What Was That All About?
The London underground strike - which was due to start next week - has been called off apparently in a last minute deal between the employers and RMT union.
The traveling public will no doubt breathe a big sigh of relief.
So too will the wider trade union movement - because the RMT's tactics were focusing attention on whether the law on strike ballots needs to be changed.
See post dated 5 May 2011 - 'Court of Public Opinion'.
The dispute has been settled because one of the two 'sacked' drivers has won his appeal against dismissal - at an Employment Tribunal.
Which decided that although he had breached safety rules - taking all the circumstances into account - sacking him was not an appropriate or reasonable response.
Good for him.
Apparently the driver will be re-engaged on 'non-driving duties' - for the meantime at least - while the breach of safety regulations is investigated and managed more effectively.
The second driver's case has still to be heard at the employment tribunal - but it seems that the RMT has decided - that yet another strike is not the way to get a result.
So peace has broken out at the eleventh hour - as it often does in these disputes.
What I can't understand though is how the two drivers were actually 'sacked' - if they continued to draw their £45,000 a year salaries.
Because to most people that sounds as if they were suspended - on full pay - until the matter came before an Employment Tribunal - which is a generous 'safety net' that few workers enjoy.
In which case - what was the strike all about?
The traveling public will no doubt breathe a big sigh of relief.
So too will the wider trade union movement - because the RMT's tactics were focusing attention on whether the law on strike ballots needs to be changed.
See post dated 5 May 2011 - 'Court of Public Opinion'.
The dispute has been settled because one of the two 'sacked' drivers has won his appeal against dismissal - at an Employment Tribunal.
Which decided that although he had breached safety rules - taking all the circumstances into account - sacking him was not an appropriate or reasonable response.
Good for him.
Apparently the driver will be re-engaged on 'non-driving duties' - for the meantime at least - while the breach of safety regulations is investigated and managed more effectively.
The second driver's case has still to be heard at the employment tribunal - but it seems that the RMT has decided - that yet another strike is not the way to get a result.
So peace has broken out at the eleventh hour - as it often does in these disputes.
What I can't understand though is how the two drivers were actually 'sacked' - if they continued to draw their £45,000 a year salaries.
Because to most people that sounds as if they were suspended - on full pay - until the matter came before an Employment Tribunal - which is a generous 'safety net' that few workers enjoy.
In which case - what was the strike all about?
