Promotion

LUL managers appear to think they are in the TV series 'Life on Mars' as they have woken up in the 1970s (or even earlier) and banned pregnant women from driving trains. They have thrown a particular woman - Kyria Pohl - off her Train Operator training course, and stated that yes, this is because they will no longer allow pregnant women to be in training or to drive a train.

Note to management: PREGNANCY IS NOT AN ILLNESS. Moreover, every pregnancy is different, and while some women may need to avoid particular work tasks while they are expecting, many do not. It is not management's job to treat women staff as though they are fragile and/or incapable: it is to protect their safety and respect their rights. Instead, the company seems determine to deny pregnancy women their dignity and rights - and in the case of trainees such as Kyria, their income as well: being kicked of the course means not getting T/Op training rates of pay, then full rates once passed out.

Fortunately for Kyria, she has a strong and effective union rep at her side, and RMT lawyers are already looking at this case. After all, it is unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of pregnancy.

Night Tube drivers have won their fight with management for a fair chance at moving into full-time jobs.

They had previously been locked in by a ridiculous rule that they had to stay put for 18 months, fifty per cent longer than the standard one year waiting time to move. As usual, management remained intransigent until strike action loomed, with NT drivers delivering a whopping vote in the ballot - at which point management suddenly saw the injustice in the 18-month bar and agreed to relax it.

The dispute resolution has put Night Tube drivers on a level par with full-time station staff applying to be full-time drivers. This is good news, as we did not want to go from one grade being unfairly disadvantaged to another being unfairly disadvantaged instead.

RMT and Aslef have now declared disputes with LU over issues affecting Night Tube drivers: their exclusion from full-time jobs, and the unfair application of the overtime rate (full-time drivers get OT payments for any hours worked over 35/week, for example in the result of delays, suspensions, etc., but as Night Tube drivers, on 16-hour contracts, will never hit this threshold, they get no extra pay if their duties overrun).

Unions are demanding that Night Tube drivers be given the right to take up full-time drivers' jobs Tubeworker welcomes the move into dispute over this clear discrimination.

Now, RMT (the only union to organise on both trains and stations) must press for a clear and fair promotion path for ALL London Underground workers. Night Tube station staff are asking, “What about us?”

Many Night Tube station workers, like their driver colleagues, took the job as a stepping stone to full-time work for the underground. Others, like numerous other station staff, hoped to become drivers. It must be made clear to London Underground that station staff must be prioritised to fill part-time driver vacancies created by Night Tube drivers moving into full time roles.

The situation for many station staff regarding movements, transfers, and promotions is dreadful. Many of us were displaced into locations we never asked to go to and now seemingly have no way of getting out, while others of us who want to stay where we are face forcible displacement.

It's all the chaotic consequence of an unnecessary regrading and cuts programme.

Here's Tubeworker's novel suggestion: employ enough staff to do the work, and only move us if we've volunteered (either via applying for promotion or by requesting a move).

Some station staff have received a letter from management about 'self-demotion', setting out the terms of the pay cut that will apply should you sign your agreement.

(This is supposed to be only for staff who have preferenced to work in a lower grade than their substantive grade. So if that doesn't apply to you and you got one anyway, then object.)

But for those who have preferenced a lower grade, is it fair to treat this a self-demotion and apply a pay cut?

Management are at least seeking your confirmation that you understand that your pay will be cut rather than leaving you to get a nasty shock when you open your next pay slip. But is it right that you get a pay cut at all?

In the ordinary scheme of things, if you choose to move into a lower grade then you're going to get your pay cut. But this isn't the ordinary scheme of things - it's the result of a massive and unfair reorganisation in which many people's new substantive grade includes duties, hours and/or locations different from those they had previously, and which they feel unable to do. You may, for example, not have worked nights before and be unable to do so, but your substantive grade requires you to; or maybe the only posts in your substantive grade are at locations which prevent you from meeting family or other responsibilities. In this sort of situation, your 'choice' to self-demote is not really a choice at all. Probably most of the people in this position will have felt that they had no choice.

So, Tubeworker suggests that should you get one of these letters, you speak with your union rep rather than sign it straightaway. You may have a case to retain your pay rate, or to have adjustments made to make it possible for you to work at your substantive grade.

A circular from the unions giving similar advice would be very welcome.

Ticket Machine Servicing (TMS) training is now a compulsory aspect of the CSA2 training programme at Ashfield House. That means LU is saving £13,000 per year per worker graduating from that course: CSA2s are being paid £23k p/a to do work that a SAMF used to get £36k for. It's an almighty con.

When RMT (and, we hope, TSSA) relaunch disputes over the fallout from "Fit for Fuck All", they should make this scandal one of the issues around which we build demands.

Responsible work that involves cash-handling deserves proper remuneration. Unions should demand that any CSA1 or CSA2 licensed to do ex-SAMF work (i.e., anything involving cash-handling or servicing machines) is given a salary enhancement for every shift where they do this work; CSAs who do not want to handle cash should have the right to refuse.

There's a bit of a grey area at the minute, as LU has said we can take the TMS assessment as many times as necessary without facing any disciplinary action. However, this guarantee doesn't apply to new trainees, who have to pass the test to graduate from Ashfield House.

Not all of us want to handle cash. The fair approach is to reinstate proper payment for the job and to give those of us who don't want to do it an opt-out.

No more unpaid promotions!

What's all this then?

It's a list of ticketing duties that LUL is now demanding that CSAs learn (in our own time) and get qualified in.

In other words, we will be selling tickets, doing all the things that SAMFs used to do except sit at a window. For and SAMF salary? No, for our CSA salary.

Fit for the Future - Stations makes every grade do the work of the current grade that is a level above it. But changing the job titles, management think they can get away with giving us a promotion (in terms of our workload and responsibilities) without a pay rise. That way, they probably reckon they can get away with giving us actual promotions with actual par rises.

Management, as ever, get away with what we let them get away with. Let's draw a line. Don't accept this.