Dispute Resolution

Does any else ever wonder about the great Scotrail dispute that never was?

The one that was due to go ahead last Christmas over the sacking of a ticket inspector - allegedly a dispute of great principle which had been dragging on for months and then suddenly came to a head - at one of the very busiest times of the year.

One minute RMT members were all going on strike to demand the reinstatement of their sacked colleague - the next some kind of 'grubby' deal appears to have been  done - presumably involving money.

But no more was heard on the subject - from either the trade union or the Scotrail management - which I find very surprising.

Because Scotrail is heavily subsidised by the taxpayer and if the company has simply thrown money at the problem - just to get a settlement - then the same problem is likely to arise again next year.

Which is another good reason for extending the list of named organisations - to whom Scotland's Freedom of Information rules apply - because at the moment Scotrail and the RMT don't have to tell the long suffering travelling public anything.

After having so much to say about the dispute in the build up to the planned strike - both sides simply clammed up and refuse to say - to this day - how their disagreement was settled.

Whereas I think the general public and the taxpayer - have a perfect right to know.

Bah Humbug (14 December 2012)

I imagine it's not easy to get the sack if you work for ScotRail - because the railway industry is highly unionised and has been for many years.

Which suggests that the railways are not in the hands of 'Victorian mill owners' and that there must be agreed procedures in place - to ensure that any disciplinary or subsequent appeal hearings are conducted fairly and properly - with due process and evidence in mind.

Because if not, an individual ScotRail employee and their trade union (like workers elsewhere) can complain of unfair dismissal to the Employment Tribunals - and seek reinstatement and compensation over the way they've been treated.

So why in the world the RMT union is calling a strike over the dismissal of one of its members - is beyond me - especially in the run-up to Christmas, as this action seems designed to hurt and inconvenience the travelling public.

Unfortunately people working in the public services do get dismissed from their jobs from time to time - it's a regular though not a frequent occurence, thankfully - but just imagine the same happening in the NHS and a trade union calling a strike in response - it simply wouldn't happen.

Seems to me that some folks in the RMT believe they're fighting a class war in the rail industry - but if so, they will only succeed in making first class idiots of themselves.Here's a report on the dispute from the BBC web site which is factual and even-handed - though it does point out that the incident which led to the employee's dismissal was caught on CCTV - and shown to the RMT three times no less.

Yet the union claimed differently in its ballot paper calling for a strike - which seems a highly irresponsible way to conduct an industrial dispute in this day and age - as well as terrible insult to ordinary RMT members.

ScotRail workers to strike on Christmas Eve

The RMT union said members overwhelmingly voted for strike action

Workers on ScotRail will strike on 22 December and on Christmas Eve in a dispute over the sacking of an employee, the RMT union has said.

In November, staff voted overwhelmingly in favour of taking action.

The RMT claimed one of its members was sacked after trying to make sure a passenger had the correct ticket.

ScotRail said the dates chosen by the union were "cynical in the extreme" and a "clear attack on the travelling public across Scotland at Christmas".

The union said all of its members, with the exception of those working on sleeper services, would refuse to book on for any turns of duty between 23:59 on Friday 21 December and 23.58 on Saturday 22 December, and between 23:59 on Sunday 23 December 23:58 on Monday 24 December.

Analysis James Cook

The extreme language being used by both sides in this dispute is not encouraging for passengers hoping for a Christmas compromise.

The RMT calls the dismissal of Scott Lewis a "travesty of justice" and threatens "massive disruption".

ScotRail says the ticket inspector was sacked for "intimidating and aggressive behaviour" and the strike is "mercenary and opportunistic".

In short, the company says the evidence proves that Mr Lewis' behaviour was unacceptable. The union says it doesn't.

There is a chink of light at the end of the tunnel. Both the RMT and ScotRail say they are prepared to hold talks, if they are "meaningful".

But the dispute is so simple and the rhetoric so heated it's not clear how any discussion between the two sides could be "meaningful" at this stage.

All of its sleeper service staff have been instructed to strike between 17:30 on 21 December and 17:29 on 22 December, and between 17:30 on 23 December and 17:29 on Christmas Eve.

The union warned the strike would cause "massive disruption" to services.

It said the action was in support of Scott Lewis, who the union claimed had been dismissed for trying to help a member of the public buy the correct ticket.

RMT general secretary Bob Crow said: "ScotRail are completely abdicating their own duty of care to their staff, who are out there working for the company in often difficult conditions.

"Their ignorance of the basic facts in this case is breathtaking. It is time for them to call off this campaign of victimisation and reinstate Scott Lewis back into his post.

"We are available for talks aimed at making that happen."

But ScotRail insisted that RMT members had been misled by the union, which it said had declared in a leaflet with the ballot paper that management had refused to produce CCTV evidence to back up the reasons for dismissing Mr Lewis.

A spokesman for the rail operator said: "The union was shown CCTV on three separate occasions, and the images reveal that standards of conduct fell well below what we expect.

"If anyone believes the conduct towards a customer, who was reduced to tears, is acceptable - let alone worthy of a strike - then they are in the wrong job.

"The ticket examiner also had a complete disregard of correct ticket procedures."

The spokesman claimed the dates chosen for the strikes "reek of selfishness" and were "designed to give those on strike extra time off and full wages while having the maximum impact on the travelling public in the run-up to Christmas."