 hours and then working for the next 8 (signallers generally work 12 hour shifts) must have seemed fairly attractive - maximum damage for minimum loss of wage. However, NR^» (Network Rail - home page) took the view that if you were to strike for part of your shift, you would not be allowed to work the rest. Signallers were looking at the loss of 4 days pay.

Hence why the emergency time tables started late and finished in the early evening. They were based on managers running the panels from 6 in the morning till 2200 at night, less in some places.

Also reading between the lines of that internal message was that if those on strike failed to report for duty for the part shift they would be in breach of their contract of employment; some signalers I suspect would have had difficulties getting to and from work due to their own industrial action.
Hopefully common sense will prevail with both NR and unions agreeing a settlement without the need for another ballot

[willc]

54% in favour of a strike was hardly an overwhelming vote

A sight more overwhelming than the percentage of votes cast in favour of any political party that has 'won' a general election in this country in many a year, a pattern that will be repeated in a few weeks' time. Are you going to query a party's right to form a government when it only gets 40 per cent of the votes?

And 77% of RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) signaller members voted for action short of a strike - which could be pretty disruptive in itself - with a turnout of 71%. The turnout in the 2005 general election was 61 per cent.

Should 'Commie' Bob be achieving Soviet-style 99 per cent turnouts and 99 per cent votes in favour before you think the RMT should be allowed to call its members out?

RMT statement this evening says they will re-ballot but are available for more talks.

A message from Bob Crow - April 1, 2010

NETWORK RAIL INDUSTRIAL ACTION CALLED OFF FOR BOTH SIGNALLING STAFF AND ENGINEERING MEMBERS

As you are no doubt aware Network Rail, instead of negotiating with the union, decided to seek an injunction to stop next week's industrial action by signalling and other operations staff going ahead. I am sorry to say the High Court today granted that injunction.

The matter has been considered by an emergency meeting of your full Council of Executives and they have made the following decision:-

"That we note the Court injunction granted against us today in regard to the signal workers action due to start on 6th April 2010.

We instruct the General Secretary to inform our members and Network Rail that the action is called off.

In regard to the infrastructure ballot and the action due to take place on 6th April 2010, as a result of today's injunction we note that this ballot may also be unsafe in legal terms. The General Secretary is, therefore, instructed to call off all industrial action and inform our members and Network Rail.

This Council of Executives is of the view that this is a highly political judgement based on a further development of over two decades of vicious anti-trade union laws in the U.K.

We are concerned that Network Rail may have provided the High Court with false information today in their efforts to convince the Court of their case

RMT has acted on the latest legal advice and acts to protect its members, their jobs and terms and conditions.

Accordingly, the General Secretary is instructed to re-ballot all of our Operations and Infrastructure members as soon as practically possible. The General Grades Committee is to be reconvened on 7th April 2010 to lay down a timetable on this re-ballot and also to receive the full legal judgement from today's Court decision.

The General Secretary is to ensure that our members are advised of this decision. We are still in dispute and are determined to fight on in defence of jobs, terms and conditions and for a safe railway.

The General Secretary is to inform Network Rail that we remain available to negotiate a settlement to both disputes; all union member and officers to be informed."

[JayMac]

All well and good quoting the figures willc, but the ballot has been proved in court to be flawed. Ipso facto the results of the ballot are tainted.

It would appear that the RMTs^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) balloting procedures are not sufficiently robust to comply with the law - a law that they should be fully aware of.

54% voting YES on a YES/NO outcome is hardly comparable to a General Election which at the very least has three voting options and often many more.
 
Rather than Commie Bob bleating about NR^» (Network Rail - home page) running to the courts when they uncovered discrepencies, perhaps he should apologise to his members for the flawed ballot and promise to sort out the problems so that the next ballot will stand up to scrutiny.

[Btline]

This strike should never have been allowed to go ahead anyway.

Kidderminster: with over 1 million passengers per annum, on Birmingham's busiest commuter line,  - was to have ALL SERVICES AXED during the action.

It would have been a nightmare - you can't just cut off a major station's services, and hold an entire region to ransom! (Kidderminster station's catchment area is vast) The A456 into B'ham and the A449 to Worcester would have been rammed even more than usual, and car parks at Stourbridge Junction and Cradley Heath would have been overwhelmed.

It's a disgrace - at least it's been called off... for now!

[Mookiemoo]

This strike should never have been allowed to go ahead anyway.

Kidderminster: with over 1 million passengers per annum, on Birmingham's busiest commuter line,  - was to have ALL SERVICES AXED during the action.

It would have been a nightmare - you can't just cut off a major station's services, and hold an entire region to ransom! (Kidderminster station's catchment area is vast) The A456 into B'ham and the A449 to Worcester would have been rammed even more than usual, and car parks at Stourbridge Junction and Cradley Heath would have been overwhelmed.

It's a disgrace - at least it's been called off... for now!

Worcester/Ludlow/Hereford and Shrewsbury would also have been completely cut off from what I can tell - as well as surrounding catchments.

Not to mention Liverpool would have had no services connecting to anywhere