What is a National Executive Committee decision?

This article is an 'executive decision' which has been written by the RMT National Executive Committee. The National Executive is the union's governing body in between AGMs. Its decisions set out what the union will do on a particular issue.

These decisions can often be brief, and may be one of several passed over a period of time. To get a better understanding or find out more information about what the RMT is doing, speak to your rep or attend your branch or Regional Council meeting.

Executive Decisions Regarding Tube 'Machinary Of Negotiation' Review

Our Ref: LUL/0005

2nd April 2013

TO ALL RMT LUL REPRESENTATIVES INVOLVED IN REVIEW OF MACHINERY AND CONSULTATION

Dear Colleagues,

MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION – LONDON UNDERGROUND

Please find below copy of General Grades Committee decisions relating to the above matter, including merged files, up until 20th February 2013.

Decision Dated 15th August 2012


“We note the report from our Regional Organiser, and accordingly instruct the General Secretary to ensure that talks on the new machinery of
negotiation and consultation progresses promptly. We will raise issues including the following;

  • Representation of Fleet grades to return to previous levels
  • Recognition of local representatives in service control
  • Parity of representation among Train Operators


We note that this will address the issues of fleet grades representation and therefore merge the file REPRESENTATION OF FLEET GRADES – LUL (LUL/20/2)
with this file.

London Transport Regional Council and branches to be advised.”

Decision Dated 20th September 2012


“We instruct the General Secretary to write to all branches with London Underground members and to all London Underground representatives advising them
of the review of the machinery of negotiation and developments so far, and asking for their feedback on issues which RMT might raise during this
review.


We further instruct the General Secretary to raise during this review our concern as to the increasing incidence of management refusing to accept
legitimate agenda items submitted by RMT representatives to meetings convened under the machinery of negotiation and consultation.

Any developments to be placed in front of us.”

Decision Dated 10th October 2012


We note the correspondence from London Underground, calling a meeting to discuss the process for conducting the review of the machineries. We instruct
the General Secretary to ensure that the appropriate officer and representatives attend this meeting, and to provide them with copies of previous
decisions on this issue.


We note that while this review was originally of the industrial relations and health & safety machineries, the correspondence from LUL now suggests
that it covers other areas. We are prepared to discuss the Time Off Agreement and the Uniform Consultative Committee, but seek the views of our Union
Learning staff and LU ULRs Co-ordinator (Brother Bradshaw-Murray) as to whether we wish the Union Learning Agreement to be reviewed. These views are to
be placed in front of us.


We further note the concerns expressed by our representatives over London Underground management using Upgrades as a means of circumventing the
established machineries. We will propose during the review of the machineries that Upgrades be incorporated into the established machineries, with our
Upgrades representatives for trains and service control added to the respective Tier 2 Health & Safety Councils.


We further instruct the General Secretary to carry out our previous decision of 22 March to obtain a report specifying how many level/tier 2
representatives RMT has in each function on LUL, and which of them have full-time release to carry out their trade union duties, and place this in
front of us. We note the view of our MATS (managers and admin) representative that there should be full-time release for representatives in this
function.

London Transport Regional Council and branches to be advised.”

Decision Dated 25th October 2012


“We note the report from our Regional Organiser, that in practice, our level 2 and tier 2 reps for stations and revenue control (10 reps) and trains (6
reps) have full-time release; we note that additionally, there is a full-time-release representative for Upgrades for trains and for service control.
In all other functions – engineering, fleet, MATS, and service control – level 2 and tier 2 representatives are released on an “as and when basis”
which can amount to nearly full-time release in practice in some, but not all, cases.


We note that our LU Fleet branch has repeatedly raised concerns about reduction of release in its areas, and that one of our MATS representatives has
expressed the view that there should be full-time release in this function.


We seek the views of our level 2 and tier 2 reps, and of branches with London Underground members, as to the effectiveness of the current arrangements
for all functions – for both level/tier 2 and for local representatives – and whether we wish to continue or amend them. Responses are to be placed in
front of us.

London Transport Regional Council and branches to be advised.”

Decision Dated 8th November 2012



We note the correspondence from London Underground. We do not accept that RMT, as by far the largest union on LUL, and with recognition and membership
in all functions, should be restricted to just three representatives (including the full-time officer) at the meeting to discuss the review.


We instruct the General Secretary to raise this matter with London Underground Ltd as a matter of urgency, and insist on adequate representation for
this union.

London Transport Regional Council and branches with London Underground members to be advised.”

Decision Dated 12th December 2012

ELECTION OF RMT REPRESENTATIVES – LONDON UNDERGROUND


“We note the correspondence from London Underground Ltd and wish to continue with the status quo pending the review of the Machinery. We instruct the
General Secretary to seek agreement with ASLEF regarding this, and to ensure that the strongest possible representations are made during the review for
a fair allocation of representatives in line with our previous and any future decisions.

We merge this file with LUL/0005 - MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION – LONDON UNDERGROUND

London Transport Regional Council and all branches with London Underground members to be advised.”

MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION – METROPOLITAN LINE UPGRADE - LONDON UNDERGROUND

Decision Dated 18th December 2012


“We note the resolution from our Neasden branch, and that the Metropolitan line upgrade is now complete. We place on record our recognition of the work
of our Upgrades representatives on this over the last few years. All issues for negotiation and consultation should now be dealt with through the
established machinery rather than the Upgrades set-up.

We instruct the General Secretary to:


1. write immediately to London Underground Ltd seeking the company’s confirmation that this will take place, to place the reply in front of us, and to
monitor the situation.

2. obtain a report on the continuing role and work of the Upgrades representatives

London Transport Regional Council, branches and representatives to be advised.”

MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION – METROPOLITAN LINE UPGRADE - LONDON UNDERGROUND

Decision Dated 8th January 2013

We note the report from our Regional Organiser, attaching a report from our LU Trains Upgrades representatives.


We and our LU trains representatives are concerned that London Underground Ltd may be using the Upgrades set-up to bypass the established Machinery of
Negotiation and Consultation. It is not acceptable to us for the employer to discuss all matters concerning the upgrades of three lines with one
Upgrades rep to the exclusion of local representatives.


We believe that the Upgrades representative should be added to the Trains Health & Safety Council. We instruct the General Secretary to ensure that
this is proposed during the current review of LUL’s Machineries and that an early response is received.


We further instruct the General Secretary to ensure that all information obtained through the Upgrades process is shared with our other
representatives.


We note that a meeting with our trains and service control representatives has been convened for 25 January to discuss Cross-Line Working, and instruct
the General Secretary to add this matter to the agenda. A report of this discussion is to be placed in front of us.

London Transport Regional Council, branches and representatives to be advised.”

MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION – METROPOLITAN LINE UPGRADE - LONDON UNDERGROUND

Decision Dated 15th January 2013

We note the report from our Regional Organiser, attaching a report from our LU Trains Upgrades representative.

We instruct the General

Secretary to seek confirmation that the letter to London Underground Ltd instructed by our decision Gww 18 December 2012 has been sent, and to place
any reply in front of us.

We link this file with LUL/0005 MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION – LONDON UNDERGROUND

London Transport Regional Council and branches to be advised.”

MACHINERY OF NEGOTIATION AND CONSULTATION –LONDON UNDERGROUND

Decision Dated 29th January 2013


“We note the correspondence and reports on file. We instruct the General Secretary to obtain a further report from our lead officer as to
representatives' views on the proposed terms of reference for the Reviews, and place this in front of us on Tuesday 5 February 2013.”

Decision Dated 5th February 2013


“We note the report on file, which gives the views of our representatives as requested by our Decision GWW, 29 January 2013. In line with these views,
we instruct the General Secretary to make clear to London Underground Ltd that:

  • We need to have a meeting of all representatives, with release before proceeding with the reviews


  • The level of representation during the reviews is totally inadequate, given RMT’S membership and recognition across all grades and functions of LUL

  • The division of the machinery review into separate groups is problematic: a coherent overall approach is needed.

We further instruct the General Secretary to ensure that:

  • A representative from Engineering/Fleet is included in our delegation to the meeting with LUL on Thursday 7th February

  • Reps taking part in talks are provided with all General Grades Committee decisions on this subject.

We further resolve to propose during the review that:

  • Non-Management admin staff in Fleet should come under the Fleet functional Council rather that MATS

  • Within MATS there should be separate representatives fir duty managers and admin

  • There should be local representation in MATS, perhaps matching that for Health & Safety reps (SDU-based).

London Transport Regional Council and branches to be advised”

Decision Dated 19th February 2013

“Further to our decision Gww 8/1/13, we note the report from our representatives' meeting held on 25 January.


We note that London Underground's Upgrades programme has a significant impact on many of our members, including providing a pretext for LUL management
to attack jobs and conditions. It is therefore essential that we mobilise all our relevant representatives to work together in unity to secure the best
possible outcome for our members and for the future of London Underground.


In line with our reps' agreed wishes, we affirm that at the point of delivery, upgrades issues should be consulted on at local level, and strongly
object to management's reported refusal to engage with our local representatives. We therefore instruct the General Secretary to inform London
Underground Limited that it must consult all our relevant local representatives regarding S stock issues.


We further instruct the General Secretary to ensure the fullest possible communication and co-operation between all our affected representatives,
including at local, Tier 2 and Upgrades levels. As one element of this, we instruct the General Secretary to arrange a meeting of our LU Trains Health
& Safety Council reps, LU Trains Council reps, LU Trains Upgrades rep, local representatives and health & safety representatives for train
staff on sub-surface lines and service control representatives, to discuss and agree a summary of the current situation with the S Stock and an
effective way forward. A report of this meeting is to be placed in front of us.


We reaffirm our demand that the Upgrades rep be fully integrated into the Tier 2 Trains Health & Safety Council in order to pursue the important
work carried out by this post and so that important upgrades issues can be consulted at that forum, and remind our negotiators that we seek an early
response from LUL to this demand.


Branches, London Transport Regional Council, its Train Grades Committee, LU Trains Health & Safety Council reps, LU Trains Council reps, LU Trains
Upgrades rep, local representatives and health & safety representatives for train staff on sub-surface lines and service control representatives to
be advised.”

Decision Dated 4th March 2013

“We note the correspondence from London Underground Ltd and additionally the report from our representative and from our Regional Organiser.


We are appalled that LUL is attempting to circumvent our agreed machinery of negotiation through its ‘Engagement’ meetings. We believe that this will
not encourage a more constructive working relationship and involvement as the company claims, but will reduce trust and remove important issues from
our agreed, transparent and formal process.

We further note the General Secretary’s Instruction letter to LUL on this issue and instruct that LUL’s reply is to be placed in front of us.


We note that LUL used our recent meeting with LUL Managing Director as a pretext for this move. Our attendance at future meetings like this is
dependent on LUL withdrawing these local events.

London Transport Regional Council and branches to be advised”

Decision Dated 27th March 2013


“We note the correspondence from London Underground Ltd and reiterate that the local ‘engagement’ meetings with representatives called by the company
are outside the machinery of negotiation and consultation and that our representatives will not participate.


We further note the report from our Regional Organiser and welcome the fact that there is to be a further meeting for all representatives to discuss
the review of the machinery. We instruct the General Secretary to send to all our representatives all relevant General Grades Committee decisions in
advance of the meeting and to place in front of us a report of the meeting.

London Transport Regional Council and branches be advised.”

What is a National Executive Committee decision?

This article is an 'executive decision' which has been written by the RMT National Executive Committee. The National Executive is the union's governing body in between AGMs. Its decisions set out what the union will do on a particular issue.

These decisions can often be brief, and may be one of several passed over a period of time. To get a better understanding or find out more information about what the RMT is doing, speak to your rep or attend your branch or Regional Council meeting.