Talk

Advanced search

Fecking tube strike!

(32 Posts)
Strix Mon 29-Nov-10 08:27:49

angry

I believe transportation across the city is a vital service to the everyday life of the public and should therefore not be permitted to virtually shut down.

I need to go to an antenatal appt. today. I will have to pay for a £££ taxi... if I can even get one.

Selfish gits.

I realise this thread will not change today or any future strike, but I feel slightly better for having posted what I think of them on the glorious world wide web.

telsa Mon 29-Nov-10 08:43:10

Get the appointment shifted or deal with it how you must - But, first off, YOU think about your own selfishness (it ain't all about YOU). Who are the people who'll stop this network being run into the ground?....those who take a stand.

Strix Mon 29-Nov-10 08:59:42

Take a stand? By causeing people who are less fortunate than they are (i.e. nurses) to pay for taxis to work.

Transporation is a vital service and should be kept running.

AS it happenes, I have worked out how to get there on the bus. But there are a lot of peopl less fortunate than I am who will suffer on this day (and all the other bazillion strike days) who have it worse that the people striking.

I am a tube rider and I do not feel this strike is in the interest of my safety. This strike is not for me, but in spite of me (and all the other passengers).

telsa Mon 29-Nov-10 09:03:10

Right so let's all suffer and change nothing - a race to the bottom. I wonder who gains most from that, eh?

Strix Mon 29-Nov-10 09:04:53

That was a bit vague. Could elaborate on how not striking constitutes a race to the bottom? The bottom of what?

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 09:23:52

Bob Crow and the RMT are bullies, this isn't about safety. The RMT don't want to modernise and are abusing their position be holding London to ransom.

The RMT have previously gone on strike to prevent Tube workers from being sacked for major safety violations such as passing red signals or opening doors on the wrong side of the train. Safety is not a major motivation for them going on strike.

I'm a believer in the good that Unions can do but Bob Crow is taking his Union on a course to destroy itself. By demanding pay rises and job security for his already well paid and secure work force when few other people get such things these days he's chiselling away at the support his Union has. One day public opinion will swing behind de-unionising the tube and putting a no strike rule in place.

And then if we do end up with an RMT that does genuinely care about safety rather than keeping people in pointless jobs, paid for by our money and in turn paying Bob Crow's sizeable salary (is he taking an unpaid day today? Of course not, all together brothers!) they'll be powerless.

RubberDuck Mon 29-Nov-10 09:31:16

Amateur Transplants - London Underground

This will cheer you up grin (warning swearing)

Strix Mon 29-Nov-10 12:25:49

I did enjoy that, thank you.

AbsofCroissant Mon 29-Nov-10 12:32:49

I'm with you.

FWIW, I thought it would be a NIGHTMARE to get in, but by the time I was heading off to work, most of the lines were working across central London. I don't know how many of the workers actually support the strike (considering how much of the network is running). The staff in the stations were being very nice (maybe they overheard my conversation with DP "right, so what happens if we see a picketing tube worker?" "punch them in the face!").

I hope they realise how little sympathy Londoners have with this strike malarky. Last year they were complaining about not getting pay rises (when millions were losing jobs/having paycuts/freezes) and now they're complaining about redundancies. But - most businesses are still suffering (I personally know three people who've been made redundant in the last three months) and this is the reality of an economic downturn. Also, I've never been on another metro line that had all those people on the platform instructing you on how to get on/off a train (e.g. Paris, Moscow, Barcelona, Athens, Kiev), so why does London in particular need them? Are Londoners that dim? (I don't think so).

Also, did they think what effect the strike would have on small/struggling businesses? Probably not.

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 12:50:54

"now they're complaining about redundancies"

There won't be any compulsory redundancies, and how many employees can say that about their place of work?

The tube has already reduced it's staff by 450 out of the planned 800. 150 people took voluntary redundancy and 300 other positions were left unfilled.

The problem the RMT seems to have is the shrinking size of the number of employees ont the underground. Why would that be? Well it's less people to pay the RMT membership fees. Bob Crow gets a basic salary of nearl £100,000 and had a 12% pay rise this year. Someone's got to pay for that, so that means he needs a certain number of union members, so that means he needs a certain number of tube workers and that means that we pay for them.

"Last year they were complaining about not getting pay rises"

Also last year they threw into the dispute, at the very last minute, the case of a driver who opened the doors on the wrong side of the tube train and then lied about it and tried to cover up his mistake. The Union wanted him to have his job back. The RMT isn't that fussed about safety when it comes to their members.

"Also, I've never been on another metro line that had all those people on the platform instructing you on how to get on/off a train"

That's partly a job creation system, if the Underground doesn't employ a certain number of people then the Unions will go on strike. So as modernisation and efficiencies mean that staff aren't needed elsewhere the Underground has to do something with them.

"Also, did they think what effect the strike would have on small/struggling businesses?"

No.

Bob Crow doesn't even care about the effect this will have on Unions as a whole.

Bob Crow's got a big salary to support, a large city to hold to ransom and a company that just can't be allowed to go bust or collapse no matter how inefficient he forces them to be.

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 13:02:38

"I don't know how many of the workers actually support the strike"

I think London Underground have about 19,000 employees.

8,700 of those belong to the RMT.

Only 3,700, less than half, of those bothered to vote over this strike.

Of those about 2,800 voted in favour of it.

So 31% of the RMT Members who work for London Underground voted in favour of this strike. That's 14% of the total employees of London Underground.

And for that Bob Crow tries to bring the capital to a halt, insists that his members give up a days pay (he's not of course) and gives thousands of ordinary working class Londoners a rubbish day.

ilovemydogandMrObama Mon 29-Nov-10 13:07:41

Yes, but it's also a TSSA strike, so not entirely accurate only to give the RMT figures.

The RMT asked management to stop the cuts for 12 weeks so there could be a safety consultation which was refused.

ReformedCharacter Mon 29-Nov-10 13:13:21

I can't stand Bob Crow.

AbsofCroissant Mon 29-Nov-10 13:34:01

<<starts furiously writing down BadgerPaws responses>>

Nice to have some proper statistics/facts rather than my usual groundless rants grin

The other problem is - Londoners are effectively held to ransom by TfL (in general). In the five years I've lived here, transport prices have gone up around 30%. There is no way on EARTH services have improved, or inflation has gone up, or they've extended the lines to the extent that a 30% price rise is warranted. But what can commuters do? Walk? Drive? Not particularly practical.

Ryoko Mon 29-Nov-10 13:39:08

As they say I may not like what you are striking over but I support your right to do so.

What the unions do eventually trickles down in a diluted form for all workers in way of increased rights and wages etc.

Lots of people moan that the tube workers have nothing to moan about because they are well paid with good benefits, but they only have what they have because they are part of a strong union. Unions are there for the members, they must continue to fight, the members pay a membership if the unions where not seen to be fighting for the corner of the members, said members would stop paying, the union would die and then the workers would have no way of fighting when the companies inevitably start cutting wages, leave, OT payments etc.

And will people stop moaning about Nurses they are not hard done by, my aunt was a nurse, she owned a flat and a car and went on Yachting holidays 4 times a year, they get a starting salary over 15k a year that rises to almost 30k and subsidised housing, do you think they would have that without a union fighting for them?.

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 13:59:03

"Yes, but it's also a TSSA strike, so not entirely accurate only to give the RMT figures."

I think that the TSSA have about 1000 members who work for London Underground.

Less than 400 of those could be bothered to vote over this strike. 72%, 270 or so, of those voted in favour.

So only 27% of the TSSA staff working for London Underground voted for this strike.

So let's be entirely accurate about this.

There are about 9,700 members of the RMT and TSSA working for London Underground

Only 4,100 of those were that concerned about this so as to vote.

In total about 3,500 Unionised worked voted in favour of the strike, that's 36% of the total union members.

Out of the entire workforce 18% support this strike.

"As they say I may not like what you are striking over but I support your right to do so."

The right to strike is a fundamental and important right. But Bob Crow and the RMT are putting this right at danger by striking over irrelevancies and with very little support from the workers. The final result of this could very well end up being a deunionised Underground as the public and the 82% of Underground Workers who do not want this strike say that repeatedly holding London to ransom just isn't on. In the end the workers will suffer.

"Unions are there for the members"

Right now the members are there for Bob Crow and not the other way around.

If Boris wanted to find a way to gut the Unions from London Underground then having someone like Bob Crow in charge of the Unions is one of the best moves that he could make. As said in the end the workers will suffer. Bob Crow will be OK, he's coining it in and is building up a very nice pension out of the subsidies of his members. The people paying the price will be the normal workers who will loose important union representation unless Bob Crow starts to act responsibly.

The Tolpuddle Martyrs did not go through what they did so that Bob Crow could hold countless working people in London hostage and threaten strikes with so little support and over issues such as not letting staff who are genuine safety risks be sacked.

Bob Crow shames them.

Ryoko Mon 29-Nov-10 14:13:06

I don't know exactly how a union works (never bothered joining one as my work refuses to recognise them) but can the members not vote out Bob Crow if they are against him or at least stage a vote of no confidence to let the top brass know their feelings?.

Boris is a bastard, he can shove his bicycles and cycle lanes up his bum, and those stupid countdown traffic lights. bring back Ken, the buses improved a lot under him, yes he changed the fare system to a simpler but more expensive one (getting rid of the short hop and imposing one flat rate) but the improvements where there, now they are just decaying.
And the new Routmaster is a pugly pointless waste of money, the only reason people liked them was because of the open back, which can't be open now due to Health and Safety thus a pointless waste of money.

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 14:30:09

"can the members not vote out Bob Crow if they are against him or at least stage a vote of no confidence to let the top brass know their feelings?."

When less than half of the members of a Union can be bothered to vote about whether they get a day off and try to strangle London once again I don't see Leadership elections attracting a huge turn out.

"Boris is a bastard"

His parentage aside Boris would love to see the Unions out of the Underground.

When he's got 82% of the workers of LU rejecting the strike, public condemnation of Bob Crow's double standards and the RMT playing silly bu**ers that's going to be a far easier goal to reach.

cestlavie Mon 29-Nov-10 14:36:13

Entirely agree "BadgersPaws". It increasingly feels like this is a campaign driven by what Bob Crow wants rather than what his members want...

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 14:39:11

"It increasingly feels like this is a campaign driven by what Bob Crow wants rather than what his members want..."

Bob Crow wants his £200k salary and nice pension package.

If that means that we, the users of the tube, have to pay for people to do pointless jobs and promise not to sack dangerous workers then that's what we'll have to do.

More than half of the Union's members couldn't give a monkeys about this strike.

Ryoko Mon 29-Nov-10 14:40:18

Maybe Boris is paying him and promising him a job in the future.

BadgersPaws Mon 29-Nov-10 14:45:29

"Maybe Boris is paying him and promising him a job in the future."

In the 80s I thought that the Labour Party was so happily destroying itself that it's leadership must have been under the pay of the Tory's.

Similar thoughts have crossed my mind regarding Bob Crow....

amicissima Mon 29-Nov-10 17:15:38

"The RMT asked management to stop the cuts for 12 weeks so there could be a safety consultation which was refused."

It wasn't refused. The managment suggested that it could be done in 6 weeks and suggested delaying for that long.

Starbuck999 Tue 30-Nov-10 23:41:45

Do any of you work for London Underground? Do you actually know first hand what is going on with these "voluntary" redundancies?

Forcing people to take "voluntary" redundacies by changing their place of work to the other side of London or totally changing their job so it becomes impossible for them to do their job is unfair! Stations need to have a staff presence at all times, for passenger safety we cannot have stations that are open totally unstaffed. Hear the story about the 3 yr old who accidently got left on one of the stations the other month? It was newlky unstaffed station (cutbacks) and thepoor mite had to wait for somoene tocome from another station on the next train!

As for whoever said about them previously striking for getting sacked over passing a signal at red - you are aware that a train passing a red signal won't hit another train aren't you? There are safety devices in place to stop this happening. Some of the signals were/are placed in such a way that it makjes it VERY difficult to see them til right at the last few seconds.

BadgersPaws Wed 01-Dec-10 09:51:12

"Stations need to have a staff presence at all times"

And they will, "all stations will remained staffed at all times" is the official statement from TFL. That the Unions have to lie about this somewhat shows that they know their case isn't the strongest.

"As for whoever said about them previously striking for getting sacked over passing a signal at red"

Let's look at one of the most recent incidents.

A driver on the Victoria Line, was sacked after he not only opened the doors on the wrong side of the train (which I can imagine might happen as human error) but then proceeded to lie about it and try to cover it up (which steps up from human error to something wilful and deliberate).

TFL called a number of strikes over him and in June at the very last minute of talks to try and avert another strike (which was allegedly over something else) they threw his reinstatement into the demands.

And TFL claim they're concerned about safety? Yet they want the reinstatement of someone who will lie over safety issues to try and protect themselves with not a thought for protecting the passengers.

Nonsense.

Over 80% of the workers of London Underground do not want this strike.

Two thirds of the Unionised workers of London Underground do not want this strike.

But Bob Crow needs his pay and pension covered so he calls his members out again while continuing to collect his salary. And he's meant to be a socialist?

Lech Walesa, a true Union man if ever there was one, once spoke disparagingly about the state of British Unions, their true loyalties and how their leadership put their goals ahead of the workers. His assessment was unfortunately oh so very trye.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now