The RMT have written to London Underground to request a meeting with Jean Cockerill, LU Transformation reps and Regional Organisers. There are still a number of principled, cross-stream issues that we feel the company has failed to properly address. 

These include the way recruitment and selection will take place during the Transformation process. The RMT presented what we believe to be a fair process for recruitment and selection, which would mitigate as many people being displaced as possible. However the company disregarded our suggestion and imposed a cross-stream process for recruitment and selection. 

However, they have moved away from this process in almost every work stream, to enable them to cherry-pick who they want to fill roles in the future. 

We strongly believe that all recruitment and selection should follow the same process across all streams and should be fair and consistent. 

We also have concerns over how they are handling people on maternity, adoption and parental leave in the Transformation process. We believe that the company are not company are not complying with legislation and are putting people under undue stress. 

Additionally, there are a number of people on fixed term contracts who have been included in scope and will be considered for new roles post-Transformation. We believe that someone on a fixed term contract should not be prioritised over a permanent member of staff. Either make these people permanent, or take them out of the Transformation process. 

We are over 100 days into the consultation process and the company are still making things up as they go along. There are roles across the business being filled by secondments and non-permanent labour, which could be offered to people in Transformation. 

It is clear to us that the company do not have a clear knowledge of what their stuff do in their day-to-day jobs and in some areas, they don't even know how many staff they have. 

This is where we are on individual work streams 

Establishment Planning 

Staff in this area submitted a counter-proposal, which has been almost fully disregarded by the company due to the cost. The company are not willing to reconsider their stance or look at other proposals from the people working in this area. The company are pushing forward with recruitment and selection 

Asset Operations 

Due to the number of sub-streams in this area, progress hasn't been as fast as in other work streams. However this hasn't stopped the company trying to force through changes and break their own processes. They have a desire to begin recruitment in some areas, which we object to because they are not sticking to their own proposed recruitment and selection process. 

At our last meeting we discussed pooling, as a lot of people have been placed in the wrong pools and we have identified people who should not be in scope and asked them to be removed. 

We asked if there is an area (signals) where three roles are available, people should be able to preference those three roles rather than only two. 

The company has still not presented to us the correct number of admin staff and are unaware how many people these staff provide admin support for. The company do not understand the roles that our admin staff are undertaking or the importance of their locations to provide support to the business. 

We also argued that some admin staff have been forced to work night shifts, which the company deny. 

Network Ops Admin 

We tabled the revised counter proposal to management and they are considering their response which hopefully we should have soon. 

Senior Management Admin

Our last meeting with the company was on 31/01/18. We continued to discuss pooling and issues around that. 

Skills Development 

We have provided the company with a lot of Job Description feedback and they have made some amendments. However, they are unwilling to change the scoring of any of the proposed new roles. We had some discussion around recruitment and selection. It is clear that the new roles are almost identical to the work that people are doing today and would like to see people mapped into new jobs where possible. We raised issues around apprentice to manager ratios and people we believe to be in the wrong pool. 

The secondment that has been advertised for 16 trainers has been imposed with financial difficulties which could mean the company struggles to fill these roles

Renewals & Enhancement and Access 

We have continued to have discussions around pooling, mapping and preference and selection process.