Category: Metronet

LUEngineering Branch Resolution to NEC

Resolution to NEC ref Transformation:

 

“This branch condemns the cuts being carried out across LUL and TFL.

We note that LUL are now informing staff that they are intent on ignoring our jobs for life deal (Annex H, PPP Code of Best Practice) and have stated that people may be made compulsory redundant.

 

We also note that the TfL and LUL bahaviours in these discussions have fallen short of the expectations that our union has on how these matters will be negotiated. We believe that the companies have failed people on Maternity Leave or with Mental Health, among many other factors and have driven change through that will not work and will make life miserable for many that remain.

 

We also note the feedback of our members that attended the Mass Meeting on Transformation on the 8th May and unanimously decided to fight these cuts. We therefore ask the National Executive Committee to:

 

  1. Ballot all Engineering Members in TfL in the PMO and Engineering for strike action and action short of strike.
  2. Ballot all members in LUL affected by Transformation for strike action and action short of strike
  3. Ballot all Members in LUL Asset Operations for Strike Action and Action Short of Strike.
  4. The General Secretary meets with the Mayor and asks him to condemn the cuts and put a halt to transformation.

That general legal advice on the contractual nature of the PPP Code of Best Practice and particularly Annex H, is distributed to our affected branches.”

 

Code of practice PPP

UPDATE ON TfL ENGINEERING CONSULTATION

UPDATE ON TfL ENGINEERING CONSULTATION

 

On Friday 20th April the TUs met with management for a Consultation meeting.

 

I am aware of the email sent out to staff at 11.32, which was just under 30 minutes before we met them. We had no knowledge of the email’s contents. As you are aware the TUs had been asking for weeks for staff to be taken out of scope so we were pleased that common sense prevailed finally and the management have agreed to remove the immediate threat of redundancy.

 

However, based on the second email sent out and also on the Consultation meeting we attended, I have grave concerns over the way the management will put in place the “targeted development plan”. They will be on a restricted timeframe, which has not been specified, but the management did state they did not see this being as long as 6 months. They will not be using the Performance Improvement Policy to do this either. If staff are not successful during this period then they could be terminated on capability grounds. This is not something that has been done before during a reorganisation under the RSRP. There has been no detail on how this will work, what support will be given and how staff will be assessed to see whether they meet the competencies following this ‘plan’.

 

The TUs have been advised that staff will be given the option of undergoing the development plan or taking VS, but people won’t be able to go through development, and then ask for VS if they don’t meet the standards.

 

There has been no mention of whether SAE will be looked at as part of this plan, or whether staff will have to ask about this instead of the plan.

 

There are a significant number of things which will need to be in place to make this acceptable to the RMT, one of which will be that no member of staff who wants to stay, will leave until every option has been looked at.

 

I have a list of questions which I will be raising at Consultation and am more than happy for any feedback to be sent to me so I can add questions if necessary.

 

Maria Taylor

[email protected] or [email protected]

 

Other Reps

Mounir

07944 835 952

 

PMO

Jamie Parry

[email protected]

Former Metronet Signals Boxing Day Dispute

LUL Signals Boxing Day Dispute

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

The RMT have been talking to LUL (ex-Metronet areas) for nearly four years regarding working over the Christmas Period. We have asked for movement towards maximising how many staff can be off should they wish and also requesting a bonus form people forced to work on Boxing Day, as happens in other parts of the business.

 

We have been told that this is just a ‘normal working day’ and that is NOT acceptable to our union and we have therefore notified LUL of our intention to Ballot Signals Staff in Incident and Maintenance in former Metronet Areas (does not include Tube Lines).

 

We are hopeful that our members will return their ballot papers on mass so that we reach the legal thresholds that the Anti-Trade Union Laws now place upon us.

 

The papers go out Thursday 30th November and the closing date for the ballot is Tuesday 12th December

 

Please be aware that this dispute DOES NOT involve any Project Staff working over the Christmas Period.

 

If you do not received you Ballot Papers by the 4th December, then please contact me or ring RMT Head Office on 0800 376 3706

 

Please VOTE YES

 

Paul Jackson

LU Engineering Branch (0962)

07810 643 681

 

www.luengineeringrmt.co.uk

 

 

LUL Signals Boxing Day Dispute

 

 

RMT demand talks regarding Train Prep

96 HOUR FLEET PREPARATION – LONDON UNDERGROUND

 

It has been brought to my attention that LUL Fleet management in both BCV/LUL and JNP are attempting to discuss the important issue of changes in frequencies of Train Preparation. There is talk of moving to a 96 hours preparation and this proposal is of grave concern to my Union with regard to the safe running of the railway.

 

As this appears to be a company-wide issue effecting other grades than Fleet Staff such as Train Operators, I believe that an ad hoc Safety Directors’ meeting should be called with extended invitees to include the Trains and Fleet H&S Council representatives from both BCV/SSR and JNP, together with the full-time Trade Union Officers and that this should meet as soon as possible.

 

In the interim, I must insist that all other engagements and discussions should cease until the required meeting takes place.

Your urgent confirmation is asked for.

Transformation & Redeployment

The RMT are holding an urgent meeting tomorrow to discuss Transformation among their reps.

 

Part of these discussions will be the below proposal from Management that could be perceived as a variation to existing agreements that affect all members of staff.

 

The RMT are happy to work through changes with Management but they need be in no doubt that we won’t stand by and see them steamroller our conditions

 

Maximising job opportunities for employees in scope for Transformation

At our last Transformation Oversight Group (TOG) meeting with the union Full Time Officers, feedback was provided on the redeployment support provided by TfL. Specifically, the trade unions were not confident that adequate arrangements were in
place to ensure that TfL was maximising the opportunities for staff in scope of organisational change to find alternative employment across TfL and in other work streams.
I share your concerns about the potential to lose knowledge, skills and experience. I also agree that we should ensure “at risk” and “displaced” staff are provided with optimum opportunities to secure a suitable job within TfL without compromising any
of the principles or commitments contained within either the RSRP or OCP processes.

To this end we will be introducing a more proactive and prescriptive approach to filling all vacancies across TfL during Transformation which seeks to redeploy existing skills, knowledge and experience as follows:

• An employee in a selection pool where there are more people than roles will be able to apply for vacancies across the business as a priority candidate at the earliest opportunity in consultation. This activity will run in parallel with either RSRP or OCP as appropriate.
• This is entirely voluntary – an employee has a choice whether to apply for a vacancy elsewhere in TfL or not.

2
• Those employees already formally displaced (whether for medical reasons or as a result of a previous organisational change) will always be considered first for any vacancies that exist, including roles currently temporarily filled by non-permanent labour (NPL). This new category of priority candidate will be considered before any other internal candidates.
• If the role is a direct 1:1 skills match (e.g. an existing PA applies for another PA role) the priority candidate will be appointed on a permanent basis. There will be no trial period.
• If the role is not a direct skills match or more than one priority candidate applies, an assessment and selection process will be followed. If the minimum benchmark is met, a priority candidate must be appointed (no trial period).
• If the priority candidate chooses to accept the role they will come out of their pool at that point. They will not take part in assessment and selection.
• The relevant terms and conditions for the role will be offered. The successful priority candidate’s salary will be honoured provided it is within the pay band. If the current salary is above the salary maximum for the band, protection of earnings will be applied for 3 years in line with OCP / RSRP as appropriate. Their salary will always be capped at the band maximum.
• If an individual is unsuccessful in securing an alternative role prior to the assessment stage they will be required to participate in the relevant assessment process for their pool.
To maximise job opportunities available for those identified above, we will implement the following:
 Targeted recruitment freeze – we will immediately limit recruitment to priority candidates only in disciplines where we can readily identify potential redeployment opportunities – e.g. Band 1 and Band 2 administration, Project Management and Engineering roles. A jobsite will be created, only accessible to priority candidates, where all applicable vacancies will be posted. We will also seek to make work streams aware of new vacancies arising on an ongoing basis during consultation.
 Business critical roles will only be temporarily filled with NPL.
 For all other recruitment (excluding high volume and operational) we will ensure priority candidates are considered before any other applicant.

3
With regard to redeployment support for those who become displaced we will be even more proactive in identifying potential opportunities for our people as follows:-
 All business areas will be required to undertake ongoing reviews of their NPL and identify all long term / permanent non specialist NPL roles for potential swap out with anyone remaining at risk of redundancy post selection and assessment.
 All secondments over 3 months to be processed through the Redeployment Team, as potential opportunities.
 We will rigorously enforce that anyone referred to Redeployment, must be interviewed for posts where their skills, knowledge and experience are deemed to match by Recruitment. Managers must accept people into roles identified as suitable alternative employment.
HR Business Partners are being briefed on this and will be able to answer any questions your representatives may have in the course of the ongoing work stream consultation.

PPP Code of Best Practice

During the TUPE talks for certain staff from LUL to be transferred into TfL, LUL continually stated that the PPP Code of Best Practice was non-contractual.

 

Your union was able to obtain information that clearly showed that that was not the true position and not only that, but, that the LUL negotiating team was fully aware that this was the case.

 

Email evidence was given over to LUL that stated that the companies legal advice had been that the PPP Code of Best Practice was indeed a contractual right.

 

So why would they lie to us?

 

The Code itself contains many safeguards that need to be abided by during any transfers. LUL have not done this. Furthermore, it also contains a clause called Annex H that is more familiarly known as the ‘Jobs for Life Deal’. This agreement means that a person must be offered a suitable job and therefore cannot be made compulsory redundant. Even today, LUL still maintain that this is a purely aspirational principle and not contractual, which is as sad as it is funny as that section of the document contains the phrase, this is contractually binding!!!

 

The RMT has demanded to know why the company has mislead its staff during these talks and want writing explanations as to how they intend to correct this matter.

 

 

Click here for the PPP Code of Best Practice

TRANSFER FROM LONDON UNDERGROUND LIMITED (LUL) TO TRANSPORT FOR LONDON (TfL) MINUTES

TRANSFER OF ENGINEERING, MAJOR PROJECTS, PMO AND CHANGE DELIVERY ACTIVITY FROM LONDON UNDERGROUND LIMITED (LUL) TO TRANSPORT FOR LONDON (TfL) 

Talks in this area have taken place over the last few months and the RMT remains opposed to this transfer and does not believe that we have ended consultation or have we reached a satisfactory conclusion to all of the issues that we have been raising despite the TUPE being imposed.

All the way through these talks the RMT argued for the need for full consultation and that we believed LUL was rushing this transfer through for Political reasons and to enable massive changes to occur straight after the transfer.

We also argued for guarantees of the below:

  1. That TfL would honour the fourth year of the LU Pay Deal.
  2. That current pension arrangements would transfer.
  3. That collective bargaining arrangements were agreed and continue, noting that there is no H&S machinery in TfL.
  4. That there is an EqIA to measure the impact on equality.

Eventually LUL had to admit that legally they had no option but to honour the fourth year of the Pay Deal which we welcomed.

However, item 2 was never about the pension rules because we understood that they remained the same, the argument was always about the pension promise that everyone received within their yearly statement. The argument surrounded the yearly increase in pensionable salary that we believed that the transfer to TfL would interfere with. The RMT have never accepted the TfL Pay for Performance formula that we believe disadvantages people in this transfer by placing them into pay bands where they will receive non-pensionable payments rather than increases in their actual pensionable salaries. We believe that this forms part of the real reason for the TUPE and is part of the government cuts agenda.

Item 3, was about not only maintaining the current negotiating structures but also about making sure that LUL & TfL understood with collective agreements applied and continued. There are a raft of decisions and agreements that the company would dearly like to get rid of and that the RMT have gone on record to highlight each and every main agreement so that there can be no hiding in the future behind the banner of ignorance when we look to enforce our members rights in all possible ways, including legal and industrial. In terms of Safety, it has to be said that there was not one single Health and Safety Meeting to discuss the implications of what can only be seen as a huge change that could have catastrophic implications for the future. The truth is that the drive to force the change through was far more important than discussing and showing that the TUPE is safe.

Item 4 is key, after months of arguing, LUL finally accepted that there was a need to carry out an Equality Impact Assessment and the RMT was appalled but not surprised to show that women and people from ethnic minorities were the most affected. The assessment showed that there is a huge amount of work to be done in TfL and LUL regarding Equality and Diversity and that this was not designed to be change for the better.

 

(17) MATS MANAGERS Functional Council Minutes 01 June 17

 

(17) MATS MANAGERS Functional Council Minutes 15 June 17

 

(17) MATS MANAGERS Functional Council Minutes 22 June 17

 

(17) MATS MANAGERS Functional Council Minutes 26 May 17

 

FINAL Joint Functional Council notes 05.05.2017

 

FINAL Joint Functional Council notes 09.06.2017

 

FINAL Joint Functional Council notes 23.03.2017

PROPOSED TRANSFER OF ENGINEERING, MAJOR PROJECTS, PMO AND CHANGE DELIVERY ACTIVITY FROM LUL TO TfL

PROPOSED TRANSFER OF ENGINEERING, MAJOR PROJECTS, PMO AND CHANGE DELIVERY ACTIVITY FROM LONDON UNDERGROUND LIMITED (LUL) TO TRANSPORT FOR LONDON (TFL)

Folloiwng LUL’s decision to renege on agreements reached at Tube Lines and Metronet for staff that had been transferred into LUL previously, the RMT have decided that it will not just accept this decision. The General Secretary has sent the branch the following letter.

Further to my letter dated 7th June regarding the above. This matter has been considered by the National Executive Committee, which has taken the following decision:-

“We note the reports from the Lead Officer and that there are issues still not rectified.

 We instruct the General Secretary to prepare a ballot matrix of all affected London Underground members in both APD & CPD, advise the company we are now in dispute; to refer this matter to ACAS and proceed to a ballot for industrial action if no resolution to this unsatisfactory situation is agreed.

 Members to be advised by e-mail and text.

 Relevant Branches and the London Transport Regional Council to be advised”.

I am currently acting in accordance with the above decision and will keep you advised of all further developments.

Yours sincerely

Mick Cash

General Secretary

LUL Engineering TUPE to TfL

Dear ALL,

We met with LUL on the 1st June in a stormy discussion regarding the proposed transfer of 1600 staff into TfL Engineering Directorates.

The RMT reiterated its opposition to this cost cutting change and our commitment to ensuring that our members are protected and their terms and conditions are not affected adversely by this change.

Below are the major areas that were discussed in summary.

  1. Pensions – The RMT stated that the proposed measure to move to Pay for Performance (PfP) will not be supported and want existing staff to remain within their existing LUL Pay Terms and Bands.  We believe that PfP will adversely impact on pensionable pay and future earnings and destroy the Pension Promise made to people on a yearly basis when they receive a pension statement showing what they are likely to receive when they retire.
  2. Functional Council Membership – LUL are fully aware that people have been removed from this TUPE because they are in Operational Grades. This has happened in Fleet, Track and Signals and in Stations & Civils (Lift & Escalators). The removal of people from scope and changing their reporting lines is a change to terms and conditions and a discussion matter for the Trade Unions. For example, the SES Group with its standing Tier 1 Rep is mainly made up of managers that are being TUPE’d. However the whole section sits in Track and Signals and therefore is part of our sphere of influence. These talks affect us all
  3. Collective Agreements – LUL have stated that collective agreements will not transfer but contractual terms and conditions will.  The RMT have massive concerns around this statement and demand clarity as to the specifics of the Metronet and TLL agreements that are considered to be contractual. This statement involves all staff that were transferred from Metronet and Tube Lines and will not go unchallenged. If people believe that we will see our hard won agreements shredded and binned, then they are deluded. Unless we hear positively on this issue, then we will potentially have a dispute involving nearly 4000 people across this TUPE and former Metronet and Tube Lines areas.
  4. Terms and Conditions – We want a full list of individual contract variations provided to us. We want to see exactly what terms LUL believe people have so that we may we challenge and correct this belief. Also, LUL have to provide this information to TfL by TUPE law so they should have this information to hand
  5. H&S – The RMT have continually stated that we believe that there must be discussion regarding Health and Safety. The should be changes potentially that are reflected by a Change Assurance Plan and we must make sure that safety is paramount. We have asked to see all the meeting minutes and inspections that TfL have carried out with its Trade Union Reps.
  6. EQIA – Throughout this whole process, we have stated that we believe minority and women may well be adversely affected by this transfer. What is there to hide and do a EQIA and let’s all see how this affects equality and diversity?
  7. Hidden Measures – We are concerned that there is more to this transfer than is being said. It looks obvious that this is just Phase 1 and that other people may well follow such as Operational Staff in Fleet, Track and Signals and Stations and Civils

It must also be said that this transfer involves far more people and areas than has been described by the company business case. This aspect needs to be fully explored and anyone not in this scope should not transfer. We believe that there has been a ‘land grab’ to get people into TfL and we will do our own ‘land grab’ to get them back!

 

The next Branch Meeting for LU Engineering Branch is 7th June at the Savoy TUP 17:00. If you are affected then please attend and give us your views.

 

https://www.luengineeringrmt.co.uk/branch-meetings-2/

 

Former Metronet Members

When the door was opened to allow former Metronet staff to join the TfL Pension Fund, there was some 168 people for various reasons that did not join at that time.

For the last eight years, the RMT have been pushing LUL to allow these people to be given the opportunity to re-enter the scheme.

LUL confirmed this morning that the scheme will be reopened to these individuals and that they would be allowed to become TfL Pension Scheme Members on the same administrative process that will be used to enter Tube Lines staff.

This will mean a major improvement to the terms and conditions of these staff and we hope that people take full advantage to think seriously about making sure this time they are joined into the scheme should they wish to be.

LUL: New Signals Framework Agreement Agreed

Following lengthy discussions, the New LUL Signals Framework Agreement has been agreed at the Company Council.

 

signals-framework-oct-2016

 

If you work for LUL in Signals, Power or DLO (Comms & Electrical), then this will apply to you.

The Main changes are:

  • The introduction of the support fitter grade in Stations & Civils area
  • Changes to how people are chosen for grade progression (move to trade tests to ensure equality)
  • Changes to the On-Call agreement in Power
  • Auto-Tech Grade will be phased out with new technology. Agreement on their promotion to Technical Officer and redeployment to alternative signalling areas agreed at Functional Council

Night Tube this weekend

RMT sets out its position on the roll out of the first phase of the Night Tube this weekend

 

RMT General Secretary Mick Cash said;

 

“RMT supports the introduction of the Night Tube and ever since the idea was first floated our members have fought tirelessly to make sure that it is done properly and that the huge staffing issues it throws up have not been ignored.

 

“The truth is that it is not politicians and their top officials  who will deliver a Night Tube for London it is the cleaners, station staff, drivers, engineers and all the other grades working anti-social hours who will be transforming London into a 24 hour City and they deserve all the praise and the credit.

 

“RMT will be maintaining a policy of ‘extreme vigilance’ with our reps monitoring issues like safety, security and the impact on staff of running services round the clock. The union will also continue to resist any attempts to deliver Night Tube on the cheap. Huge logistical challenges in areas like safety, maintenance and engineering will remain under close scrutiny by the union.

 

“RMT is also conscious of a range of problems with the rolling out of the second tranche of Night Tube services and it is essential that those issues are dealt with through the negotiating machinery and that procedures aren’t dodged in order to hit arbitrary deadlines.

 

“Night Tube is a massive step for London at a time of surging demand for transport services. It must not be compromised by under-valuing the staff charged with delivering the service or by the Government cuts that are being lined up for the TfL budget.”

 

Archives