<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4213692.stm>

Rail workers at a train company in the South East are to be balloted
on strike action in a row over re-privatisation.

Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union (RMT) at South
Eastern Trains will vote in the next few weeks on whether to take
industrial action.

The company runs trains from Kent and parts of Sussex and Surrey into
London. Four bidders are competing to take over the franchise from
early next year.

South Eastern Trains said it was disappointed the ballot was being
held.

Job cuts feared

The company has run trains in the South East since Connex was stripped
of its franchise in 2003.

The RMT has been protesting at plans to re-privatise the franchise,
arguing that services have improved since South Eastern has been in
charge.

The union fears possible job cuts and has asked for assurances there
will be no compulsory redundancies or worsening of pensions and other
working conditions.


"We made it quite clear that failure to agree by the end of August
would result in a dispute and we have now set in motion a ballot for
strike action among our 1,350 members," said RMT general secretary Bob
Crowe [sic].

Michael Holden South Eastern's managing director, said a meeting had
been set up with the RMT on 20 September to discuss its demands.

"I'm saddened that this unnecessary and extreme step has been taken
before we've even had the chance to discuss them," he said.

"It is not possible to agree to reinstate previous British Rail terms
and conditions nor can we stop the re-franchising of the South Eastern
Trains' network.

"Equally, I cannot make an agreement now as to what the owners of the
company may wish to do after the transfer."



Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Capercaillie - Downtown Toronto (from the album 'The Blood Is Strong')

Neil Sunderland wrote:

> Rail workers at a train company in the South East are to be balloted
> on strike action in a row over re-privatisation.
> 
> Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union (RMT) at South
> Eastern Trains will vote in the next few weeks on whether to take
> industrial action.



Good. I don't usually like the way Crowe works, but I hope they bring it 
to a halt on this, and bring the entire network to a halt regarding the 
proposed service cuts in the North East.

Darren  wrote:


>Neil Sunderland wrote:
>> Rail workers at a train company in the South East are to be balloted
>> on strike action in a row over re-privatisation.
>> 
>> Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union (RMT) at South
>> Eastern Trains will vote in the next few weeks on whether to take
>> industrial action.
>
>
>Good. I don't usually like the way Crowe works, but I hope they bring it 
>to a halt on this, and bring the entire network to a halt regarding the 
>proposed service cuts in the North East.



That would be secondary action, and therefore illegal.

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 17:29:25 +0100, Tony   Polson 
wrote:


>That would be secondary action, and therefore illegal.


Quite, though it didn't stop the BA workers, and the railway is in a
similar situation in that staff used to work for one organisation. 

A cynic might propose that this was the main reason why the Tories
promoted rail privatisation.

That said, if there is a *threat* of cuts nationwide, I don't see why
that couldn't be carried out as a nationwide ballot, perhaps
separately for each TOC but conveniently on the same day?  It's a fine
line...

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil Williams) wrote:


>On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 17:29:25 +0100, Tony   Polson 
>wrote:
>
>>That would be secondary action, and therefore illegal.
>
>Quite, though it didn't stop the BA workers, and the railway is in a
>similar situation in that staff used to work for one organisation. 



There was some justification for secondary action in the case of Gate
Gourmet.  

British Airways outsourced their in-flight meals several years (~3
years?) ago and the BA facility was taken over by Swissair.  The ex-BA
staff were TUPEd into Swissair.

Then Swissair went bust, and the facility was sold (2004?) by the
receivers to a US-based consortium, who inherited Swissair's TUPE
obligations towards the ex-BA staff.

Given BA's intimate involvement in Gate Gourmet, extending to
discussions about the detail of personnel practices, rates of pay and
conditions of employment, plus the very firm pressure exerted by BA on
Gate Gourmet to perform within a rigid financial framework BA imposed,
the Gate Gourmet staff were virtually still under BA control.  I can
sympathise with the action of BA staff who withdrew their labour in
sympathy with their (ex-)colleagues at Gate Gourmet whose shabby
treatment was not unconnected with the actions of BA management.

I don't think you will find that BA will sue the union for allowing
such secondary action, as BA would have far more to lose than they
could possibly gain.  The whole sordid tale is a direct result of
outsourcing with the emphasis placed almost solely on saving
significant amounts of money, with insufficient regard being given to
how the staff would suffer as a result.

".

>
> That said, if there is a *threat* of cuts nationwide, I don't see why
> that couldn't be carried out as a nationwide ballot, perhaps
> separately for each TOC but conveniently on the same day?  It's a fine
> line...
>

I seem to remember that the person proposing rail cuts  was none other than
the invisible MoT Alistair Darling who stated that he did not see why the
taxpayer should pay for running trains full of nothing but air. (paraphrase)
SET have improved the running of trains by sleight of hand e.g. extending
running times and taking out trains. Perhaps Mr.Crowe and his merry band are
not aware of this in their pursuit of their socialist ideals. The passenger
does not care who runs the trains it is what he gets for his money that
counts.
MJW

Neil Sunderland wrote:

>Rail workers at a train company in the South East are to be balloted
>on strike action in a row over re-privatisation.


(This isn't really related to this, but I couldn't think of anywhere
else to put it!)

This link was posted in Another Place today:
<http://www.mtullett.plus.com/JUNE1975.JPG>

It's the front page of the Daily Telegraph from 3rd June 1975, showing
a photograph of the lying snow that stopped the cricket match at
Buxton between Derbyshire and Lancashire the day before.

Unfortunately most of the page has been trimmed off, but there's just
enough left to see that the National Union of Railwaymen had given 21
days notice of an all-out national strike after rejecting a 27.5% pay
offer.

Oh, and the paper cost 8p in Eire.


Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Belle and Sebastian - She's Losing It (from the album 'Tigermilk')

Neil Sunderland  wrote:


>It's the front page of the Daily Telegraph from 3rd June 1975, showing
>a photograph of the lying snow that stopped the cricket match at
>Buxton between Derbyshire and Lancashire the day before.



I cannot stand lying snow.  Why can't it just tell the truth?

Or is this the origin of the "wrong kind of snow" story?

;-)

M.J.Whitson wrote:

> ".
> >
> > That said, if there is a *threat* of cuts nationwide, I don't see why
> > that couldn't be carried out as a nationwide ballot, perhaps
> > separately for each TOC but conveniently on the same day?  It's a fine
> > line...
> >
> I seem to remember that the person proposing rail cuts  was none other than
> the invisible MoT Alistair Darling who stated that he did not see why the
> taxpayer should pay for running trains full of nothing but air. (paraphrase)
> SET have improved the running of trains by sleight of hand e.g. extending
> running times and taking out trains. Perhaps Mr.Crowe and his merry band are
> not aware of this in their pursuit of their socialist ideals. The passenger
> does not care who runs the trains it is what he gets for his money that
> counts.
> MJW



SET generally runs a lot more empty trains during the off-peak, often
avoiding awkward but popular places like Lewisham and Charing Cross.
However, they also run slightly less full trains in the peaks than
there used to be.  This must all help with their performance
statistics.  Extended journey times (eg 4 minutes extra between Slade
Green and Charing Cross) that might have been blamed on the Strood
tunnel work don't seem to have been reduced again.

However, I certainly support the RMT in resisting reprivatisation.  I
would be interested to know what SET management's reward will be for
manoeuvering in preparation for franchising.  I also wonder if they are
not allowed to look too good in case of unwelcome comparisons.

Their provision of information to passengers (and their own staff)
sinks to ever more appalling depths.  For example, passengers missing a
train and being delayed by half an hour, even though it ran on time,
simply because the information display showed it at the wrong platform.
 The change of platform was due to a diversion which had taken place
half an hour earlier, but the staff weren't told and no announcement
was made.  Brilliant.

Neil Sunderland wrote:


> The RMT has been protesting at plans to re-privatise the franchise,
> arguing that services have improved since South Eastern has been in
> charge.


But the RMT will soon change that!

Charlie