Supplementary memorandum by TSSA (LU 02A)
PERFORMANCE OF LONDON UNDERGROUND
At the recent Transport Committee evidence session
to examine the performance of London Underground on Wednesday
8 December 2004, I agreed to write to the Committee with further
evidence supporting the claim that "as the Infraco safety
cases are contractual rather than statutory it should be understood
that these can and have been amended with little meaningful consultation
with trade union representatives".
I can now confirm that at a meeting in November
2004 with Metronet the trade unions raised the question of a bulletin
on Safety Review and Change Control (SRCC) for Metronet BCV and
Metronet SSL published in September. The minutes of the meeting
show the TSSA's concern that the bulletin was reporting a Category
1 safety change together with another safety change of an unspecified
level neither of which had then been the subject of consultation
with the staff representatives. In response Metronet Management
confirmed that consulting staff representatives was an inherent
part of the SRCC submission process and whilst our representatives
in the Infracos confirm that this should be the case they remain
convinced that in terms of delivering the necessary levels of
consultation Management performance is patchy.
The trade unions have also drawn Metronet's
attention to changes in the Asset Engineers' area which which
impacted on the Safety Case. We pointed out that there had been
no prior consultation on these changes although there had been
consultation in respect of changes in Procurement which had fewer
safety implications. The HR Manager Capital Projects has responded
by giving a commitment to ensure that in future "all Tier
2 Safety Secretaries were consulted on all changes". This
example would support our representatives claim that in terms
of consultation Management performance is patchy.
Gerry Doherty
General Secretary
20 December 2004
| 
