Stations Admin Transformation

Your RMT reps, along with the other unions, were due to meet London Underground today (03/04/18) for the latest consultation meeting. Unfortunately, the company have cancelled today’s meeting.

At the last meeting, on 29/03/18, London Underground rejected our proposal to reduce the proposed number of Team Leaders, to protect more admin jobs. They argued that more Team Leaders were needed for the transitional period. We expressed our concerns for what would happen after the transitional period to the Team Leader jobs.

We also raised the issue of vacancies on Trains admin not being filled, despite station admin being at the top of waiting lists for these positions. We have also asked about waiting lists in the future and whether people would keep their existing nominations, but these questions haven’t been answered.

LU had previously argued that one of the two Support Managers in the work stream would not be mapped into a new role. We argued that this was completely unfair and now both individuals will be mapped into new roles.

There was some discussion on hub locations. We raised issues that we have with some of the proposed hub locations and insisted that we have the proposed numbers for each location. We sought clarification on the tasks that would be expected of admin staff in the future and what activities would fall under the remit of coverage or core. We also demanded to see the ratios of admin staff to operational staff because by what we have worked out from the limited information supplied by the company, ratios could be as high as 1/295, which is totally unacceptable.

There was a long discussion around preferencing. It is our aspiration that any assessment is kept to a minimum. We asked for assurances that if an equal number of people preferenced coverage or core, as there are roles available, that people would be mapped into the new roles. We also asked if people’s current locations and lines could be considered when deciding future locations. The company refused to accept this and said that they wanted to fill roles with ‘top scorers’. They are seriously suggesting that on top of all the stress they have already put our members through; they intend to ignore preferences as well. This is unacceptable to the RMT, and we requested that the preference window not be opened until after we had agreed on principles of preferencing.

The company have however pressed forward with opening the window and will continue discussions around selection and assessment with us at later meetings. We will update you on any progress, but in the meantime, pass any concerns to your MATS rep or your Branch