ATTENDANCE

• Bakerloo branch - Sean Geoghegan, Micky Hyde
• Camden no.3 branch - Pat O'Brien, Clara Osagiede, Mick Crossey, John Reid, Becky Crocker, Garry Houghton
• Central Line West branch - Vaughan Thomas (meeting chair), Stefan Melnyk, Ross Marshall, Peter Sheridan
• DLR branch -
• East Ham branch - Andy Izard
• Finsbury Park branch - Glenroy Watson, John Kelly, Dean O'Hanlon, Frank Curtis
• LU Fleet branch - Linda Martin
• Hammersmith & City branch - Mark Harding
• Jubilee South & East London Line branch - Chris Carroll
• LU Engineering branch - Andy Littlechild, Jackie Darby
• Morden & Oval branch - Arwyn Thomas, Mark O'Donnell
• Neasden branch - Gerard Vickers, Adrian Rowe
• Piccadilly & District West branch - Gwyn Pugh, Kingsley Omole
• Retired Members' branch - Ted Richardson
• Stratford no.1 branch - Unjum Mirza, Janine Booth (meeting secretary), Adrian Finney
• TfL no.1 branch - Carol Foster, Paul Rutland, Lindsey Rutland, Linda Wiles, Joanne Parry
• Thames Riverboats branch -
• In attendance - Steve Hedley (Regional Organiser), Olly New (Council of Executives member)

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Brian Munro, Paul Jackson, Dave Rayfield, Bob McMunn

2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

Proposed by East Ham, seconded by Stratford no.1 - agreed as accurate.

3. MATTERS ARISING from the minutes of the previous meeting

Janine Booth reported that she had submitted resolutions form the previous meeting to the General Secretary, but that he had refused to table two of them ('Revised Pay Offer' and 'Rank and file members be heard') to the GGC/Executive. LU Engineering branch had appealed to the Executive against the GS's decision, but the Executive had decided to refer the appeal into a sub-committee and would not make a decision on it until it had been overtaken by events. Janine proposed that the Regional Council appeal this decision(s) by the Executive to the union's AGM, and urged branches to do so also.

Olly New replied.

Delegates from the following branches spoke in favour of the proposed appeal: Central Line West, Camden 3, LU Engineering, TfL no.1

Olly New opposed.

Janine's proposal was seconded by LU Engineering branch.

Vote: 10 in favour; 0 against; 0 abstentions. Passed unanimously.

4. RECRUITMENT & RETENTION

In the absence of regional Membership Officer Dave Rayfield, it was agreed to deal with this item under the Regional Organiser's report.

5. COUNCIL OF EXECUTIVES REPORT

Olly New reported on:

• Disputes elsewhere in rail industry
• A further ballot at Seven Sisters, to defend sacked driver Jamie Witchell
• LUL/TfL dispute - results; industrial action dates; mass meeting; consideration of tactics
• DLR dispute update
• Employment Act 2008 - Executive plans dayschool in each region, factsheet for reps, article in RMT News

Questions/points raised in discussion:

• Strike committee report.
• Disciplining of reps for visiting Vic line pickets
• Should reps refuse to carry out union duties while any section of the membership is on strike eg. Vic line dirvers? Reply - needs discussion.
• Objection to hearing strike dates from media not from RMT. Reply - RMT emailed and texted decision to all members as soon as it was made.
• Lack of CSDE on the Victoria line constitutes serious and imminent danger.
• Should do leaflet for the public to win support for dispute, preferably before strike not just on the day. Reply - Executive has already agreed to do this; also considering newspaper adverts.
• 9 Vic line drivers refused to work on safety grounds: pay docked, since reinstated with apology.
• 'Down tools' might be better strike tactic.
• Stations Safety Council reps will consult with management only at meetings, not via email.

Reply: Yes, management and Mayor are gunning for us; their approach is political and media-driven.

6. REGIONAL ORGANISER'S REPORT

Due to the Regional Organiser's attendance at media interviews about the LUL/TfL dispute, this was deferred to later in the meeting.

7. RESOLUTIONS

(a) Revenue Control Training, submitted by Central Line West and Hammersmith & City branches

This Council condemns the poor treatment of members of staff who after 2 years are still waiting for Revenue Control Training.
The London Underground Revenue Dept has at Least 12 Vacancies which could be filled. LUL's excuse is that it would cost more money. However these are existing vacancies that should be covered by the existing budget.
This region instructs the Regional Organiser to convey an urgent meeting with LUL to push for these members to be given their training, and also request a legal opinion on if anything can be done about this through the courts.

The resolution was proposed and seconded formally, and passed with one abstention.

6. REGIONAL ORGANISER'S REPORT

Steve Hedley reported on:

• media interviews about the LUL/TfL dispute
• Alstom has offered 2% plus possible concessions on travel - more information is needed
• cleaners - RMT is meeting officials from the Mayor's office on Monday - propose a protest outside the meeting
• ongoing victimisation of Elaine Holness

Points raised in discussion:

• Elaine Holness case - history with the manager concerned
• Mayor uprating London Living Wage - RMT should submit a new pay and conditions claim to cleaning companies and base recruitment drive around this and campaign for immigration rights
• Branches should help with organising cleaners; Region should apply to head office for funding to give them grants to do so
• Cleaners' grade meeting time and venue will change - grade secretary to circulate details as soon as possible
• Olly reported on meeting with MPs re political campaigning on cleaners' issues
• increase in cleaners' workload - meeting with HR next week

7. RESOLUTIONS continued

(b) Childcare payments, submitted by LU Engineering branch, seconded by TfL no.1 branch
This branch notes that the Regional Council pays £15 to the cost of child care for those attending the LT Regional Council Meetings. We believe that this should be changed to be the full amount of the cost. This belief is based on low take up and therefore overall cost of the scheme and that it is several years since this was altered and costs have risen.

Amendment submitted by Stratford no.1 branch, seconded by Finsbury Park branch:
ADD at end of second sentence, subject to a maximum of £50 and subject to review.
Stratford no.1 moved the amendment; Finsbury Park seconded; delegate from Central Line West spoke against; delegate from TfL no.1 spoke against. Stratford no.1 replied.
Vote on amendment: 5 for; 7 against. Defeated.

LU Engineering proposed the resolution; TfL no.1 seconded formally. Finsbury Park spoke in favour.
Vote on resolution: passed unanimously.

8. CORRESPONDENCE

The correspondence file was circulated, and the following correspondence raised: