|
|
Post by rheostar on Feb 21, 2017 8:43:51 GMT
The problem is, the local RMT rep checks every single duty we do, makes sure we're not in a minute before 20:30 and if he hears we have done something we're not supposed to, he is banging on the door of the depot manager. The local management were kind enough to let us choose which annual leave group we wanted for 2017/18. First come first served. Everyone was happy with that apart from the RMT rep who went mental as we weren't just allocated leave periods according to agreements. Sometimes, you can't make it up. It's quite bemusing that the RMT are balloting for strike action over the conditions for staff working NT. It was the RMT that fought the hardest to have the differentials between NT T/Ops and 'day' T/Ops brought in. The RMT always referred to NT as Boris's vanity project and made things as difficult as possible for LU to bring in NT. Originally, LU wanted NT and 'day' tube run by T/Ops on a single roster, but the unions, mainly the RMT, weren't having it. Hence the current farce of staff doing exactly the same job, but on different grades. The RMT should be ashamed of their actions. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2017 11:35:10 GMT
The problem is, the local RMT rep checks every single duty we do, makes sure we're not in a minute before 20:30 and if he hears we have done something we're not supposed to, he is banging on the door of the depot manager. The local management were kind enough to let us choose which annual leave group we wanted for 2017/18. First come first served. Everyone was happy with that apart from the RMT rep who went mental as we weren't just allocated leave periods according to agreements. Sometimes, you can't make it up. Hmm, personally I would have been not happy with this - probably not enough to kick off about it but not overjoyed. The annual leave system has it s issues but is fair and transparent - first come first serve is neither of those. For those with family or other commitments at least we can plan (and organise swaps). So tbh I think the rep is right about this. |
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Feb 21, 2017 12:41:15 GMT
The problem is, the local RMT rep checks every single duty we do, makes sure we're not in a minute before 20:30 and if he hears we have done something we're not supposed to, he is banging on the door of the depot manager. The local management were kind enough to let us choose which annual leave group we wanted for 2017/18. First come first served. Everyone was happy with that apart from the RMT rep who went mental as we weren't just allocated leave periods according to agreements. Sometimes, you can't make it up. What happens 2018/19, will you go on rota basis or will it still be first come first served which is a pain if you're the last one getting the annual leave no one else wants Whichever period we are in for 2017/18, we will follow on for the following year. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Feb 22, 2017 5:56:57 GMT
What happens 2018/19, will you go on rota basis or will it still be first come first served which is a pain if you're the last one getting the annual leave no one else wants Whichever period we are in for 2017/18, we will follow on for the following year. Okay I'm not quite understanding this, if you've picked leave period 1 will you get period 1 every year or do you move onto period 2 then period 3 etc. If its the later then that's the same as the TO21s but if it the former then that's unfair on whoever came last, they're doing the same job as everyone else, getting paid the same but end up with the leave period nobody wants and I can understand why the union rep is kicking up a stink |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Feb 22, 2017 6:43:35 GMT
The problem is, the local RMT rep checks every single duty we do, makes sure we're not in a minute before 20:30 and if he hears we have done something we're not supposed to, he is banging on the door of the depot manager. The local management were kind enough to let us choose which annual leave group we wanted for 2017/18. First come first served. Everyone was happy with that apart from the RMT rep who went mental as we weren't just allocated leave periods according to agreements. Sometimes, you can't make it up. It's quite bemusing that the RMT are balloting for strike action over the conditions for staff working NT. It was the RMT that fought the hardest to have the differentials between NT T/Ops and 'day' T/Ops brought in. The RMT always referred to NT as Boris's vanity project and made things as difficult as possible for LU to bring in NT. Originally, LU wanted NT and 'day' tube run by T/Ops on a single roster, but the unions, mainly the RMT, weren't having it. Hence the current farce of staff doing exactly the same job, but on different grades. The RMT should be ashamed of their actions. ASLEF were also opposed to the Night Tube shifts being added into the existing TO21s roster, we all knew full well that the "interim period" would turn into a permanent fixture and we'd be stuck working Night Tube for no extra gain. There was plenty of discussion back in 2015 and I didn't hear a single driver say they wanted to work Night Tube unless it was at a higher rate of pay. The NT drivers of both unions have voted at their respective branch meetings for a strike ballot and the unions are complying with their members' wishes, why should either union be ashamed? |
|
|
|
Post by trt on Feb 22, 2017 7:05:18 GMT
They can't add normal tube shifts to TO23 duties if I'm understanding this right.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Feb 22, 2017 8:33:28 GMT
trt - you understand correctly, TO23s are contracted to work night shifts on Fridays and Saturdays only.
|
|
|
|
Post by rheostar on Feb 22, 2017 8:49:06 GMT
; There was plenty of discussion back in 2015 and I didn't hear a single driver say they wanted to work Night Tube unless it was at a higher rate of pay. The NT drivers of both unions have voted at their respective branch meetings for a strike ballot and the unions are complying with their members' wishes, why should either union be ashamed? The unions should've held out for a single roster and more pay, same as we did for OPO back in the '80s.. LU were desperate to get NT in place so they'd have given more money in the end. The unions should be ashamed to be party to discrimination against one set of employees. How can one set of people drive a train, be subject to the same rules and regulations, drive over the same track, use the same facilities, yet be deemed to be a different grade? If, for example women were doing the same job as men, yet were on a different contract, quite rightly it would be a clear case of discrimination. It's no different to the people working on NT. Yet this is what both unions wanted. The local RMT reps are actively checking to make sure that this discrimination continues. As for including on the ballot NT staff being able to work overtime, you and I both know that train crews have never worked voluntary overtime. It was that way in the 70s when I joined as a guard and nothing's changed since then. Where I work, several of us are ex ASLE&F reps and can't believe what the unions are doing to NT staff. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Feb 22, 2017 9:40:52 GMT
; There was plenty of discussion back in 2015 and I didn't hear a single driver say they wanted to work Night Tube unless it was at a higher rate of pay. The NT drivers of both unions have voted at their respective branch meetings for a strike ballot and the unions are complying with their members' wishes, why should either union be ashamed? The unions should've held out for a single roster and more pay, same as we did for OPO back in the '80s.. LU were desperate to get NT in place so they'd have given more money in the end. The unions should be ashamed to be party to discrimination against one set of employees. How can one set of people drive a train, be subject to the same rules and regulations, drive over the same track, use the same facilities, yet be deemed to be a different grade? If, for example women were doing the same job as men, yet were on a different contract, quite rightly it would be a clear case of discrimination. It's no different to the people working on NT. Yet this is what both unions wanted. The local RMT reps are actively checking to make sure that this discrimination continues. As for including on the ballot NT staff being able to work overtime, you and I both know that train crews have never worked voluntary overtime. It was that way in the 70s when I joined as a guard and nothing's changed since then. Where I work, several of us are ex ASLE&F reps and can't believe what the unions are doing to NT staff. Except the unions did hold out, in August 2015 LU offered £200 per Night Tube shift if we agreed to include them in our roster for an "interim period" but they had absolutely no intention of giving us more money on a permanent basis and we all knew that once the interim period was over we'd have been stuck doing them for the standard rate. They weren't that desperate, it wasn't until November that they brought in the idea of bringing in part timers and Night Tube was meant to start in September. What discrimination? TO23s are contracted to work two 8 hour shifts on Friday and Saturday nights (with a number of annual leave days that I can't remember), TO21s are contracted to work 36 hours (1 hour unpaid counted towards annual leave) over five days, otherwise the terms and conditions are exactly the same for both grades. You've obviously misunderstood the whole overtime issue, here's what it says on the RMT website: "Secondly, LUL has advised that Night Tube Train Operators do not attract the overtime rate of pay until they exceed 35 hours in a week. As Night Tube Train Operators are currently contracted to only 16 hours, they are prevented from being compensated for any late finish due to, for example, service disruption" www.rmt.org.uk/news/full-time-train-operator-positions17217/That seems grossly unfair to me and I can understand why the NT people are annoyed. |
|
|
|
Post by rheostar on Feb 22, 2017 11:54:21 GMT
If NT drivers are not being paid overtime if they finish late, no wonder they have the hump. I have to confess, I wasn't aware of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Feb 22, 2017 12:38:00 GMT
If NT drivers are not being paid overtime if they finish late, no wonder they have the hump. I have to confess, I wasn't aware of that. We are paid overtime but at single rate up to 35 hours theoretically. The RMT want the overtime rate to be enhanced like the full time drivers. To me that will be unachievable. If for instance we did 4 hours overtime. The 20 hours of pay, if overtime is enhanced would be more than a TO21 doing a part time duty of 20 hours. And if overtime was allowed and we did overtime up to 35 hours, our pay would be way in excess of a TO21. Can't see how this can be justified. |
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Feb 22, 2017 12:41:26 GMT
It's quite bemusing that the RMT are balloting for strike action over the conditions for staff working NT. It was the RMT that fought the hardest to have the differentials between NT T/Ops and 'day' T/Ops brought in. The RMT always referred to NT as Boris's vanity project and made things as difficult as possible for LU to bring in NT. Originally, LU wanted NT and 'day' tube run by T/Ops on a single roster, but the unions, mainly the RMT, weren't having it. Hence the current farce of staff doing exactly the same job, but on different grades. The RMT should be ashamed of their actions. ASLEF were also opposed to the Night Tube shifts being added into the existing TO21s roster, we all knew full well that the "interim period" would turn into a permanent fixture and we'd be stuck working Night Tube for no extra gain. There was plenty of discussion back in 2015 and I didn't hear a single driver say they wanted to work Night Tube unless it was at a higher rate of pay. The NT drivers of both unions have voted at their respective branch meetings for a strike ballot and the unions are complying with their members' wishes, why should either union be ashamed? Sorry, wasn't being clear. Yes we move onto the following group in subsequent years. Our leave allocation is also 8 x 1 week periods. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Feb 22, 2017 13:35:43 GMT
If NT drivers are not being paid overtime if they finish late, no wonder they have the hump. I have to confess, I wasn't aware of that. We are paid overtime but at single rate up to 35 hours theoretically. The RMT want the overtime rate to be enhanced like the full time drivers. To me that will be unachievable. If for instance we did 4 hours overtime. The 20 hours of pay, if overtime is enhanced would be more than a TO21 doing a part time duty of 20 hours. And if overtime was allowed and we did overtime up to 35 hours, our pay would be way in excess of a TO21. Can't see how this can be justified. I don't see why it is unachievable, the only overtime drivers get is if they work past their finish time because of signal failure, etc. The chances of even getting 4 hours overtime are remote unless there were service suspensions both Friday and Saturday night. And if memory serves a lot of the NT duties get off the "second half" train anything up to an hour before the book off time so even less chance of going past into overtime. |
|
|
|
Post by nig on Feb 22, 2017 14:01:31 GMT
We are paid overtime but at single rate up to 35 hours theoretically. The RMT want the overtime rate to be enhanced like the full time drivers. To me that will be unachievable. If for instance we did 4 hours overtime. The 20 hours of pay, if overtime is enhanced would be more than a TO21 doing a part time duty of 20 hours. And if overtime was allowed and we did overtime up to 35 hours, our pay would be way in excess of a TO21. Can't see how this can be justified. I don't see why it is unachievable, the only overtime drivers get is if they work past their finish time because of signal failure, etc. The chances of even getting 4 hours overtime are remote unless there were service suspensions both Friday and Saturday night. And if memory serves a lot of the NT duties get off the "second half" train anything up to an hour before the book off time so even less chance of going past into overtime. Do the part time TO21 (those that work weekends in day ) get the overtime rate if finish late if not how come RMT haven't brought this up for them before ?? |
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Feb 22, 2017 14:05:39 GMT
I don't see why it is unachievable, the only overtime drivers get is if they work past their finish time because of signal failure, etc. The chances of even getting 4 hours overtime are remote unless there were service suspensions both Friday and Saturday night. And if memory serves a lot of the NT duties get off the "second half" train anything up to an hour before the book off time so even less chance of going past into overtime. Do the part time TO21 (those that work weekends in day ) get the overtime rate if finish late if not how come RMT haven't brought this up for them before ?? No they don't nor do any of the part time CSA's that do overtime. |
|
