"Malcolm & Nika" wrote in message
...
LUL signal and control staff to ballot after talks fail - 6 Dec 2004

DECEMBER 6: LONDON UNDERGROUND's biggest union is to ballot more than 330
signallers and line controllers for strike action after six months of
negotiations failed to resolve a four-year dispute over pay rates, pay
structures, hours and conditions.


Press release from the RMT today:

A year after RMT won a £2,000 interim payment for signalling and
service-control grades, and six months after a working party began
detailed talks, LUL has demanded 14 per cent reduction in jobs,
lengthening of shifts, reduction in minimum rest-periods and other
"unacceptable" strings.

snip


"When it came to pay we were happy to negotiate a unified and simplified
pay scale, but by 'red-circling' individuals outside the new structure the
company is attempting to use it as a downgrading exercise," Pat Sikorski
said.

ends



For public transport, they sure do hate the public. This really, really
annoys me. I'm so fed up of being a pawn in this stupid game between the
RMT and LUL. Why do they close the service? Don't they care that us, the
people who pay their wages, are getting our lives screwed up on an
increasingly regular basis?

If they really DO care about the public, the union workers should strike
like they do in Dublin. In Dublin, during industrial action, public
transport workers stop charging people fares. The company gets a financial
wake-up call, AND it's a gift to the very public they're supposedly trying
to serve.

Anyway, after all the stuff the RMT has been given, more threats of
industrial action aren't sitting too well. One gets the feeling they are
trying to get all they can, whether they deserve it or not. I'm sure that's
not the case, though.

sorry if this offends anyone, but I don't like walking to work.

d.

What is it the RMT have been given?

Anyway, after all the stuff the RMT has been given, more threats of
industrial action aren't sitting too well. One gets the feeling they are
trying to get all they can, whether they deserve it or not. I'm sure
that's not the case, though.

In article , d
writes
DECEMBER 6: LONDON UNDERGROUND's biggest union is to ballot more than 330
signallers and line controllers for strike action
[...]
For public transport, they sure do hate the public. This really, really
annoys me. I'm so fed up of being a pawn in this stupid game between the
RMT and LUL. Why do they close the service?

What other options do signallers and line controllers have?

Don't they care that us, the
people who pay their wages, are getting our lives screwed up on an
increasingly regular basis?

I suspect they care more - assuming the report is true - that *their*
lives are about to be screwed up by less pay and longer hours.

If they really DO care about the public, the union workers should strike
like they do in Dublin. In Dublin, during industrial action, public
transport workers stop charging people fares.

Signallers and line controllers don't have anything to do with fare
collection. If those staff who do collect fares got involved, they'd be
breaking the laws about unions.

The company gets a financial
wake-up call, AND it's a gift to the very public they're supposedly trying
to serve.

Since I have an annual season ticket, it doesn't affect me. It won't
affect the vast majority of regular travellers, just those who would
only travel if they don't have to pay.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Exactly - it wouldn't affect you. It would affect the company, though.
That's the beauty. Why should we suffer over a dispute between two other,
seperate entities? It just strikes me as madness.

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
news
In article , d
writes
DECEMBER 6: LONDON UNDERGROUND's biggest union is to ballot more than
330
signallers and line controllers for strike action
[...]
For public transport, they sure do hate the public. This really, really
annoys me. I'm so fed up of being a pawn in this stupid game between the
RMT and LUL. Why do they close the service?

What other options do signallers and line controllers have?

Don't they care that us, the
people who pay their wages, are getting our lives screwed up on an
increasingly regular basis?

I suspect they care more - assuming the report is true - that *their*
lives are about to be screwed up by less pay and longer hours.

If they really DO care about the public, the union workers should strike
like they do in Dublin. In Dublin, during industrial action, public
transport workers stop charging people fares.

Signallers and line controllers don't have anything to do with fare
collection. If those staff who do collect fares got involved, they'd be
breaking the laws about unions.

The company gets a financial
wake-up call, AND it's a gift to the very public they're supposedly trying
to serve.

Since I have an annual season ticket, it doesn't affect me. It won't
affect the vast majority of regular travellers, just those who would only
travel if they don't have to pay.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

Since I have an annual season ticket, it doesn't affect me. It won't
affect the vast majority of regular travellers, just those who would
only travel if they don't have to pay.

Eh? If you have an annual season ticket, you may not lose out
financially but you will certainly pay in time and inconvenience if your
regular service doesn't run. It may well affect the ability of some
workers to earn overtime if their commuting journeys take longer. I'm
sure there are also many people who use the Tube for non-leisure
purposes but who do not have the same journey every day. They *will* be
affected, and it may reduce their income or increase their costs if
they're self-employed.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Generally speaking, in the past any strike action has cost more to the
employee in pay lost than they recoup from an increase in wages. So perhaps
they do it because they have a principle to adhere to.


"Richard J." wrote in message
.uk...
Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

Since I have an annual season ticket, it doesn't affect me. It won't
affect the vast majority of regular travellers, just those who would
only travel if they don't have to pay.

Eh? If you have an annual season ticket, you may not lose out
financially but you will certainly pay in time and inconvenience if your
regular service doesn't run. It may well affect the ability of some
workers to earn overtime if their commuting journeys take longer. I'm
sure there are also many people who use the Tube for non-leisure
purposes but who do not have the same journey every day. They *will* be
affected, and it may reduce their income or increase their costs if
they're self-employed.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Malcolm & Nika wrote:
Generally speaking, in the past any strike action has cost more to
the employee in pay lost than they recoup from an increase in
wages. So perhaps they do it because they have a principle to
adhere to.

That's true of a few maybe. The rest strike because they couldn't be
bothered to vote in the ballot. I can never understand why so few union
members vote when, as you say, they stand to lose more than they gain.
I hope the signallers and line controllers actually vote this time.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In article , Richard
J. writes
Since I have an annual season ticket, it doesn't affect me. It won't
affect the vast majority of regular travellers, just those who would
only travel if they don't have to pay.
Eh? If you have an annual season ticket, you may not lose out
financially but you will certainly pay in time and inconvenience if your
regular service doesn't run.

You missed the point. The previous post said that a ticket-checking
embargo would benefit passengers. It will *not* benefit the vast
majority of regular travellers, just those who pay per journey (and
therefore might well not have travelled if the embargo wasn't
happening).

Yes, an actual strike (of signallers, in this case) will affect me
adversely. However, if it's justified (something I don't have enough
information to determine), then I will grin and bear it.

[Older readers may wish to note my name.]

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...

The previous post said that a ticket-checking
embargo would benefit passengers. It will *not*
benefit the vast majority of regular travellers,
just those who pay per journey (and therefore
might well not have travelled if the embargo
wasn't happening).

A strike of ticket-checkers would *adversely* affect regular passengers,
since a large number of them would not be able to fit on their usual trains,
unless boarding the train at its origin.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

LUL management have pointed out that it is a breach of any employees
contract not to operate the gates and check tickets. Therefore if staff were
to leave gates open they could face disciplinary action. As they wont have
the protection of a strike and the associated union backing....they cant do
it.

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , Richard J.
writes
Since I have an annual season ticket, it doesn't affect me. It won't
affect the vast majority of regular travellers, just those who would
only travel if they don't have to pay.
Eh? If you have an annual season ticket, you may not lose out
financially but you will certainly pay in time and inconvenience if your
regular service doesn't run.

You missed the point. The previous post said that a ticket-checking
embargo would benefit passengers. It will *not* benefit the vast majority
of regular travellers, just those who pay per journey (and therefore might
well not have travelled if the embargo wasn't happening).

Yes, an actual strike (of signallers, in this case) will affect me
adversely. However, if it's justified (something I don't have enough
information to determine), then I will grin and bear it.

[Older readers may wish to note my name.]

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: