Category: News

Posted on

RMT Circular 10th May 2018

 

 

 

 

OFFICIAL CIRCULAR

 

TO ALL BRANCHES AND REPRESENTATIVES

ALL UNDERGROUND AND FORMER LT EMPLOYERS

 

 

 

10th May 2018                                                          Circular No: IR/228/18

 

Dear Colleague,

 

DISMISSAL, L. VIGO, TRAIN OPERATOR, BAKERLOO LINE – LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/4/1)

 

Further to my previous Circular (IR/209/18, 24th April 2018), the meeting of the Trains Functional Council Reps, Bakerloo Line Trains IR Reps and Senior Assistant General Secretary reached a clear consensus in relation to the appalling treatment of Brother Vigo who was sacked for obtaining a drink of water whilst on duty. It was noted that the company taking this draconian action has set a clear precedent which will put all Train Operators in the firing line for dismissal. The company’s action against Brother Vigo also flies in the face of natural justice, which is evidenced by him winning his recent Employment Tribunal case hands down.

 

The National Executive Committee has considered this matter and taken the decision to immediately ballot all Train Operator and Instructor Operator members on the Bakerloo Line and to follow this with a ballot of all London Underground Train Operator and Instructor Operator members if the company fail to reinstate Brother Vigo as a Train Operator following his ET remedy meeting next week.

 

I am currently making the necessary preparations in respect of this decision and would be grateful if all Branches could ensure all Train Operator and Instructor Operator details are kept up to date. I will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

 

INTRODUCTION OF WTT15 – TRAIN OPERATORS – JUBILEE LINE, LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/14/2)

 

Further to my previous Circular (IR/217/18, 30th April 2018), all Jubilee Line Train Operator and Instructor Operator members should now have received their ballot paper for the above ballot and I urge all members to make sure they return it, to reach the Scrutineer by the closing date of Thursday 17th May 2018.

 

If any member has not received their ballot paper, or knows of a colleague who has not received it, please call us on 0800 376 3706 or 0207 387 4771 and ask for the Industrial Relations Department or e-mail info@rmt.org.uk as soon as possible. It is imperative that we get a massive return in the ballot.

 

PAY & CONDITIONS, SCL1, SCL2 & SM GRADES, HAMMERSMITH CONTROL CENTRE – LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/14/3)

 

Following extensive negotiations with the Company regarding the new Hammersmith Control Room, a final position has been received from LUL. The Lead Officer has consulted our Service Control Functional Council Representatives and affected members and the National Executive Committee has noted the recommendation on file and taken the decision to inform London Underground of our acceptance of the offer.

 

The agreement reached for Hammersmith SCC – SCL2 Competence & Pay Progression is as below and is in addition to agreements already secured in October 2016.

 

Guaranteed minimum pay points: Subject to individual commitment to developing to SCL2 Controller activity competence across all line at Hammersmith:-

 

  • Four guaranteed minimum pay points created within the existing Pay Band
  • Movement to each pay point determined by achieving prescribed competence
  • Movement beyond each pay point continues to be achievable by demonstrating additional performance
  • Similar progression will exist for Service Managers who achieve SCL2 (Line Controller) CBTC/Cross-line competence and “Step Down” under the PCSA agreement
  • Similar progression will exist for Service Controller Level 1 who hold SCL2 (Line Controller) CBTC/Cross-line competence and “Step Up” under the PCSA agreement
  • Minimum pay thresholds are based on 25%, 55% and 85% of the salary range
  • Pay progression will have no impact on existing entitlement to Higher Grade working where that already applies
  • Subject to there being no additional training & development, the company will apply the equivalent threshold point for starting salary should Hammersmith SCL1s be successful in securing a permanent SCL2 position at Hammersmith

 

The above will apply also to both transferring and new starters to Hammersmith. This provides scope for others within Service Control, should they wish, to transfer to and take advantage of enhanced pay progression for multiple line SCL2 Controller competence.

 

Guarantee for single line operations: Individuals at SCL2 level transferring to Hammersmith who wish to only work their current line will be able to do so and remain at Hammersmith for a period of at least 5 years (until May 2023). This guarantee will be reviewed at that point and will be extended in 2 year blocks if possible. If not, consultation will take place on appropriate transfer arrangements to provide safe and reasonable solutions for those individuals who are still only willing to work a single line.

 

STAFFING LEVELS AND WORKING PROCEDURES – ELIZABETH LINE / LUL (LUL/14/5)

 

The following resolution has been received from our East Ham Branch:-

 

“This branch notes the flagrant ignorance of safety issues at Elizabeth Line stations that interact with LUL. These being Whitechapel, Tottenham Court Rd, Bond Street, Moorgate, Paddington and Farringdon.

 

Serious concerns include:

 

  • Reduction in minimum numbers, including having 2 supervisory staff within the minimum numbers
  • Lack of Elizabeth Line staff
  • Poor emergency procedures
  • Lack of general available staff

 

This branch asks the NEC to consider a ballot of all staff in effected station for industrial action”.

 

The National Executive Committee has considered this matter and taken the decision to call a meeting of H&S Reps from affected lines/stations, the Lead Officer/Relief Lead Officer, Senior Assistant General Secretary and NEC. This meeting is due to take place on Tuesday 22nd May and I will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

 

REDUNDANCIES, STATION ADMIN STAFF – LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/16/3)

 

The following resolution has been received from our East Ham Branch:-

 

“This branch is appalled by London Underground’s proposals to significantly cut numbers of Stations Admin staff.

 

These cuts will cause unacceptable stress to our members, with increased workloads, significant changes to their roles and unsafe workloads. Additionally, this will create extra work for our station staff members, who will have to take on some of the responsibilities that currently fall to our admin members.

 

We call on the union to strongly oppose these job cuts by launching a campaign to protect these members and also to prepare a ballot matrix for strike action and action short of strike”.

 

The National Executive Committee has considered this matter and taken the decision to arrange a meeting of all our Senior IR Reps affected along with the Lead Officer; Senior Assistant General Secretary and NEC and to launch a campaign to completely oppose these cuts. This meeting is due to take place on Tuesday 22nd May and I will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

 

TRAIN PREPARATION SCHEDULE – LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/14/10)

 

The following resolution has been received from our East Ham Branch:-

 

“This branch notes the very dangerous intention by LU to change the train preparation schedule from every 24 hours to every 96 hours. London Underground are saying that this is as safe as 24 hours. No safety related submission has been provided to back this up. The company will effectively be running a train service with a large percentage of its train service unchecked for four days at a time.

 

Not only will this lead to major fleet issues, it will inevitably lead to more train failures in service putting an unacceptable pressure on all grades within LU.

 

This branch asks the NEC for consideration of bringing all operational grades into the possibility of balloting for action alongside drivers and fleet staff”.

 

The National Executive Committee has considered this matter, noted the upcoming joint Tier 2 meeting on 18th May between our Fleet and Trains Health & Safety Reps with management and taken the decision to arrange a meeting of H&S Reps at the earliest opportunity following the joint Tier 2; with our Fleet & Trains Senior Health & Safety Reps, Lead Officer, Senior Assistant General Secretary and NEC. This meeting is due to take place on Tuesday 22nd May and I will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

 

RATES OF PAY & CONDITIONS OF SERVICE 2018 – KEOLIS AMEY DOCKLANDS (DLR/0001/KAD)

 

In line with Union policy, a pay claim for an increase in pay and improved terms and conditions was submitted to the company. The Regional Organiser has met with them and the following offer has been tabled:-

 

  • RPI + 0.25% or 2% (whichever is higher) for 5 years (1st April 2018 to 1st April 2022)

 

  • RPI + 0.5% for employees with a salary under £30,000 for either the full 5 years or until they meet the £30,000 threshold

 

The National Executive Committee has congratulated our DLR Branch on achieving this offer through negotiations and taken the decision to conduct a referendum of affected members with a recommendation to accept the offer.

 

The voting papers will be posted to members next week and I will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

 

Yours sincerely

Mick Cash

General Secretary

 

Posted on

TfL Transformation Update

UPDATE FOLLOWING TfL ENGINEERING CONSULTATION

 

We met with the management yesterday (9th May) and discussed a range of issues.

 

The main topics we discussed were when results would be known, VS, SAE, development plans, targeted development plans, staff comms & the Resource Planning Tool.

 

We talked about the number of assessments that have been scored and input into the database. We also talked about your concerns over when people will find out whether or not they have been successful. The management said they had approximately 300 assessments to score and input, which they expected to be completed by the end of next week. I did ask for a comms to be sent out to staff to let them know that.

 

As yet we don’t know what a “targeted development plan” looks like and neither does the management. I have asked them to work on what a hypothetical plan would contain. This is going to be different to a development plan where someone just missed passing the assessment. We need to see an example of what a targeted plan would look like so we can find the problems before the plans become live. We also clarified what people on targeted development plans would do whilst on the plan. We asked for this to be made clear in the next comms. We asked about the process as this doesn’t fall under any current policy/process and we want to make sure that staff are treated fairly and that the right of appeal is there. I asked that if someone goes on a plan they know which role they would be going into at the end of the plan if they were successful. Management said they would look at this.

 

We asked if people who fell just short of passing would be able to ask for VS. The management confirmed that people in this group wouldn’t get VS. Then we asked about staff who get a role they didn’t preference at all. The management said they will look at this.

 

We talked about when SAE would be used and said that it would also need to be used at the end of the targeted development plan if someone had failed the plan because that member of staff may be able to find a role elsewhere in TfL/LUL.

We talked about the Resource Planning Tool. This is still being tested but we are hoping to see demonstration of it soon.

We asked about seeing the Transition Plan and also an updated CAP.

 

 

Posted on

RMT Circular 30th April 2018

 

 

 

 

OFFICIAL CIRCULAR

 

TO ALL BRANCHES AND REPRESENTATIVES

ALL UNDERGROUND AND FORMER LT EMPLOYERS

 

 

 

30th April 2018                                                                     Circular No: IR/217/18

 

Dear Colleague,

 

INTRODUCTION OF WTT15 – TRAIN OPERATORS – JUBILEE LINE, LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/14/2)

 

The following resolution has been received from our Neasden Branch:-

 

“This branch notes that London Underground is proposing to introduce Working Timetable 15 from 20th May 2018.

 

Following a recent schedules meeting and scrutiny by our representatives it became clear that the introduction of WTT15 would increase the volume of weekend working which is in breach of the pay dispute resolution agreement dated 21st May 2016.

 

No improvements have since been made and we request the NEC to enter into dispute with London Underground on this matter and to ballot all Train Operator and Instruction Operator members (with the exception of Night Tube Train Operators) on the Jubilee Line for strike action and action short of strike action.

 

Work life balance is important to all of us and it’s crucial that we hold London Underground management to the commitments they have previously made to us on these issues.

 

I urge you all to pass this motion and send a strong message to London Underground that enough is enough”.

 

The National Executive Committee considered this matter and took the decision to inform London Underground that a dispute situation exists between us over this issue and to ballot all Jubilee Line Train Operator and Instructor Operator members for industrial action. Ballot papers will be posted to members on Thursday 3rd May and the closing date for this ballot is Thursday 17th May 2018.

 

If any member does not receive their ballot paper, please ask them to call the Freephone helpline on 0800 376 3706, RMT Head Office on 0207 387 4771 to speak to the Industrial Relations Department or e-mail info@rmt.org.uk to request a replacement. I will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

BREAKDOWN IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, TRAIN OPERATORS, PICCADILLY LINE – LONDON UNDERGROUND (LUL/14/2)

 

Further to my previous Circular (IR/168/18, 28th March 2018) a resolution was also received from our Finsbury Park Branch and this matter has been considered by the National Executive Committee, which noted the views of Reps at the meeting held on Monday 23rd April and a report from the Lead Officer.

 

The NEC has taken the decision to write to LUL to raise all our concerns and to prepare a ballot matrix of all affected members. Also to refer the file to the Southern Sub-Committee to produce a timetable to resolve our members concerns.

 

I am currently acting in accordance with this decision and will keep Branches advised of all further developments.

 

Yours sincerely

Mick Cash

General Secretary

Posted on

Transformation Mass Meeting Confirmed

Transformation Mass Meeting

 

As part of the transformation consultation, the RMT have organised a Mass Meeting to feedback to our members involved in this reorganisation and decide our next course of action.

 

The meeting will take place at 14:00 – 16:00, Tuesday 8th May in the Mahatma Ghandi Hall, Indian YMCA, 41 Fitzroy Square, London W1T 6AQ.

(The nearest station are Great Portland St or Warren St Tubes)

 

The agenda for the meeting is:

  1. Feedback and Reports from the Negotiating Reps on TfL, LUL and JNP
  2. Questions from the floor, and then a response from your reps.
  3. A decision on what actions to take next.

 

The reality is that talks have been very hard and there has been a lot of misinformation and errors circulated. However, this is your chance to come and have your say and guide your union on how to take this matter forward or how we will oppose these changes.

The RMT London Transport National Executive (NEC) Member, Andy Littlechild will be in attendance to receive your feedback and report back directly to Unity House.

The meeting is open to ALL RMT MEMBERS and those staff that are affected and want to join our union to oppose cuts in any way our members and NEC direct us.

 

Transformation Mass Meeting Poster

 

 

Posted on

UPDATE ON TfL ENGINEERING CONSULTATION

UPDATE ON TfL ENGINEERING CONSULTATION

 

On Friday 20th April the TUs met with management for a Consultation meeting.

 

I am aware of the email sent out to staff at 11.32, which was just under 30 minutes before we met them. We had no knowledge of the email’s contents. As you are aware the TUs had been asking for weeks for staff to be taken out of scope so we were pleased that common sense prevailed finally and the management have agreed to remove the immediate threat of redundancy.

 

However, based on the second email sent out and also on the Consultation meeting we attended, I have grave concerns over the way the management will put in place the “targeted development plan”. They will be on a restricted timeframe, which has not been specified, but the management did state they did not see this being as long as 6 months. They will not be using the Performance Improvement Policy to do this either. If staff are not successful during this period then they could be terminated on capability grounds. This is not something that has been done before during a reorganisation under the RSRP. There has been no detail on how this will work, what support will be given and how staff will be assessed to see whether they meet the competencies following this ‘plan’.

 

The TUs have been advised that staff will be given the option of undergoing the development plan or taking VS, but people won’t be able to go through development, and then ask for VS if they don’t meet the standards.

 

There has been no mention of whether SAE will be looked at as part of this plan, or whether staff will have to ask about this instead of the plan.

 

There are a significant number of things which will need to be in place to make this acceptable to the RMT, one of which will be that no member of staff who wants to stay, will leave until every option has been looked at.

 

I have a list of questions which I will be raising at Consultation and am more than happy for any feedback to be sent to me so I can add questions if necessary.

 

Maria Taylor

mariataylor@tfl.gov.uk or tfl1ir@gmail.com

 

Other Reps

Mounir

07944 835 952

 

PMO

Jamie Parry

jamieparry@tfl.gov.uk

Posted on

Rail for London

The RMT have been building members that work for Rail for London at various locations including Allsop Place and Romford.

 

However, once Senior Management found out, they immediate gave recognition to two sister unions, TSSA and Prospect on the basis that they sign a no strike deal.

 

 

TSSA NO STRIKE AGREEMENT

 

 

 

This is not only unbelievable but unacceptable and Rail for London staff have continued to join the RMT on the back of wanting a democratic and fighting trade union watching their backs.

 

Our sister unions and management have resorted to desperate measures such as pressuring staff to join the chosen unions, allowing free access for recruitment drives to their representatives and officers and resisting all attempts by the RMT to  organise effectively. However, this has failed.

 

The TSSA even had to resort to free membership however, people know that negotiation without industrial power is collective begging and the RMT are never on their knees.

 

We have written to the TUC to lodge a formal complaint regarding the matter and await a response. However, the truth is that recognition without members as meaningless as a Trade Union that cannot strike.

 

The RMT therefore plans to increase our membership and have already lodged a pay claim for the staff at Romford Rail Operating Centre regarding General Salary Levels, Rostering and Flexible working and shift rate and overtime payments.

 

 

RfL Letter

 

 

Sadly for Rail for London, this union doesn’t sign no strike deals but what we do, is fight for our members in every possible way including Industrial Action

 

 

Posted on

[Bring Back British Rail] We need your support to take Chris Grayling to court!

 

We need your support to bring Chris Grayling to court over the East Coast rail franchise fiasco. We can’t do this without you.

Please pledge and share today:
crowdjustice.com/case/eastcoast

Pledge to help us make East Coast public

Enough is enough! Our East Coast mainline was a brilliant success in public-ownership and should never have been re-privatised in 2015. Now it has failed for the third time at the hands of private operators: GNER in 2007, National Express in 2009 and now Virgin Trains East Coast in 2018.

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling has admitted that Virgin Trains East Coast “got its numbers wrong” and breached “a key financial covenant” in their franchise agreement. Yet, he is allowing its owners – Stagecoach and Virgin – to walk away and continue running and bidding for other rail franchises. We can’t let them get away with this.

We’re now working with public law experts Leigh Day to bring Chris Grayling to court to account for these decisions. We expect this to be a landmark Judicial Review case; exposing the farce of rail franchising for the shameful waste of public money that it is, and paving the way to a re-unified national rail network run in the public’s interest once again.

Please pledge and share today:
crowdjustice.com/case/eastcoast

Please help us reach more people by sharing online:

 
 

 

You have received this email because you are on the Bring Back British Rail mailing list. You will only receive a maximum of five emails a year updating you on key campaign activities and developments.

You can view our email archives here: www.bringbackbritishrail.org/newsletter

To unsubscribe, please send an email to: bringbackbritishrail-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net

 

Posted on

RMT Wishaw and Motherwell: Reasons they are against Labour Party Affiliation

RMT Wishaw and Motherwell:          12th April 2014

 

RMT affiliation to the Labour Party:

Branch and Regional Council Consultation

 

Preamble:

 

1)  On this and each and every occasion, we must examine what is in the best interests of our Members.

 

In relation to the “RMT Labour Party Affiliation Discussion Paper” circularised to Branches and Regional Councils, we are of the view that it does not provide in clear, concise and unambiguous terms answers to concerns of crucial importance for the Union and its Members. It also has clearly been presented with opinion, giving a particular bias towards affiliation to the Labour Party.

 

Any document of this nature should have informed Branches of the dates of the Meetings between the Union and the Labour Party and who was present representing both Organisations. It should also have indicated who the authors of the Discussion Paper were.

 

2)  We should remember that we were once affiliated to the Labour Party, so we understand very well the processes and machinery of how the Labour Party operates. The Document is replete with explanations of the processes within the relevant structures of the Labour Party: all portrayed as giving the Union some type of significant status when we know, in reality, that is not how it works.

 

3)  We should never ever forget that the Labour Party expelled the Union from its organisation. It is worthwhile to reflect on how this Union (an affiliate since its inception and our predecessor Union had laid the foundation of the Labour Party) was expelled.

 

4)  We were expelled by the Labour Party because we wanted (through the Rules of the Union) to allow our Regions, Branches and Members to have a democratic say on what political parties and candidates they choose to support – not just Labour. The Labour Party as an Organisation had failed to uphold the principles on which it was formed. Its political direction and policy objectives acted contrary to the values and aims of our Union and therefore was not acting in the best interests of our Members. We wanted to back candidates and parties who demonstrated clear support for the Trade Union and its policies and we did so. The Union judges candidates solely on their merits as advocates of policies that match the Union’s own programme and which would deliver for our members, their families and their communities.

 

Affiliation to the Labour Party would stop all that because it insists that the Union as an affiliate cannot support candidates in an election whether it be Local Authority, Scottish Parliament or Westminster Parliament that are in opposition to Labour Candidates.

__________________________________

 

RMT Wishaw and Motherwell  opposes Affiliation to the Labour Party:

 

It is our position that we support the status quo in relation to political affiliation viz. that we remain without any affiliation to any current political party. We consider that there should be no infringement of the Rules of the Union that were introduced to allow Branches to submit bona fide requests for support and endorsement of candidates to include those from outwith the Labour Party, whom Branches consider will act in the best interests of our members. These Rules must remain.  In this context we reject any interpretation or suggestion that all candidates must declare support for the Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn as being in complete contradiction of the Rules of the Union.

 

It is claimed that there is a transformation taking place within the Labour Party because of Corbyn’s leadership. We are not convinced.

In any event it would be a mistake to affiliate to any organisation under the circumstances whereby a leader is seen as the reason for joining – Corbyn in this instance. This would be a gross error and Labour and Trade Union Movement history informs us so.

We as a Branch are implacably opposed to all the actions and policies of the reactionary and reprehensible Tory Party and Government. We note that in the General Election of 2017, even when the Tories delivered an inept campaign based on deceit, regressive policies, division and incompetence under the leadership of one of the most useless Prime Ministers ever, the Labour Party failed to remove them from Office. In Scotland the once powerful Labour Party are now the third party in the Scottish Parliament and at Local Authority level in some areas have taken control through arrangements with the Tories.

 

Throughout the UK where our Members are fighting to save jobs, pay and conditions there are Labour led authorities not prepared to give support. This is not a new state of affairs in the Labour Party.

 

It is argued that a mass party of labour can be born through the ranks of the current Labour Party – “a mass party of labour that fights in the interest of the working class and Labour now has the potential to be that Party”, it is said.  Have we forgotten that the principal reason as to why the Union is not affiliated to Labour is because the Labour Party abandoned the cause of acting on behalf of working people? The Party lost trust and will not be transformed.

 

The correct position adopted by our late, lamented General Secretary Bob Crow was to argue for a “new party of labour” – “the time for an alternative party of Labour is now”. His position was clear in relation to the Labour Party. On the 16th of February 2014 only a few short weeks before his passing he was asked by Andrew Neill, in an interview on the Sunday Politics show “Will the RMT reaffiliate to the Labour Party?” and he replied “I have got no intention to”.

Our current General Secretary on his election to succeed Bob Crow stated “it is important to understand that there will be no deviation from the industrial and political strategy mapped out under Bob’s leadership.”  Mick Cash himself was not averse to establishing an alternative party to Labour. Addressing the ASLEF 2015 Annual Conference he said “I cannot see in my time as General Secretary that we will get back into the Labour Party”. Because we have a huge problem with the party that was born out of our movement endorsing policies that work against this movement.”

 

Labour lost the 2015 and 2017 General Elections.

 

Currently we have in our Rules the freedom to allow Branches to seek approval to support political candidates from any Party who act in line with our Union policies.  This could and has included in the past individual Labour Party Candidates.

Why would we want to change this favourable position?

This important freedom within our Rules allows our representatives (National Executive Committee, National Officers, Regional Organiser and others) acting on the Members’ behalf not to be constrained when dealing with the Government, Devolved Administrations, Regional and Local Authorities. In effect the Members’ interests are paramount and not compromised by or subservient to any political party allegiance.

 

It should be noted that our Members in Scotland in the context of the Scottish Independence Referendum of September 2014 voted in a referendum ballot to support the case for Scottish Independence. The Labour Party is implacably opposed to Scottish Independence and even seeks to deny the Scottish people another vote on this issue. (their 2017 General Election Manifesto states this). How’s that for an organisation that claims to support Democracy?  The Labour Party are directly acting against the Union policy on this matter as dictated by our Members.

 

Of course, over the years successive Labour Governments have failed to repeal the Anti-Trade Union Laws, Renationalise the Railways, shied away from policy commitments and failed to tackle in any meaningful way a rotten political system that has produced austerity, inequality, division and severely impacts on the most vulnerable in our society.

 

Those who argue for re-affiliation contend that it is different now under Corbyn’s Leadership. They are wrong – bitter experience has taught us that the Labour Party are to be judged by their actions in government and not by promises in opposition.

 

We should stand by the principles inherent within our Rules. Our current political strategy is in the best interests of our Members. Bob Crow expressed the benefit to our members when he said –

 

“By freeing ourselves from the shackles of automatic Labour support, RMT’s political influence is thriving with political groups established in the British, Scottish and Welsh parliaments and assemblies that involve a base of supportive Labour representatives, Greens and SNP. The condition for joining is that elected members sign up to the core political priorities laid down by the Union”

 

The Branch agrees with this assessment and concludes that there is no convincing argument for affiliation to the Labour Party.   END.

Posted on

CHANGES TO CRIMINAL HELPLINE NUMBER

To: All Branches, Regional Councils & Regional Offices

 

Dear Colleague,

 

RE: CHANGES TO CRIMINAL HELPLINE NUMBER

 

I write in relation to the above matter. I have received notification that Powell Spencer Solicitors are currently in the process of installing a new system to handle out of hours calls for the Criminal Helpline. The new system will not be fully installed until the 27th April 2018.  In the meantime members should call on the usual switchboard number, 020 76045600, at all hours in order to access the criminal helpline.

 

Following 27th April 2018, the office hours number will be 020 76045600, and the new out of hours number will be 020 7624 8888.

 

I would be grateful if you could bring the contents of this circular to the attention of your members.

 

 

Yours sincerely

Mick Cash

General Secretary

Posted on

Why LUEngineering Branch decided against Affiliation to the Labour Party

Following several branch meetings to discuss the matter of whether to reaffiliate to the Labour Party, our Branch decided against.

 

We also decided to take part in the broader campaign to keep our political independence

 

 

Click here to read why

 

 

Please ‘like’ the campaign facebook page –

 

https://m.facebook.com/Campaign-to-defend-RMTs-political-strategy-731272743663085/

 

 

Here are others that agree

 

The Campaign to defend RMT’s political Strategy supporters include (Individuals in a personal capacity):

LU Engineering Branch

RMT Offshore Energy Branch

Wishaw and Motherwell Branch

Paul Shaw – NEC (Maritime North)

Paul Reilly – NEC (Midlands)

Andy Budds – NEC (Yorks & Lincs)

Del Marr – NEC (South East)

Mark Northard – NEC (Scotland)

Andy Littlechild – NEC (London Transport)

Gordon Martin – RO (Scotland & N. Ireland)

Jake Molloy – RO (Scotland)

Warwick Roberts – MerseyRail Guards Rep

David King – Newcastle Rail & Catering Br Sec and striking North Rail guard.

Michelle Rogers – Br sec Mans Sth & former NEC member

David Hainey – Br Sec (Wishaw and Motherwell)

Mike McCaig – Br sec Offshore Energy Br.

Joe Kirby – Asst Sec Offshore Energy Br

Paul Jackson – Br Sec LU Engineering Branch.

Les Harvey – LU Engineering Asst Sec

Lewis Peacock – LU Engineering Political Officer

Paul O’Brien – LU Engineering Chair & SGM del.

Carlos Barros – Piccadilly/District West Br President

Cat Cray – Political Officer LTRC

Glen Hart – LTRC Secretary & Chair BAEM Advisory Ctte

John Reid – Former NEC member and retired member.

Paul McDonald – Wimbledon Br Sec & Wessex Regional President

Ted Woodley – SGM delegate

Gary Harbord – SGM delegate

Jared Wood – SGM delegate

John Holmes—SGM delegate

Greg Hewitt – former NEC member

Conor Cheyne – Inverness Br & Young Member

Declan Ritchie – LT Region Asst Sec

 

Posted on

Public inquiry finally confirm Mark Cassidy as an undercover police officer that infiltrated construction union UCATT

Undercover police officer HN15 = Mark Cassidy = Mark Jenner

The undercover policing public inquiry has finally confirmed that the joiner many of us knew as Mark Cassidy was in truth an undercover police officer. His real name is Mark Jenner and b

etween 1995-2000, he infiltrated the construction UCATT (his subs were paid from a bank account set up by Special Branch)

 

He also infiltrated rank and file groups including the Building Worker Safety Campaign, the meetings of which he chaired at the Colin Roach Centre in Hackney. Jenner / Cassidy also targeted RMT, Unison, CPSA, TGWU and was on numerous picketlines including Dahl Jenson at Waterloo, JJ Fastfoods at Tottenham Hale and L.B. Southwark DLO.

 

Mark Cassidy / Jenner was first publicly named in by an article by journalist & union activist Mark Metcalf and in Blacklisted book by Phil Chamberlain & Dave Smith. The Met Police issued a public apology to ‘Alison’, the activist he lived with during the five years of his deployment. It is shameful that the Met and the public inquiry have taken so long to admit that Mark Cassidy was an undercover police officer from the Special Demonstration Squad, something that everyone has known for years.

 

‘Alison’, Mark Metcalf, UCATT (now part of UNITE) and blacklisted workers Brian Higgins, John Jones, Steve Hedley, Frank Smith, Dan Gilman & Dave Smith (who attended meetings, protests and pickets with Mark Cassidy / Jenner) have all been granted core participant status in the undercover police public inquiry.

 

This public confirmation about Mark Cassidy comes just a week after the Met confirmed that police provided information to the building industry blacklist.

 

Blacklist Support Group send a huge hug to ‘Alison’ and all the women activist at Police Spies Out of Lives for their inspirational battle to force the authorities to tell the truth about the undercover police officers that abused them.

 

 

https://policespiesoutoflives.org.uk/finally-confirms-hn15-mark-cassidy/

Full story on Mark Jenner: http://powerbase.info/index.php/Mark_Jenner

 

 

 

 

Alison’s Statement in full:

“I welcome the Inquiry finally confirming that my former partner Mark Cassidy was an undercover police officer and that his name now appears on the UCPI website’s list of cover names. It is deeply disappointing, however, that it has taken the Inquiry so long to confirm a fact that we exposed over five years ago.

There is no restriction order on his real name: Mark Jenner. Yet his real name – and the real names of other confirmed officers -are not listed on this table, making it hard for the public to keep track of who’s who. It feels as if they’re always trying to keep as much hidden as possible.

His employer, the Metropolitan Police, has still not confirmed his identity or given me any information as to why I was spied on. Despite appealing my Data Protection Act request, I’ve been told repeatedly that the (then) Commissioner had nothing he was obliged to share with me. I cited Jenner in the case we brought against the Metropolitan Police in 2011. In 2013, his photograph, cover and real names were in the press, and I gave testimony to the Home Affairs Select Committee about my five year relationship with him. The Inquiry began in 2015 and I have been given no explanation as to why it has taken three years since then to confirm the truth.

I and other women similarly deceived have received no disclosure about how these abusive relationships were allowed to happen. None of those responsible has been held to account, and the direction the Inquiry has taken towards greater secrecy since the appointment of Sir John Mitting does not bode well for this being remedied.

With other women who have had relationships with undercover officers, I have written this week to the Home Secretary calling for an urgent meeting to discuss our concerns. Our experience is the result of institutional sexism within the police and recent comments by the presiding judge appear to lack any understanding as to what this means.

The Inquiry needs a panel of advisers who have sufficient expertise and diversity to be able to recognise and challenge sexism, racism and police malpractice. As a priority, it should release the cover names of all officers and the files they compiled on activists and campaigners. It should release the names of all groups about whom information was gathered.

If those who have abused their power are to be held to account and the scale of political spying in this country is to be exposed, the Home Secretary needs to act. It is in the public interest for this Inquiry to have the confidence of its core participants. Without transparency, how can the extent of the wrong-doing be understood? How can lessons be learned? And most importantly, how can human rights abuses perpetrated by covert police units be prevented in the future?’

 

Blacklist Support Group

book: http://newint.org/books/politics/blacklisted-secret-war/

video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNcgrNs6pB8

facebook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/blacklistSG/

blog: www.hazards.org/blacklistblog

 

 

RELATED NEWS

Archives