Dinosaur 2010 style.

[Southover Street Seagull]

Work locations shoud be irrelevant if the RMT had kept their listings up to date - but the RMT sent ballots to these incorrect places expecting there to be members there to be able to vote, they also missed quite a few work locations from which members should have been ballotted. That makes it relevant.

The court thought it was all a shower of shite anyhow, and the actual votes that were cast are now irrelevant as the whole process wasn't properly carried out.

They didn't send ballot papers to work addresses, they sent them to their home addresses.

Read the blog and you will see why the workplace has been used by some of the press:

New Labour’s “Fairness at Work” legislation, the 1999 Employment Relations Act, amended 1992 legislation such that a union had to give notice to an employer, “containing such information in the union’s possession as would help the employer to make plans and bring information to the attention of those of his employees”. It dispensed with the need for a union to give the names of individuals to be balloted. The unions considered this a gain since they did not necessarily want to have to give management a list of all their members.

However, there was a sting in the tail. The new legislation now obliged a union to provide a list of the grades/categories, the workplaces, and the number of grades in each and every workplace.

The 2004 Employments Rights Act said this list “must be as accurate as is reasonably practicable in the light of the information in the possession of the union at the time”. It is, of course, a nightmare to keep accurate and updated information on such detail as this because members are always coming and going, changing jobs, moving to different work locations and so on.

This is where the employers are getting the unions caught out in court, they are saying the information about workplaces is not accurate and this it seems is how in this case they got the ballot overturned.

 

[beorhthelm]

Yeah,let's get those kids back up chimneys eh!

so there'e no alternative to Unions then? seems german work councils do a very good job and they have much better management/employee relations.

From this blog:

The case of the phantom signal boxes – Network Rail propaganda and the balloting regulations Martin Wicks

this blog is spinning the union position to a tee. it completely ignores the possibility that the RMT gave a rigged list to the third party handling the ballot.

and consider this: the claims where made by Network Rail in court, if they are false they would be in contempt. we should therefore look forward to the union appealing and proving this, putting the NR in a very poor position.

 

[tedebear]

They didn't send ballot papers to work addresses, they sent them to their home addresses.

Read the blog and you will see why the workplace has been used by some of the press:

New Labour’s “Fairness at Work” legislation, the 1999 Employment Relations Act, amended 1992 legislation such that a union had to give notice to an employer, “containing such information in the union’s possession as would help the employer to make plans and bring information to the attention of those of his employees”. It dispensed with the need for a union to give the names of individuals to be balloted. The unions considered this a gain since they did not necessarily want to have to give management a list of all their members.

However, there was a sting in the tail. The new legislation now obliged a union to provide a list of the grades/categories, the workplaces, and the number of grades in each and every workplace.

The 2004 Employments Rights Act said this list “must be as accurate as is reasonably practicable in the light of the information in the possession of the union at the time”. It is, of course, a nightmare to keep accurate and updated information on such detail as this because members are always coming and going, changing jobs, moving to different work locations and so on.

This is where the employers are getting the unions caught out in court, they are saying the information about workplaces is not accurate and this it seems is how in this case they got the ballot overturned.

But again, the court has ruled on the entire package...(I;d certainly not be taking that blog as gospel truth if I were you)

Also membership information being up to date is pretty easy, given someone is paying each month ??

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

But again, the court has ruled on the entire package...(I;d certainly not be taking that blog as gospel truth if I were you)

Also membership information being up to date is pretty easy, given someone is paying each month ??

I'm not saying it is gospel and I don't think it is either, but it is an alternative to the majority right wing press that exists in this country.

Is it pretty easy? What if a member changes their workplace but doesn't inform the union? What if a member retires but doesn't inform the union? What if a member changes job in the same company but doesn't inform the union? If you have a union with a very large membership, then keeping the said membership is bound to be hard and with the anti-union legislation that still exists in this country the unions will sometimes fall fowl of the law.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

so there'e no alternative to Unions then? seems german work councils do a very good job and they have much better management/employee relations.



this blog is spinning the union position to a tee. it completely ignores the possibility that the RMT gave a rigged list to the third party handling the ballot.

and consider this: the claims where made by Network Rail in court, if they are false they would be in contempt. we should therefore look forward to the union appealing and proving this, putting the NR in a very poor position.

Where did the RMT get their employee information from?

NETWORK RAIL.

 

[beorhthelm]

Where did the RMT get their employee information from?

NETWORK RAIL.

and who tells Network Rail the members, or merges/filters that information and passes it on to the third party? really, there is no way the RMT can absolve itself of this. if there is too much bureacracy under the new legislation, well they should take that up with the Labour government. or improve their system to adapt the legislation, as all other business and organisations have to.