Janine's blog

I have today sent the following email to the Egyptian Embassy, eg.emb_london@mfa.gov.eg

I have today read in the media (for example, here: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/us-egypt-idUSTRE70O3UW20110214...) that Egypt’s military authorities are planning to issue an order banning workers’ meetings and strikes. If this is true, I wish to register the strongest possible objection.

While the exciting events in Egypt make headline news, the mainstream media do not tell us much about workers' and trade union involvement. So I have compiled this selection of links:

• Up-to-the-minute workers' movement news and reports about Egypt on LabourStart website
• Center for Trade Union and Workers' Services (the site appears in Arabic; to see the English version, click the drop-down menu, top left)
  

RMT members joined other trade unionists and students in marching through London today to protest against rises in tuition fees, cuts in education funding, and the scrapping of the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA).

The last photo shows me speaking at the opening rally, giving solidarity greetings from RMT - after a speaker from the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts had sent a speaker to our Regional Council meeting two days previously.

I've signed up to this statement and campaign against 'kettling' and other repressive police treatment of protesters.

We should all have the right to protest without being held captive or violently assaulted. Please read the statement and consider adding your name too.

I have sent the following message of support to French rail strikers. You can read about their action here.

=====

I am writing on behalf of the London Transport Region of the National Union of Rail Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) here in the UK. I write to tell you of our strong support for the action you are taking in defence of pensions.

I have written this article for my local anti-cuts campaign newsletter in Hackney ...

We may not have London Underground here in Hackney (except at our very edges!), but the loss of 800 Tube staff posts would still affect us - in a very bad way. So, many Hackney residents and workers fully support Tube unions RMT and TSSA in their campaigning and industrial action against these cuts.

I recommend this article for some interesting insight into why industrial (ie. all-grades) trade unionism is more effective than craft (single-grade) trade unionism.

It was written by Irish Marxist James Connolly, who was a trade union organiser in the USA at the time (1910) that he wrote this article.

This is what our two failed Infracos said about themselves before they signed their PPP contracts ...

"Tube Lines believes that it will add value to the vital public service provided by LUL by delivering on time and to budget."

"Metronet has the skills, the knowledge and the ability along with sound financial backing to help turn London Underground into a system fit for the 21st century."

If anyone had to eat their words, the bosses of these consortia would have alphabetti spaghetti on the menu for years to come ...

In 1998, the recently-elected New Labour government announced a ‘public-private partnership’ for London Underground. Operations would remain in the public sector, but the infrastructure would transfer to private consortia on 30-year leases.

Both London Underground and Tube Lines - and, no doubt, many other companies - will tell us that they "have to" cut jobs because of the economic crisis. But a look at London Underground's history shows that this is not just untrue - it is the opposite of the truth.

London Underground began in 1863, when private companies starting opening lines. By the 1920s, the Underground had expanded into a web of lines beneath London, run by several different private companies.

I have tabled these thoughts for discussion at today's Regional Council Executive meeting ...

For some time, I have been thinking over the potential benefits of enhancing the role of grades committees within the Region, and would like to schedule a discussion on the subject at this month's Regional Council Executive, with a view to circulating some firm proposals in good time for February's AGM. Here are some thoughts:

I've written the following article for 'Solidarity' newspaper ...

A decision by the PPP Arbiter in December may prove to be a fatal punch to private infrastructure company Tube Lines and the whole ‘Public-Private Partnership’ set-up on London Underground.

The New Labour government imposed the PPP at the very end of 2002, despite widespread opposition. PPP organised the Underground’s infrastructure into three groups of lines, and transferred them to private consortia known as Infracos, two to now-defunct Metronet, one – the Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly lines – to Tube Lines.

On 17 December, the PPP Arbiter published an important document, which may turn out to be a staging post in the collapse of Tube Lines and – following 2007’s similar collapse of Metronet – of the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) itself.

It also contains information about issues of great concern to London Underground and TubeLines staff - including problems with the Jubilee line upgrade, pensions, the London Living Wage, cuts in stations refurbishments, "machine-room-less escalators", and engineering staff working across all lines.

As it is a very long and technical document, I have attempted to summarise and explain it here.

Under RMT's rule book, a member could only stand for election as a delegate to the union's Annual General Meeting (AGM) once s/he had been a member for five years. Many union branches felt that this rule was unfair and out-of-date, and submitted a proposal to last Friday's Special Meeting to reduce the qualifying period to three years.

I am pleased to report that, following a lively debate and a close vote, the proposal was passed. Printed below is the speech I made in proposing the rule change, which outlines the reasons and arguments behind the change.

=====

As a supporter of the four rule changes to be discussed at the forthcoming RMT Special General Meeting, I have written this guide to the proposals and how they would improve the democracy of the union.

More time for branches to submit amendments

RULE 3, GOVERNMENT OF THE UNION - ANNUAL AND SPECIAL GENERAL MEETINGS

(i) Clause 5:

delete "8th April" and insert "1st April"

delete "first Thursday in May" and insert "8th May"

RMT's Annual General Meeting took place in the Isle of Man at the start of July. The delegates from London Transport region were: Bill Teale (LU Fleet branch), Bob Law (Jubilee South and East London Line branch), Brian Munro (Bakerloo line branch), Glenroy Watson (Finsbury Park branch), Janine Booth (Stratford no.1 branch), Linda Wiles (TfL no.1 branch), Mick Crossey (Camden 3 branch), Paul O'Brien (LU Engineering branch), Vaughan Thomas (Central Line West branch).

This is my personal report on the RMT AGM, which has also been published in 'Solidarity' newspaper, and on Stroppyblog.

Rail and transport union RMT held its annual general meeting from 28 June to 2 July, against a backdrop of employers attacking jobs and conditions across the industry.

The AGM was unanimously determined to resist these attacks. However, thousands of job cuts are going ahead, several strike ballots have been voted down, and it was not entirely clear how the union plans to turn this situation around.

At RMT's AGM, I proposed this resolution on behalf of Stratford no.1 branch. Lots of delegates spoke in favour of the resolution, telling stories of management abuse of sick staff in their company and/or area. This relates strongly to one of the three issues of our current Jobs Pay and Justice dispute. The resolution was passed unanimously. This is the text of my speech.

Across our industry, employers are clamping down on sickness absence.

Refusal to work on the grounds of safety - rights for pregnant women and new mothers

At RMT's AGM, the General Secretary presents a written report, and delegates can question and comment on it. These are the two points that I raised:

=====

There are two issues that are not in the Report, which I think should have been.

=====

Firstly, refusal to work on the grounds of safety.

Last month, Israel Railways, a state-owned company, launched a new policy denying employment to railroad crossing guards who have no permit to carry weapons - that is: who have not served in the Israeli army. This policy will lead to the lay-off of the approximately 150 Arab railway workers who monitor and maintain Israel's level crossings.