Resolution: Where is our RMT Challenge to LU/TFL?

This resolultion, submitted by TfL no.1 branch and seconded by LU Engineering branch, was passed unanimously by the April meeting of the Regional Council.

The LTRC requests that a RMT legal challenge is sought ASAP.

It is obvious that LUL lied to us in the run up to the Metronet TUPE on the 7th December when they told us there were no economic changes planned, despite the overwhelming planning behind the Operational Cost Review.

Furthermore, the consultation on redundancies has been shown to be a sham by concurrent talks with us whilst simultaneously briefing those involved. Whilst our branch/LTRC accepts the law is not written for us, it is written and they do not appear to have followed the law. We therefore request that we get someone of the stature of John Hendy to fight this battle. Information should also be accessed through the Freedom of Information Act to help assist our case.

We believe the European Acquired Rights Act has been contravened by LUL in their treatment of Metronet employees under the OCP.

TUPE-our original consultation. LU said that they did not have the details of the outcome of the OCR at the time they were talking to us. We have evidence that the managers were asked not to talk about it in the TUPE briefings, and were planning the reductions and re-organisation as the TUPE progressed. The TUPE actually enabled the reductions to be made, so we believe that they had information in connection with TUPE that they concealed or did not release to us.

TfL TUPE and OCR/OP. inexorably linked now, with redundancies as result. They are trying to avoid the redundancy notices and consultation period by transferring staff in small groups of less than twenty by directorate, although all the staff, of which there are more than twenty altogether are from the same undertaking.

There is an identifiable group of permanent staff specifically engaged in Metronet work, with special arrangements for those staff, as we heard yesterday. They therefore have a quite legitimate right to retain their Company Council as it is a company still and will continue to be one, and the employees are supplied by LU under the Human Resources Agreement.

How can consultation be meaningful if the staff were sent letters telling them their status, mapped hybrid or at risk, before any meeting or information had been given to their reps. The OCP was imposed from the outset? No Criteria for selection was available to the reps and has not been supplied in any form.

Jobs for senior managers in IM were being advertised externally before the "consultation" was a week old and while the permanent staff were told they would be displaced.

Several H&S regulations have been flouted, notably The SRSC regulations and in Sean Laudons view the Act itself.

The OCP process itself states that all the paperwork must be provided prior to the start date of the time frame and that an independent body must also review the business decisions made as the monies involved come from the public purse.

We are all well aware that a legal opinion will not save jobs alone, but we need to explore every avenue and use all the ammunition we can to help our members.