Stations 35-Hour Week 2004-6

A Shorter Working Week?

Submitted by Tubeworker on Mon, 29/05/2006 - 15:54

Well it’s been nearly 4 months since the new rosters were imposed, ahem I mean implemented, on a grateful LUL workforce!

The SWW was heralded as a great deal for staff but in reality that is far from the truth for a lot of staff.

Who in their right mind would envy CSAs at Wembley Park and their roster? They work a 13-week roster and although on paper they an average of 37.5 hours a week, in reality during their roster they can work 7 days in a row working a staggering 59hrs 45 minutes!

Customer Led?

Submitted by Tubeworker on Mon, 13/03/2006 - 20:21

Question: When is a customer-led organisation not a Customer led organisation?

Answer: When that customer-led organisation is London Underground Ltd!

Just over a month has elapsed since the new Shorter Working Week rosters were imposed on / accepted by (depending on your point of view) the majority of the 44 groups of stations on London Underground.

One of the consequences resulting from the implementation of these new rosters has been greatly reduced Ticket Office window opening times especially at stations outside zones 1&2.

Thirteen mistakes

Submitted by Tubeworker on Mon, 30/01/2006 - 15:12

Before listing 13 key mistakes that Tubeworker thinks that RMT made during the stations shorter working week campaign, we need to make a few things clear. The blame for the cuts in staffing levels lies squarely with management, and behind them, the Mayor. RMT at least fought the cuts, whereas TSSA never even got out of the starting blocks (no change there, then). The existence of two unions to start with doesn’t help.

Tube station staff endorse inadequate deal

Submitted by Tubeworker on Sat, 28/01/2006 - 16:10

RMT’s stations membership have voted by about 5:1 (1,250ish to 250ish) to accept the deal brokered by LUL management and the union’s leadership. In doing so, it has ended the dispute over the staffing cuts, and those cuts will now go ahead.

So, why did members vote to give up this fight? A few reasons:

Brief report on last Thursday’s mass meeting

Submitted by Tubeworker on Fri, 27/01/2006 - 14:59

About 60 people there, three-quarters of them station staff, the rest other grades. So an OK turnout, but not as ‘mass’ as a mass meeting might have been. Had it been held before the National Executive had decided what to do with LUL’s offer, then loads more people would have come, because they would have seen a point in coming to a meeting that might actually affect what the union did. As it was, the meeting simply discussed what the union had already done. Although the referendum was still going on, the leadership had pretty much cast the die already.

We've Started So We Should Finish

Submitted by Tubeworker on Thu, 19/01/2006 - 15:08

... as Magnus Magnusson might say.

When the union embarks on a campaign, it has to see it through. Station staff - including some of LUL's lowest-paid grades - sacrificed two days' pay to act not just in their own interests, but in the interests of colleagues and passengers. Our union should respect that sacrifice and not settle for small beer.

That doesn't mean that we go on and on and on and on, never agreeing any compromise deals. But it does mean that we should go as far as our fighting capacities can take us.

RMT Tube station staff: Vote No to management’s inadequate offer

Submitted by Tubeworker on Wed, 18/01/2006 - 11:50

Vote to Keep Up the Fight

RMT is asking its members to accept an offer from management which amounts to giving up our fight against staffing cuts for a few small concessions. Tubeworker urges readers to vote “No”.

If we accept this – if we call off our fight – then management will go through the motions of a ‘safety validation’ which might restore one SA here, one SS there, but which will not reverse the drastic cuts in staffing levels. Why would they reverse them if we take the pressure off?!

Media Frenzy

Submitted by Tubeworker on Wed, 18/01/2006 - 10:52

Talk about a rough ride in the press! You’d think we were planning mass murder, not fighting for staff and passenger safety.

The BBC’s reports sounded like they were lifted straight from an LUL press release, claiming that you “might not have noticed” there was a strike on cos disruption was so minimal. The Evening Standard, on the other hand, reported “chaos”, not because they want to talk up the effectiveness of our action, but because dramatic headlines sell newspapers and serve their campaign to demonise us.

Strange Management Behaviour During Strikes (part 756)

Submitted by Tubeworker on Wed, 18/01/2006 - 08:47

It's New Year's Eve, and Bank station is closed, the Waterloo & City line suspended. Management tell the signaller on duty to send a train to Bank, carrying the precious cargo of a DSM and half a dozen "station staff". Half and hour later, the station re-opens.

Surely the company has not worked out a way to familiarise staff with the largest station on the network in just thirty minutes?! Of course not, the mere suggestion is ridiculous.

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.