Category: Minutes

Special Company Council, Tube Lines TUPE

Special Company Council, Tube Lines TUPE Consultation,

Thursday 26TH October 2017,


Commencing at 10.00 ER Meeting Room, 7th Floor, Palestra



Martin Coppen, Head of AP JNP

David Swygart, ER TfL

Jackie May, HR TLL

John Leach, RMT

Russ Clark, RMT

Bill Teale, RMT

Paul O’Brien, RMT

Kelly Berry, RMT

Kyle Dempsey, RMT

Mark Langridge, RMT

Gary Clements, RMT

Terry Wilkinson, FTO, ASLEF

Stephen Wakefield ASLEF

Hugh Roberts, FTO UNITE

Dave Morgan, UNITE

Patricia O’Donoghue, UNITE

Bernie Horsley, UNITE

Maggie Hayes, TSSA Observer

Gene Walton TSSA

Madelene Bellingham, HR TFL


Apologies for absence:

Brian Whitehead RMT

Ben Stevenson, Organiser TSSA



Commenced: 10:02am


  1. Welcome and Introductions
  2. Minutes from previous meeting.
  3. Issues Log

Issue log worked through and responses clarified and closed unless marked otherwise.


Ref No.10 Can early sight be provided


Consultation on the proposal is likely to begin on 7 November 2017.


  • Staff briefings for will begin on Tuesday 7 November
  • There is a large number of people who could potentially be in scope – operational roles are not in scope
  • Areas carrying out reviews:


LU Establishment Planning

LU Renewals and Enhancements

LU Senior Manager Admin

LU Skills Development

LU Network Operations Admin

LU Asset Operations


  • Other Areas listed


TFL Major Projects Directorate

TFL Engineering



  • Trade union representatives covered by the relevant forums for consultation will be invited to these briefings.


RMT wanted it made clear that they intend to resist this change and that the same is being said at the equivalent LU meeting.


Ref No. 45 Have any contracts been issued between 16 and 29 October


Zero contracts issued.


Ref No. 46 PPE Manager role


The role has been withdrawn as it is one position that is impacted by transformation.  Going forward the post may not exist.


RMT we don’t except this we think management should have continued with due process.


DS advised that a closed consultation letter will have the revised headcount at the time of transfer.


Ref No. 47 Will first aider payments apply retrospectively to the value of TLL


LU have advised the LU payment is £200.  RMT wanted to know whether those coming up for payment in November would be receiving the TLL rate at £250?  Confirmation given that it will be at the LU rate of £200.


RMT advised they intend to come back on this item as they were not happy.


RMT wanted to know about TRACS award for being safe?  Response given that anything due by 29/10/17 will be paid, at present we have only been made aware of Track and Vents.


  1. Additional questions/Feedback:

RMT wanted to know for clarity, the TLES vacancies gets advertised and they are offered a job would they get LU T’s and C’s what SPC rate would they be paid?  The advice is if they were transferred then the TLL rate would apply.  If they apply for a position then they would receive a LU contract and the LU SPC rate.

UNITE asked with LU contracts would the come under the LU attendance at work policy?  JM advised yes and as their service is continuous.

RMT wanted to know what was the limitation of transfer e.g. ATM’s HDP in Engineering?  MC advised if they transfer then they retain the TLL T’s and C’s.  If they were to apply for the position then they would be issued with an LU contract with LU T’s and C’s.  TFL MPD are going through their own transformation.

JM advised recruitment campaigns going forward will be managed by TFL recruitment consultants.  We have a meeting in the diary for next week to discuss Transplant.

DS advised if the roles in TLL don’t exist in LU then they will be paid at the TLL salary with LU T’s and C’s.

RMT wanted to know what was happening with Transplant?  MC advised they would eventually transfer to Renewals and Enhancement, currently led by Lincoln Ofakansi

RMT wanted to know if Transplant would still be part of the TLL machinery?  MC advised yes.

  1. Communications to date

– Everyone is due to receive a welcome letter over the coming days.

– There is a meeting in the diary for next Tuesday to close out any issues that may come up post transfer.

– A conference call is due to take place next Thursday.


RMT requested time off for their local representatives to allow for them to feedback.  This was agreed.


Unions advised to expect a letter in the coming days confirming transfer to take place on 29 Oct.


  1. Next meeting

10am Tuesday 31st October 2017, (ER Meeting Room) 7th Floor Waterloo Meeting Room, 7G4, Palestra, 197 Blackfriars Road, Southwark London SE1 8NJ.

End: 10:30am



Acting Secretary: Oliver New

Contact: 07931 198501

Minutes of Branch Meeting 6th September 2016 in Unity House

Present  were Jackie Darby, Carol Foster, Gary Weston, Olly New, Martin Eady, Roy Carey and guest speaker John Reid

Apologies were received from Geoff Palmer, Frank Murray and John Leach.

It was agreed that Carol chair the meeting.

Minutes:  The minutes of the previous meeting, which had re-launched the Branch, were agreed as a true record.

Matters Arising from the Minutes:

  • Jacky had discussed the LT Pension Consultative Committee with Mark Harding. A nominee was needed for the retired section, but the deadline was too short for the branch to assist. Mark had offered to help with some names of retired members.
  • Olly had arranged for the Branch to be publicised in a yellow circular
  • Carol reported that the National Pensioners Convention was holding a Greater London Rally on 2nd November at 1130 am on Old Palace Yard, opposite the House of Commons.


Everybody briefly introduced themselves.

Martin had brought copies of his excellent just published book “Hold on Tight – London Transport and the Trade Unions”.


  • Olly reported that the branch is still in the process of establishing itself and acquiring members – he had contacted all LT RMT Branches asking them to contact or pass on names of retired activists.
  • Martin and Carol had contacted several former activists, who were interested, although most were no longer in London.

Guest Speaker John Reid the RMT LT Executive Member reported on some of the current issues facing RMT.  The strikes taking place on Southern are not merely against the removal of guards, but effectively the removal of RMT. Southern management had made major concessions to station staff to prevent RMT opening a second front.

On LUL, the core working agreements on Fleet was under threat.

On the Piccadilly Line, threats of drivers strike action had beaten back management on 7 disciplinary cases and a similar struggle was underway on the H&C.  There was a major success in Tubelines coming back in house although there was a dispute over pay parity.

The big issue was stations and although RMT has done well in reducing the impact on members and jobs over 800 posts had gone and jobs was being systematically de-skilled and downgraded. Another ballot was possible.

LUL was preparing another across the board major re-structure (a so-called “Transformation”) in order to make cuts of 2.9 billion pounds.

Overall there is a huge bosses offensive but RMT’s record of resistance was far better than other areas – average RMT members pay had slightly beaten inflation over the last 10 years.

Regional Organiser John Leach had met the Mayor and used the opportunity to raise the issue of bringing cleaners in house. We need to keep organising and recruiting cleaners. John was thanked for his excellent report.



Olly circulated correspondence and highlighted out items of interest including a report from the AGM. It was noted that RMT was not seeking affiliation to the Labour Party, but remaining independent while supporting progressive developments.  A discussion ensued.


Building the Branch:

Roy offered to promote the Branch on Facebook

Carole offered to make phone calls to identified former activists and reps

Olly would try to get a list of former reps

Jacky would contact Paul Jackson and ask for contact details of former activists

Martin would do the same with Bill Teale.


Future Activity:

Cleaners’ recruitment – normally a 10.00am meet up at Unity House on the first Monday.

Southern picket lines – Ray was going

Olly was asked to bring flags and badges to the next meeting

It was agreed that when the Branch was bigger we would start to invite outside speakers – Dot Gibson and Louise Irvine were suggested and a speaker on social services. It was agreed to ask Mark Harding to talk about the LT Pension.

Discussion at next meeting:  Olly would talk about the battle to defend our NHS.


It was agreed that we would elect the following officers at the next meeting on November 1st.

  • Secretary
  • Assistant Secretary
  • Chair
  • Vice-Chair
  • Pensions Liaison Officer

Plus delegates to the London Transport Regional Council.

Future Meetings:

The next meeting will be Tuesday 1st November at 14.00 in meeting Room 1, Unity House.

In 2017:  Tuesday 10 January, Tuesday 7 March and Tuesday 2nd May (subject to room availability).

No other business: meeting closed

June 2016 Tube Lines Company Council Minutes

Notes of Company Council Meeting No 57

Held on Wednesday 1st June, 2016, at Westferry Circus.



John Edmonds, Chairman

Andy Derbyshire, Head of AP JNP

Terry Deller, ER LUL TfL

Brian Whitehead, RMT Full Time Officer.

Bill Teale, RMT

Russ Clark RMT

Paul O’Brien, RMT

Michael Hogg, RMT

Jason Cullen, RMT

Kelly Berry, RMT

Stephen Wakefield ASLEF

Peter Bickers ASLEF

Tony Wheeler, FTO TSSA

Gene Walton, TSSA


  1. Apologies for absence Wayne Geoghegan Rebecca Shah, Mel Taylor, Mark Langridge, Phil Rigby-Faux, Terry Wilkinson and Mark Alden.


  1. Minutes of previous meeting number 56,  held 9th March, 2016 approved, two minor spelling errors corrected.


  1. Review of action list:


  • RMT believe that there are still individuals being issued with TFL contracts of employment without consultation, agreement or discussion. JE asked RMT Reps to provide examples and the matter can be investigated.

3.2 RMT asked for the Ill Health Process to be re-circulated.

3.3 Paul O’Brien advised that plans to move Rail Lubricators were being finalised and so far going well.



  • The PMA Role Overview (Nicola O’Callaghan)

Nicola O’Callaghan (NOC) asked the staff reps what their issues are with the PMA role/model within AP JNP. She advised that once she has an understanding of the concerns she can set about dealing with the issues.

JE commented that at the last meeting Rebecca Shah had told the meeting that PMA role was just to advise line managers on policy and process.

BW observed that the PMAs do not do what they should be doing at the appeal stage of any issue because the person is usually the same person as advised the line manager at the original hearing and are therefore not impartial. They interrupt appeals and ask questions of the individual and are therefore clearly not advising on process or policy. He went on that there has been a good system in Tube Lines and that the TfL way of operating is not correct or in keeping with local practice. He asked that the former system be re-introduced.

NOC disagreed with this view. She said that the PMA is not present at these hearings to keep quiet and did need to ask questions when necessary in order to get clarity. She agreed that the PMA was not in attendance to cross examine individual but the manager needed to hear any case properly.

Michael Hogg (MH) pointed out that interaction should only be with the chair of the hearing.

NOC responded that it should require a common sense approach.

Tony Wheeler (TW) pointed out that if the current practice is not stopped it could be potentially embarrassing for TfL. He pointed out that the company needed to comply with statutory requirements and failure to observe these requirements as LUL has found to its cost, results in losing ET cases.

BW stated that TfL has caused the problem by trying to change the process without agreement.

NOC observed that the problem is one of lack of independence as matters are escalated.

Bill Teale (BT) said that TfL is changing an agreement that had been made with Tube Lines and they do not have the right to make that change.

TW asked if is the case that TfL is imposing its process on Tube Lines as a matter of principle.

Russ Clark pointed out that at a meeting a while ago Rebecca Shah advised the TU representatives that TfL were going to change some wording in the Tube Lines agreements and that the revisions would be sent to the Unions. He said that this had not been done and there has been a breakdown in communications. He concluded that the documents have not been agreed yet.

BW asked what was going to be done about the situation.

Andy Derbyshire (AD) said he would need to take advice.


TW asked that use of these revised procedures be suspended until agreement is reached.

BW said that a meeting was needed to discuss the changes.

Ad said he would take away and speak to Colin Game and get back with a response.


  1. Trade Union Issues

5.1 Pay and Night Tube and 5.2 Pensions.

BW stated that an agreement on pensions was reached including the reduction of 371 posts due to the introduction of new technology that would ‘pay’ for pensions. He said that agreement had also been reached on the timescales through to 2019, 2020 and 2021. He said that there was then a problem with the actual wording of the agreement and TfL wanted a no strike clause in the agreement. He went on to say that an alternative form of words was drafted which said that we would not strike as long as the agreement was adhered to. He went on that since then there has been no feedback and now no one will talk to us about the issue.

He went on that the company then wanted to talk about Pay and Night Tube but nothing on Pensions. He said that the RMT had been accused of linking pay and night tube with pensions but the discussion on pensions has been on-going since 2012, well before pay and night tube. He concluded that the RMT position now is that they will only talk about pay and night tube when the pension issue is resolved.

He went on to say that he been present in 2012 when Mike Brown, at one of his pre-Olympic road shows, said that all would be ok on pensions. So now he has either changed his mind or had his mind changed for him.

He said that he understands that Steve Griffiths is supposed to be reviewing things but there has been no outcome as yet although LUL has now reversed an earlier decision and re-opened the fund for transfers-in. He closed by observing that although this is a Tube Lines meeting, there is no representative from TfL to be able to provide answers. He said that the recent ballot had an 85% yes vote for action and the RMT wanted action because they are fed up with talking and the buck should stop with Mike Brown.

Terry Deller (TD) responded by clarifying that it had been made very clear throughout the pension discussions that it was always going to need an extra layer of approval.


BW acknowledged that he had told them that.


TD went on to say that although the two parties had come close to reaching agreement, the significant changes to senior management personnel had impacted on the discussions. He observed that had Phil Hufton remained the matter may well be in a different place but he is no longer in post. He also pointed out that there is a new commissioner, a new CE, a new MD and a new Mayor and things had made things substantially more difficult. In the current economic climate £15m is a massive amount of money at a time when TfL need to save £2.8B.

He said that he understood the frustration but prevailing circumstances are very different now.

He then said that he understood that ACAS have now been in contact and a suggestion has been made that the two sides meet week commencing 6th June, 2016.

BW said that TD had only stated the obvious. He referred back to the plan presented by Tim Keogh with a summary of the savings that would be made if the posts went.

He felt that the matter should have been referred to a higher level much sooner but all that has happened is that the TU reps have been kept in the dark.

He said that he understood that Phil Hufton had been the driving force but he said that there must have been some trust placed on the negotiating team to obtain the best possible deal.

He concluded by saying that in his eyes and those of his members, there is always something that is considered more important than pensions and the figures used were the company’s figures and  no one else’s. He said that pay and night tube would be a formality if pensions are given.


AD commented that the travel concessions have been granted as a goodwill gesture and now there is an opportunity to discuss further with ACAS next week.


BW Said he wasn’t optimistic. He said that John Woods from ACAS had been in touch with the RMT and claimed that Jean Cockerill didn’t even know that agreement had been reached on the 371 job losses.

AD asked if the TU reps were willing to talk about pay and night tube.


BW said there was no chance.


5.3 Tampers Agreement

BW said that under the Tamper Agreement, staff were paid the full rate of pay as soon as they were passed out as drivers and now this agreement is not being adhered to. There are two people now not being paid in accordance with this agreement.


AD said that if the agreement has been made it should be honoured and if someone wants to change it, they should negotiate the changes. He said that he would look into the matter.


5.4 CSS Bonus Scheme

RC asked when the CSS bonus payment is due to be paid.


TD said that he would find out and the information would be conveyed to the representatives.


5.5 recruitment Freeze

RC said that he understood that there is now a freeze on all recruitment.


AD confirmed that headcount is being reviewed across TfL because the new mayor has been very challenging over non-permanent labour across the whole of TfL.

He went on to say that if a role is safety critical or business critical there is a process to follow. He said that the process is still being refined and all on-going recruitment needs to be justified just as it always has been in Tube Lines.


BW asked if roles were being covered by contractors instead.


AD advised that bringing in contractors was really difficult now but would be required to meet the fluctuations in workload. But he said that where there are gaps on the roster that create difficulty to deliver workload they would be filled.


BW asked if promotions are being blocked.


AD confirmed that they are not.


5.6 Fit Notes

Steve Wakefield asked if a member of staff produced a fit note stating they are fit to do alternative duties, and where there are no alternative duties, whether the individual is considered to be off sick.


JE said that he was not sick but could be asked to report for duty on a daily basis to establish if there is alternative duties that he can do.


SW asked that the local manager be advised.


5.7 Bank Holiday Working

Steve Wakefield asked if there could be consideration being given to changing the current rules about bank holiday working.


AD stated that this had been a part of the ASLEF pay claim and that he is willing to talk about everything in relation to how staff are deployed as long as it does not introduce higher cost to the business.




Planned Meetings for 2016


September 7th 2016

December 1st 2016



Distribution list:

Andy Derbyshire, John Edmonds, Terry Deller ,Rebecca Shah, Brian Whitehead, Bill Teale, Russ Clark, Paul O’Brien, Phil Rigby-Faux, Mark Langridge, Kelly Berry, Terry Wilkinson, Stephen Wakefield , Gene Walton, Wayne Geoghegan, Hugh Roberts, Martin Coppen, Ian Bailey, Paul Rankin, Simon Pateman, Tony Wheeler






Latest LUL Company Council Minutes





Steve Griffiths, Chief Operating Officer (Chair) (NB)

Jean Cockerill, HR Director – LU Operations (JC)

Phil O’Hare, General Manager (POH)

Lance Ramsay, General Manager (LR)

Terry Deller, Senior Employee Relations Manager (TD)


Finn Brennan (ASLEF)

Terry Wilkinson (ASLEF)

Graham Dean (ASLEF)

John Leach (RMT)

Paul Jackson (RMT)

Will Reid (RMT)

Jim Whyte (TSSA)

Mary Anastasiou (TSSA)

Abdel Zaki (TSSA)

Hugh Roberts (UNITE)

Paul Maybin (UNITE)

Steve Coates (UNITE)



In Attendance:                                     Angela Palmer, Employee Relations Advisor (Notes)


APOLOGIES:                                     Wayne Geoghegan (TSSA)


No. Item Minute



Who Due Date Status


Introductions and apologies for absence

SG made introductions and apologies were received on behalf of Wayne Geoghegan.












Item 4









Item 5









Item 7













Previous Minutes and Matters Arising


SG noted there were no comments from the Trade Unions and the meeting notes from 2 February 2016 are agreed.


SG confirmed all matters arising from 2 February 2016 have been completed, with the following exceptions:-


Pension Transfer, Grievance Procedure and LU Machinery Breakdown – TD provided an update explaining that at the last meeting RMT and UNITE requested to have sight of the agreement stating right place for discussions to take place would be at Tube Lines Company Council. TD noted that there is no specific document to be shared as this was the output of a meeting, adding that originally the management letter to Trade Unions stated that issues would include Tube Lines only but the Trade Unions specifically requested that BCV and SSL reps were included.


Drug and Alcohol Policy – SG explained that an engagement event is to be arranged which is in progress. JC explained that the management position was that the D&A Policy did not require updating. We would set up an engagement event for interested parties and this would allow us all to assess if any changes to policy or approach were necessary.


RMT asked when this would be completed.  JC agreed this would be held before the next meeting on 7th July 2016.


Reps at Fact finding Investigation

    i.       Incorrect wording of letter referred to at the previous meeting – TD explained that this had been investigated and the template letters will be amended for clarity.

ii.       JC and TD to clarify the TU understanding of reps at Fact finding investigations – TD explained this had been investigated and both the Law and the Company Policy are clear but it has transpired that this practice has been happening sporadically across the business.


RMT feel that this is problematic as the policy is not reflecting the application on the ground. RMT asked why this has changed.

TD said this has not changed adding that he is simply stating the facts that this practice is not in line with the company policy.

ASLEF noted that managers are being trained to apply this principle in practice. ASLEF reiterated that they feel this should be included in the policy.


JC stated that whilst there is no statutory right for TU reps to attend fact finding meetings, in principle the company does not object to representatives attending but would not expect this to be routine. Additionally, meetings should take place without unreasonable delay and therefore could not be held up for a specific rep to become available nor would we expect significant requests for release as this would be unreasonable.


SG summarised stating that the issue is about “reasonableness” and ensuring individuals have sufficient support where appropriate, however it is not a right and as such it is not included in the company policy.





































































































7 July 2016




7 July 2016
























































3. Business Update


SG said if there are no objections he would like to share a business update with the Trade Unions following a meeting with the Commissioner, Mike Brown (MB) on Monday, 18th April 2016.


No objections received.


SG noted that MB reaffirmed the purpose of TfL remains the same, to keep London moving, working and growing and making life in our city better.  SG explained the company faces 4 stark realities Demand, Politics, Technology and Funding. SG said we need to respond to the realities in order to deliver the ambition which is to be customer focused service provider, commercially driven and the envy of transport authorities, cities and Governments around the world. SG said that to deliver this MB has set out 6 priorities:-

1.    To put customers and users at the core of business decision making

2.    To drive improvement in reliability and safety across our network

3.    To accelerate the growth and increase the capacity of our network

4.    To invest in our people and lead them to be the best they can be every day

5.    To cost less, be more affordable and to generate more income

6.    To exploit technology to produce better and faster results


SG said that MB vision is for the company to operate as One TfL, to be more coherent and as such more efficient. To do this the business will be managed differently with 4 Delivery Businesses which are London Underground, Surface, Major Projects and Commercial Development and these delivery businesses will be supported by 8 professional services each led by a single professional lead. The professional services are Customers, Communication and Technology; Finance; General Counsel; Human Resources; Engineering; Planning; Business Strategy and Crossrail 2.


RMT asked SG how the company plans to save £2.9 Billion as required due to changes in government funding.

SG acknowledged that this will be a challenge explaining that one of the things the business is doing is to review all current and planned programmes looking at how to take the cost out of the delivery by reducing the programme times and looking at duplication and unnecessary work.


UNITE asked if the company will be looking at getting more money out of the assets it already has.

SG said yes the company will be looking at the development of commercial revenue from the assets, such as land for housing.


SG said MB leadership team will now take responsibility for the whole of TfL operating with a more joined up approach, matching the demand and making improvements in a more efficient way. SG said he will keep the Trade Unions informed as these changes progress.





















































Update on progress made at Night Tube CCSG


LR provided an update from the ongoing Company Council Sub Group set up to discuss the Introduction of Night Tube Train Operators.


LR explained that significant progress has been made on the following issues adhering to the principle of avoiding making changes to existing agreements as far as possible:

o   Night Tube Train Operator Contract and offer letter has now been issued

o   Process for transfer from Night Tube to Full Time established

o   Successful placement of Night Tube Train Operators into location of choice

o   Options on patterns of Nights for Existing Staff established

o   Communications and Frequently Asked Questions document produced

o   Rosters for the Night Tube Lines based on our discussions are in production


LR listed a number of Item still under discussion as follows:

o   The management of Night Tube Train Operators

o   Train Driving experience once qualified for Night Tube Train Operators

o   Impact of the introduction of Night Tube on the Depot Establishment

o   Further discussion on the patterns of nights to be held at local level.

o   Annual leave carry over for internal candidates, how many will it affect and a solution for the leave to be taken


LR explained that with the consent received from Company Council the Trains CCSG intends to commence work on the long term commitments included in the pay deal (e.g. Four day- 36 hour week trial) as these are linked to the current discussions.

LR provided assurance that the commencement of the other work stream will have no impediment on the date of the introduction of Night Tube.


RMT and ASLEF agreed the talks have been productive and hope to continue as such.


ASLEF stated that they have heard there will be a phased introduction of Night Tube and asked which lines would be starting first.

SG said the CCSG should work towards Central and Victoria Line starting first, followed by Jubilee and Northern Lines with the Piccadilly line last.


ASLEF asked if the facilities for Night Tube drivers had been considered.

SG said this should be discussed at the CCSG.


ASLEF asked if a date for implementation had been agreed as this has implications on the discussions at CCSG in planning for training etc.

SG said no date for implementation of Night Tube has been agreed.


ASLEF asked why the Piccadilly Line will be launched last.

SG said the decision has been based on customer usage and impact and in addition this line is the only manual driving line.


RMT asked if the management team foresee any other barriers to the launch of Night Tube.

SG said they are aware that discussions are ongoing in Track and Signals regarding staff moving onto a Sunday – Thursday shift. SG added that whilst good progress has been made if staff will not move the business will look at other alternatives.


JC added that the business plans to launch Night Tube as quickly and efficiently as possible within the agreed parameters. JC closed by saying this was good work and will be pleased with the CCSG to continue with discussions in this vein.

















































































Rates of Pay  and Conditions of Service 2015 – LUL- Former UK Power Networks Staff

RMT is of the view that Former UK Power Networks employees who TUPEd into LUL in 2013 should be entitled to the 2015 pay settlement for LU.  RMT acknowledged that an agreement was reached for these employees in 2011 for a five year pay deal with 2015 being the 5th Year; however, this means their increase in 2015 is June RPI plus 0.25% which is less favourable than Year 1 (2015) of the LUL award. RMT want the Year 1 LUL 2015 award applied to these employees. RMT explained they are not asking for these employees to receive both pay increases but rather to be entitled to the more favourable LUL settlement for 2015 as this would be most fair option.


TD explained that the Powerlink pay deal is a collective agreement which transferred with the employees as part of their TUPE transfer and this was made clear during the consultation process. TD added that there was never any confusion, these employees were clear they already had an existing pay deal in place and we are adhering to this commitment.


RMT said staff from Former UK Power Network were included in their ballot matrixes and these were not challenged so they feel they have been clear about their intentions.


JC stated that the 2015 pay increase for this group of employees was paid on time and the company has been consistent with the TUPE approach. JC added that the pay deal for Powerlink expires in 2016 so the staff will be eligible for the LU pay deal from year 2.


SG stated that this point should have been discussed at the LUL Pay Talks but it was not raised in that forum and as such the existing agreement was honoured.


TSSA said they feel the staff on these grades should be entitled to have the £500 consolidated increase as part of the LUL pay award.

JC clarified that these employees will be paid the £500 Night Tube Launch Payment but not the £500 consolidated increase.


RMT pointed out that the Pay Award states the consolidated bonus is for “all grades”.

TSSA added that Night Tube discussions had not commenced when these staff TUPEd back in 2013 and they understood from the ACAS talks that all staff would be eligible for the £500 consolidated increase.

JC explained this is for all grades that are eligible for the 1st year of the pay deal.
































































4. Apprentices Contracts (3 years vs Permanent)

RMT explained that this issue was first raised at Fleet Functional Council in December 2015 but not resolved. RMT feel that apprentices employed on fixed term contracts is unfair and they should be offered permanent contracts with the company.


TD explained that apprentices are employed by LUL on a fixed term contract then they move into a permanent role, where available, on completion of their apprenticeship. TD added that he is not aware of any occasion where an apprentice has been told there is no role available.


UNITE stated this is a distinct change as the contract was always permanent and the deeds of the apprenticeship could be extended at the end of an apprenticeship if additional time was needed. UNITE asked to see when this had changed.


TD explained that this has not changed, only the perception that has changed. TD explained that an apprentice is employed on a fixed term contract with a set of terms and conditions and then when they are offered a new role they get a new contract with new terms and conditions relevant to the new role. TD added that the flexibility to extend a fixed term contract should the apprentice require additional team is still an option. TD said the company does make every effort to employ apprentices permanently if posts area available as a lot is invested in their training.


RMT asked to see the policies on this and if a response could be sent in writing for the Trade Unions to consider and revisit if necessary.

JC agreed to set out how apprentices are managed and recruited in a written response to each of the Trade Unions.


UNITE asked when the length of service for apprentices is calculated from.

JC said from the first day as an apprentice.


UNITE asked management to please take a view that a 3 year apprenticeship is not always enough time for each trade.

SG stated that apprenticeships have changed in that you do not stop learning at the end of the apprenticeship and the 3 years is to focus on the core competency required for that trade.


RMT asked management to consider the arrangements regarding Tube Lines apprenticeships.

JC and TD agreed.










































































































7 July 2016












7 July 2016


SG said there was nothing further to add and asked if the Trade Unions had any further questions.


Impact of National Insurance Increase on Back Pay


ASLEF asked what the impact of the increase to National Insurance Contributions would be to employees receiving back pay following the conclusion of the pay deal.

JC said contributions are taken at the time they paid and not at the time they are earned.  JC committed to clarify the situation in writing.


LCH Bonus Target Met


ASLEF asked if the LCH Bonus targets had been met for 2015.

SG said they had been met for Quarter 1 and 3 and as such employees will receive £100 for these quarters only.

JC said this will be clarified for the Trade Unions.











































7 July 2016






7 July 2016


Tube Lines Safety Forum Minutes March 2016

Minutes of the AP JNP Health & Safety Forum

On Thursday 17th March 2016 at 10:00 to 13:00

In Auditorium 1, Ground Floor, Westferry Circus


  Attendees representing Management:

Angela Back, Head of HSE Operations (Chair)

Paul Cooper, JNP HSE Senior Manager

Paul Rankin, Head of Operations

Donna Goodwin-Sobczyk, Meeting Secretary


Attendees representing the Trade Unions:

Peter Bickers, RMT

Russ Clark, RMT

Pat Gaskin, RMT

Michael Jones, ASLEF

Paul Lisi, RMT

Anthony Mack, RMT

Danni Rogers, RMT

Phil Saunders, ASLEF

Bill Teale, RMT

Stephen Wakefield, ASLEF

Martin White, RMT


Paul Arnott, RMT

John Edmonds, HR Business Partner

Mark Langridge, RMT





1.0 Items raised by the H&S Representatives


1.1 Diesel fumes and dust whilst tamping in cut and cover tunnels


  SSL staff now refusing to work with tampers. Anthony Mack gave an overview:


·         This issue had been previously raised at Tier 1 and Tier 2 meetings in TransPlant one year ago.

·         Staff are not assured by the level of protection in the cab

·         Staff are exposed to diesel fumes, emissions and dust.

·         You cannot communicate when wearing full face mask.

·         A trial was promised but has not been carried out.

·         Personal monitoring of the tamper crew was promised has not been carried out.

·         Certificates for exhaust emissions have not been requested but not produced.


  Paul Rankin advised he fully supported getting the above resolved. A meeting is to be arranged with Paul Rankin, Andy Pereira, Tony Jessop and Paul Cooper to take this forward.

Action: Paul Rankin


1.2 No fire evacuations taking place at Stratford and other locations at night when most staff are in attendance


  Bill Teale said that Mark Langridge had originally raised this issue but was off sick.

·         Raised at Tier 1 and 2.

·         A test was scheduled at SMD but cancelled at the last moment.

·         This has been ongoing for 2 years.

·         There are lots of contractors that are not familiar with SMD


  Paul Cooper advised TfL Facilities were now responsible for fire evacuations. Paul Rankin is to follow up.

Action: Paul Rankin

1.3 Request that the PPE Committee is reinstated


  Bill Teale advised that it was reinstated but abandoned after one meeting. It should be a regular meeting.


  Paul Cooper and Donna Goodwin-Sobczyk to arrange the PPE Committee meetings.

Action: Paul Cooper/Donna Goodwin-Sobczyk

1.4 Appropriate arrangements should be made for reps to attend H&S Exhibitions


  Martin White advised that reps had not been notified of when H&S exhibitions were on, been released to attend or had any involvement in them.


  Paul Rankin said this needs to be discussed and coordinated at management level and he is happy for the reps to be involved.
1.5 Up date regarding the Euston number 4 escalator diamond issue


  It was noted this issue is already on the open action tracker and was originally raised by Paul Arnott who was not at the meeting.


  Escalator left in passenger service with a passenger emergency stop covered up after contractor cut into a cable. There was a meeting on 16 October with Robin, Andy Derbyshire and Paul Cooper.

A follow up meeting is to be arranged with Robin, Paul Rankin, Paul Cooper and Paul Arnott.

Action: Paul Rankin/Paul Cooper

1.6 Engineers train paths – Unrealistic train travel times


  Michael Jones advised:

·         Trains were coming back late

·         They shouldn’t be getting back after 6.15 – should be cancelled

·         Was advised it would take 3 months to sort out the train paths on the district line


  Paul Rankin is to speak to Andy Pereira and Charles Carter to get a better understanding of the above issues and provide feedback at the next H&S forum.

Action: Paul Rankin

1.7 Communications on outcomes of IRF’s


  Bill Teale advised the H&S reps never get the outcome of an IRF or any feedback. Managers should be notifying a rep of the outcome if it an issue the reps were involved in.


  Paul Rankin said that IRF’s could be reviewed at local monthly H&S meetings and fully supports these meetings taking place.


Paul Cooper is to check the IRF list to ensure all the H&S reps are on there.

Action: Paul Cooper

1.8 Clarification on Station and Site access – passes and permits
  Bill Teale said there still seems to be a great deal of confusion as to what is necessary to access a Station or work site. Pat Gaskin was not able to access a site with his PTAC.


  Paul Cooper is to get a definitive statement on what is required to access stations and sites.

Action: Paul Cooper

  Transplant H&S Reps are not provided with details, results of fact finding or reports of the safety incidents listed below:
1.9 Incident 1: SPAD involving Schoma locos 3+9 pulling tamper 774
1.10 Incident 2: Two separate incidents of handbrake failure of JLE wagons
1.11 Incident 3: Current not discharged in a specified area, member of train crew lucky not to get electrocuted.
1.12 Incident 4: Train returning to Ruislip depot from a weekend site uncoupled en-route.
1.13 Incident 5: Track Recording Vehicle (TRV) on the Northern line.
  Peter Bickers advised that the TransPlant reps had not been notified officially of the above incidents but had been told by other drivers. They had requested further information, updates and reports from management but this had not been provided despite chasing several times. H&S reps are entitled to be part of the investigations.


  A regular ‘H&S review’ meeting is to be arranged on a monthly basis with the H&S reps, Paul Rankin, Andy Pereira and TransPlant management to review all of the incidents. Paul R will also have a separate discussion with TransPlant management.

Action: Paul Rankin

2.0 Minutes of Last Meeting and Matters Arising


2.1 The minutes of the 17th December 2015 were agreed as a true record.
2.2 Refer to the action tracker for the latest status of actions.
3.0 Health & Safety Quarterly Overview


3.1 Paul Cooper gave an overview of performance during Periods 09 – 12 2015/16 (15th November 2015 – 5th March 2016).


High Potential Incidents and Noteworthy Incidents are currently included in the report but will be included from the next report.


The section titled Assets: System Safety Precursors will be presented in a different format going forward.


Paul is to get the H&S reps registered for inspection training.

Action: Pau Cooper




4.0 Safety Bulletins & Alerts


4.1 Paul Cooper gave an overview of some recent Safety Bulletins.
  It was noted that the AP JNP H&S reps had not been receiving the recent HSE Bulletins that had been issued.


Donna Goodwin-Sobczyk is to speak to ask Joanne Parker if the HSE Alerts and Bulletins distribution lists can be updated.

Action: Donna Goodwin-Sobczyk

5.0 A.O.B


5.1 Anniversary of  staff member killed in service


  Danni Rogers said there had been no communication regarding the 40th anniversary of Julia Stevens who was killed in service and the company should do more to mark the anniversaries of staff that have died in service.

Action: Angela Back

5.4 The next H&S forum will be held on Thursday 23rd June at 10:00 in Auditorium 1, WFC.


March 2015 Track and Signals Functional Minutes LUL

Please find attached the March 2015 LUL track and Signals Functional Minutes


Track and Signals Functional Council Minutes 3 March 2015_RMT Clean





Management Staff Side
Mr Bob Doyle (Head of AP SSL – Chair) Mr Andy Littlechild (RMT)
Gary Warner (Engineering Director), Mr Paul Grant (RMT)
Mr Gary Russell (Head of MIS)Mr Neil Hyde (Head of Permanent Way)Mr Jamie Stapleton (HR Business Partner)Ms Samantha Curniffe (Employee Relations Manager)

Mr Sayara Ali (Employee Relations Support Manager)

Minute Taker???

Mr Peter Ashley (RMT)Mr Paul Jackson (RMT)Mr Mark Harris (RMT)Mr Les Harvey (RMT)

Mr Niall Lynch (RMT)

Mr Paul O’Reilly (RMT)


GUEST: Joe Hickey (Access Solutions Manager), Doug Hammersley (Protection Implementation Manager),

Ben Wells (Unite), Scott Godfrey (RMT)


APOLOGIES: Mr Simon Milburn (Signal Incident Systems Manager), Mr Rick Taylor (Area Infrastructure Manager)


1. Adoption of Previous MinutesMinutes from the previous meeting were agreed.2. Arising & Outstanding Matters

Minutes 11 December Item 17.8 Parity with SSMs

RMT said that this related to SSMs at Osborne house and Baker street and that there was an individual who was paid considerably more than their counterparts. Mr Doyle said that he would give a response on the issue.


3. Previous Actions

Actions of 11th December2014

Action 4, Item 11 Increase in Payment for IRSE Assessments/ Principles Tester

Mr Doyle said that consideration had been put to this matter and concluded that the existing payment was adequate.

The RMT did not accept this answer and believed that the amount of work and changes to the process meant that the existing payment needed to be increased.  FAILURE TO AGREE

RMT also stated that they believed the Payment for Principles Testers was too low.  Mr Milburn to review and reply to the Trade Unions

Action 5, Item 13 – Canteen Facilities –Stratford

Mr Doyle advised that there was no bar on staff eating their own food. He added that staff are required to take off their PPE before entering the canteen facility. The RMT stated that they believed this needed to be relayed to the canteen staff involved

Action closed


Actions of 25th September 2014

Action 3, Item 1.1.4 Closure of Hainault

Mr Doyle said that his investigation had determined that the individual had a substantial pay increase in the same year which was considered to include the payment for site person in charge duties.

Bob Doyle had agreed to meet the individual along with the TU side to discuss the matter


Action 4, Item 1.1.6 Handheld devices

Mr Doyle said that as per the update on the actions list the management team had supplied the bare bones of the draft agreement and they were awaiting TU feedback.


Action 6, Item 1.1.8 Overtime Limit

Management stated that the overtime limit was an average and was reviewed on a job by job basis. It did not include individuals working in other areas such as CPD

4. Recruitment & Transfer List Across Track and Signals

The lists were shared. The RMT stated that th elist were incorrect and needed updating


5. Skills Training Review

[The lists were shared, no issues raised.]


6. Maintenance Capability Update

Mr Doyle said that the Patrolling changes on B&V had been implemented and the changes in regard to the Central line had been agreed in principle.


7. Organisation Update

[There were no updates to give.]


8. Sentinel

Mr Hickey explained that LUL was moving away from LUCAS to Sentinel (the LUCAS contract was expiring on 1st April). He said that from 1st April 2015 there would be no requirement for LUL staff to have a LUCAS card but that they were still expected to maintain their competence. He said that the LUCAS card was only used to gain access to the LU infrastructure. (Post meeting Update – It is now mandatory for LU staff attending worksites to undergo the on-line Worksite Safety Induction on the eZone).


9. Permissioning

Mr Hickey outlined that Permissioning was moving away from people working out for themselves when traction is off to being told. Requirements will be put in the new SCADA system where people can book on and get confirmation back from SCADA to keep traction current off until the track is cleared. He said a Proof of Concept prototype App had been developed by the Innovation team; this App will communicate with a server and utilises QR codes to simplify entering the work booking and sentinel numbers. Potentially some of the set up could be done by the administrator or manager beforehand and the person providing protection would be given a unique booking reference. The system comes back with details of competencies and the work booking.


Mr Hickey explained how track can be booked out as a possession, how to update a working party and check their competencies. He demonstrated how the app would work and that it could be used to increase/decrease track access and where individuals are starting and leaving the track. He said that the system identifies hazards with the use of the Sabre number. A standard declaration is produced with a booking reference which staff can use to book on directly. The QR code can be used by Station Supervisors to go on PICER which is quicker and easier at the station.


RMT queried whether the system would apply at depots; Mr Hickey said this wouldn’t really be the case. He said that the app could pick up if the wrong QR code was scanned for the work that is intended to be done. He informed that it can check if traction current is in a booking, if it’s off and if the last train has left – it then confirms if track access can be granted (alarms etc. can be seen if applicable).


RMT asked what would happen if there was an over-run. They also asked whether staff could leave from different locations if for example they did not get as far as they had intended. Mr Hickey said that the Protection Master should know where staff are going. Mr Hickey confirmed that the change would also be discussed at Tier 2.  He estimated that go live would be in 2019, in the mean time work rules need to be finalised and feedback received on them from users. Mr Hickey said that the contract for SCADA was going out to tender in the middle of March. Mr Warner explained that the current system will be replaced in 2018.


RMT asked what the process would be if the system crashed, Mr Hickey advised that zonal protection and other protection to set people on track.  He said that everything was based on SCADA so if SCADA fails staff wouldn’t go onto the track anyway. RMT felt that assumptions were being made; Mr Hickey explained that this was why he was working with the Trades Unions – to work through assumptions etc.  He said that what was being shown was a prototype to test the waters.


RMT felt that QR codes on platforms would be used to monitor staff whereabouts and times and would be unacceptable. Mr Hickey explained that they would be used to confirm an individual’s location and confirm that traction current was off; this does not necessarily have to be done utilising QR codes as there maybe a better way of confirming location. The QR codes were used as a simple method of showing the concept. RMT asked how management could stop members of the public taking a picture and hacking the system. Mr Doyle stated that this would not be possible as they would not have the necessary code or passwords etc.


The RMT stated that there was massive health and safety issues associated with Permisssioning and that LUL was basicfally asking our members to risk their lives on the say so fo a mobile phone game.  This matter needed to be fully discussed there


The RMT also felt that this would lead to to demise of the TAC’s and other job losses and wanted this  to be discussed further


10. ACAS Agreement and associated meetings i.e. incident/rainbow

RMT stated that they did not accept Rainbow but that as part of the Acas Agreement, any case would be reviewed prior to any meeting on the matter. They said that there had been a case on the District line that had to be stopped as it had proceeded without Mr Doyle’s review. The RMT stated that they was to be understand his review process and have a line of communication on this review


11. Changing the framework agreement with reference to the training selection

RMT said the Signals framework agreement needed adjusting. It had been agreed at an Adhoc Directors review on stations to introduce Support Fitter Grades on stations only. Also there was issues with the signals selection process for courses and it may be discriminatory. It was suggested that therefore selection moved to a trade test undertaken by the school


12. Introduction of Support Fitter (Stations)

Mr Doyle said that there was a Directors Review as in 11 above. The only outstanding issue was agreeing the grade progress requirements to Support Tech in that area


13. Apprenticeship Issues: Tubelines – Pensions/Four Counties

RMT wanted to know what input Four Counties had and felt that LU should stop using them. Mr Doyle said that there were discussion going on as to why they had failed the OFSTED inspection and how LU may be able to help them until there is another solution.

Action: Acquire and share details of Four Counties involvement in apprentice training and share with RMT.

RMT stated that they believed that LUL apprentices taking jobs on Tube Lines would lose their right to remain in the TfL Pension Scheme. This they believed was against agreements to with this union and removal of anyone from the scheme would be unacceptable. Bob Doyle said he would investigate


14. CPD Resource planning for Christmas 2015 and review of leave

There was a query over the resources that may be needed over this period.  Mr Hyde advised that the 2014 arrangements had been successful and that the involvement of the RMT had been useful. He said that definitive knowledge of the work bank for this year was not yet known but the expectation was that a similar resource level would be required as was used in 2014.

It was agreed to review the staffing levels by July so as avoid any issues with resourcing as occured in 2014


15. Christmas and Boxing Day Payments for all Staff

The RMT stated that their members were aggrieved over Christmas Payments mainly for Christmas Day and Boxing Day. Mr Doyle said that if the RMT put something forward it could be discussed. RMT said that Tubelines staff were being paid and LU staff were not, as were LUL drivers.


16. Night Tube Update

Mr Doyle said that the issue had been included in the pay discussions and that the matter now sat at Company Council. RMT said that LUL had asked for functional position statements to be created. Mr Doyle said that there were certain things such as Banked Rest Day’s that needed clarify as to what was in his gift or within the remit of the Company Council discussions.


17. UKPN Update

An update was given with regard to the proposed new Framework for the Power Distribution Group. The Framework had been sent to company council for ratification and RMT and Unite had said that there were some matters that they wanted to take away before it could be ratified to discuss with their members. A further JWP meeting was scheduled for the following day.


18. Stores re-org position (Plant & Equipment Manager) to be made available to light duties staff

RMT said that his post was originally amongst talks in SSL and BCV. They said that that role is being undertaken by NPL that the RMT wanted to be made permanent.

Mr Hyde said that the role needs to be looked at and management need to decide whether the role should remain and if so where it sits. He suggested that it should be looked at by Denise O’Connor as part of the stores review.

The RMT also raised why a former employee was being used to run an informal stors in Signals at Acton and wnated her removed and the role offered to someone who was medically restricted or other internal staff

Action: Liaise with Denise O’Connor re status and continuation of Plant & Materials Manager role


19. Cody Road, Lillie Bridge Update

RMT stated that they were aware that the proposed change was a work in progress, no decision had been made. Management were reviewing what RMT had put forward. Miss Curniffe stated that the RMT proposal was similar to the proposal that had been put forward by management and another meeting was scheduled for 1st April to continue the discussion. RMT said that John Lambert would ascertain what happened to Stores staff and that while staff would be spoken to they did not want staff to be asked to agree to anything.


20. Review of TBTC Training given by Stratford Staff

RMT said that at the moment Tubelines were delivering the training, the course is so complicated that people are struggling to pass it. They said that it was a 3 week course with a 3 hour written paper and a half day practical.  RMT said that they had concerns that the course should be testing on what’s taught and trained.

Action: Paul Campbell to review the syllabus


21. Internal Track Staff side-lined in favour of external labour

RMT said that they want a framework for Track as they felt that certain work should be carried out internally. Mr Russell said that a meeting would be arranged to discuss overtime and work to be done by internal labour.

Action: Mr Russell to convene a meeting regarding overtime and work to be done by internal labour.


22. Use of agency signals staff i.e. Kelly Rail at Acton

RMT said that they wanted a reduction in the use of contractors and that they thought that the posts would not be difficult to fill.

Action: Mr Hyde to look at issue outside of the Functional Council as long as there was a guarantee that shifts would be covered.


23. FRC Rep position in with Ops Managers

RMT said that they did not agree why their colleague was not recognised as a rep, they had an email from some time ago which stated that she was a rep. Miss Curniffe said that representative status had to be looked at in line with the machinery which states that for Signals Maintenance and Incident Managers there are spaces for 2 RMT representatives. If the RMT want this individual to occupy a seat and there is a vacancy there was no problem with this taking place. However, in the event that there is no vacancy and both current incumbents want to remain an additional space would not be created.

Action: Ms Curniffe to formalise the position with regard to the FRC rep


24. CPD Denial of access to LU Grievance procedure for TDU employee

RMT said that they have a member in TDU that put in a grievance and was told it would not be heard. They said that it had been raised at Stage 2 with George McInulty who had received some advice from PMA management that they did not agree with. Mr Hyde stated that the legal advice was that the issue was not a grievance. Miss Curniffe advised that the issue had been raised outside of the grievance procedure and that the PMA manager was arranging a meeting to discuss the issue with the individual and his rep.



Meeting Closed 15:25