RMT sabre rattling again?

Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
drivers pay and conditions argument to death.

B2003

In message <1182164968.572424.157530@c77g2000hse. .com>,
Boltar <boltar2003.uk> writes
>Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
>is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
>they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
>drivers pay and conditions argument to death.
>
Yep, eventually public sympathy will go, the next Tory govt (sadly there
will be one) will turn the Underground into about 8 or 9 private
companies and the RMT will become all but dead !!

The sad thing is that Unions don't learn from the past. Where are the
other great Unions ? What happened to the NUM ? They all became
dinosaurs pushing for silly claims and conditions, still thinking it was
1900, not 2000 and they became extinct.

Not that Crow cares. I bet he's on the best money he's ever earned in
his life and he can look forward to a seat in the house of Lords. What
can his members hope for ??


--
Edward Cowling "Must Go - The Wild Geese Are Calling"

"Boltar" <boltar2003.uk> wrote in message
news:1182164968.572424.157530@c77g2000hse. o...
> Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
> is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
> they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
> drivers pay and conditions argument to death.
>

I can only assume Bob Crow's terms and conditions require him to launch into
a new conflict with LU about every 6 months - is there a record kept
anywhere of which month these 'considering a ballot' stories appear every
year?

Paul

In message <1182168413.497290.195770@q69g2000hsb. .com>,
alex_t <atereshchenko@> writes
>
>> the next Tory govt (sadly there will be one)
>
>Look ma, the Labour still have one voter left!
>
I hope you still feel like joking after a few years of good old David
Cameron and his buddies !


--
Edward Cowling "Must Go - The Wild Geese Are Calling"

On Jun 18, 12:55 pm, "Paul Scott" <notvalidpmsc...@>
wrote:
> "Boltar" <boltar2....uk> wrote in message
>
> news:1182164968.572424.157530@c77g2000hse. o...
>
> > Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
> > is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
> > they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
> > drivers pay and conditions argument to death.
>
> I can only assume Bob Crow's terms and conditions require him to launch into
> a new conflict with LU about every 6 months - is there a record kept
> anywhere of which month these 'considering a ballot' stories appear every
> year?
>
> Paul

It's summer. Those tubeworkers don't want to be underground, so they
have to come up with an excuse to go on strike. I'd vote for any
government who said they'd ban strike action on transport, in
hospitals. education and the emergency services.

Neill

On 18 Jun, 14:59, "clyde dempster" <clyde.demps...@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
> "Boltar" <boltar2....uk> wrote in message
>
> news:1182164968.572424.157530@c77g2000hse. o...
>
> > Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
> > is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
> > they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
> > drivers pay and conditions argument to death.
>
> > B2003
>
> There pension is not worth fighting for ???

Why now and not 5 , 10 , 15 years ago? And how come strike action
seems to be the bargaining tool of choice with the RMT? Is it because
they know if they argued their case out it would show it up to be the
slim pickings it really is?

B2003

In message <1182178734.226411.308220@c77g2000hse. .com>,
Boltar <boltar2003.uk> writes
>On 18 Jun, 14:59, "clyde dempster" <clyde.demps...@ntlworld.com>
>wrote:
>> "Boltar" <boltar2....uk> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1182164968.572424.157530@c77g2000hse. o...
>>
>> > Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
>> > is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
>> > they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
>> > drivers pay and conditions argument to death.
>>
>> > B2003
>>
>> There pension is not worth fighting for ???
>
>Why now and not 5 , 10 , 15 years ago? And how come strike action
>seems to be the bargaining tool of choice with the RMT? Is it because
>they know if they argued their case out it would show it up to be the
>slim pickings it really is?

Because...

LU have recently changed the rules. In the past, if an employee was
medically retired they would receive a full LU pension from the date of
the enforced retirement. LU (actually I think it's TfL) in their
infinite wisdom have now decreed that if a medically retired employee
goes on to find some other paid employment they will forfeit these
pension rights until normal retirement age.

This mainly affects drivers who have to have a very high standard of
health to continue in their role, with regular medical check-ups. So a
driver who has been forced to retire now cannot take on a job as say, a
storeperson as they will lose their LU pension.

If that were me, I would much rather be out working at a possibly lesser
paid job than vegetating at home all day but would be reluctant to take
on another job as that would make me worse off.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Edward Cowling London UK wrote:
> In message <1182168413.497290.195770@q69g2000hsb. .com>,
> alex_t <atereshchenko@> writes
>>
>>> the next Tory govt (sadly there will be one)
>>
>> Look ma, the Labour still have one voter left!
>>
> I hope you still feel like joking after a few years of good old David
> Cameron and his buddies !
>
>
Would that be Druggie Dave?

On Jun 18, 3:58?pm, Boltar <boltar2....uk> wrote:
> On 18 Jun, 14:59, "clyde dempster" <clyde.demps...@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
> > "Boltar" <boltar2....uk> wrote in message
>
> >news:1182164968.572424.157530@c77g2000hse.googleg ro...
>
> > > Theres a report in Metro (page 25) that the RMT - aka Bob Crow Inc -
> > > is considing a strike ballot on the tube over pensions. Looks like
> > > they've found a new topic to whinge about after they've flogged the
> > > drivers pay and conditions argument to death.
>
> > > B2003
>
> > There pension is not worth fighting for ???
>
> Why now and not 5 , 10 , 15 years ago? And how come strike action
> seems to be the bargaining tool of choice with the RMT? Is it because
> they know if they argued their case out it would show it up to be the
> slim pickings it really is?
>
> B2003

Since when did Bob Crowe have the intellect to let a bad argument get
in the way of his strik-first, think-second mentality?

As I understand it, the "issue" being manufactured by him is that, if
an Underground employee has an illness or injury that prevents him
from continuing his same job, he will be expected to work at another
job (even, shock, horror, one that may pay less!) within the
Underground until retirement. Failure to do so would have an impact on
pension entitlement. And, in my view, rightly so! It's called the
"ups and downs of life", and the right to retire at the age of, say
30, on a full pension just because one cannot continue in the precise
same occupation because of injury or illness is fantasy of the sort
only Bob Crowe and his ilk could even attempt to advocate.

Writing as someone who is self-employed and if, for any reason at all
I fail to work I earn nothing at all, I'm with verbena wholeheartedly.

M.M.

On 18 Jun, 16:40, Steve Fitzgerald <junk@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
> LU have recently changed the rules. In the past, if an employee was
> medically retired they would receive a full LU pension from the date of
> the enforced retirement. LU (actually I think it's TfL) in their
> infinite wisdom have now decreed that if a medically retired employee
> goes on to find some other paid employment they will forfeit these
> pension rights until normal retirement age.

Errr , so what? Either they're "ill" or they're not. If they're fit
enough to be able to do another job then why should they get an early
pension? Sorry , but I can't see an issue with it.

B2003