RMT’s talks team believed it had made sufficient progress on a number of key issues arising out of the long-running harmonisation dispute to be able to recommend a suspension of this weekend’s action.

However, a letter subsequently received from Network Rail head office failed to reflect the understandings reached in a number of crucial respects.

“It is reasonable to expect that the people you are sitting round the table with have the authority to negotiate, but the progress we thought we had made in talks at Network Rail on Tuesday has simply been vetoed from on high,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.

“On a range of issues, including pay protection, we believed we had made enough progress to enable the union to call off the weekend’s strike, but when we received a letter that was supposed to confirm the progress made, some of the key items were simply not there.

“The only possible conclusion is that someone at a senior level in Network Rail would rather undermine their own negotiating team and see the weekend’s strike go ahead than allow the understandings we had reached to stand.

“That is shabby and underhanded and it undermines the faith the union should have in the talks process Network Rail is telling the world it is committed to.

“I have written urgently to Iain Coucher, the NR Chief Executive, urging him to re-instate the understandings we negotiated with his management team, but under the circumstances the union’s executive had no choice but to confirm that the weekend’s action will go ahead,” Bob Crow said.

ends

Note to editors: RMT members will not book on for shifts that commence between midday on Saturday July 26 and 17:59 on Sunday July 27. Members will also not undertake any overtime or ‘on-call’ work between 06:00 on Saturday July 26 and 06:00 on Monday July 28. Weekend maintenance work was brought to a virtual standstill during the first stoppage in the dispute, over the weekend June 14 and 15.

See also:

Harmonisation Update No 4

Below is the text of a letter sent today (July 24) to Network Rail Chief Executive Iain Coucher

Dear Mr Coucher

HARMONISATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE TERMS & CONDITIONS – NETWORK RAIL

As you will be well aware, my union has been in discussions with your company through a joint working party on harmonisation of infrastructure employees’ terms and conditions for over two years now.

These discussions entered a new phase recently and a deadline on coming up with a set of proposals which would have been acceptable to both parties was set for July 31st. These discussions, which have included your company’s Maintenance Director Steve Featherstone, have seen a lot of work being done by both parties. However, there has been a major concern that not enough issues have been ticked off and that, by 31st July, they just would not have been resolved as items were “subject to further negotiation.”

My negotiating team reported these matters to our representatives who expressed concerns that yet another delay to the timetable was about to occur even though the timetable was set exactly in order to avoid this. It was for this reason – i.e. no progress being made and no progress expected by 31st July – that my union reluctantly called further industrial action.

However, I can state quite clearly that my union remains committed to the harmonisation process and to further negotiations and that is why my representatives entered into further negotiations on 22nd July 2008. After four hours of exhaustive talks with your team, my representatives came away believing that a clear agreement had been reached on a number of areas which could have allowed my union to suspend this weekend’s industrial action and moved us toward a final and satisfactory outcome on harmonisation.

I was utterly dismayed and angered however that, two hours after leaving the meeting, I found out that what had been agreed was vetoed by your Maintenance Director’s superiors. It begs the question as to why your company agreed to further talks in the first place and why you would appoint people to carry out the negotiations if they cannot take the decisions. My union had received an assurance from your Human Resources Director and Maintenance Director earlier this year that whoever was involved in negotiations with my union on harmonisation would have the authority to take the decisions.

I urge you to intervene directly in this dispute and urge you to do this immediately. If what we agreed with your Maintenance Director on Tuesday afternoon was endorsed by your company, then this could result in my union calling off this weekend’s industrial action.

As a further point, my union needs an absolute undertaking that, in future, you are prepared to support your management team who are present in the negotiation room with my union as I am sure they are as disappointed as I am at the lack of support they have been given by your company until now.

I look forward to hearing from you on what concrete steps you are taking on resolving this dispute as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely

Bob Crow
General Secretary