|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
Union calls off strike against privatisation of London's Underground
rail network
By Tony Robson
9 May 2001
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email
Rail workers have had their vote for strike action against
the part privatisation of London's Underground network overturned
for a second time.
In February, a nine-to-one majority vote for a 24-hour stoppage
by 7,500 members of the Rail Maritime and Transport union (RMT)
was outlawed by the High Court, which ruled that the stringent
criteria of the anti-strike laws had not been met.
Now, an even larger majority of 11-to-one was overturned by
the RMT executive, who cancelled a planned one-day strike on May
3 only four hours before the stoppage was due to begin. The union
leaders said that the action should not go ahead so as to facilitate
discussions with management, even though their current offer does
not meet workers' demands. The RMT has said strike action could
take place on May 15.
Very few Tube workers received news of the cancellation directly
from the RMTonly hearing of the decision on TV or in the
newspapers. For others, the news was relayed via a phone call
from management instructing them to report to work. Workers were
left with little or no information on why their strike had been
called off, and some stayed away from work.
Union leaders utilised the resulting confusion to claim that
they had won a major concession from London Underground, the guarantee
of job security following the planned partial privatisation under
the government's Public Private Partnership (PPP). However, this
claim has proved to be groundless.
Alongside the drivers' union ASLEF, the RMT had held negotiations
with London Underground management through the ACAS arbitration
body. During talks held between April 30 and May 1, a draft joint
agreement had been put forward. This did not rule out compulsory
redundancies, but stated that in order to avoid them, unions and
management would jointly: Develop a mechanism to deal with
surplus staff if voluntary processes do not work with a guarantee
of at least one alternative job offer.
After 18 hours of discussions the RMT announced late on May
1 that the strike would proceed, as management had not given the
undertakings they required. The union has attempted to justify
its subsequent decision to call off the strike by asserting there
was further clarification of the redeployment policy by management.
The RMT has presented two management documents in a favourable
light: the first, describes how the process of redeployment will
operate. It states, Once a suitable alternative vacancy
is found, the displaced employee is offered this job. If they
reject a vacancy they need to explain why they do so and demonstrate
how this is not a suitable vacancy to remain with the Company,
and be subject to any further such offers. However, if this is
not demonstrated the Company is not obliged to make any further
job offers."
The accompanying correspondence explains that there is no limit
to the number of times this procedure can be applied, and that
until a full time position is found, the displaced employee can
be placed in a temporary job. In one scenario it describes the
following example: an employee works in London Underground
in a permanent contract and is displaced. The employee concerned
is redeployed to a suitable alternative job inside London Underground.
Six months later, this employee is transferred to an Infraco [a
consortium of private companies running part of the rail infrastructure],
where within four months he is displaced again. The Infraco then
redeploys this employee to another suitable vacancy and he continues
to work in a permanent capacity in the new job...
The second document states that if an employee working for
an Infraco is made redundant they can be offered redeployment
to any of the Infraco's working on London Underground. The RMT
claimed that this was a breakthrough; as for the first time it
covered the 6,000 workers who face being transferred over to the
private sector following PPP.
Rather than winning job security, the unions are instead creating
a transient workforce who face redundancy if they do not accept
complete flexibility. The draft joint agreement stipulates that
in return for such job security the unions must co-operate
with the introduction of organisational change and new working
arrangements.
Based upon this, the RMT executive voted four-to-three to call
off the dispute. Assistant General Secretary Bob Crow played a
key role in having the strike called off.
There has been concerted effort by the Trades Union Congress
(TUC) on behalf of the Labour government to halt opposition to
PPP. During the ACAS talks, TUC General Secretary John Monks wrote
directly to RMT Assistant General Secretary Vernon Hince stating,
I would formally request the RMT executive committee to
suspend the industrial action.
The Evening Standard newspaper, whose headline on Wednesday
May 2 ran, "TUC attacks tube strikers", seized upon
Monks' efforts. The paper had derided Tube workers as antediluvian
for fighting to protect their jobs, dismissing concerns over the
threat to safety posed by PPP as mere scare-mongering and dubbing
the action a jobs for life strike.
On the very evening the strike action was due to start, the
government announced the names of two of their preferred bidders
to run the deep tunnel line sections for the next 30 years. Both
these consortia include companies that have been implicated in
the worst disasters to occur on the national railways since it
was privatised in the early nineties: The Jubilee, Northern and
Piccadilly (JNP) Infraco is to become Tubelines. This
consortium includes Ameythe firm responsible for the signalling
around London's Paddington stationin charge of the maintenance
of the poorly sighted signal SN109 responsible for the collision
of two trains in 1999, which claimed the lives of 31 passengers.
The Bakerloo, Circle and Victoria (BCV) Infraco is to become
Metronet. The main firm in this consortium is Balfour
Beatty, responsible for failing to replace the cracked rail at
Hatfield that caused the derailment of a train last October, killing
four passengers. Balfour has also been implicated in several other
rail safety violations, including the collapse of a tunnel at
Heathrow in 1994.
The Underground unions had promised a joint campaign against
the threat PPP posed to safety and jobs. Despite their members
voting for joint strike action on three occasions in February,
the leadership of both unions ensured it did not take place. The
RMT withdrew from the first strike following the threat of legal
action. By the time they re-balloted their membership and took
action, ASLEF had overruled a 75 percent majority and called off
industrial action, claiming that management had met their demands.
The two days of strike action that have taken place and that closed
down most of the network have been the result of unofficial action,
as the rank and file of both unions refused to cross each other's
picket lines.
For Tube workers, the strikes were seen primarily as a means
to stop PPP. But the unions have always refused to make this their
explicit aim. This was not solely to avoid defying the anti-strike
laws forbidding industrial action of a political nature.
From the outset, the unions have accepted that the private sector
would be given a greater role in the Underground network; they
differed only over the form through which this would take place.
Token industrial action has been combined with political support
for London Mayor Ken Livingstone's proposals for a bond
scheme instead of PPP. However, Livingstone described the
bond scheme proposal as the son of PPP, and his alternative
is designed to enable the government to retreat from implementing
PPP in its present form, whilst not departing from its essential
agenda. Proponents of the bond scheme have argued that it is less
expensive and still allows for a large amount of outsourcingthus
complying with the government's tight budgetary policies and its
strategic aim of extending the private sector into public services.
The appointment of Bob Kiley as Mayor Livingstone's Commissioner
for Transport was aimed at currying favour with big business.
After initially describing Kiley as a union buster,
the RMT backtracked and later welcomed his appointment as a tactical
coupbecause it had enabled the Mayor to win corporate endorsement
and the backing of the financial elite for his proposals.
In the horse-trading that has followed between Deputy Prime
Minister John Prescott, responsible for the Transport Ministry,
and Kiley, the government refused to drop its commitment to introducing
separate responsibility for running the trains from the Underground's
maintenance and the infrastructure. For his part, Kiley has argued
that a unified management structure was the most efficient way
of supervising private sector involvement.
With a general election being held on June 7 and Livingstone
due to challenge the present PPP structure in the courts in mid-June,
Prime Minister Blair moved to iron out the differences. Kiley
has been appointed Chair of London Transport, in which capacity,
as head of London Underground's parent company, he will be involved
in negotiating the terms of the contracts with successful Infraco's.
For Tube workers, the fight to defend their jobs and working
conditions can only proceed in a direct struggle against the unions.
The fight against PPP requires a political perspective that is
not based upon different varieties of privatisation, but genuinely
places workers' rights and public safety above the profit motive.
See Also:
London Underground hit by
drivers' strike
[7 February 2001]
Britain:
Rail Tragedies & Related Issues
[WSWS Full Coverage]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |