Media centre

Wednesday 1 Oct 2008

RMT HAS NO EXCUSE FOR CYNICAL STRIKE

Region & Route:

Scotland’s Railway: Scotland

Network Rail has today challenged the RMT to justify its planned Scottish signallers strike before it inflicts four days of service disruption on the travelling public.

Despite repeated requests over the last four months, the union has so far failed to provide any examples to substantiate its claims that Network Rail is abusing rostering principles. Its other stated reason for a strike – that progression should be based on seniority – is a practice phased out some 15 years ago and under today's employment law, is most likely illegal.

Network Rail is now calling on the RMT to end the campaign of misinformation its representatives have used to encourage Scottish signallers to take industrial action and accept the company’s offer of conciliation talks, an offer which was made through ACAS on Tuesday.

David Simpson, Network Rail route director Scotland, said: “There is no justification for the RMT taking industrial action on these issues and it is nonsense to expect us to be able to resolve a problem for which there is no evidence.

“ACAS has offered to hold conciliation talks and is now waiting for the RMT’s response to that offer. If the union prefers to strike, its action will only serve to inconvenience the public and cost signallers reductions to their pay and bonus.

“In the course of this dispute the union’s representatives have repeatedly distributed false and misleading information to its members and the press. Frankly, some of the allegations made by the RMT in recent weeks bear as much resemblance to reality as a Thomas the Tank Engine story.

“Despite the union's claims, we have never changed our signallers base roster times without mutual agreement and have no plans to do so in the future. Nor do we have even the remotest of intentions of introducing ‘floating’ rest days – and we’ve only ever read of them in the RMT’s circulars.

“We’re now calling on the RMT to begin to act responsibly on this issue and either prove its point or spare the travelling public an unnecessary strike and its members lost wages.”

Questions the RMT has left unanswered:

• What evidence is there that Network Rail has breached rostering principles?

• Why does length of service count for more than ability?

• Why have local reps failed to keep members properly informed with the facts?

• Why can’t the dispute be taken to talks with ACAS?

• Why, if this is such a major issue, had Network Rail not received complaints from signallers about abuse of rostering principles prior to this dispute?