National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers (RMT)

Deutsche Presse Agentur: Sep 30, 2007

Berlin - Germany's state-owned rail company Deutsche Bahn is planning to hire foreign train drivers to cushion the effects of a national rail strike expected next week, a press report said Sunday.

The newspaper Bild am Sonntag said train drivers from Austria and Switzerland could be approached if the militant GDL drivers' union goes ahead with industrial action.

The union is expected to announce strike plans on Monday, following the breakdown of pay talks with Deutsche Bahn last week.

'We plan to hire locomotive drivers from other countries such as Austria and Switzerland to help out,' one of the rail operator's senior managers told the newspaper.

He said Deutsche Bahn had drawn up contingency plans to ensure that services were disrupted as little as possible by the strike.

The GDL is seeking a 30 percent pay hike in a wage deal separate from the 4.5 percent rise agreed with Transnet and the GDBA, two other unions representing the bulk of Deutsche Bahn staff.

The rail operator offered the same terms to GDL, but also higher overtime pay, leading to a further rise of 5.5 percent. The package meant a 10 percent rise in total, Deutsche Bahn officials said.

The GDL called its 15,000 drivers out in brief warning strikes in early August, but then agreed on a month-long no-strike period while mediation took place. That period runs out Sunday.

The damaging strike, the first major stoppage at DB in 15 years, looms as the German parliament debates a controversial bill to part- privatize the national rail company, while retaining the track and signalling in state hands.

See also:

New Round of Disruptive German Rail Strikes Looms

Javno.com: 30 September 2007

Germany is bracing for a new round of disruptive rail strikes this week.

Germany is bracing for a new round of disruptive rail strikes this week as a moratorium on walkouts expires without a new wage deal between the state railway operator and a union representing 34,000 train drivers.

Deutsche Bahn, which the government wants to partially privatise by 2009, has for months been locked in a wage dispute with its drivers, who say they are underpaid compared to their counterparts elsewhere in Europe.

After a series of strikes over the summer, the two sides agreed to hold new talks through September, but they have been unable to reach a compromise.

Manfred Schell, head of the GDL drivers' union, has said new strikes look "unavoidable" and he will hold a news conference in Frankfurt on Monday to announce the union's next steps.

At the weekend, Deutsche Bahn personnel chief Margret Suckale said the company had done all it could to try to settle the wage dispute.

"We have emergency plans in place and are readying ourselves for a labour conflict," Suckale told Die Welt newspaper.

Deutsche Bahn had hoped to convince GDL to sign up to a wage deal that it struck with two other unions, which foresees salary increases of 4.5 percent.

Last week, it offered to pay the drivers for an additional two hours' work per week -- which it said would result in bottom-line salary increases of up to 10 percent. But GDL has said the new offer just means more work for the same pay.

Because the union has promised not to strike this Wednesday, a holiday to mark the German anniversary of unification, any new walkouts are expected to start from Thursday.

Transport Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee warned at the weekend that new strikes could have a devastating impact on the economy.

Deutsche Bahn, a transport and logistics giant with tentacles spread across Europe and into Asia and the Middle East, is Germany's largest employer. It transported 1.85 billion passengers last year and brought in revenues of 30 billion euros ($43 billion).

In past strikes, GDL has targeted freight as well as passenger trains, hitting supplies to German manufacturers. The DIW economic institute has estimated that rail strikes could cost Germany 500 million euros a day.

The threat comes amid mounting resistance to a partial privatisation within Germany's Social Democrats (SPD), who rule with Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives.

Some fear the plan, which foresees the sale of an initial 25 percent stake, could endanger a national resource if financial investors buy shares and press the firm to focus on profits.

SPD parliamentary leader Peter Struck defended the sale plan on Sunday and voiced confidence that his party would not doom it when it meets next month for a closely-watched congress.

"Everyone knows that the Bahn needs to stay competitive following a liberalisation of the European market, and for that it needs money," Struck told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. "There is no going back."

Posted on 06:45 PM | Permalink

National Parliamentary Rally for Trade Union Freedom
Thursday, October 18 2007

SUPPORT THE TRADE UNION RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS BILL
Demonstrate outside House of Commons 4pm-5.30pm
Rally in Committee Room 14 5.30pm-7.30pm

Confirmed Speakers:

* John Hendy QC

* John McDonnell MP

* Bob Crow (RMT)

* Tony Woodley (Unite)

* Paul Kenny (GMB)

* Mark Serwotka (PCS)

* Brian Caton (POA)

* Katy Clark MP

* Jon Cruddas MP

* Christine Blower (NUT)

* Patrick Roach (NASUWT)

* Manuel Cortes (TSSA)

* Phil McGarry (Scottish TUC)

What you can do

* Send your MP this model letter asking them to support the Bill Download file

* Ask your MP to sign Early Day Motion 532 in support of the Campaign for a Trade Union Freedom Bill.

Posted on 10:22 AM | Permalink

BBC News: 28 September 2007

A man who made hoax calls about bombs at railway stations in an attempt to get time off work has been jailed for two-and-a-half years.

Stewart Monk has a previous conviction for planting fake bombs

Stewart Monk, 28, of Ackerley Court, Ashford, Kent, worked as an on-board trolley steward for Rail Gourmet on trains between Kent and London.

He admitted making 11 false bomb threats concerning London Charing Cross and Ashford International stations.

Maidstone Crown Court heard how his calls caused chaos for commuters.

They were made to a railway customer service centre in February and March this year.

New baby

On one occasion, Monk threatened: "There is a bomb at Ashford International, don't let the police know. I will blow it."

And in another call he said: "There is an hour to go before the bomb at Charing Cross goes off."

Two of the 11 calls were made from public telephone boxes, the other nine from Monk's own mobile phone.

Bridget Todd, prosecuting, told the court: "Each case had to be dealt with as if it was bona fide."

"You were causing fear and anxiety to a large number of people" - Recorder Peter Digney

Monk's counsel John Honey said the motive appeared to have been "to get time off work... when he was tired because of the arrival of a baby".

Mr Honey added that he was "bemused" as to why his client had used a personal phone to make some of the calls.

Monk had previously admitted 11 counts of communicating information which was known or believed to be false.

Jailing him on Friday, Recorder Peter Digney said: "You were causing fear and anxiety to a large number of people.

"I do take into account the fact that you pleaded guilty at an early stage, otherwise the sentence would be considerably higher than it is."

Monk was given two-and-a-half year sentences for each count, to run concurrently.

The court heard that he has a previous conviction for leaving fake bombs - devices attached to an aerosol, with a wire running to a battery - in a shopping centre, hotel and cinema.

Posted on 04:52 PM | Permalink

Japan Focus: September 29, 2007
Nakano Akira

When I got off the train, a sign on the platform informed me that Seoul lies 56 kilometers to the south and Pyongyang 205 km to the north.

Dorasan, the northernmost station in South Korea on the Gyeongui Line, was constructed five years ago. This view was taken in Paju City. Photograph by Nakano Akira

This is Dorasan Station, close to the demilitarized zone (DMZ) demarcating the two Koreas. It is the northernmost station in South Korea on the Gyeongui Line. It connects North Korea's Sinuiju, near the border with China, and South Korea's capital, Seoul. The station is located in an area in which the South Korean military controls civilian traffic. Only three trains come this far each day. Passengers must provide ID and allow their belongings to be searched by military police.

Until a few years ago, the area was carpeted with land mines. They were removed after the first summit meeting between the North and South Korean leaders in 2000.

An upshot of the meeting was to restore part of the Gyeongui Line that was destroyed during the 1950-53 Korean War. The station was constructed five years ago.

In May, during a trial run, a train crossed between the two Koreas for the first time in 56 years. It was a symbolic moment.

Extending the track to the North represented a new phase in efforts to achieve some sort of reconciliation between the divide.

A planned summit between North and South Korean leaders has been postponed to early October due to flooding in the North.

South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun was originally scheduled to take the route running along the Gyeongui Line to reach Pyongyang on Aug. 28. He apparently wanted to emphasize the benefits of exchanges between North and South Korea.

What brought me here?

When I studied when and how Japan colonized the Korean Peninsula, I learned that building railways formed a major part of that process. The Gyeongui Line is said to have played an important role.

Shadows of colonization, the division of North and South, and reconciliation. To start the journey of learning about the occupation, I wanted to see first-hand the symbolic place where history looped back in several layers.

Flashpoints for conflict

In Seoul, I visited University of Seoul professor Chung Jae Jeong, who wrote a book titled "Japanese Imperialism and Korean Railroads."

When I asked him if railways had made life easier for Koreans, his face became grim and he answered as follows:

"From Korea's point of view, the Imperial Japanese Army brought railways with it, beginning a period of deprivation and oppression. Japan thought the Korean Peninsula was strategically crucial to its military and laid railways as tools to control the peninsula. The Russo-Japanese War was, in a way, a war over railways."

An exhibit at the Independence Hall of Korea in Cheonan City reproducing a scene of Imperial Japanese Army soldiers executing Korean saboteurs of a Japanese-built railway. Photo by Nakano Akira

Chung went on to explain that the great powers viewed railways as key to expanding their areas of influence because of the ease with which military personnel and goods could be transported in bulk.

Japan and Russia battled over railroads located in northeastern China and the northern part of the Korean Peninsula. The two countries couldn't reach a settlement through negotiations and that was part of the reason they fell into conflict, Chung said.

After the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-95), Russia scrambled to expand its own rail network. That included obtaining right of passage from the Qing Dynasty for the Chinese Eastern Railway that traversed northeastern China almost to Vladivostok, and its south Manchurian branch line from Harbin to Lushun.

Japan also focused on acquiring control of the Gyeongui Line and the Gyeongbu Line that connected Seoul with Pusan at the southern tip of the country. That was because the rail link allowed movement up and down the peninsula. Japan gained right of passage for the Gyeongbu Line after the First Sino-Japanese War and started construction in 1901. As tensions grew with Russia, Japan rushed to complete the railway. The government of the Korean Empire wanted the Gyeongui Line to be built with its own people, but the project stalled due to a lack of funding.

Public records from that time clearly show the Japanese government's intentions. For example, in a document that then Foreign Minister Komura Jutaro submitted to then Prime Minister Katsura Taro in 1902 for Cabinet approval includes the following:

"If Japan constructs the Gyeongui Line on our own and connects to the Gyeongbu Line, all major railways will be in the hands of our empire, in effect keeping Korea under our influence."

The following year, the Cabinet in Tokyo adopted a negotiating policy with Russia that aimed to have Russia promise not to block future Japanese expansion of railways in Korea toward the southern part of Manchuria. In other words, Japan aspired to extend railways from the Korean Peninsula to northeastern China to expand its sphere of influence.

The Russo-Japanese War began in February 1904.

Before the war, the Korean Empire announced it would be "neutral" in the conflict. However, Japan ignored the statement and sent advance troops to Incheon two days before declaring war on Russia.

Fighting in the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 in a Japanese conception

With the inclusion of reinforcements, more than 10,000 soldiers flooded the capital and its immediate vicinity. In practice, Korea was occupied by Japan. About two weeks after the start of hostilities, Japan and Korea signed a protocol. Under this document, Japan got Korea to allow it to expropriate militarily sensitive areas on an as-needed basis. In other words, the Imperial Japanese Army gained the power to obtain whatever land it deemed necessary.

Regarding the pending Gyeongui Line, Japan notified the Korean Empire that it intended to build a military railroad. A railway battalion was dispatched to begin construction.

War the catalyst for colonization

To visit the site where railway and colonization history overlap, I traveled to Yongsan-gu in Seoul.

The district to the east of Yongsan Station is blank on Korean maps. Now, a massive U.S. military base occupies the area that is lined with barbed wire, concrete and brick walls along the roads.

Aerial view of US base at Yongsan/Itaewon

Japanese troops expropriated land throughout the area during the Russo-Japanese War to build military facilities. Even now, 100 years later, Koreans still cannot enter the area freely.

Why did the Japanese army choose Yongsan?

Seoul National University researcher Kim Baek Young used an old map to explain. Yongsan Station, the gateway to the region, was a railway junction on the peninsula at that time, and the Gyeongui Line and other rail arteries extended from it. It was located where the army could easily keep watch on the Korean imperial palace.

"The Japanese army built a massive military base where it could easily monitor the king and move to other places on the peninsula by rail," said Kim.

The Gyeongbu Line was another important route that was completed in January 1905. A ferry service to and from Shimonoseki, Yamaguchi Prefecture, also started the same year. In April of 1906, the entire Gyeongui Line was operational.

In only a few years, during which the Russo-Japanese War was waged, Japan had built a railway that extended across the peninsula almost into northeastern China, a distance of some 950 km.

The distance is approximately the equivalent of Tokyo to Shin-Yamaguchi on the Tokaido-Sanyo Shinkansen train line.

Railroad network constructed in colonial Korea

Previously, the army had resorted to horses and other means to transport weapons and food by land. The railways enabled mass transport to China's doorstep.

The Japanese army not only built an artery to move troops and supplies, but it also set up troop encampments as an excuse for transporting goods to the front lines and security along the railways. Along the way, it stripped Korean police of their authority in the country's capital.

Even after the war against Russia ended, Japanese troops did not leave. An army contingent estimated at around 30,000 soldiers, or about two divisions, stayed on. Furthermore, it expropriated massive areas of land mainly along the railways in Daegu and Pusan for key military bases.

During my research, I met Seo Min Kyo of the truth commission on pro-Japanese anti-Korean activities in an office in Seoul. He told me:

"When the Russo-Japanese War began, Korea essentially fell into the hands of the Japanese army, and colonization developed. That is why the commission covers the period of Japan's colonial occupation from the start of the Russo-Japanese War in February 1904 to Korea's liberation in August 1945."

In other words, South Korea considers Japanese colonial occupation to have begun with the Russo-Japanese War, not from the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty signed in 1910.

Rural labor unrest triggers protests

How was railway construction viewed by the Korean people?

In early July I visited the Independence Hall of Korea in Cheonan City that was built 20 years ago as controversy raged over the content of Japanese history textbooks. Outdoor exhibits depicted life-size dolls of Japanese soldiers holding guns and crucifying Korean people. The panel said the display would continue until the end of August. It explained, "This is a reproduction of how patriotic Koreans were executed in 1904 for destroying a railway built by the Empire of Japan for the invasion of Korea."

Independence Hall

The three Koreans executed by firing squad in public near the Gyeongui Line in the country's capital in the midst of the Russo-Japanese War are honored as loyal soldiers who resisted Japan's colonization. A photograph of the execution scene appears in history textbooks.

Construction of the railways did not just involve expropriation of farmland. Japanese soldiers and businesspeople were mainly supervisors and local farmers who were, for the most part, coercively rounded up did the physically demanding work. Such methods invited public antagonism and hatred, and railway projects were targeted for sabotage by rebellious farmers and others.

The Japanese army was having problems controlling the rebellion, so it issued orders to "punish with death" those who attacked the railways and who harbored such people. Some executions were carried out.

In Anyang City, a suburb of Seoul through which the Gyeongbu Line runs, the name " Ito Hirobumi " is carved into a stone monument standing on a small hill overlooking the city. According to the inscription, local resident Wong Tae Woo learned that Ito was passing through Anyang by train on the Gyeongbu Line in November 1905. He threw stones at the train, injuring Ito. Wong was thrown into prison and tortured.

The stone monument was erected 15 years ago by local residents to pass along the local "hero's achievement" to younger generations.

Ito, a former prime minister, was visiting the country as an envoy to press the Korean Empire to sign the Japan-Korea Protectorate Treaty (Eulsa Treaty) that would strip Korea of its diplomatic rights and make it a protectorate of Japan.

On Aug. 22, 1910, 10 months after Ito was assassinated by Korean activist An Jung Geun, the Korean Empire held its last imperial conference, approving the signing of the Annexation Treaty. The conference room used to be in a corner of the Changdeokgung Palace complex, now a UNESCO World Heritage site.

Changdeokgung Palace at night

A plaque there refers to it as "the place of misfortune where the Korea-Japan Annexation Treaty was adopted."

In the following year, construction work finished on a bridge spanning the Amnok River that separates the Korean Peninsula from China, connecting Pusan to northeastern China by rail. Japan began a headlong rush to wage aggression with China.

Fact File: Truth Commission on pro-Japanese anti-Korean activities

The commission was established in May 2005 with a special law under President Roh Moo-hyun's administration to investigate collaborators and their activities during Japan's colonial rule. The commission has 11 members, including scholars and lawyers. It also has research staff. A separate commission, called the Investigative Commission on Pro-Japanese Collaborators' Property, was set up to look into assets held by pro-Japanese collaborators as a result of their dealings with the Empire of Japan. It confiscates assets from descendants and put them under state control.

Fact File: Japan an unusual colonizer

Until the discovery of the "New World" in the 15th century, colonies referred to new cities and towns created by ethnic groups and others who emigrated to another land. Now, the definition includes external territories under the control of a nation. From the late 19th century, European nations and the United States competed to acquire colonies in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific to access raw materials and sell their products. Japan is a rare example of a country that colonized neighboring states with which it had maintained relations since ancient times.

This is a slightly abbreviated version of an article that appeared in the International Herald Tribune/Asahi Shinbun on September 28,2007 and at Japan Focus on September 29, 2007.

Posted on 05:00 PM | Permalink

Evening Post: 27 September 2007

Taxi fares in Swansea are to go up after the council agreed to a request from cabbies to alter their prices.The Swansea No.1 Branch of the Railway Maritime and Transport Workers Union (RMT) submitted a request on behalf of its members who are Hackney carriage owners to increase fares for the first time since November 2005.

The changes mean that from 6am until 10pm passengers pay £1.50 for the first 285 yards, where they currently pay £1.50 for the first 302 yards. After that the charge would be 25p for each subsequent 285 yards or part thereof.

Between 10pm and 6am, the tariff changes would mean that passengers pay £1.70 for the first 285 yards and 30p for each subsequent 285 yards. Currently the charge after 1pm is £1.70 for the first 302 yards and 30p for each subsequent 302 yards.

If the changes go ahead, a journey of two miles, from Swansea to Tycoch for example, would cost £4.50 between 6am and 10pm, where it is currently £4.25.

Posted on 09:10 AM | Permalink

The Times: September 27, 2007
Joe Bolger

The Department for Transport presides over a railway industry divided between state-backed Network Rail, as owner of track and stations, and the companies that run the trains.

Travelling by train should be safer, faster and more reliable than going by road. Over long distances and on busy commuter routes, rail should be the transport of choice. However, for too many people, deterred by the cost and the prospect of delays and discomfort, it is not.

Other industries might envy the railway. Demand is strong and growing, capacity looks set to increase and prices are rising faster than inflation.

Yet all is not rosy. Peak-time trains are already full. Prices are rising, but the Government is footing less of the rail industry’s bills. More trains are promised, but passengers must wait till 2015 for the most significant deliveries.

Passenger fares brought the industry nearly £5 billion in the 2005-06 financial year and the Government provided support of more than £4 billion. By 2013-14 passenger fares will bring in £9 billion, but the Government’s contribution will fall below £3 billion.

The industry faces trying to meet rising demand within the restrictions of the current network. One problem, one rail executive says, is that the Government is too involved. “The Government has got to learn how to set policy and then empower people,” he says, arguing that the Department for Transport (DfT) has in recent years tended to “micromanage”, paying too much attention to details of running the network and restricting train operators’ ability to “get on with it”.

Where a train company runs a station ticket office, it must seek approval from the Government to change the opening hours. To alter the minimum number of services on a route, it must also seek approval. On a grander scale, the Government is selecting which trains to buy for a key InterCity order.

The reason for this intervention, the rail executive believes, is that civil servants crave control and want to “shut off risk to zero”. Another rail manager says that the DfT is “paranoid” in its need to illustrate that it is getting value, demanding monthly meetings.

Tom Harris, the Rail Minister, counters that it is reasonable that the DfT monitor progress, since so much taxpayers’ money supports the industry. He plays down the suggestion of control. “You may call it intervention, I’d call it a loving hug,” he says.

The latest redrawing of rail industry structure — prompted by the closure of the Strategic Rail Authority in 2006 — gave responsibility for rail franchising to the DfT. It had previously been handled by arm’s-length bodies.

The DfT previously sat at one end of the industry chain, subsidising the track owner — Network Rail — which served the train operators, which carried passengers. The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) regulated Network Rail and the SRA handed franchises to train operating companies and kept them in check. The DfT now has a direct relationship with train operators, Network Rail and the ORR.

The latter relationship — inherited from integration of the SRA into the DfT in 2006 — requires the DfT to outline its long-term requirements for the railway and agree, with the ORR, how much money Network Rail will have to carry out its wishes.

That, according to rail executives, illustrates the closeness of Network Rail and the Government. It is an issue raising tensions amid concern as to who should be considered Network Rail’s customer. Some train operators lament that Network Rail does not see train operators as customers, despite supplying them with access to its track and stations. The rail infrastructure owner, maintainer and provider is said to be more concerned with the wants of the Government and the ORR.

The result, operators say, is that Network Rail puts more emphasis on meeting targets set by the ORR, such as on financial efficiency, asset condition and safety, than on helping the train groups to improve services or run more trains.

One rail boss says “95 per cent of my worries would disappear” if Network Rail were more interested in helping train operators. Another believes that a closer relationship would mean customers’ needs were better met. For example, Network Rail might more readily agree to train operators’ calls for more car parking spaces at stations.

Network Rail is said to be arrogant in dealings with train operators, telling them how they can use its track. Train operators say that a better relationship could make it easier for them to run more services or change timetables to match demand better.

Network Rail has in the past proposed that train operators increase the length of journeys in their timetables to help to improve punctuality rates.

Paul Plummer, director of planning and regulation for Network Rail, concedes that it needs to improve how it deals with train operating companies. “We want our people to treat [the train operators] as partners,” he says, but he adds that the company also has a duty to future rail passengers.

“Many of the decisions that we make have implications that last decades,” Mr Plummer says, noting that the ultimate customer is the passenger and the rail freight user. “While we need to take into account the perspective of train operators, in many cases we need to make decisions that go beyond the life of their franchises.” Network Rail also has to make decisions that affect rival franchisees.

Mr Plummer dismisses suggestions that the relationship between Network Rail and government is too close. “I don’t think it’s cosy,” he says. “We have some pretty robust discussions.”

One such discussion is thought to have taken place in recent months between the minister and Ian Coucher, Network Rail’s chief executive, over the number of delay minutes — the standard measure for cumulative train delays — caused by Network Rail.

Network Rail accounted for 10.5 million minutes of delays in the 2006-07 financial year, including delays caused by signalling problems, track defects and speed restrictions. That figure beat its regulatory target of 10.6 million minutes but was unchanged from last year and weaker than the 9.8 million minutes target it set for itself.

Train operators complain that while their delay minutes are falling, Network Rail’s performance is showing signs of plateauing. In addition, its delay minutes are still significantly above those reported by Railtrack before the fatal Hatfield crash in 2000.

Network Rail was responsible for 54.3 per cent of delay minutes in 2006-07, up from 45.7 per cent in 1999- 2000, when Railtrack ran the network.

Network Rail attributes the rise in delay minutes to running more trains on its network and factors beyond its control, including poor weather. Speed restrictions in the wake of Hatfield will also have harmed punctuality.

Another criticism of Network Rail, not least by the Commons Transport Select Committee, is lack of accountability. “Network Rail [is] a private company without any private sector disciplines, seemingly set up simply to keep the enormous costs of the railway infrastructure away from the Government’s balance sheet,” the MPs said in 2004.

Concerns centre on Network Rail’s board of members — more than 100 people representing companies with an interest in the industry, the public and the DfT. It is meant to provide the governance that shareholders would in a public company. However, the Transport Select Committee concluded, in its latest review, that the board was failing to exercise “effective control”.

The Adam Smith Institute has championed vertical integration of the network, to unite control of trains and track and improve communication.

Stagecoach, the transport group, has also favoured some form of integration, arguing in 2001 that the model that would ultimately be used to create Network Rail “may weaken the commercial and management motivation of the infrastructure owner”.

Mr Harris foresees no such change, saying: “Network Rail’s safety record is tremendously good. The idea of giving up maintenance of tracks to train operators is just bizarre.”

The network needs more capacity. The Government is taking longer-term decisions to achieve it, but short-term improvements are possible and needed.

The way to maximise capacity in the short term is to cut the volume of delays, freeing space on the network.

To achieve that, the network needs stability. That means Network Rail must stay a government-backed, not-for-dividend company. Its ability to raise funds on generous terms relies on its government guarantee. Government is right to monitor its spending, but there is scope to lessen its grip on operations while retaining oversight.

Were privatisation re-run, there would be a strong case for integrating track and train to remove barriers between different firms working separately to deliver a joined-up service.

Such a change now could put stability at risk. A more realistic move is extension of “virtual” integration, putting Network Rail people and train operator staff in the same control room.

Network Rail is right to follow the Government’s lead in planning beyond existing franchise agreements. But train operators are incentivised to increase the number of passengers using the railway. By focusing on operators’ needs, Network Rail should be able to achieve more for passengers.

* Have your say

If nationalised British Rail still existed, had it been able to spend on tracks and trains all the money which was wasted on privatising and franchising, and were it now to enjoy the current soaring demand which has occurred in spite of privatisation NOT because of it, then Britain would have a rail system fit for the changing times ahead.

Instead, it is a leaderless, dysfunctional shambles that is the joke of Europe. Well done Tories. Well done Labour. You've broken what used to be working and wasted billions.

David Bond, Wellington, New Zealand

Posted on 12:18 AM | Permalink

Builder & Engineer: 25 September 2007

Network Rail has won this year's People Management Award for its Advanced Apprenticeship Scheme.

The company was the overall winner and category winner, 'Business impact through learning and development'.

Launched in 2005, the scheme combines personal development and technical training and is based at Royal Navy facilities at HMS Sultan in Gosport, Hampshire. An investment of £30 million makes the programme one of the biggest in the UK.

Each year, up to 240 apprentices enter the scheme, spending the first year of their course at HMS Sultan and undertaking technical training delivered by Flagship Training. Accommodation is provided at nearby HMS Collingwood.

Network Rail staff teach years two and three of the course, delivering a range of rail-specific training before successful completion of the course provides apprentices jobs within the company's maintenance function.

Iain Coucher, chief executive of Network Rail said: "We are changing the very nature of Network Rail, what it is and how it operates. Training and development are key parts of change, which is why Network Rail developed its apprenticeship scheme, the most talented of whom would go onto a Foundation Degree at Sheffield Hallam University, and leadership schemes for potential high flyers.
"This is a huge investment in our future. This apprenticeship scheme will deliver over 1,000 skilled technicians who will become the backbone of Network Rail for the next 25 years."

Posted on 10:45 PM | Permalink

Associated Press: Sept. 25, 2007

STRASBOURG, France — International passenger rail services in the European Union will open to cross-border competition by 2010.

New guidelines approved by the European Parliament on Tuesday will be reviewed in 2012 to see if domestic train lines should also be liberalised, the EU assembly said.

A proposal to open those lines to foreign competition by 2017 has been rejected by countries where state companies dominate the market, such as France, Belgium or Austria.

Smaller EU states, such as Luxembourg and some Central European nations, also fear their national providers could fold if a giant company, such as Germany's DB, entered their domestic market.

But competition will increase on international lines, where any company from any of the EU's 27 member states will be able to run services.

In a package of rules governing the EU railway sector, lawmakers also voted in favor of setting minimum standards on compensation for delays on domestic and international routes, and of certifying train crews to show they meet professional, medical and linguistic standards.

Under the rules, which will enter into force in 2009, passengers could be compensated 25 percent for an hour's delay, if the operator is responsible, or 50 percent for a delay of two hours or more.

Also, operators must allow folding bikes on trains but may ban other bicycles if there is no space for them in the cars as most European trains are not yet designed to carry a large number of bikes.

The rules have already been backed by EU member states.

See also:

EU rail delay compensation ruling may let train operators off the hook

Press Association: 26 September 2007

Train passengers will get compensation for delays or cancellations under new rules approved by Euro-MPs - but only if the train operator is to blame, not if delays are caused by engineering work, points or signalling failures or bad weather.

The cashback deal forces railway companies to refund 25% of the ticket price for delays exceeding one hour and 50% for trains more than two hours behind schedule - but only if the operator can be held responsible for the hold-up.

That means severe rail disruption of the kind triggered by the storms which swept parts of the UK in the last few days would almost certainly not leave rail companies facing huge claims.

See also:

EU injects small dose of competition into its railways

EUOBSERVER: 25.09.2007
By Renata Goldirova

BRUSSELS – European lawmakers gave their final blessing to a package of railway reforms, aimed at injecting more competition into Europe's rail networks as well as introducing an EU-wide set of passenger rights for minimum compensation when trains are delayed.

"This result shows the will of Europe to develop the use of railways and to advance towards the creation of a real European railway space", EU transport commissioner Jacques Barrot said on Tuesday (25 September) in response to MEPs' vote on the topic.

Under the newly-adopted legislation, international passenger rail networks within the 27-nation Union will have to welcome competitors from 2010, with centre-right German MEP Georg Jarzembowski saying "this will lead to more competition and more choice for the customers".

However, MEPs failed to push through their demand to liberalise domestic services from 2017, as several EU capitals – especially France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, all home to state-owned operators – were reluctant to set an exact date.

Instead, the European Commission will assess the market situation no later than two years after the directive enters into force and will subsequently suggests whether competition should be injected to domestic services as well.

Thorny issue of passenger rights

In addition, EU capitals have scored one more point regarding the controversial issue of EU-wide passenger rights, similar to air traveller rights which came into force in February 2006.

Under the new rules, all rail passengers will get 25 percent of their fare for a delay of 60 minutes or more and 50 percent for a delay of 120 minutes or more, but only if the operator can be held responsible for this delay.

Compensations will apply to international as well as to domestic travellers.

However, the directive will at the same time allow governments to have generous exemptions – altogether allowing for a possible 15-year-long transitional period for domestic rail networks.

"The fact that it was so difficult to persuade all member states to grant basic rights to rail passengers shows how poorly railway authorities treat their customers nowadays", Belgian liberal MEP Dirk Sterckx said in response to the parliament's concessions on passenger rights.

"That is a pity but we had to get the new member states on board", he added.

The travellers' rights will enter into force in 2009, with Mr Jarzembowski hoping "the odds are that trains will run on time much more often and railways will become a more popular means of transport".

See also:

European Parliament approves Third Railway Package

Railway Gazette: 28 Sep 2007
Chris Jackson

International passenger services to be liberalised on January 1 2010 after compromise agreements are accepted

Further liberalisation of train operations across Europe will come into effect over the next three years, following a vote by the European Parliament on September 25 adopting three 'conciliation agreements' on the Third Railway Package.

Intended to open up the rail market further, the Third Railway Package was introduced by the European Commission in 2004. Building on the reform of infrastructure management and liberalisation of freight train operations in the First and Second packages, the Third is mainly focused on passenger services and certification of train crews. Some of the proposals proved controversial with the EU member states, leading to lengthy negotiations between the commission, the parliament and the Council of Ministers.

The three conciliation agreements were reached by the Council in June, paving the way for the package to be returned to the Parliament for final approval. Each agreement covers one of the three main measures in the package:

* Liberalisation of the market for operation of international passenger trains

* Creation of a European licencing system for train drivers

* Standardisation of rights for passengers using long-distance and international rail services.

Proposals for the liberalisation of domestic passenger trains and licencing of other train crew members have been deferred but remain under consideration for the longer term.

International passenger services within the EU will be opened up to competition from January 1 2010, after parliament voted 541:66 to adopt the conciliation agreement.

The European Parliament's rapporteur for this directive, Georg Jarzembowski (EPP-ED, DE) expressed the hope that railway undertakings "will take the opportunity to present their passengers [with] consumer-friendly offers that will be competitive to air carriers", which he suggested would "lead to a revival of the Community's cross-border railway transport and to a better environment".

Jarzembowski regretted that the required majority had not been reached at second reading for the opening up of domestic passenger services to competition. However, the conciliation agreement requires the Commission to table a report on the application of the directive in 2012. This will include an assessment of whether further liberalisation should be pursued.

A Directive will come into force in 2009 introducing a European licence for train drivers. All drivers will be required to hold a certificate stating that they meet minimum requirements relating to medical fitness, basic education and general professional skills.

The Commission's original proposals envisaged extending this requirement to other train staff, but this was rejected by the Council. Following pressure from the Parliament, the European Railway Agency has now been instructed to draw up a report, 18 months after the directive enters into force, identifying "any other train staff performing safety-critical tasks who should be subject to a similar system of licences". The Commission must then present its own report no more than 12 months after the ERA study, "accompanied, if appropriate, by a proposal for a new law".

Rapporteur Gilles Savary (PES, FR), said he was satisfied that by 2012 crew members other than train drivers performing safety-critical tasks may be included within the scope of the directive. "The agreement is an example of good social dialogue at European level and of social interoperability also for others than train drivers", he explained

The regulation on the rights and obligations of rail passengers was originally intended to apply only to passengers on international journeys but pressure from MEPs and "arduous negotiations" resulted in what rapporteur Dirk Sterckx (ALDE, BE) described as an "honourable compromise" extending some rights to passengers on domestic journeys.

When the law enters force in 2009, all rail passengers will enjoy a set of basic rights (covering issues such as train operators' liability for passengers and their luggage, and a basic right to transport for people with reduced mobility. Compensation in the event of delays on cross-border services will be 25% of the fare for a delay of 60 minutes or more and 50% for a delay of 120 minutes or more, provided that the operator can reasonably be held responsible for the delay.

The package includes further 'non-basic' rights - such as the right of a passenger to take a bicycle on a train. However, Member States may exempt long-distance domestic services from these rights for an initial period of five years, which may subsequently be extended for two further periods of up to five years. Urban, suburban and regional services can be granted an indefinite exemption. Under the conciliation agreement, the Council accepted Parliament's demand for a review every five years of any exemptions from these rights which Member States grant to their domestic train operators.

The head of the Parliament's negotiating team, Vice-President Alejo Vidal-Quadras (EPP-ED, ES) described the proposal as "a genuinely European law" which "gets away from old-fashioned obsessions with national borders and gives basic rights to passengers on all railway journeys". In particular, he emphasised "passengers on all long-distance journeys will be treated the same, whether or not their journey crosses national borders".

Welcoming the conciliation agreement as a fair compromise, European Commission Vice-President Jacques Barrot confirmed that the Commission would come forward with reports on the certification of other train crew and liberalisation of the national railway market.

Posted on 11:53 AM | Permalink

Edinburgh Evening News: 25 Sep 2007

THE SNP Government is set to ditch plans for a direct rail link to Edinburgh Airport and tell travellers to take the tram instead.

Plans due to be unveiled later this week are expected to include a new station at Gogar, where passengers could switch from train to tram to get to the airport.

The ambitious £650m Edinburgh Airport Rail Link (EARL), which involved diverting both the Edinburgh-Glasgow and Edinburgh-Fife lines and building a tunnel under the runway, will be scrapped.

The SNP fought the Holyrood elections earlier this year on a pledge to ditch both EARL and the trams, but it said it did want an alternative way of providing a rail link to the airport.

The Government was forced to accept defeat on the trams and allow the project to proceed. But MSPs agreed the EARL scheme needed to be reviewed.

And it is understood the Scottish Government's transport agency Transport Scotland has recommended to ministers that trains from the west and north should stop at a new station on the Edinburgh-Fife line near the Gogar roundabout. Trains from Glasgow and Dunblane could also be diverted via the station by using a link between Winchburgh and Dalmeny.

Passengers for the airport could get off and join the already approved tram line to the airport terminal. They would also have the opportunity to join the tram line - which begins at Newhaven - at Edinburgh Park.

The details of the scheme are expected to be confirmed when Transport Minister Stewart Stevenson makes a statement to the Scottish Parliament on Thursday.

However, despite the SNP's latest plans, opposition MSPs said the rail link plan was not necessarily dead. Tavish Scott, the Liberal Democrat who was transport minister before May's elections, reportedly said scrapping the rail link scheme would be a "huge error".

"Scotland's economy would benefit best from the project," he added. "Any other kind of proposal being dreamed up is more about getting the SNP out of a spending hole than in the strategic interests of Scotland."

His views are likely to be supported by Labour transport spokesman Charlie Gordon, who reportedly will be "questioning the minister closely on Thursday".

Labour group leader Cllr Ewan Aitken, who led the city council prior to May's elections, said both a rail and tram link were needed.

He said: "What we have to remember is this is not just Edinburgh's rail link to the airport, it's a rail link for the whole of Scotland. I've always believed that the trams would provide an excellent route to the airport but the rail link is between the airport and the rest of the country."

See also:

Costs going like a runaway train...

The Scotsman: 24 Sep 2007
ALASTAIR DALTON TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT

The line between Cambus (near Alloa) and Stirling on the new Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Rail Link.
Picture: Neil Hanna

THE costs of major new rail projects across Scotland have spiralled by tens of millions of pounds, with some planned routes poised to become the most expensive, mile for mile, in the whole of Britain, The Scotsman has learned.

Three projects designed to improve the network are in danger of running up to £90 million over budget and could become the "rail equivalent of the Holyrood building project", sources have warned.

The price hikes are forecast for the opening of lines to Alloa, the Borders and Glasgow Airport.

It is understood poor management and lack of planning are responsible for the latest cost escalations. Some initiatives have suffered by being presided over by small local authorities, with a Scottish Government quango being forced to step into the fray.

Stewart Stevenson, the transport minister, has said he is "disappointed and concerned" with at least one project, while Transport Scotland, the government agency, has pledged to review costs across the board.

Rail watchdogs have called on the government to establish a review of why the projects have run over budget and to act upon any recommendations to ensure sufficient safeguards are put in place.

Of the three initiatives, the one most at risk of incurring vastly increased costs is the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine line: it is likely to cost three times its original estimate and open nearly two and a half years late.

Its cost is believed to have risen to about £95 million - that is some £10 million more than in June and well above the figure of £65-70 million being quoted a year ago.

Sources have told The Scotsman it could now hit £100 million, making the 13-mile route one of Britain's most expensive, mile for mile. One said: "This scheme is in danger of becoming the rail equivalent of the Holyrood building project."

Another claimed the original costs had been deliberately kept low to make the scheme appear more attractive.

The Waverley line between Edinburgh and Borders is also understood to have suffered significant cost increases, which could push the bill from the current £175.5 million to nearly £200 million.

Mr Stevenson has already said there is a unspecified funding gap in the project and that the planned opening in five years time was unachievable.

Transport Scotland is taking over both the Alloa and Waverley line projects from the local authorities involved.

The third project to face cost hikes is the Glasgow Airport rail link, where the current cost estimate of £170-210 million is at risk of increasing by £50 million. This is thought to relate to extra land and property costs.

Colin Howden, director of TRANSform Scotland, the campaign for sustainable transport, expressed frustration with the delays to the Alloa scheme, in particular, but said major road improvement initiatives had suffered from even greater cost increases.

Robert Samson, the Scottish spokesman for Passenger Focus, the independent rail watchdog, said that, once the projects were completed, the government should carry out a review of why budgets and completion dates had been allowed to slip, and then put in place safeguards to prevent their reoccurrence.

"With the costs and finishing dates rising, the government must prevent such things happening in the future and ensure the processes are robust," he said.

It is the Alloa line which is the most beset by difficulties. The project was hampered in that it was led by Clackmannanshire, Scotland's smallest council, and other bodies, such as the tram developer Transport Initiatives Edinburgh, were drafted in to help out.

The latest cost increases follow outrage from the SNP over the previous rise, which Keith Brown, the Ochil MSP, described as "appalling". He said: "That figure and the delay that has been caused by poor management of the contract should have those in the previous [Scottish] Executive who were responsible hanging their heads in shame."

Mr Stevenson said he was "disappointed and concerned" that the project was running late and over budget.

The minister has reaffirmed the previous administration's commitment to the Waverley scheme, namely contributing £115 million, quoted at 2002 prices, which is expected to be the equivalent of £159 million when the line is built. However, he has stressed that the Scottish Government's continuing support depended on conditions such as costs being contained and risks being managed. The rest of the cost would be shared by local authorities, enterprise agencies and developers.

Des McNulty, the shadow transport minister, told MSPs last week: "I have spoken at some length to people dealing with the Waverley railway project, who express severe doubts about whether the project can be delivered with the current funding package."

However, Christine Grahame, an SNP MSP for the South of Scotland, put a brave face on the situation.

She said "There has been an element of scaremongering going on over the costs, but I remain optimistic, despite the failings of the previous Liberal and Labour administration that the project will go ahead."

Transport Scotland said it was reviewing the costs of the Alloa and Waverley projects, while the cost of the Glasgow Airport line had still to be determined.

A spokeswoman said the agency had taken over project management of the Alloa line and an audit was under way. She went on: "The audit will report during September and will identify an anticipated final cost for the project."

She said Transport Scotland had launched a "due diligence exercise" as part of taking control of the Waverley project, and that process was expected to be completed by the end of this month.

Counting the cost as projects descend into financial farce

HERE we go again. Just when the long-suffering public thought that it had seen, in the shape of the Miralles-formed Holyrood building, the last of the great spending overruns, here come a whole lot more.

Taxpayers will be baffled, not to say frustrated and angry, that the pattern seems to be repeated over and over again.

First, an estimate, perhaps given by a politician anxious to avoid scaring off the voters - as was the case with the proposed Scottish Parliament. Then, as the date for the beginning of the project nears, a new estimate. And, as it progresses, the estimates climb ever higher. How can this possibly continue to happen? And is it just a Scottish or, indeed, British phenomenon?

The answer to the first question is something that Audit Scotland, the public spending watchdog, is currently investigating.

Called the "major capital projects review", the investigation is looking at the £7.8 billion of infrastructure spending commissioned by the then-Scottish Executive, now the Scottish Government, between 2004-5 and 2007-8.

The findings have yet to be published, but in setting out its remit, Audit Scotland laid out the kinds of problems which have been encountered in the past.

The watchdog states: "Under successive administrations, a number of large public-sector capital projects did not meet time, cost and quality targets.

"This was due to a range of problems in project management, including the need to choose the right procurement route; the dangers of proceeding without a fixed design; lack of strong cost control and the need for a single point of decision-making."

Pretty clear. And there are some recent examples of this.

Audit Scotland's overview of transport projects, published in 2006, found that of six major road and rail projects completed between February 2003 and November 2005 the tendered construction costs exceeded estimated tender costs by up to 30 per cent.

Actual construction costs exceeded the pre-tender estimated cost by up to 33 per cent. There has been some good news more recently. Audit Scotland was asked by the Scottish Government to look at the Edinburgh tram scheme and the Edinburgh Airport Rail Link (EARL).

Their report, published in June, concluded that the tram project was "relatively well advanced and arrangements to manage it looked sound". However, there was more uncertainty about EARL which "highlighted some particular concerns about its governance and procurement aspects".

As to the second question, there is plenty of evidence that the problems of cost overruns is not uniquely Scottish or even British, but happen the world over.

The now famous Sydney Opera House, for example, ended up at 15 times the estimated cost. Closer to home, the British Library was allowed to go almost £450 million over budget and 15 years behind schedule.

But these are modern projects. Cost overruns are not new. The cost of Charles Barry's gothic Houses of Parliament, at Westminster, caused a 19th century scandal when it overran its budget by 200 per cent.

That, however, was still modest compared to the Scottish Parliament building at Holyrood, which came with an original estimated cost of £40 million. The final bill was £414 million.

In short, building major infrastructure projects is not simple and is, it appears, almost bound to involve significant escalations in costs.

SNP ministers, who are about to embark on perhaps the biggest project of modern times in Scotland - building a new Forth crossing - and who were highly critical of cost overruns when they were in opposition should be warned.

The new Scottish Government plans to keep on spending to improve Scotland's infrastructure. We must hope that they will, finally, learn some lessons from the past and do what they predecessors have not managed. Keep control.

But don't count on it.

Posted on 08:49 AM | Permalink

Deutsche Welle: 25.09.2007

Funding has been approved for a controversial high-speed train to run between Munich and its airport. But critics say the project is expensive and that the deal isn't as final as its champions would like to think.

Germany's finance minister said he thinks funding could dry up before all the track is laid

The German-designed Transrapid magnetic levitation train will be the first of its kind in Europe and trim the current 40 minute journey from Munich to the airport down to 10 minutes. But concerns remain over the project's 1.85 billion euro ($2.6 billion) price tag.

Money to build the Transrapid will come from the European Union, Germany's federal government, the Bavarian government, the Munich airport, Germany's state-owned Deutsche Bahn (DB) rail company and German companies. The major participants reached a deal on the financing late Monday, Sept. 24.

The Transrapid will hover on a track above the ground and will travel at speeds up to 450 kilometers (280 miles) per hour. The 37-kilometer (23-mile) route is scheduled to be completed by 2014.

Technology made in Germany

Stoiber's "parting gift"

The project is seen by critics as a "parting gift" for Bavarian Premier Edmund Stoiber, who heads the conservative Christian Social Union, the Bavarian sister party to Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU). After 14 years in power, Stoiber will step down next month.

Stoiber denied that the Transrapid was being done as a personal favor, saying Tuesday that the project was the "guiding light for high technology made in Germany."

German engineering giants Siemens and ThyssenKrupp developed the project. So far, the technology has not been broadly adopted due to safety concerns. In September 2006, 23 people died and 11 were injured when a Transrapid crashed into a maintenance vehicle during a test run near the western German city of Osnabrück.

Currently only China has an operational Transrapid track. It runs between Shanghai and the city's airport.

Government warns of cost overruns

The only operational Transrapid is in Shanghai

As part of the deal, the German government will pay no more than 925 million euros for the magnetic levitation train and has stipulated it will not be responsible for cost overruns. Germany's Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück voiced his continuing opposition to the project Tuesday, saying that it will be much more expensive than originally planned.

"The project will be considerably more expensive," the Social Democrat was quoted saying in the Tuesday edition of the Stuttgarter Nachrichten newspaper. "The costs will definitely not stay at 1.85 billion euros."

In his former position of premier of North Rhine-Westphalia, Steinbrück quashed a proposal to build a similar project.

The city of Munich is also unhappy about the Tranrapid. Munich's socialist mayor, Christian Ude, said he will fight in court against the plan.

Accident last year killed 23 people

"Naturally, the regional capital of Munich will initiate legal measures against the plan's official approval," Ude was quoted as saying by Reuters news agency.

While this week's financial agreement was an important step, CDU expert Steffen Kampeter said it doesn't mean the project will get a green light in the end.

The recent agreement brought the project "nearer to being financially viable," Kampeter told the DPA news agency Tuesday in Berlin.

"The devil is in the details," he said.

Stoiber said he was confident the project would go forward despite ongoing opposition.

"Nobody will reverse this step," he said Tuesday.

See also:

Germany moves toward building high-speed maglev line from Munich to airport

The Associated Press: September 25, 2007

MUNICH, Germany -- Munich is to get a high-speed magnetic-levitation rail link to its airport, Bavaria's outgoing governor said Tuesday, but city officials pledged to fight the project and Germany's transport minister expressed caution.

Bavarian Governor Edmund Stoiber said the expensive project — currently slated to cost €1.85 billion (US$2.6 billion) — would be "a beacon for high technology 'made in Germany.'"

Germany has sought to promote the so-called Transrapid for export, and a line has gone into operation from Shanghai, China to the city's airport. However, plans to operate the trains in Germany have stalled for years, with cost a major concern.

Construction of the roughly 40-kilometer (25-mile) stretch from Munich's main station to its airport could start in summer 2008, Stoiber said.

Once completed, perhaps as early as 2012, the line would cut the journey to about 10 minutes, compared with the current 40 minutes by commuter train.

Maglev trains float just above the track on a magnetic field, cutting resistance and enabling extremely high speeds.

The German federal government is to shoulder half the cost, providing some €925 million (US$1.3 billion).

Stoiber said the state government, railway operator Deutsche Bahn and the companies involved agreed Monday to increase their contributions and cover a €165 million (US$233 million) financing gap. He proclaimed that "the way is clear for the start of construction."

He said he was confident that the costs would not exceed the planned €1.85 billion (US$2.6 billion) — a major concern among skeptics.

However, Federal Transport Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee said the agreement was not a "definitive solution" and building would only start if the project could be kept within budget.

Munich Mayor Christian Ude, who favors a cheaper express railway link, said he would take legal action to prevent permission being granted to build the maglev link.

The agreement comes days before Stoiber is due to leave office after 14 years as Bavarian governor. However, he insisted that "the Transrapid is a German project and certainly not a going-away present for me."

The German maglev trains are built by Transrapid International, a consortium including ThyssenKrupp and Munich-based Siemens.

Germany has a well-developed network of conventional high-speed trains. The only Transrapid line in Germany so far is an experimental stretch in the rural northwest.

In September 2006, that line was the scene of a crash between a Transrapid train and a maintenance vehicle, in which 23 people were killed. Investigations pointed to human error as the likely cause.

See also:

Munich Airport Transrapid Link Wins Funding Agreement

Bloomberg: Sept. 25
By Brian Parkin

Germany may become the first country in Europe to build a commercial Transrapid rail link, after the southern state of Bavaria forged agreement on a high- speed line connecting downtown Munich with the city airport.

Edmund Stoiber, Bavaria's prime minister who retires next month, persuaded a group of investors to bridge a gap in funding between the state and Deutsche Bahn AG, Germany's state-owned railway, paving the way for the delayed project to proceed, Bavaria's state government said in a press statement today.

"We've finally achieved a breakthrough to build the Transrapid,'' Stoiber told a news briefing in Munich broadcast live on national television. The project is a "beacon for technology made in Germany.'' Building can begin in summer 2008, he said.

The deal brings to an end squabbling over cost-sharing between the Berlin-based federal government, the states and industry that has dogged the history of the German-developed Transrapid. The system is a collaboration between Siemens AG, ThyssenKrupp AG and Deutsche Bahn.

Transrapid trains run on an elevated concrete track at speeds in excess of 400 kilometers per hour (250 miles per hour) using a magnetic-levitation system patented in 1934 and developed 30 years ago. The technology is in commercial use in only one city worldwide: Shanghai's Transrapid system has linked Pudong International Airport and the Lujiazui financial district since 2002.

Project Costs

Construction of the 37-kilometer (23 mile) rail link in Bavaria may cost about 2.2 billion euros ($3.1 billion), according to Bavaria's state economy minister, Erwin Huber. Federal Transport Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee has pledged 925 million euros, leaving the gap to be funded by the city, Deutsche Bahn and investors.

Bavarian authorities face extra costs for post-Sept. 11 security and more extensive safety measures following a crash at the Transrapid test site in northwestern Germany last year in which 23 people were killed, Germany's worst rail accident this decade. That raised questions about the train's safety. The rail-hugging Transrapid is less susceptible to derailment than ordinary rolling-stock, experts have said.

The project will boost Munich airport, "one of the most important motors for growth in the region,'' Stoiber said. Huber told reporters the announcement was "the news of the decade.''

Opposition Friction

Opposition parties to Stoiber's Christian Social Union criticized the accord as expensive and outdated.

Actual building costs may be higher than Huber's estimate because it was made four years ago, pre-dating the accident in Lathen in northwestern Germany last September, according to Thomas Beyer, a Social Democrat lawmaker in the state's Munich- based parliament.

"Frankly, we need faster affordable links between the city and airport, not a new Oktoberfest attraction,'' Beyer, the Social Democrats' deputy chairman in parliament, said in an interview, citing surveys showing a majority of Munich citizens are against using taxpayers' money to pay for the project. The cost of a one-way trip on the Transrapid will be some 15 euros, he said.

"This is Stoiber's retirement gift to Munich -- a terrific tax burden to remember him by,'' Beyer said. SPD-run Munich city will try to block the project in court, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported, citing mayor Christian Ude.

Stoiber rejected that allegation, telling the news conference that the Transrapid project was "definitely not a going-away present.''

Stoiber, who turns 66 in three days' time, has ruled Bavaria as prime minister since 1993, promoting business- friendly policies credited by analysts as helping the state -- home to companies including Siemens AG and Audi AG -- to contribute about a fifth Germany's gross domestic product in 2006. Stoiber will retire from the chairmanship of his party on Sept. 29 and as state premier on Oct. 10.

Posted on 08:16 AM | Permalink

Granma International: September 24, 2007
By Ronald Suárez Rivas

CARACAS — Cuba and Venezuela have taken a new step forward in cooperation after approving a credit to fund the rehabilitation of the island’s railroad structure.

Representatives of the Venezuelan Economic and Social Development Bank (BANDES) and the Cuban Foreign Bank signed the agreement granting $100 million to upgrade rail tracks, signals and communications.

Jorge Luis Sierra, Cuban transport minister, stated that this action “will increase the speed of our trains from 40 to 100 kilometers per hour, have a direct impact on transportation capacity and multiply the country’s current rail fleet.”

He added: “With this credit, the lines can be completely restored to bring them up to their original design conditions for freight or passenger traffic.”

Sierra noted that the Cuban railroad system deteriorated badly during the Special Period and stated that now, as the economy is becoming consolidated, is the time for its reestablishment.

He also explained that Cuban specialists are working in Venezuela on a parallel project to upgrade and extend that country’s railroad system, abandoned for more than 30 years.

The Cuban minister and president of BANDES, Rafael Isea, agreed that efforts like this to confront shared problems fall within the framework of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) and are a material feature of Latin American integration.

See also:

Venezuela to lend Cuba 100 mln USD for rail upgrade

People's Daily: September 26, 2007

Venezuela will lend Cuba 100 million U.S. dollars to help modernize its rail system, Cuba's Transportation Minister Jose Luis Sierra told official newspaper Granma on Tuesday.

Improvements will be made in the signaling and switching systems and trains will be able to travel at 100 kph instead of the current 40 kph, he said, adding that the lines will also be restored to their original designed capacity.

The loan from Venezuela's Social and Economic Development Bank (Bandes) to the Cuban Exterior Bank will also allow an increase to the rolling stock fleet.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba has been suffering a crisis, known as the "special period," which has hurt many sectors, including railways.

Railways that enable the swift movement of passengers and cargo are essential for Cuba's economic recovery, Sierra said.

See also:

Cuba to Develop Railroad System with Venezuelan Assistance

Mathaba: 2007/09/26

Cuba and Venezuela took another step in the area of bilateral cooperation with the approval of a Venezuelan credit to finance the recovery of the railroad infrastructure on the island.

Havana, Sept 25 -- According to Granma news daily, representatives from the Venezuelan Bank for Socio-Economic Development (BANDES) sealed the accord that will grant Cuba $100 million to improve railways, railroad signposting and communications.

The Cuban Transportation Minister, Jose Luis Sierra Blanco, noted that this agreement will allow Cuba to increase the speed of trains from 40 to 100 km/h. The capacity of transportation as well as the Cuban rail fleet will also increase as a result of this initiative, he added.

Sierra recalled that the Cuban railroad system suffered a significant deterioration during the harsh economic crisis of the 1990s and stressed that, with the recovery of the national economy, it is necessary to revert that status of deterioration.

He also explained that Cuban experts work in Venezuela to restore and to expand the railroad system in the South American nation.

Posted on 07:53 AM | Permalink

The Times: September 26, 2007
Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent

Rail passengers on the country’s most overcrowded routes face up to two years of cramped conditions because train companies are refusing to order extra carriages unless their contracts are extended.

Passenger groups say that the dispute between the train companies and the Government underlined the need for reform of the franchise system. They argue that squabbles over profits stop the network from expanding.

Virgin West Coast and First TransPennine Express, are negotiating with the Department for Transport (DfT) over the delivery of 150 carriages. Demand for both services is at record levels and crowding on them is expected to worsen.

Passenger numbers on Virgin have increased from 15 million in 2004 to 20 million last year. People are forced to stand on one in four of its services, partly because the company ordered too many first-class carriages and not enough standard-class ones.

Passenger numbers on TransPennine have grown by 50 per cent in four years, reaching 18.5 million last year. The worst overcrowding is on peak services into Manchester and Leeds on which hundreds of people are forced to stand for up to an hour.

TransPennine accepted a new fleet of 51 three-carriage trains only last year but the new trains are already struggling to cope with demand. The company is negotiating with the DfT over the addition of a fourth carriage to at least 20 of the trains.

Both companies are demanding a compensation deal for the new carriages, arguing that accepting them will cause disruption and add to maintenance and running costs. In both cases, the carriages would be bought by rolling stock companies and leased to the operators, with the costs partly underwritten by the Government.

Virgin said that it wanted a two-year extension to its franchise, which runs out in early 2012. A spokesman said: “Introducing these carriages would cause disruption to our business. Giving us an extension to 2014 would allow us two clear years of smooth running to make up for that.

“It is generally accepted that whenever something new is introduced on the railways that affects the business, compensation would be paid.”

He said that if a deal were reached the new carriages could be introduced from 2010. If not, passengers would have to wait until after Virgin’s franchise expired in 2012.

A DfT source said the department would not be forced into accepting a deal with a train company that did not offer value for money for passengers and taxpayers.

Passenger Focus, the government-funded watchdog, said that demands for compensation by private rail companies were delaying the expansion of the network. Anthony Smith, the chief executive, said: “The sight of train companies squabbling with the Government over new trains is deeply unattractive to passengers. They don’t care who provides or runs the new trains, they just want to see action now on adding capacity.”

He said that the existing franchise system had been based on the assumption that there would be no significant growth in rail travel.

“There is a weakness in the system because the Government or Network Rail has to pay compensation when it wants to improve the railways. You see the bizarre situation where a train company is compensated when a station is being upgraded even though the work will benefit everybody.”

The DfT is bracing itself for more disputes with other companies as it seeks to introduce a total of 1,300 new carriages by 2014.

Posted on 01:27 AM | Permalink

Thomson Financial: 25 September 2007

BRUSSELS - The European Commission said it has cleared UK's FirstGroup PLC and Denmark's national railway operator (DSB) proposed acquisition of Denmark's Orestundstag ApS.

The joint venture will operate a railway transport passenger service on the Oresund bridge between Denmark and Sweden.

The commission said the transaction would not not significantly impede effective competition in the European Economic Area.

The EU executive said FirstGroup does not have any activities in the railway passenger transport sector in Denmark or Sweden.

Some of the services provided by DSB in Denmark, (such as the passenger high-frequency rail network connecting the Greater Copenhagen area, the Ystad connection service and some regional railway passenger services), would overlap to a minimal extent with the railway line to be operated by the joint venture.

Given the differences in services offered and geographic areas covered, the commission said they 'cannot be considered interchangeable with the ones to be provided by the joint venture'.

It also said that DSB is already operating the services to be provided by the joint venture in Denmark, so the transaction would not bring any change in the Danish market.

'In Sweden, the proposed transaction would not give rise to any overlap between DSB's and the joint venture's activities given that the joint ventures' activities would be limited to the southern part of Sweden, whereas DSB's activities are focused in the Stockholm area,' the commission said.

First Group and DSB plan to operate trains on the Oresund strait, which has a bridge-tunnel connecting the Danish capital of Copenhagen and the Swedish city of Malmo. It is the longest combined road and rail bridge in Europe.

DSB currently operates train services on the Danish side of the Oresund and will replace Sweden's SJ on the Swedish side after the deal.

See also:

EU OKs Rail Service on Oresund Bridge

Associated Press: 09.25.07

BRUSSELS, Belgium - European Union antitrust regulators on Tuesday approved a joint venture between Denmark's state railway company DSB and British bus and train operator FirstGroup PLC to operate passenger rail services on the Oresund bridge between Denmark and Sweden.

The European Commission said the venture, Oresundstag ApS, would not "significantly impede" competition rules within the 27-nation bloc. The venture foresees running trains between Denmark's city of Helsingoer through Copenhagen to Malmo in Sweden via the Oresund bridge. Traffic has soared to new levels on the 9-mile bridge-and-tunnel link since it opened in 2000 and many use the bridge to commute to work either in Malmo or in Copenhagen.

Posted on 08:20 PM | Permalink

The Guardian: September 24, 2007
Dan Milmo, transport correspondent

· Lazard looks for bidders for rail-leasing firm
· Plump order book likely to outweigh ORR scrutiny

Britain's fleet of high-speed Pendolino trains could become the latest infrastructure asset to fall into the hands of private equity after bankers were appointed to line up buyers for the largest train-leasing company in the country.

Royal Bank of Scotland has hired Lazard to explore options for Angel Trains, owner of the 53 tilting Pendolino trains that are leased by Virgin Trains for its London-Glasgow service. Angel is an important player in the British rail market as the owner of about 5,000 carriages and locomotives, and is valued at £4bn.

RBS confirmed yesterday that it was "investigating options into disposing of Angel Trains" but declined to confirm whether it was in active discussions with potential buyers. It is understood that the bank hired Lazard in order to flush out interest from the private-equity sector, although Barclays and Babcock & Brown, an Australian investment company, are also expected to run the rule over the business. Potential bidders are expected to pay close attention to any tax liabilities attached to acquiring a leasing company.

RBS is exploring the sale of Angel as it prepares to offload Southern Water, another significant infrastructure business on its books, in an auction also valued at £4bn that has attracted several bidders. It is offloading subsidiaries as it closes in on the acquisition of ABN Amro, the Dutch bank.

Angel is considered an attractive asset for private equity because of its large asset base and dependable income stream, which has a predictable revenue line because its trains are leased to operators such as Virgin and South West Trains who have franchises lasting up to 10 years.

However, the stability of the business was put under threat in April when the Competition Commission was asked to investigate the carriage and locomotive hire market by the Office of Rail Regulation. Haydn Abbott, managing director of Angel, said at the time that the two-year investigation could force the postponement of train orders because it would leave question marks hanging over the long-term return that lessors can make from their carriages.

However, the company appears to have persuaded RBS to continue backing train investments and Angel is on the short list for the next generation of high-speed trains to be used on the UK rail network. Another glut of orders is guaranteed from the government after it pledged in the rail white paper this year to acquire a further 1,300 carriages for the British market.

The ORR has questioned whether the healthy profits train-leasing companies make are legal, amid government concern that train operators' costs are being inflated by an anti-competitive market that is dominated by three lessors: Angel, Porterbrook, owned by Abbey, and HSBC Rail. According to the Department for Transport, the train-leasing triumvirate makes about £175m a year in profits.

Chris Bolt, the ORR's chairman, said at the time: "Our review of these markets has identified features that appear to us to prevent, restrict or distort competition - the test for a reference to the Competition Commission. This means that train operating companies may be paying higher prices ... than if competition was more effective."

The dispute has contributed to a delay in Virgin Trains adding 106 carriages to its Pendolino fleet. The train operator is lobbying the DfT for a reduction in franchise payments in order to finance the deal, while Angel has accused the DfT of attempting to interfere with the terms.

Another asset owned by Angel, a fleet of class 158 trains, is also the subject of an attempt to renegotiate franchise terms. FirstGroup wants to extend its First TransPennine franchise in order to finance a deal with Angel for more class 158 trains, which were an unwanted commodity 18 months ago but are now in demand from at least six franchises.

The head of FirstGroup's rail division, Andrew Haines, said in a recent speech that the government should take note of a sentence in the rail white paper that said "passengers will be much less tolerant of delay at any stage".

"I believe this statement applies as much to expectations of the timing of capacity enhancements as it does to the reliability of trains," he said.

Franchise owners are asking for changes in the terms of their contracts in order to finance deals with the likes of Angel just as the government has signalled a change in funding. By 2014 it expects three-quarters of the cost of running the railways to be met by the fare payer.

Posted on 07:39 AM | Permalink

Bloomberg: Sept. 21
By Brian Lysaght

A group representing 300 London businesses said it may be "tough'' to reach an agreement with the U.K. government over how to the £15 billion Crossrail.

Business leaders from the U.K. capital met yesterday with Ruth Kelly, the U.K. transport secretary, and were told that the government wants businesses to find a solution for funding the project by Sept. 25, according to business group London First.

"We are ready to help find a fair way for businesses to contribute to meeting this funding gap, but it will be a tough call to achieve all this in the timeframes being discussed,'' said Jo Valentine, chief executive of the group, in an e-mailed statement.

The railway, first proposed in the 1980s, would connect Heathrow Airport in the west with central London and the Canary Wharf financial district in the east. Supporters say it would ease overcrowding on the 144-year-old London Underground. The meeting yesterday included representatives from Citigroup, Deutsche Bank AG and British Land Co. Plc.

Supporters of the railway have proposed dividing the costs equally between the U.K. government, farepayers and London businesses, which would pay a special tax supplement of as much as 3 percent on business property taxes.

"The support of businesses is still there and I'm confident a solution will be worked out,'' said Michael Snyder, who attended the Kelly meeting as policy chairman at the City of London business district, in an interview today. "The government has got to do it in an organized way.''

A spokesman for the Department of Transport said today that Crossrail may be part of next month's government spending review, which sets out funding priorities.

London Mayor Ken Livingstone told the city's legislative assembly on Sept. 12 that the government would be "very generous'' about funding the railroad.

A bill authorizing the construction of Crossrail is being considered in Parliament and could become law by early 2008.

Posted on 12:13 AM | Permalink

Times of India: 23 Sep 2007

LONDON - There has been a dramatic rise in the number of Asian women, including Indians, committing suicide on just one stretch of a railway track in west London, a train company's internal report has revealed.

The First Great Western manager's report said one third of the total such suicides in England and Wales now happen on the line passing through Southall, which has a very large Asian community and a "disproportionately high number" of the total fatalities in the area were women of Asian origin.

Figures showed that 80 of the 240 rail suicides nationally last year were on that particular stretch of line.

A women's right group has claimed that the suicides were linked to the prevalence of domestic violence in Asian families, Daily Mail reported.

In one of the most horrific cases in 2005, a Sikh housewife, Navjeet Sidhu, 27, jumped in front of a Heathrow Express train at Southall clutching her five-year-old daughter and 23-month-old son. All three died instantly.

Six months later, Sidhu's mother Satwant Kaur killed herself at the same spot. There was no suggestion that she was abused.

An investigation later found she felt she had failed to be a good mother and homemaker.

Hannana Siddiqui, from the women's group Southall Black Sisters, claimed abuse and "sensitive cultural issues" were at the root of the problem.

"The high instance of Asian women suicides is linked to abusive practice within Asian families," she said.

"There is a correlation between these suicides and violence in Asian homes. Psychiatric research has shown there are rarely cases of mental disorders in these cases, suggesting they are the result of social circumstances. These women are often isolated and find it hard to escape," Siddiqui said.

Posted on 06:22 PM | Permalink

Railnews: 19 September 2007
BY MATTHEW GEORGE

Tory 'Vulcan', John Redwood has recommended the break-up of Network Rail, turning track maintenance over to private firms like FirstGroup, slashing investment in the rail network, allowing more freight links to take up track capacity, fitting rubber wheels on trains and building a futuristic 'Magnetic Levitation' system. And to think, they said he was mad ...

Network Rail should be decentralised, allowing train operators to own the track they run on, a Conservative policy group has said.

It also suggested fitting rubber wheels to commuter trains, to improve braking and acceleration and allow 40 trains to run every hour, rather than the current 24. And there should be a serious look at the feasibility and costs of introducing high-speed, high-tech Maglev trains.

The Economic Competitiveness Policy Group was chaired by former Cabinet Minister John Redwood and Simon Wolfson, the chief executive of Next fashion group. Conservative leader David Cameron set it up in January 2006, but is not bound by any of the think-tank recommendations.

The report says that, because Network Rail was given Treasury guarantees for very substantial borrowings, and access to Consolidated Fund revenues, any real private sector financial discipline had been removed. Despite a surge in extra administrative, consultancy and renewal costs, there has been no noticeable shift upwards in either railway capacity or growth compared to the late 1990s.

It states: “We recommend that an incoming Conservative government should decentralise Network Rail to allow for greater benchmarking in the industry, and to open up the potential for track and train services to be run together.

“We also recommend that the provision and use of track should be contestable: if someone wishes to build new track, they should be able to do so, subject to planning permission.

“Clearly, they should also be able to interconnect this new track with the existing system and, if charging and timetable arrangements for such an interconnection cannot be agreed upon voluntarily, arbitration would be compulsory.

“Most of the money for track improvement and maintenance should come from the private sector.”

The report proposes expanding the freight railway, “primarily by allowing and encouraging a large number of short links from the existing railways into the industrial estates and ports”.

It suggests looking to best practice abroad to improve the commuter railway, such as the rubber wheels used on the Paris Metro to give trains extra grip, allowing them to accelerate more smoothly and brake more quickly.

“It has been suggested that, if we introduced these to British commuter trains, the railway could run a much more effective service of 40 trains per hour, an increase in capacity of about 65 per cent.

“Lengthening trains does not improve service frequency: running more trains does, which makes trains more attractive to busy people.”

The policy group report ends: “Finally, we have looked at high-speed train options for the UK, and have concluded that an incoming Conservative government should explore the feasibility of implementing the new Maglev technology, which offers the opportunity of far faster inter-city travel and hence a more effective challenge to the aeroplane.

“This should surely be preferred to spending further large sums of money on attempts to create a limited number of express facilities on our already congested and overburdened track, at the expense of other rail services.”

Posted on 09:50 AM | Permalink

BBC News: 18 September 2007

The managing director of rail franchise First Great Western (FGW), Alison Forster, has been moved to a new post after the company's poor performance.

Alison Forster - A rail watchdog has called services on First Great Western "abysmal"

She has presided over poor punctuality and a row about overcrowding, which led to a fares strike by a small group of passengers.

She will now become Rail Safety and Performance Director at First Group.

Andrew Haines, the group's UK Rail managing director, will take over daily operations at First Great Western.

Andrew Haines - in with the new

Customer complaints

Earlier this year a rail watchdog had called for the government to review the FGW franchise, saying it was an "abysmal service".

London TravelWatch, in its plea to the government this summer, cited late trains, overcrowding and poor customer care.

Earlier this year FGW said it was working to improve its service, but that it was not breaching franchise conditions.

And in June a spokesman for FGW said it was "aware our performance has been poor and we have already apologised for this".

'Sustained improvements'

Moir Lockhead, FirstGroup's Chief Executive, said: "In recent months Alison and her team have been addressing the challenges faced by the new franchise and their efforts have resulted in improvements in our performance."

He also said that Mr Haines had helped deliver "sustained improvements" at First TransPennine Express, First ScotRail and First Capital Connect, the group's newest franchise.

"At each franchise punctuality and reliability has reached over 90% in recent months," said Mr Lockhead.

He also said that FGW and Network Rail were investing nearly £1bn to improve overall performance in the region.

See also:

WILL NEW RAIL BOSS IMPROVE OUR TRAINS?

Bath Chronicle: 20 September 2007

Bath Mp Don Foster has called for the new man in charge of the west's rail firm to dramatically improve the performance of train services.First Great Western has moved its managing director Alison Forster into a new post after the company endured a storm of criticism.

Ms Forster's three-and-a-half-year tenure has been marred by poor punctuality and public rows about overcrowding.

Now she is to be made rail safety and performance director at FirstGroup, FGW's parent company.

Andrew Haines, the group's UK Rail managing director, will take over daily operations at FGW.

Passenger complaints reached their peak at the beginning of 2007 when 2,000 rail users staged a fares boycott on trains over cuts in services and rolling stock.

The protest was organised by the More Trains Less Strain (MTLS) group, formed by passengers in Bath and Frome frustrated by poor train services.

Mr Foster said the change in personnel was of little importance to the people of Bath, and what mattered was that the company now delivered the sort of service people deserved.

He said: "Since First Great Western took over the franchise the service has been pretty appalling. Promises have been made and not delivered. What matters is that the new person in charge makes sure that these promises are now stuck to, and we get the service that we need and deserve."

MTLS spokesman Tony Ambrose said they would shed no tears for Ms Forster.

"Things have not improved on her watch. We still have one in four trains late. First is only just beginning to listen. The Government is also a player in this game and they have to renegotiate this franchise," he said.

Earlier this year rail watchdog London TravelWatch weighed in and called for the Government to review the FGW franchise, saying it was an "abysmal" service.

Moir Lockhead, FirstGroup's chief executive, said Mr Haines had helped deliver sustained improvements at First TransPennine Express, First ScotRail and First Capital Connect.

"At each franchise, punctuality and reliability has reached over 90 per cent in recent months," he said.

He emphasised that FGW and Network Rail were investing nearly £1bn to improve performance in the region.

Mike Greedy, of independent consumer watchdog Passenger Focus, said: "Passengers really won't mind who is running the company as long as they see improvements."

See also:

Rail boss shunted into a siding

There’s nothing like a good scapegoat. It turns out that Alison Forster, the managing director of First Great Western, has been moved to a different role, following the rail franchise’s continued poor performance.

The operator, which runs trains between London and the South West, has taken huge amounts of flak from customers for its poor punctuality, overcrowding and customer care, and was criticised recently by rail watchdog London TravelWatch for its ‘abysmal service’.

Regular readers of the MT website should know of our writers’ first-hand experience of First Great Western, which includes seeing police being called to an overcrowded bank holiday train to deal with a fist-fight over a mix-up with seat reservations. To that we can now add last weekend’s debacle, in which one of our staff had to stand and watch as the last service of the day pulled away from Paddington, taking his reserved seat with it, while First Great Western staff struggled to work out what they had done with his tickets.

Sadly, these aren’t isolated incidents. You could therefore argue that Forster should be the one to shoulder the blame. But is it really her fault? Let’s hope not. She will now become the First Group’s director of rail safety.

See also:

FirstGroup moves MD of under-fire Great Western UK rail franchise

Hemscott: 20 Sept 07

LONDON (Thomson Financial) - FirstGroup PLC has moved the managing director of its much-criticised Great Western rail franchise to another job.

The bus and train firm said it has transferred Alison Forster to the newly created position of safety and performance director for the group's rail operations, which also include First Capital Connect, First Transpennine Express, First Scotrail, Hull Trains and freight operator GB Railfreight.

It said in a statement that Andrew Haines, managing director of the group's UK rail division, will take responsibility for day-to-day operations at First Great Western (FGW) until a permanent replacement for Forster is found.

A First spokesman was unable to say whether Forster was given the choice of remaining in her current job. 'My understanding was that she was offered the opportunity to take this important new role and accepted it,' he said.

First has faced heavy criticism for the performance of FGW, which runs services from London to Bristol, Wales and the West Country.

The franchise came bottom in official performance figures for long distance services in the year to the end of March 2007 after only just over 75 pct of its trains turned up within the permitted 10 minutes of their scheduled arrival time.

First had to apologise to passengers in May after a national passenger survey showed satisfaction with FGW had fallen 6 pct points to 72 pct.

Passengers in the south west protested against sweeping service cuts and reductions in rolling stock that First introduced after taking over services formerly run by National Express Group PLC's Wessex franchise.

The outcry forced First to review the service reductions and to introduce more carriages.

First later said the situation had improved and the spokesman said today that figures showed 82 pct of FGW trains had arrived on time in the four weeks to Aug 18.

Infrastructure group Network Rail (NR) has also faced criticism from the UK rail regulator for the poor performance on the Great Western main line.

In a letter to FGW on Sept 3, the Office of the Rail Regulator (ORR) said it had expressed 'serious concern' to NR about the extent to which delays attributable to the track and signals operator were running ahead of levels projected in an improvement plan drawn up jointly by NR and FGW.

Posted on 11:07 PM | Permalink

Associated Press: September 19, 2007

PARIS: Employees of France's national rail network called a strike for Oct. 17 to protest President Nicolas Sarkozy's push to do away with their special privileges in the pension system.

The CGT, Sud, CFTC, FO and CGC unions plan to take part in the strike, the CGT union announced Wednesday. Three other unions have decided to consult with members before making a decision.

The strike will begin Oct. 16 at 8 p.m. (1800 GMT) and will continue the following day. Unions left open the possibility that it could last beyond that.

Sarkozy said this week that he wanted to do away with the coveted retirement privileges that some state employees enjoy, calling the benefits too expensive, outdated and unfair.

Employees of the SNCF rail network, for example, can retire at age 55 — while train conductors can retire even earlier, at age 50. French workers are generally eligible to retire starting at age 60.

A previous plan to trim special retirement packages for a swath of public employees fed weeks of paralyzing strikes in 1995 that unions still point to as a warning

Posted on 10:57 PM | Permalink

Bloomberg: September 20, 2007
By Andreas Cremer

Deutsche Bahn AG, Germany's state-owned railway, may face new strikes after labor unions representing railway staff failed to agree on a joint strategy to pursue higher wages.

The GDL engineers' union "refused to accept'' proposed terms for talks on a new remuneration system, Norbert Hansen, head of the fellow Transnet union, told reporters after joint discussions with management in Berlin today. "The GDL's conduct is completely irresponsible.'' New walkouts before the union's planned Sept. 30 deadline "could now happen.''

Relations between the three main unions representing staff at Deutsche Bahn soured earlier this year after the GDL rejected a 4.5 percent pay increase accepted by fellow unions Transnet and GDBA. The GDL held limited strikes in July and August to press its own claim for a raise of as much as 31 percent for some 20,000 train drivers and 10,000 ticketing staff.

The Frankfurt-based GDL, after entering mediation, last month dropped a demand for separate talks with Deutsche Bahn and pledged to cooperate with fellow unions on negotiating a new pay system. The GDL "effectively buried'' that position today, GDBA head Klaus-Dieter Hommel told reporters.

The two mediators, former Saxony state premier, Kurt Biedenkopf, and Heiner Geissler, a one-time general secretary of Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats, were faced with "an insurmountable task'' to narrow dissent between management and unions, Hommel said. The latest rift among the unions "hasn't made their task any easier,'' he said.

'Wrong Concepts'

Deutsche Bahn's human resources director, Margret Suckale,accused the GDL's leadership of keeping to "wrong concepts'' in wage bargaining, according to an e-mailed statement.

Train drivers in Germany earn about 1,500 euros a month net on average, less than their counterparts in neighbouring France or Switzerland, according to the union. GDL wants gross monthly pay to rise to at least 2,500 euros and weekly hours to be cut to 40 from currently 41.

Hansen said Transnet and GDBA will now continue their own talks with Deutsche Bahn on future payment rules. If GDL manages to secure a bigger raise than the 4.5 percent from the company,Transnet and GDBA may follow by seeking higher compensation for their members too.

"Of course, members will then expect to get similarraises,'' Hansen said. "After all, it's not about what we want but what our members expect.''

GDL members voted Aug. 6 to stage the first open-ended railway strikes in Germany since 1992 before mediators werecalled in to de-escalate the conflict. All-out strikes by theGDL could cause revenue losses of 500 million euros ($685million) a day, according to the Berlin-based DIW economic institute.

See also:

Bahn Says New Strikes Possible After Union Split

Javno.com: September 20

Deutsche Bahn said that new strikes were possible after a split between its unions dimmed chances of securing a new wage agreement.

Reuters German rail operator Deutsche Bahn said on Thursday that new strikes were possible after a split between its unions dimmed chances of securing a new wage agreement by an end-of-month deadline.

After months of disruptive walkouts, Deutsche Bahn and its unions agreed last month to hold talks on a new wage deal with the aim of reaching a compromise by the end of September.

But on Thursday, the Transnet and GDBA unions said their attempts to cooperate with another union representing train drivers had collapsed.

"Naturally we now recognise that there is a chance" of new strikes, Bahn personnel chief Margret Sukale told reporters in Berlin.

The 34,000-member GDL drivers' union had previously refused to sign up to a wage deal agreed by the two other unions that foresaw salary increases of 4.5 percent. The September talks were aimed at getting a single deal for all three unions.

GDL rejected sharp criticism from the other unions and said it planned to continue the wage talks.

The drivers say they are underpaid given the high level of responsibility required in the job and compared with drivers in other European countries.

They staged walkouts in recent months that disrupted passenger and freight services. The strikes have come at an awkward time for the company, which is on track to be partly privatised by 2009.

Posted on 08:37 PM | Permalink

Thomson Financial: September 20, 2007

LONDON -- Rail freight operator EWS has won a new five-year contract from Imerys to haul china clay from Cornwall to locations across the UK, it announced in a statement.

Under the terms of the new contract, Imerys will significantly increase the volume of china clay moved by rail through the introduction of longer trains, EWS said.

The new contract, the value of which was not disclosed, will be implemented in phases during the autumn, with the final phase being completed next year.

In June, German state-owned rail operator Deutsche Bahn launched a takeover of EWS, which is owned by Canadian National Railways Co, New Zealand merchant bank Fay Richwhite and US investment groups Berkshire Partners and Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

The deal, worth an estimated 250 million sterling, is awaiting regulatory approval.

Posted on 09:03 AM | Permalink

RMT: September 12 2007

TODAY’S CALL by the TUC for a referendum on the re-named EU constitution reflects the wishes of the vast majority of trade unionists, specialist transport union RMT said in Brighton today.

"Nearly three-quarters of trade unionists want a referendum, and today's decision underlines that the progressive movement in Britain is demanding the vote that was promised two years ago," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.
 
"This is the same constitution that Congress rejected two years ago, and delegates have today rightly identified the threat it poses as a Trojan horse for unfettered privatisation.
 
 "It would mark a further transfer of power to unelected mandarins in Brussels and undermine democratic advances fought for by working people over centuries.
 
"If a referendum is good enough for the people of Ireland, it should be good enough for the people of Britain.
 
"We are told we have a listening government, and if that is the case it should take serious note of the voice of organised labour, and allow the democratic vote we were promised," Bob Crow said.

Posted on 09:33 AM | Permalink

The Guardian: September 10, 2007
Jackie Ashley

The proposed treaty is the constitution revived in all but name. Labour should honour its promise of a public vote

The campaign to persuade Gordon Brown to hold a referendum on the new EU treaty is gaining force. The drums are rolling, time is short and this choice cannot be fudged. Immediately after next month's EU summit meeting, he and his colleagues have to decide whether to accept the treaty and ram it through the Commons, using his personal authority, or risk a crisis in relations with other European leaders, and the future of the treaty, by throwing caution to the winds and agreeing that the people have a right to vote directly.

Fighting for a referendum are "usual suspect" Labour MPs, including Gisela Stuart, Frank Field and Kate Hoey; the still Eurosceptic Conservatives, led on this issue by that arch-Brusselsphobe William Hague; and now some of the big voices in the trade unions, led by the GMB and the RMT. Their motives are mixed and, to the foreign secretary David Miliband, suspect too.

It's easy to see why the prime minister may not want a referendum. Surely, here is the moment to show himself a committed European and to reassert the powers of parliament, by pushing it all through the Commons. Yet to my own surprise, the more I look at the proposed new treaty, the more I find myself in the referendum camp. They may be a strange alliance, from rightwing newspaper types to anti-Brown leftists, from dissident Labour MPs to the UK Independence party. But those calling for a national choice are absolutely right and, if they are listened to, will strengthen not weaken the government. Brown and Miliband need to think very carefully before trying to bolt the door on them.

Let's start with the basics. Brown's case to the country has been that he offers a genuinely fresh start, a "new politics" that eschews deviousness in favour of plain dealing. His strong performance in the polls is based on people hoping that's true, plus his highly competent early moves. He has won sceptics round - a bit - by talking plainly, by sticking with early promises to tell parliament first about new policies and by working through cabinet. But it is all fragile, and there are millions of people who haven't quite made up their minds about him. Lose them, and he'll lose the election.

The government promised a referendum on the original treaty. That caused much irritation in Brussels, and yet even the very pro-European Tony Blair decided it was the right thing to do. Only the revolt of French and Dutch voters got him off the hook. The big problem for the government now is that, to avoid accusations of bad faith, it would have to show that the new treaty is significantly less important than the old one. And at the moment, that isn't true. Apart from trivial changes, such as the use of symbols and music, it is overwhelmingly similar. Many of the key figures in Europe actually celebrate this.

Listen to Germany's Angela Merkel: "The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact." What about Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the aristocratic former French president who was in charge of the original treaty? He told a London conference that although Britain, France and the Netherlands had demanded the word "constitution" be eliminated, all the key elements were still there: "All the earlier proposals will be in the new text but will be hidden or disguised in some way." Spain's prime minister José Zapatero? "We have not let a single substantial point of the constitutional treaty go."

There are plenty of other examples from across the EU. And if you judge the treaty by the core where-does-power-lie questions, they are surely right. The change in voting includes the end of Britain's veto in 61 areas. The EU court of justice gets new powers over policing and criminal justice. There would be a new EU diplomatic service and someone who would be, in effect, Europe's foreign minister. Though national parliaments do get very limited new rights to scrutinise what the Brussels commission proposes, they are weak and balanced by a formal insistence that national parliaments should actively contribute "to the good functioning of the union".

Now, as it happens, I approve of much of this. To make the larger EU function better, we do have to give up some veto powers, for instance; and after the mayhem of the last US-dominated decade, it would be a good thing if the EU exercised more influence in world affairs. But what I can't manage to do is to pretend that all of the above is somehow unimportant, and does not add up to a new constitutional treaty. So, a question: how likely is it that the British people, who seem to be overwhelmingly in favour of a referendum, will be persuaded despite the known facts, and the cheerfully unhelpful contributions of Merkel, Giscard, Zapatero and all, that this is a mere tidying-up exercise that can be left to parliament?

Not very. It is true that there are British opt-outs. But as the former Europe minister Keith Vaz has pointed out, they are the same ones as in the original treaty. Nor are they unequivocal. Vaz, like David Blunkett and other mainstream MPs, has concluded that the argument against a referendum is lost. And, to cap it all, John Hutton has promised that "if there is some significant constitutional arrangement that would affect our relationship with the European Union ... there should be a proper referendum."

So Brown is under huge pressure, and not just from stroppy union leaders who call the new treaty "anti-labour to the core". Brown has a reputation as moderately Eurosceptic, based mainly on his hostility to joining the euro, which has won him newspaper support but is likely to cause him increasing difficulty on the continent. Accepting a referendum would not be risk-free. Other leaders would be furious. At home, it would unleash hostility from hostile Blairites who have so far bitten their tongues.

Above all, consider the alternative. Parliament doesn't actually get the right to properly scrutinise the treaty, since parliament can't amend it and send it back for second thoughts. So the idea is that in the teeth of public hostility, and on the back of a threadbare, widely ridiculed argument, he should ram this through Westminster? Not only would that be wrong in principle, it would severely damage Brown's hard-won reputation for straight dealing and give the Tories the opening they've been searching for. Come on, Gordon.

Losing a referendum would be a political embarrassment. Refusing one would be a political disaster.

Posted on 07:41 AM | Permalink

Daily Telegraph: 10/09/2007
By Alistair Osborne, Business Editor

Britain's rail regulator has defended its decision to give Network Rail a further two months to improve its performance on the First Great Western routes before it considers enforcement action and a fine.

The ORR says hold-ups caused by Network Rail are up to 25pc more than projected

The Office of Rail Regulation hauled Network Rail's chief executive, Iain Coucher, into a meeting last month to explain why delays attributable to the infrastructure operator were running ahead of a joint plan it had put together with the train operator.

Frequent delays on First Great Western services from London Paddington - exacerbated by the botched introduction of a new timetable - have caused howls of protest from passengers.

Last month, in its quarterly monitor of Network Rail's performance to June 23, the ORR said the First Great Western train service "continues to suffer from very high levels of delays attributed to Network Rail". Pointing to a series of "major incidents", the ORR said hold-ups caused by Network Rail were 15pc-25pc more than projected in the "joint performance improvement plan" - a situation since aggravated by July's floods.

Describing Network Rail's performance as "exceptionally disappointing", ORR said it had recently met with Mr Coucher "to seek assurance that everything possible is being done to turn the situation round quickly ".

In a letter last week to Alison Forster, First Great Western's managing director, the ORR said it had made clear that unless Network Rail cut delays "or convinced us that it was taking every possible step that it reasonably could to do so, we would have to consider the possibility of enforcement action".

The letter went on to say, however, that "in the light of what we heard at that meeting, and of further written responses from Network Rail, we have decided to hold back from that course for the time being".

Industry sources said the ORR's apparent backtracking reinforced views expressed by Gywneth Dunwoody MP, chairman of the Commons Transport Select Committee, that "when it comes to enforcing the licensing conditions of Network Rail, the ORR has got significant powers, but it appears meek and reluctant to use them".

Chris Bolt, the ORR chairman, denied that the First Great Western situation supported such a view. "Absolutely not," he said. "It is entirely consistent with our approach which goes through an escalation process. This is the last step before there is enforcement."

He pointed out that the ORR had only last week fined Network Rail £2.4m for weak planning and execution of the Portsmouth resignalling scheme.

Sources close to First Great Western said the ORR had effectively put Network Rail on probation.

FGW goes back to the future

First Great Western, the embattled train group owned by First Group, is to ditch its modern trains and replace them with 30-year-old Intercity 125s.

The move will see the company phase out 14 Adelante sets which have 280 seats each in favour of 10 older, yet refurbished, pieces of rolling stock that each seat 515 passengers.

The company said it was making the switch to increase capacity as well as reliability. It runs services from London to cities such as Cardiff and Bristol.

Posted on 07:36 AM | Permalink

Sunday Telegraph: 09/09/2007
By Robert Watts, Whitehall Correspondent

Gordon Brown could give ground on a referendum on the European Union treaty, according to a Cabinet minister. John Hutton, the Secretary of State for Business and Enterprise, said that the Government would wait to see the fine print of the treaty before a public vote is ruled out.

Mr Hutton said the new treaty posed "issues that are of real concern" about "economic and foreign policy sovereignty" and that it was vital that Britain's "red line" issues - concerning national sovereignty - were enshrined in the final document.

"We've got to wait for the October [EU] council obviously, to make sure all the agreements we've secured are properly and fully reflected in the text. But if there is some significant constitutional arrangement that would affect our relationship with the European Union … there should be a proper referendum."

When asked if the Government would win a referendum on the treaty, seen by most commentators as unlikely, Mr Hutton would only reply: "Well, I think so. I'm an optimist."

Mr Hutton's comments, given in an interview to be shown on GMTV this morning, were last night interpreted in Westminster as more of a gaffe than evidence that the Prime Minister was about to embark on an embarrassing volte-face. Nevertheless, his intervention is likely to be seized on by campaigners demanding a vote.

Last week, The Sunday Telegraph revealed that Mr Brown was determined to rule out a referendum after securing the support of key Cabinet colleagues. Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, who as foreign secretary in 2004 convinced Tony Blair to promise a referendum on the EU constitution is now understood to be "fully behind Gordon".

Nevertheless, Labour rebels claim that about 100 of the party's MPs may vote against the treaty when it is put to the Commons.

This weekend the Government is embroiled in heated last-ditch negotiations with trade union leaders ahead of next week's TUC conference.

On Wednesday afternoon delegates are set to vote on whether there should be a referendum. Mr Brown's advisers are negotiating over possible concessions that may persuade them to drop the motion.

The union movement is fiercely divided on the treaty. Brendan Barber, the TUC general secretary, is determined that the motion be dropped. However, four major unions that bankroll Labour are demanding a referendum: the GMB general workers' union and three public sector unions - the RMT, Unison and Unite.

Meanwhile, a senior Brussels official accused Europe's politicians of backtracking on past commitments to openness by conducting negotiations on the new EU treaty in secret. Margot Wallstrom, European Commission vice-president, said the EU appeared to have returned to drawing up new treaties in confidential talks between lawyers and bureaucrats.

"We have backtracked on the ideal of openness," she told The Sunday Telegraph. "We have returned to the traditional approach."

Popular demand for a referendum continues to grow. An online campaign launched three days ago, called simply Iwantareferendum.com, already has more than 4,300 supporters.

A petition organised by The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Telegraph has already attracted 86,932 signatures.

Posted on 08:37 AM | Permalink

The Guardian: September 7, 2007
Dan Milmo, transport correspondent

Management overhaul at FGW and Network Rail Service so bad commuters refused to pay their fares

Britain's most troubled rail route has undergone a management shake-up that has seen significant changes at the companies responsible for railway services and for track maintenance on the Great Western line.
First Great Western, the franchise operator that runs trains on one of the UK's oldest routes, and Network Rail, which is in charge of keeping the route in good working order, have put new executives in overall charge of their operations. The changes have not been made public, but FGW and Network Rail both confirmed them yesterday.

FGW attracted unwanted headlines in January when passengers in the Bristol and Bath area staged a fare strike in protest at overcrowding caused by the operator mishandling the introduction of a new timetable and the transfer of a train depot. FirstGroup, FGW's owner, apologised publicly for the errors. Its punctuality figures have also caused misery for customers on key services into London's Paddington station. Network Rail, which is in charge of maintaining and upgrading an ageing route that stretches from London to Bristol, Penzance and Hereford, was blamed for the delays.

FirstGroup confirmed yesterday that FGW's managing director, Alison Forster, would be focusing "temporarily" on FGW's high-speed train services and the responsibilities of FirstGroup's head of rail, Andrew Haines, would be expanded to cover FGW for the first time. FirstGroup also confirmed that two executives had been appointed to run FGW's Wessex and Thames Valley services, with John Curley taking charge in the south-west and Mike Carroll running commuter services in and out of Paddington.

A FirstGroup spokesman said Ms Forster would continue to have responsibility for FGW, but Mr Haines would have an "over-arching" role now that the franchise had been added to his areas of responsibility - which include FirstGroup's First TransPennine, First Capital Connect and First ScotRail franchises.

Network Rail confirmed that Robbie Burns, the route director for the Great Western zone, had been appointed to a new company-wide role of major programme director. It is understood that FirstGroup had been urging Network Rail to change its management on the Great Western route for some time. In an internal announcement to staff, Network Rail said: "The appointment of one of our best route directors to this role demonstrates the seriousness with which we see this challenge. Robbie's operational knowledge, along with his experience and background in major construction projects will be essential to our success." Mr Burns will be replaced by David Ward, a Network Rail route director.

The Office of Rail Regulation recently described Network Rail's record as "awful". Anthony Smith, chief executive of the rail user watchdog Passenger Focus, said: "A fresh management approach is welcome. Clearly, looking at the passenger satisfaction scores for First Great Western, the train company and Network Rail have a lot to do. However, passengers will believe it when they see improvements."

Posted on 09:19 AM | Permalink

BBC News: 6 September 2007

Higher interest rates, fuel bills and the costs of bidding for acquisitions and new franchises hit Arriva's profits in the first six months of this year.

The Cross Country franchise covers 1,600 miles

The transport group's pre-tax profit for the half-year to 30 June fell to £47.3m from £48m for a year earlier.

This year, Arriva has won the Cross Country rail franchise from Virgin as well as making a number of acquisitions in continental Europe.

The Cross Country franchise runs from Scotland to the south of England.

The new Cross Country deal will also include Nottingham-Cardiff and Birmingham-Stansted services.

European acquisitions include 85% of a train company in Lower Saxony in Germany, a bus business near Prague in the Czech Republic, and a bus company in the Spanish capital, Madrid.

See also:

Arriva poised to bid for Chiltern

Guardian: September 7, 2007
Dan Milmo

Arriva, recent winner of the Cross Country rail franchise, stated its interest yesterday in acquiring its rival operator Chiltern Railways. The franchise, which operates from London-Marylebone to Birmingham and Stratford-upon-Avon, was named Operator of the Year at the National Rail Awards yesterday. Chiltern's owner, the fund manager Henderson, has appointed KPMG to advise on the potential sale of the business, which it inherited in last year's £950m acquisition of John Laing.

David Martin, Arriva chief executive, said: "If a formal sale process started then clearly we would be interested and our investors would be disappointed if we were not interested." Arriva announced a small increase in first-half operating profit to £52.9m yesterday.

Posted on 02:30 PM | Permalink

UK Press Gazette: 6 September 2007
By Patrick Smith

An Evening Standard photographer covering this week's London Underground strike was attacked outside the offices of Tube administrator Metronet by an unnamed man who "went berserk" without warning.

Glenn Copus was outside Metronet's central London headquarters on High Holborn on Tuesday morning where protesters from the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) were picketing and handing out leaflets in support of the three-day strike.

Copus said a man emerged from the building around 8.30am and assaulted a cameraman from an independent TV company, damaging his camera, and then barged into Copus.

"Someone came out of the building with a pile of books in his hands," said Copus. "He whacked the cameraman and his camera, I went to take a picture of it and he charged at me and rammed me into a shop. He came at me wailing like a banshee; he just went berserk.

"An RMT official pulled him off me; I was trying to protect my camera and he just went off ranting and raving. He was saying ‘why have you done this?'

"I don't think he was the full shilling."

Copus was unharmed in the scuffle and said he was not going to press charges. Police arrived soon after but were not thought to have got the man's name.

A spokesperson for Metronet said the company was investigating the incident, but does not know the man's identity.

Evening Standard photographer Glenn Copus is attacked by a mystery man

Copus tries to protect his camera from the 'wailing banshee'

An RMT official grabs the man who attacked Copus

Posted on 01:59 PM | Permalink

RMT: September 4 2007

MORE THAN three-quarters of Londoners want future Tube maintenance to be carried out in-house by London Underground, a poll commissioned by the network’s biggest union reveals.

Striking Metronet workers are among RMT members and supporters lobbying the Department of Transport from 11:30 to 13:00, calling for an end to the disastrous part-privatisation of the Tube and for the return of maintenance work in-house.

The ICM omnibus poll of 1,028 Londoners questioned between August 1 and 26, commissioned by RMT, asked who should carry out the future London Underground maintenance of track, signals, stations and trains.

Some 76 per cent believed it should be carried out by London Underground, while just 13 per cent believed it should be done by a private company. Six per cent said it didn't matter and six per cent said they did not know.

"This poll result shows that the vast majority of Londoners agree with the people who do the work that Tube maintenance belongs in-house," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today ahead of this morning's lobby.

"The collapse of Metronet gives us the opportunity to bring the majority of infrastructure work back home into London Underground.

"This is what Tube workers and RMT want, it is what Londoners and their Mayor want, and it remains the only sensible solution," Bob Crow.

Delegates representing six million working people at the Trades Union Congress, which opens in Brighton on September 10, are expected to back calls by Tube unions TSSA and RMT for Tube maintenance to be taken back in-house.

The Congress is expected to initiate a campaign to urge the government to support London Mayor Ken Livingstone's desire for infrastructure work to be taken under direct London Underground control

ends

Notes to editors:

The ICM Omnibus poll of 1,028 Londoners between August 1 and 26, asked:

Do you think that future London Underground maintenance of the track, signals, stations and trains should be carried out by...?

A Private Company: 13%

London Underground itself: 76%

It doesn't matter which of the two does the maintenance 6%

Don't Know: 6%

A full breakdown of respondents is available from the RMT media office

TUC Congress Motion

Motion 42, on the railway industry, from TSSA, includes:

Congress considers the continuing debacle of maintenance undertaken by Metronet on the London Underground under the public-private partnership must be addressed urgently and calls for all the work to be taken back in-house as a priority.

An amendment from RMT would add:

"Metronet's collapse could jeopardise Tube services and London's preparations for the Olympic Games. Congress urges the Government to support the Mayor's desire for infrastructure work to be taken under direct London Underground control and urges the General Council to support an early conference to campaign for this position."

Motions can be read in full at http://www.tuc.org.uk/extras/congress2007finalagenda.pdf

Posted on 11:57 AM | Permalink

Financial Times: September 4 2007
By Chris Bryant

Eurostar set a record time of just over two hours on its inaugural journey on Britain’s new high-speed rail line carrying trains from Paris to St Pancras station in London.

The train, which raced along at speeds of up to 202mph, took two hours, three minutes and 39 seconds, cutting the previous journey time by 32 minutes.

It was the first time a train had run from Paris to London along a new 24-mile stretch of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, now known as High Speed 1, linking Ebbsfleet in Kent to St Pancras.

Eurostar removed heavy food service trolleys and ran only half-full in a bid to break the psychological two-hour barrier, but a speed restriction on the line near Calais meant it narrowly failed.

When regular services are switched from Waterloo to St Pancras in November the journey will take a more sedate two hours and 15 minutes, at a maximum speed of 186mph. Eurostar hopes the time-saving will help it increase passenger numbers from 8.3m this year to 10m by 2010.

From November passengers will be able to buy through-tickets from 145 stations around Britain to the continent, with return fares from Manchester to Paris starting at £84.

“Today marks Britain’s entry into the European high-speed rail club,” Richard Brown, chief executive of Eurostar, said as the train arrived in St Pancras.

The completed 68-mile British section of high-speed track from the Channel Tunnel crosses over the Medway viaduct and under the Thames, before looping underground to the east of the City of London to emerge at St Pancras.

The total cost of the project, which includes the redevelopment of St Pancras and construction of new stations at Ebbsfleet and Stratford, east London, was £5.8bn.

Neil Meare, who drove the train on the British side of the Channel, admitted that Britain’s failure to complete its high-speed rail link had been a source of embarrassment in the past.

In 1993 François Mitterrand, then French president, famously quipped that the slow crawl through southern Britain – at speeds as low as 60mph – at least gave passengers a chance to admire the landscape.

“Now the French people can finally forget about Waterloo,” Guillaume Pépy, chairman of Eurostar, said before the inaugural run.

London and Continental Railways, the company responsible for High Speed 1, expects it to attract £10bn of investment to run-down parts of east London.

High-speed domestic services will begin in 2009, cutting the journey time between Ebbsfleet and St Pancras to 17 minutes.

During the 2012 Olympic Games the line will carry high-speed shuttle services between St Pancras and a new station at the Olympic site in Stratford.

“This project is about much more than just transporting passengers from London to the continent,” Rob Holden, LCR chief executive, said. “It’s about the creation of a piece of infrastructure that will be a catalyst for the regeneration of some of the most deprived areas of Britain.”

Speed king

• New record time between Paris and London of two hours, three minutes and 39 seconds.
• From November 14 the journey will take two hours and 15 minutes, 20 minutes faster than present, at a top speed of 186mph.
• High-speed domestic services from a new station at Ebbsfleet will begin in 2009. The journey to St Pancras will take 17 minutes at speeds of up to 140mph.
• Fares from St Pancras to Paris will continue to cost from £59.
• Through-tickets to the continent from 145 stations around the country will be available from November.

Posted on 12:00 AM | Permalink

Hochtief: 05 Sep 2007

Berlin - German rail company Deutsche Bahn said Wednesday it was selling a property unit to a consortium comprising civil engineer Hochtief and property investor Redwood Grove International.

The unit, Aurelis, mainly owns inner-city land and buildings which are not needed for German rail operations.

After Wednesday's approval from Bahn's board, a contract is to be signed soon on the 1.6-billion-euro (2.2-billion-dollar) transaction, which enables Bahn to reduce debt.

The new owners said they would be obtaining prime sites in Berlin, Frankfurt, Munich, Hamburg, Cologne, Dusseldorf and Stuttgart and could now offer sites to investors for redevelopment as shops or offices with Hochtief as builder and property manager.

Posted on 11:52 PM | Permalink

Reuters: 5 Sep 2007
By Shapi Shacinda

LUSAKA - A huge consignment of Zambian copper destined for export is stuck in transit following a three-week strike by unionized employees of the Tanzania-Zambia Railways (Tazara), officials said on Wednesday.

Tresphore Chileshe, the president of the Workers Union of Tazara-Zambia (WUTAZ), said some copper was stuck at Kapiri Mposhi, 200km north of Lusaka, because of the slow movement of cargo trains due to the strike.

Chileshe told Reuters that 1,400 striking workers had refused to return to work, forcing management officials to drive cargo trains carrying copper to the port of Dar-Es-Salaam in Tanzania.

"Most of it (copper) is at Kapiri Mposhi because there is slow movement of cargo trains as our members are on strike. There is also congestion for other exports," Chileshe said.

Copper is carried on trucks from the southern African nation's mineral-rich copper belt to Kapiri Mposhi where workers reload the metal onto trains.

"At the moment management workers are the ones offloading the trucks, but they are quite slow because that is not their area (of expertise)," he added.

Workers are demanding a pay hike of $208 per month across the board, while management has offered no increase, Chileshe said. Lowest paid workers at Tazara earn $100 per month.

Chileshe said Tazara workers in Tanzania had also threatened to join the strike.

"It is a difficult situation, and we hope management will offer something. We have a meeting at the Tazara headquarters in Dar-Es-Salaam this Friday and we hope we can resolve this impasse," Chileshe said.

Zambia's Transport and Communications Minister Sarah Sayifwanda told Reuters that the government was concerned with the slow movement of copper and that it had stepped in to help management and the union to break the deadlock.

"There is a step forward we have taken to help resolve the strike. We are very concerned with the situation and we want to ensure things get back to normal," the minister said in response to a question on the slow movement of copper.

Zambia owns 67 percent of Tazara, while Tanzania holds the balance. The railway was constructed by the Chinese in the 1970s as an alternative route for Zambian copper after sanctions were imposed on South Africa for its apartheid policy.

Years of neglect have forced some copper mines to export their production by road to Durban in South Africa, one of southern Africa's largest ports.

See also:

Copper

miningmx.com: 05 Sep 2007

A huge consignment of Zambian copper destined for export is stuck in transit following a three-week strike by unionized employees of the Tanzania-Zambia Railways (Tazara), officials on Wednesday told Reuters.

Tresphore Chileshe, the president of the Workers Union of Tazara-Zambia (WUTAZ), told the news wire that 1,400 striking workers had refused to return to work, forcing management officials to drive cargo trains carrying copper to the port of Dar-Es-Salaam in Tanzania.

Workers are demanding a pay hike of $208 per month across the board, while management has offered no increase, Chileshe said. Lowest paid workers at Tazara earn $100 per month.

"It is a difficult situation, and we hope management will offer something. We have a meeting at the Tazara headquarters in Dar-Es-Salaam this Friday and we hope we can resolve this impasse," Reuters said, citing Chileshe.

See also:

Zambia: Tazara Workers Locked Out

The Times of Zambia (Ndola): 28 August 2007

THE Joint Tanzania Zambia Railway (Tazara) Industrial Council meeting which was scheduled to take place in Dar-es- Salaam, Tanzania today to resolve the on-going stand off between Tazara management and employees has been put off until workers first call off their strike.

And Tazara management at the railway company's Zambia regional office in Mpika has locked out all unionised workers who were yesterday morning gathered outside the offices.

And the Workers Union of Tazara, Zambia has made a passionate appeal to Government to move in and help resolve the problems affecting employees at the railway firm.

WUTAZ general secretary Promise Nyirenda confirmed to ZANIS in Kasama in a telephone interview yesterday that management had cancelled the Joint Tazara Industrial Council demanding that workers must first return to work before any initiative to resolve the impasse could proceed.-ZANIS

Posted on 11:24 PM | Permalink

Bits of News: 05 September 2007
Written by Garrett Johnson

130 years ago in America, labor unions were small in number and relatively powerless, the federal government was immensely corrupt, and the presidential election had just been openly rigged...

"Terrors Reign, The Streets of Chicago Given Over to Howling Mobs of Thieves and Cutthroats." - Chicago Times headline, 1877

130 years ago America was a different place. Labor unions were small in number and relatively powerless, the federal government was immensely corrupt, and the presidential election had just been openly rigged.

Hmmm. OK. Maybe America wasn't different from today's world after all. But it was a great deal different from the America of most of that 130 years.

On September 18, 1873, the country experienced a financial panic so severe that Wall Street closed for 10 days. By 1875, 18,000 businesses had failed and the unemployment rate had risen to 14%.

For America the mid-1870's was still very early in the Industrial Revolution. There was no social safety net, so when the breadwinner lost his job the whole family went hungry. While industry was growing and expanding, the workers rights movement was still in its infancy. Craft unions only represented 1% of the workforce. The first attempt at a national union had been a complete bust. Even after the economic downturn ended businesses cut wages, and cut wages some more, and kept cutting them, and there was nothing the working man could do about it. Wages had been cut by as much as 45% and most employees were working part time.

The new industries showed little respect for working people. Many paid the workers in company script which could only be redeemed at company stores while requiring the workers to live in company housing. Working 10 hours a day, six days a week was the norm. The new industrial machines were dangerous and the courts would rarely favor lawsuits for injuries sustained. The Robber Barons of the day justified it with Social Darwinism.

This environment needed only a spark to have an explosion.

The Great Strike of 1877

The Great Strike was unprecedented for many reasons. It was the first nationwide strike. It saw the first general strikes in America. It was far larger than any strike before it, and rarely matched in size after it. But the biggest difference was that it was the only national strike in American history that wasn't led by a labor union. In fact, labor union members were a minority of the strikers.

Instead of being simply a strike by a labor union against a certain company about specified grievances, the Great Strike resembled a general working class revolt against the establishment. It was leaderless and uncoordinated, and for that reason it was also probably the most violent strike in American history.

Nothing in America was ever the same after the Great Strike.

Even before the Great Strike had started there was labor trouble. Pennsylvania Railroad slashed wages by another 10% in June of 1877, while doubling the size of trains going east without adding any additional crew. Angry railroad workers stopped the trains in protest. Management decided to preempt a strike and started firing unionized workers.

No sooner had these measures for economy in the company's management gone into effect, than the class, and only the class— utterly worthless employees— to, began their secret meetings and their seditious efforts.

The following month, on July 11, 1877, the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad copied Pennsylvania and cut wages by 10% while reducing the workweek by at least a day. It was the second pay cut of the year for B&O. At Martinsburg, West Virginia, the workers had had enough.

On July 16 firemen and brakemen refused to work. The company tried to bring on replacements — many experienced men were unemployed because of the depression — but the strikers assembled at Camden Junction, three miles from Baltimore, would not let trains run in any direction.

The word quickly spread to Martinsburg, W. Va., where workers abandoned their trains and prevented others from operating them. The railroad company appealed to the governor, who called out the militia. Militiamen and workers exchanged gunfire. The scabs ran off, the militia withdrew — and the strikers were left in control of their idled trains.

Trains idle at Martinsburg

The national guard refused to use deadly force against other West Virginia citizens. As word of the strike spread, so did the strike itself. Soon trains weren't moving in Wheeling and Parkersburg. The governor's hand was forced and he called for federal troops. New Republican President Hayes immediately responded to the call, and for the first time in this country's history federal troops were about to be used to break up a labor dispute.

At Martinsburg, federal troops armed with Gatling guns managed to drive off the strikers with a show of force. 13 locomotives were released and trains began moving again...for the moment.

Meanwhile the strike had spread to Baltimore where it became more violent. The strike was far from over.

"Indeed, it was barely begun. As fast as the strike was broken in one place it appeared in another." - Harper’s Weekly

Soon the strike had spread to western Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Ohio. No longer was this about B&O. It was about all railroad companies, and soon it was about even more than that. Maryland's governor called out his own militia.

Within a half hour of the call, "a crowd numbering at least 2,000 men, women, and children surrounded the [Maryland Sixth Regiment] armory and loudly expressed their feelings against the military and in favor of the strikers," according to Harper’s Weekly. The crowd added bricks and stones to the curses hurled against the armory. The police were powerless.

Once the troops emerged for their march to Camden Station, shots were fired — and shots were exchanged.

6th Regiment fights its way through Baltimore

The militia killed 11 and wounded 40, both strikers and onlookers. Half of the 120 troops quit almost immediately. The rest marched to the Camden Station where they engaged the strikers in a running battle. By that time nearly 15,000 strikers and supporters had arrived at the station. The governor asked for federal troops, which sent five hundred regular army troops and calmed the situation down.

Strikes were occurring almost every hour. The great State of Pennsylvania was in an uproar; New Jersey was afflicted by a paralysing dread; New York was mustering an army of militia; Ohio was shaken from Lake Erie to the Ohio River; Indiana rested in a dreadful suspense. Illinois, and especially its great metropolis, Chicago, apparently hung on the verge of a vortex of confusion and tumult. St. Louis had already felt the effect of the premonitory shocks of the uprising. - St. Louis Republican, 1877

The Battle of Pittsburgh

Baltimore was a moderately pro-union city, but Pittsburgh's union roots ran much deeper. The local police and militia openly sided with the strikers. According to Harper's Weekly, even local businessmen sided with the strikers.

The strike in Pittsburgh can be traced to one man - a flagman named Gus Harris.

Harris refused to go out on a “double-header,” a train with two locomotives carrying a double length of cars, to which railroaders had objected because it required fewer workers and made the brakemen’s work more dangerous.

The decision was his own, not part of a concerted plan or a general understanding.

When Harris said he would not go, the rest of the crew refused too. The strikers now multiplied, joined by young boys and men from the mills and factories (Pittsburgh had 33 iron mills, 73 glass factories, 29 oil refineries, 158 coal mines). The freight trains stopped moving out of the city. The Trainman’s Union had not organised this, but it moved to take hold, called a meeting, invited “all workingmen to make common cause with their brethren on the railroad.”
Local authorities were forced to call on the Philadelphia militia for help in breaking the strike, who didn't arrive until July 21.

"[Strikers should be given] a rifle diet for a few days and see how they like that kind of bread." - Thomas Alexander Scott, President of Pennsylvania Railroad, 1877

When the Philadelphia militia arrived at the Pittsburgh train station they were met by thousands of men, women and children, and a "shower of stones". Some of the events are disputed but two facts are certain: 1) the angry mob was mostly unarmed, and 2) the militia fired volley after volley into the crowd without discriminating the victims.

"The sight presented after the soldiers ceased firing was sickening," reported the New York Herald; the area "was actually dotted with the dead and dying."

Official estimates were 20 men, women and children dead, 29 wounded. But those numbers are probably understated because some relatives carried away their dead and wounded loved-ones. The high percentage of dead shows that the militia didn't "accidentally" shoot anyone.

Normally at this point the story ends. The military committed their atrocity on the civilians. The civilians would cower in their homes. A few ringleaders would be given kangaroo court trials and then publicly hung. Some government official would express "sympathy", and the media would accept it all and then forget about it.

However, this isn't one of those times.

"Shot in Cold Blood by the Roughs of Philadelphia. The Lexington of the Labor Conflict at Hand. The Slaughter of Innocents." - Newspaper headline, 1877

When word of the massacre reached the nearby mills and manufacturing shops, the workers there poured out into the streets. Some broke into a gun factory.

"Miners and steel workers came pouring in from the outskirts of the city and as night fell the immense crowd proved so menacing to the soldiers that they retreated into the roundhouse." - Harper's Weekly

Instead of facing a few thousand rock-throwing women and children, the troops were now facing an entire armed city. Instead of a city wanting them to leave, they now wanted them all dead. By midnight the railroad roundhouse that the militia had retreated to was surrounded by 20,000 angry men, about 5,000 of them armed. This wasn't what the President of Pennsylvania Railroad had in mind when he talked about a "rifle diet". In fact, the situation was totally out of control of the authorities.

Workers and soldiers exchanged rifle fire all night long. At one point the workers nearly set the roundhouse on fire by sending a blazing oil car hurtling against a nearby building. If that had happened there was little chance that any of the militia would have survived the night.

"[It was] a night of terror such as last night I never experienced before and hope to God I never will again." - New York Herald, told by a Civil War veteran, member of the militia

The next morning the troops realized that help was not going to come in time. If they were to live they had to save themselves. They marched out of the roundhouse firing in all directions. Their fire was returned.. from everywhere. A legislative report said that the National Guard forces "were fired at from second floor windows, from the corners of the streets...they were also fired at from a police station, where eight or ten policemen were in uniform."

The troops literally ran out of town under fire. Along the way they managed to kill about 20 more people, while four of the troops were killed along the way, their bodies left behind because anyone who stopped would die. The militia was sniped at for nearly a dozen miles outside of Pittsburgh.

Meanwhile the angry mob took their rage out on the railroad station. They set fires that razed 39 buildings and destroyed 104 locomotives and 1,245 freight and passenger cars. The entire city had come to a complete halt as the nation's first general strike took hold.

The destruction of the depot

Roundhouse after the fire

For nearly a month the city of Pittsburgh was outside of the control of state and federal authorities.

Elsewhere in Pennsylvania

The workers of Reading Railroad were not a happy bunch. Their pay was in arrears by two months. On July 22, a crowd of workers and their families had gathered at the Reading train station and blocked traffic. In a near exact copy of previous clashes, the railroad called out the national guard. The crowd threw stones at the troops and the troops responded by shooting wildly into the crowd, killing 10 and wounding 40, including 5 local police.

“Six men lay dead in the twilight,” Bruce reports, “a fireman and an engineer formerly employed in the Reading, a carpenter, a huckster, a rolling-mill worker, a labourer A policeman and another man lay at the point of death.”

The crowd did not leave, but grew more menacing. At which point the troops lost heart. They stacked their guns and swore not to fire. Some handed their weapons and ammo to the crowd. They were allowed to leave.

The same evening in Sunsbury word got out that a national guard unit would pass through on its way to Pittsburgh to crush the strike there. A crowd gathered at the railroad junction at 3rd and Chestnut streets to stop it. When the train came into town the crowd overran the train, took it over, and sent it back in the direction it came.

In Danville on the morning of July 23, the workers appointed a group to ask the Commissioner of the Poor for bread or work. The Commissioner “passed the buck” to the mayor. At 3 PM a large crowd gathered at the weigh scales on Mill Street in the middle of Danville . One speaker said “We will give the borough authorities until tomorrow at 10:00 to devise some action to give us work or bread. If at that time nothing is done for us, we will take [explicative] wherever we can find it.”

The next day there was almost a bread riot. Citizens were on the verge of starvation. [...] One policeman tried to arrest Treas, for using incendiary language. But he could not get to Treas in the crowd. Following these events, the authorities gave food to those in need.

Meanwhile back in Reading a protest on the 25th got out of control and looted the Reading Railroad station. "Mayor William Douty gathered vigilantes outside City Hall in response to a prearranged signal - a bell ringing at the Presbyterian church where he belonged." Douty had already made himself famous by being a coal mine owner who persecuting the Molly Maguires. Douty's vigilantes shot into the crowd, wounding 12 and killing two. Neither of the two killed were members of the rioters. A Mr. Weist was shot dead while closing his candy store.

In Lebanon, Pennsylvania, one militia unit mutinied. In Altoona, a national guard unit found itself surrounded by rioters and disabled engines, simply surrendered. The rioters gave them water and sent them home accompanied by a singing quartet. When that unit made it back to Philadelphia they were met by a much larger group of rioters who took their guns away and marched them through the street like prisoners of war. They were fed at a hotel and then sent home.

Believe it or not, most railroad unions were not supporting the strike. The Order of Railway Conductors, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, the Brotherhood of Engineers, disavowed the strike.

While the Philadelphia militia was fighting for its life against the strikers in Pittsburgh, the working men and women of Philadelphia was supporting the cause of the strikers. Strikers and rioters engaged the militia in street battles. Much of the City Center suffered fire damage before federal troops arrived and put down the riots.

Further to the west

“All you have to do, gentlemen, for you have the numbers, is to unite on one idea—that the workingmen shall rule the country. What man makes, belongs to him, and the workingmen made this country.” - strike speaker in St. Louis, 1877

The strike hit its peak when it reached Illinois.

On July 21, all railroad traffic through St. Louis was halted by the strikers. In a show of support, a general strike was called by the Workingmen's Party and the entire city simply shut down for a full week.

At one of its huge meetings, writes Marieke van Ophem, "a black man was the voice for those who worked on the steamboats and levees. He asked: ‘Will you stand to us, regardless of color?’ The crowd shouted in response: ‘We will!’

"Only around St. Louis did the original strike on the railroads expand into such a systematically organized and complete shut-down of all industry that the term general strike is fully justified. And only there did the socialists assume undisputed leadership. . . . no American city has come so close to being ruled by a workers’ soviet, as we would now call it, as St. Louis, Missouri, in the year 1877." - David Burbank

Despite a lack of violence, the city was put under martial law. Strike leaders were thrown in jail without charges or a trial. Federal troops, combined with company thugs, put an end to the strike, much like everywhere else.

Chicago wasn't so lucky.

The last major city to join in the strike, Chicago workers were met with the most deadly, official violence.
On July 24, rail traffic in Chicago was paralyzed when angry mobs of groups of unemployed citizens wreaked havoc in the rail yards, shutting down both the Baltimore and Ohio and the Illinois Central Railroads. Soon, other railroads were brought to a standstill, with demonstrators shutting down railroad traffic in Bloomington, Aurora, Peoria, Decatur, Urbana and other rail centers throughout Illinois. In sympathy, coal miners in the pits at Braidwood, LaSalle, Springfield, and Carbondale went on strike as well.

The Workingmen's Party had a large base in Chicago and one of its leaders was a man named Albert Parsons. Parsons was fired from the Chicago Times the day after he spoke at the huge Workingmen's rally on July 24, which drew 20,000 people. Albert Parson was martyred a decade later by being hung for his participation in the Haymarket Square Riot, despite the fact that he wasn't even in Haymarket Square at the time of the riot.

The mayor of Chicago, Monroe Heath, asked for 25,000 vigilantes to put down the strike. Together with the police, they attacked the crowds.

“The sound of clubs falling on skulls was sickening for the first minute, until one grew accustomed to it. A rioter dropped at every whack, it seemed, for the ground was covered with them.” Two companies of U.S. infantry arrived, joining National Guardsmen and Civil War veterans. Police fired into a surging crowd, and three men were killed.

The next day, an armed crowd of 5,000 fought the police. The police fired again and again, and when it was over, and the dead were counted, they were, as usual, workingmen and boys, eighteen of them, their skulls smashed by clubs, their vital organs pierced by gunfire.

Aftermath

Somewhere between 80,000 and 200,000 workers had participated in the Great Strike. Between 100 and 200 had died, almost all of them at the hands of authorities. About 1,000 strikers were arrested.

The strike from beginning to end lasted about 45 days.

The results of the strike were mixed. Some railroad company wage cuts were rescinded. Some worker safety issues were addressed.

But the bosses also took steps to not let the workers gain the upperhand again. Many states enacted conspiracy statutes. New national guard units were formed, with armories constructed in many cities (usually with loopholes for guns). Business leaders took a rigid stance against unions, and in response to that rigid stance, unions kept growing.

However, the workers learned important lessons as well. One lesson was that they in fact had the power to bring everything to a halt if they so chose. They also learned that strike organization was vital to win concessions for the workers.

This strike led directly to the rise of national unions, as well as decades of violent labor conflict that wouldn't completely end until workers rights were enshrined into federal law under FDR.

Posted on 09:25 AM | Permalink

Reuters: Sep 4, 2007

LONDON - A strike on the London Underground, that caused commuter chaos on Tuesday, was suspended following talks, RMT said.

"The action that was to continue to Thursday has been suspended," RMT union leader Bob Crow told Reuters.

"But the action planned for next week is still on while we consult with our members," he said after nine hours of talks with management.

See also:,/b>