BASTARD tube drivers going on strike again

[fromheretomaternity]

Following on from the teachers strike thread (which I don't really have an opinion on):

Tube drivers are going on strike EVERY DAY week beginning 27 June, causing massive disruption to all of us unlucky enough to be reliant on the underground.

All over the dismissal of one worker. I don't know the ins and outs of the case but as this is just the latest in a whole series of strikes it's hard not to come to the conclusion that what this is really about is Bob Crow being a total c*&$

Any other Londoners out there totally fed up with this?

You don't have to be a DM reader to think a strike is unjustified when it is called over an issue which has not yet completed all the prior stages of redress.

These strikes aren't going to do much to endear the wider public to their causes.

Times are getting tough for everyone. Tough shit.

No, meditrina, but the vitriol and what I can only label extremely low-level Tory dim-wittedness that is permeating this thread is classic DM stuff.

Hysterical Thatcherite nonsense.

Fair enough - this isn't AIBU.

But this isn't a "Thatcherite" issue - it's a straightforward 'his word against yours' case (on a conduct issue where sacking would be justified if management case upheld). The correct arbiter (the tribunal) is involved, and the judgement is expected before the end of the month. Striking before that is wholly unreasonable. (Striking after, if he is exonerated but not reinstated, would be quite a different matter and would merit support. But the current action is a travesty).

Bob Crow's been a bit busy this week celebrating his birthday with long expensive lunches - maybe he's not thinking quite straight yet.

Friday - no need to insult people just because they don't agree with you.

Automate the lot and sack them all as in Glasgow.

What planet do these people live on? The wages are obscene

We have a perfectly decent employment tribunal system in this country and lots of employment laws. Why on earth is a union going on strike for the sake of someone who is already taking the relevant legal redress?

They definately will not have or win public support. Bob Crowe is a thug and a moron.

"The wages are obscene" Yes because only people who have been to University should receive more than a mere pittance

Vior - anybody - university educated or not - should receive what they earn.

I bet Bob Crow was discussing the case in detail during his £650 lunch at Scotts of Mayfair with his RMT colleagues - all expensed.

power to the people.

I support the RMT tube strike. There. Said it. And I support the teachers. And I want public sector workers to get good pensions. On 7/7, you didn't see many people calling Tube workers lazy, greedy bastards when the Tube staff were using their belts as tourniquets. Bob Crow is a union leader. He does the job he's employed to do. I thought that's what you lot believed in.

I agree Alice's dp

But Alice - where are we going to get the money to contribute such a huge anount for public service workers to keep getting their pensions as they are at the moment.

It's alright saying you support them but they are going to have to fall in line with the private sector who are seeing the value of their pensions fall and the amount they have to contribute grow - why not if you work in the public sector (I work in the public sector by the way and was bloody well shocked at the piss taken out of it - days taken as sick or when emergencies (questionnable ones) came up, the rate of pay which I think is very high for the job that I do it being local and the amount of sick taken - if you were a [private sector worker you would be without a job or at least given a warning for the behaviour I have seen!)??

The RMT strike isn't about T&C, pay or pensions. It's about a single disciplinary case which has not yet been adjudicated.

Not remotely the same thing as NUT/ATL/UCU.

Madame & Edith - bankers seem to get the golden parachute, MP's get resettlement when their royally abused constituents finally sack the thieving bastards. Where does that all come from? Don't really care what it's about, my default position is one of supporting workers rather than forelock tugging to management.

FFS - how can anyone think that well they get it so we should is a good arguement for anything - the money isn't there to continue bailing out public sector pensions - they will have to just accept that - it has been going on for rather a long time and just cannot continue.

I support teachers too - but i think being paid forty grand for opening and closing doors is pretty good by anybody's standards

Madame - because that's how we settle on what is considered a decent standard of living for the average person. It has been established that large differences in wealth lead to social problems. Equality is generally healthier. Nancy - all Tube workers have to pass the 'annual test of rules' or lose their job. The people who check your ticket and give you directions are actually employed to evacuate the station in an emergency, eg 7.7, fire, crash, etc.

But this strike isn't about either pay or pensions!

BREAKING NEWS - the driver has won his tribunal.

Now let's see LU reinstate immediately as promised (no announcements made by them yet), and then the reason for the strikes falls away totally and that's one fewer thing for Londoners to worry about.

Statement now made by LU too - it seems the Tribunal found for the driver, in that the previous disciplinary action was disproportionate. But they did not find he had been victimised for Union activities. Nor did they rule he should be reinstated (BTW - anyone know if do Tribunals ever actually specify reinstatement).

Extract from latest iteration of the story from BBC:

"But Mike Brown, the managing director of LU, said the tribunal had not called for Mr Thomas to be reinstated.

"The employment tribunal has ruled today that Mr Thomas should have been disciplined for his actions and that his dismissal was in no way due to his activities as a union member." LU would consider "in detail" the finding that the punishment against Mr Thomas was too severe, Mr Brown added.