Leaders of the 2 foremost rail unions have accused the federal government of stopping prepare operators reaching pay offers.
Eddie Dempsey, senior deputy common secretary of the RMT union, and Mick Whelan, common secretary of Aslef, had been being questioned by MPs on the Transport Select Committee.
Mr Dempsey stated rail employees had been getting used as “a political football”. He accused ministers, together with the transport secretary, Grant Shapps, of “incendiary comments”.
He stated: “The government probably felt it was a good opportunity to pick a fight and paint us as the enemy.
“We have made some progress with Network Rail, to be sure, in stark contrast to the train operating companies.
“It’s a shame Grant Shapps hasn’t been called here to answer some questions about this because the people on the other side of the table that we’re dealing with are telling us they regard themselves as brokers, not negotiators.
“They tell us they’ve got a mandate that they’ve got to refresh. They often have to leave the room to go and have a conversation with their ministerial people before they can continue discussions with us.
“We’re in a room with people that are not able to make decisions.”
A strike by members of the RMT working for Network Rail and 13 prepare operators introduced a lot of the rail system to a halt on 21, 23 and 25 June, with disruption additionally on the times after every stoppage.
Further industrial motion is to be mentioned later – presumably coordinated with the prepare drivers’ union, Aslef.
At the identical committee listening to with MPs, Mick Whelan, common secretary of Aslef, accused the federal government of “underlying deceit”.
The chief of the prepare drivers’ union stated: “We believe we’ve got free collective bargaining. Please let us bargain. Traditionally within the industry it finds its level and we find a solution.
“We’ve been driven into strife by the government not allowing the companies to talk to us.
“The strike action is the fault of this government and the employers, and not the workers.
“Everywhere the DfT is not involved, we’re able to reach settlements.”
A spokesperson for the Department for Transport (DfT) stated: “It is a matter for unions and employers – not government – to engage in meaningful talks on modernisation practices to avoid damaging strike action and prevent chaos on the railways.
“Government is not the employer here. Previously when there were strikes by firefighters and post workers the then-Labour government said it’s between employers and unions, and we are continuing with that position.
“It’s important that ministers remain close to the ongoing situation regarding negotiations to ensure that railway staff, passengers and taxpayers are getting a fair deal.
“Industry is offering daily talks to the unions. We encourage the unions to stay at the negotiating table.”.
At the committee listening to, Mr Dempsey of the RMT additionally advised MPs the most recent Network Rail pay proposal “is based on removing a third of the maintenance frontline and also cutting planned maintenance in half”.
He stated: “We’re going to end up with an industry reliant on overtime and sub-contractors. We’re going back to the days of Railtrack.”
During the tenure of Railtrack, the private-sector predecessor of Network Rail, a number of deadly prepare accidents passed off.
Network Rail disputes the union claims, saying it intends to cut back upkeep numbers by 20 per cent and has supplied a assure of no obligatory redundancies in its newest pay proposals.
The infrastructure supplier says its reforms will minimize time beyond regulation and using sub-contractors.
Mr Whelan condemned the federal government’s plans to permit employers to herald company workers to switch hanging employees as a “scabs’ charter”, and warned that the coverage may create lasting division.
He stated: “The real problem in an industry like ours – there’s still people not being spoken to who scabbed in 1955, in 1982.
“Of course scab labour can only work for scab management.
The committee chair Huw Merriman said it was an “emotive” and “intimidating” time period.
“If any reasonable person heard what you said, when you used the term ‘scab’ about four or five times, I would take it as quite intimidatory, myself.”
Source: www.impartial.co.uk