A very sensible and reliable person contacted me to discuss what he had overheard while travelling recently on a London underground train. He was sitting next to four “suits” who were wearing what appeared to be either Network Rail or their contractor’s identification badges. These people were managers who were loudly discussing company business, regardless of who was sitting next to them.
It was in the afternoon so they may have had a long liquid lunch. However, my contact was astounded to hear these managers openly discuss how they will get rid of the RMT (the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers) members in a forthcoming reorganisation. They boasted about how they will be sitting on the interview panels and ensure that RMT members will not be successful in getting jobs.
Now, I may not be over impressed with the RMT Leadership over various issues, but this does make you think about the reasons why the RMT are militant. If their managers are so arrogant that they feel they can openly boast about sacking people on the basis of their trade union membership then faced with such rubbish no wonder the RMT believe that they have to be so stroppy. I think this is called “Cause and effect”?
Thursday, 23 April 2009
Pandemic Flu
Pandemic Flu Guidance for Unions June 2007
Introduction
Pandemic influenza is very different from, and far more serious than, the usual seasonal influenza outbreaks that happen every year. A pandemic is an outbreak that may affect hundreds of millions of people worldwide, leading to a large proportion of them becoming ill. Pandemic flu occurs when a new influenza virus emerges that is very different from ordinary seasonal flu and, because it is new, people have very little or no immunity to it. There are normally around two to three such pandemics every century. The most recent pandemic was in 1968 and affected mainly the young and the elderly. An earlier outbreak in 1918 caused an estimated 20-40 million deaths worldwide, most of which occurred among people aged between 20 and 45.
Pandemic influenza is also very different from avian flu, which is the general name given to a number of influenza viruses that birds get but which can, in some circumstances, be transmitted to humans. Some of these are harmless to humans while others can be fatal. However, because they are not passed from human to human they are not spread as quickly as human influenza viruses and so are much easier to contain. It is possible however that avian influenza (or any other animal influenza virus) could mutate in a way that made it easier to be passed from person to person. This could lead to a pandemic outbreak.
Once a virus is very easily passed from person to person then it is likely to spread very quickly. It can be transmitted through touching anything that is contaminated with the virus, or from casual contact between people. Normally illness develops two to three days after infection, although the effects of previous pandemics have varied considerably.
It is estimated that from the initial outbreak of a new influenza virus strain, once it is in the UK, it could spread to all major cities within one to two weeks with a peak around 50 days from initial entry in the country. Influenza pandemics occur either in a single wave or several waves several weeks apart.
The fatality rate for previous pandemics has varied from 0.2% to 2% with between 25% and 50% of the population being affected during the outbreak. This compares with a death rate from avian H5N1 virus of over 50%. However, this virus is very different from pandemic influenza and is not passed from person to person. It is believed that if H5N1 were to change so that it could be easily spread it would have a much lower fatality rate.
The government’s “worst case” guess is that the 50% of the population could become ill over a period of 3-6 months with a maximum of 750,000 deaths as a result.
However this is the worst of the likely outcomes and, in reality any pandemic would probably be much less severe. It should be stressed that when an influenza pandemic is likely to break out, and the likely severity if it does, are both completely unknown. Nevertheless, the TUC supports the government view that contingency plans should be put in place to ensure that, in the event of a pandemic developing, its effects are minimised as far as possible. That means that plans must be flexible enough to cover all possible eventualities.
Why pandemic influenza is an issue for trade unions
The possibility of an influenza pandemic is more than just a public health issue. It will have a major effect in the workplace. Large numbers of people are likely to be absent at any one time. In the event of schools closing (which is a high possibility) many workers with children will find it impossible to go to work.
Likewise, those who have partners or dependents who become ill may also not come to work. This would have a major impact on all aspects of health and social care, as well as on the economy as whole.
The TUC believes that trade unions and employers, working together, can make a significant difference in ensuring that the effects of a pandemic are minimised, that the workforce are educated and informed on transmission issues, and in helping ensure there is no panic.
Unions will also have a major part to play in ensuring that those workers who are ill as a result of infection stay at home and do not come in to work either through misplaced loyalty or employer pressure.
In addition, it is important that the effect of any pandemic does not hit those who are more vulnerable hardest, such as the low paid, those who don’t have permanent employment or sick pay schemes and those who have dependents.
The government plan
The government has produced a detailed plan for dealing with an influenza pandemic. It outlines the roles of various government and public bodies as well as the contribution of the voluntary sector and community networks. Much of the plan has been piloted in special government exercises or simulations, but the real effect will not be known until an actual pandemic breaks out. It is only then that we will be able to assess the likely number of people who will be affected, the mortality rate, the effect on emergency services and the economy, and how people will react.
Clearly this will be much more than just a health emergency. Although priority must be given to ensuring that medical treatment is made available as quickly as possible to as many people as possible, efforts must also be made to ensure maintenance of essential services and continuity of basic functions such as transport, energy, finance, law and order, and food supply.
The government will have to make very difficult decisions on matters such as whether or not to close schools and group childcare activities. The decision on this will have a major impact on the ability of not only industry, but also the health service and social services to function. Decisions will also have to be made on access to either vaccinations when they become available, or anti viral medicines. The government is planning to maintain stocks of sufficient anti viral medicines to cover 25% of the population. It is not known whether this quantity will be sufficient or whether the anti virals stocked will be effective against the particular strain of influenza which appears.
In addition to the national framework for responding to a pandemic, the government has also produced an ethical framework against which decisions on such issues should be made.
Why you must act now
It is important that employers do not wait until the outbreak of pandemic flu before considering what measures they need to take. At the same time, it is also important that people do not take panic measures. Although the government response is based on the “worst case scenario”, with the closure of schools, major problems with transport and distribution, and very high levels of sickness, it will be impossible to predict the actual full effect of a pandemic until the beginnings of an outbreak.
That is why forward planning must be flexible, practical, and based on realistic assessments of likely risk.
This does not necessarily mean starting from scratch. Many employers will already have general plans for a major incident so planning for an influenza pandemic can often be incorporated into general emergency planning.
As media attention to the risk of pandemic influenza increases, fuelled by occasional outbreaks of avian flu, employers will become susceptible to approaches from unscrupulous companies who will attempt to sell them anti viral medicine or protective equipment, much of which may have no practical effect or even prove counter productive.
What unions can do
Trade unions should ensure that their employer has in place either a separate policy for dealing with pandemic influenza, or a general policy covering major disasters or incidents that also covers major public health incidents such as pandemic influenza.
It should not be left to employers alone to decide on what is an appropriate response. Unions must also be involved, as any effective policy must have the confidence of the whole workforce.
When considering your employer’s response to pandemic influenza the following are some of the areas that you may wish to address.
Are the employer’s proposals reasonable and practical?
Many employers will have either overly elaborate plans or will simply add “pandemic influenza” onto an existing emergency plan without making any real changes. To be of any use the employer must actually go through the process of considering what effect all the different possible scenarios would have on their staff and how they operate, right up to the worst likely situation of up to 50% of the workforce being off, disruption to transport, and the disruptions to other services that could also arise (such as banking, the internet, supplies etc.)
Among the things that unions should look at are:
• Do the employer’s plans underestimate the possible absence rate in the event of a major pandemic, as a consequence of employee infection and/or if the schools close.?
• Have they looked at issues around supply of materials or services?
• Have all departments been involved in drawing up the plan?
• Does it treat all staff equally?
• Have they considered the operation of functions such as cleaning and catering, if these are not done “in-house”?
Dealing with sickness absence
Some employers are planning for absenteeism rates of up to 50%. This is on the basis that it will not only be those who are ill that are unable to come into work, but also those looking after family members who are ill or those with children in the event of schools being closed. In addition, in the event of a severe pandemic, some staff will be afraid to come into work for fear of contracting the virus. There may also be difficulties with public transport.
While it is impossible to predict the likely rate of absenteeism during a pandemic, trade unions should ensure that employers are committed to equal treatment of all those who are absent. Those who are unable to travel because there is no public transport, or those who have got dependents who they cannot leave, should be treated no differently from those who are themselves ill. It is important that they are not disadvantaged in terms of issues such as pay, compared to those staff who are able to work from home.
Many employers will simply say that they will look at such cases sympathetically but most workers, especially those on low pay, will want to know in advance where they stand, so policies should be agreed beforehand.
Trades unionists will have to ensure that employers do not encourage staff to come in when they are ill and may themselves have to try to ensure that staff do not attempt to come to work through misguided loyalty to their employer or their client or their work colleagues. It is important that all staff who are ill remain at home until fully recovered.
It is likely that increased sickness absence may put pressure on other employees to work longer hours to cover for those who are off. Employers will still be covered by the Working Time Regulations and it will not help if those employees who remain at work find their health being undermined by excessive pressure.
In the event of a pandemic breaking out, unions will want to get involved in discussions with their employers over issues such as staff taking leave.
Does the employer’s plan include remote working?
One of the obvious responses employers are likely to make to a major health crisis is to ensure that staff are given the opportunity of working from home. This should generally be encouraged, but it means that there must be arrangements made to ensure that systems are in place to enable them to do so. That means looking at issues around IT, including broadband capacity and the management and coordination of work.
Another issue for trade unions is the fact that many workers, such as cleaners, are simply not able to work from home.
The TUC is concerned that this may mean that there will be two tiers of staff with those unable to work from home, but who still have domestic responsibilities, being treated differently from those who can work from home if they need to care for a dependant and remote working arrangements should ensure that no staff are disadvantaged through not being able to work at home because of the nature of their job.
Personal protection
Some employers have decided that one of the steps they should take to prepare for a pandemic influenza outbreak is to keep stockpiles of gloves, masks, and hand sanitising liquid. The TUC does not recommend the use of gloves or masks in most workplaces for a variety of reasons. Gloves do not prevent infection as people will still touch their skin with the gloves and then touch another surface or person.
Latex gloves carry significant risks of producing an allergic reaction and were they to be used during an outbreak there would be problems of disposal. There is also no evidence that, outside health care situations, the general use of facemasks has any actual effect on protecting people or reducing the speed of a pandemic’s development. Although the evidence from the recent SARS outbreak suggests that people will seek to use them regardless of any advice on their effectiveness, they are not generally recommended by health professionals. In addition, there is evidence that some people think that if they wear a mask, even if they are ill, they can still come to work. This could lead to increased risk. This is not however the care in health care and where there is likely to be close or frequent contact with symptomatic patients.
The use of hand sanitising liquid is slightly different. It may be that some public organisations will make it available at key entry areas or where there is likely to be contact between people. Public transport systems may use some form of sanitising spray in the event of an outbreak. However, care should be taken to ensure that any products used are fully safe to use and are not likely to exceed their sell-by date within the next few years.
Many employers will also plan to step up their cleaning regimes in the event of an outbreak. However, they should bear in mind that it is likely that the number of cleaning staff may be reduced as a result of illness. Damp rather than dry dusting should be carried out during a pandemic to avoid the generation of dust and it is recommended that the cleaning of surfaces be carried out using a freshly prepared solution of detergent and hot water followed, where necessary, by a chlorine based disinfectant solution.
There may also be proposals to switch off air conditioning systems in large open plan offices or workshops as a way of preventing the virus spreading. The HSE do not recommend this. They state, “the overall effect would be to create more static air which may result in discomfort and ill health effects. The main advantage of air conditioning is that it has a dilution effect on stale/contaminated air and also provides a more comfortable environment overall. Therefore continue running and air conditioning system already provided for the workspace.”
The main type of personal protection that employers are considering is the pre-purchase of anti viral medicines. A number of large employers have already secured sufficient supplies for all their staff and, in some cases, are giving staff the opportunity to purchase supplies for family members in the event of an outbreak.
The TUC has grave concerns over this. It believes that, in the event of an outbreak, the limited stocks of anti-virals that are available should be distributed on the basis of need and effectiveness, and in accordance with an ethical framework. While there is a case for those within the health and social care field and emergency services to be offered treatment as a priority, large corporations keeping supplies simply in order to keep their staff at work could have serious implications for other sectors. The Department of Health does not recommend the stockpiling of private supplies of anti-virals by employers.
Personal hygiene
This is one area which employers can start taking action on straight away. One of the ways in which any virus is likely to spread quickly is through hand to face contact, coughing and sneezing. Employers and union activists can download material from the Department of Health in order to educate people on the importance of hand-washing and the use of handkerchiefs now, rather than waiting for a pandemic to break out.
Many people will simply think that the best way of preventing the spread of the virus is to stay at home while showing symptoms. However many people can be infectious without showing symptoms. This is why unions should support general hygiene campaigns, as a way of slowing the spread of any pandemic should it develop.
Education and Training
Safety representatives are urged to ensure that their employer notifies all their staff of what arrangements they have made to prepare for an outbreak of pandemic flu, including what role they expect individual staff to take. Staff should be given information about pandemic flu and the need for personal hygiene. This should be done in a non-patronising way and with the full involvement of stewards or safety representatives however.
Further information
The HSE has a web page on pandemic influenza which includes advice on what to do in the event of a pandemic being declared:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/biosafety/diseases/pandemic.htm
The Department of Health pandemic influenza website, which includes the current contingency plan is at:
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/PandemicFlu/index.htm
Advice is also available on the Health Protection Agency Website:
http://www.hpa.org.uk/infections/topics_az/influenza/pandemic/default.htm
Introduction
Pandemic influenza is very different from, and far more serious than, the usual seasonal influenza outbreaks that happen every year. A pandemic is an outbreak that may affect hundreds of millions of people worldwide, leading to a large proportion of them becoming ill. Pandemic flu occurs when a new influenza virus emerges that is very different from ordinary seasonal flu and, because it is new, people have very little or no immunity to it. There are normally around two to three such pandemics every century. The most recent pandemic was in 1968 and affected mainly the young and the elderly. An earlier outbreak in 1918 caused an estimated 20-40 million deaths worldwide, most of which occurred among people aged between 20 and 45.
Pandemic influenza is also very different from avian flu, which is the general name given to a number of influenza viruses that birds get but which can, in some circumstances, be transmitted to humans. Some of these are harmless to humans while others can be fatal. However, because they are not passed from human to human they are not spread as quickly as human influenza viruses and so are much easier to contain. It is possible however that avian influenza (or any other animal influenza virus) could mutate in a way that made it easier to be passed from person to person. This could lead to a pandemic outbreak.
Once a virus is very easily passed from person to person then it is likely to spread very quickly. It can be transmitted through touching anything that is contaminated with the virus, or from casual contact between people. Normally illness develops two to three days after infection, although the effects of previous pandemics have varied considerably.
It is estimated that from the initial outbreak of a new influenza virus strain, once it is in the UK, it could spread to all major cities within one to two weeks with a peak around 50 days from initial entry in the country. Influenza pandemics occur either in a single wave or several waves several weeks apart.
The fatality rate for previous pandemics has varied from 0.2% to 2% with between 25% and 50% of the population being affected during the outbreak. This compares with a death rate from avian H5N1 virus of over 50%. However, this virus is very different from pandemic influenza and is not passed from person to person. It is believed that if H5N1 were to change so that it could be easily spread it would have a much lower fatality rate.
The government’s “worst case” guess is that the 50% of the population could become ill over a period of 3-6 months with a maximum of 750,000 deaths as a result.
However this is the worst of the likely outcomes and, in reality any pandemic would probably be much less severe. It should be stressed that when an influenza pandemic is likely to break out, and the likely severity if it does, are both completely unknown. Nevertheless, the TUC supports the government view that contingency plans should be put in place to ensure that, in the event of a pandemic developing, its effects are minimised as far as possible. That means that plans must be flexible enough to cover all possible eventualities.
Why pandemic influenza is an issue for trade unions
The possibility of an influenza pandemic is more than just a public health issue. It will have a major effect in the workplace. Large numbers of people are likely to be absent at any one time. In the event of schools closing (which is a high possibility) many workers with children will find it impossible to go to work.
Likewise, those who have partners or dependents who become ill may also not come to work. This would have a major impact on all aspects of health and social care, as well as on the economy as whole.
The TUC believes that trade unions and employers, working together, can make a significant difference in ensuring that the effects of a pandemic are minimised, that the workforce are educated and informed on transmission issues, and in helping ensure there is no panic.
Unions will also have a major part to play in ensuring that those workers who are ill as a result of infection stay at home and do not come in to work either through misplaced loyalty or employer pressure.
In addition, it is important that the effect of any pandemic does not hit those who are more vulnerable hardest, such as the low paid, those who don’t have permanent employment or sick pay schemes and those who have dependents.
The government plan
The government has produced a detailed plan for dealing with an influenza pandemic. It outlines the roles of various government and public bodies as well as the contribution of the voluntary sector and community networks. Much of the plan has been piloted in special government exercises or simulations, but the real effect will not be known until an actual pandemic breaks out. It is only then that we will be able to assess the likely number of people who will be affected, the mortality rate, the effect on emergency services and the economy, and how people will react.
Clearly this will be much more than just a health emergency. Although priority must be given to ensuring that medical treatment is made available as quickly as possible to as many people as possible, efforts must also be made to ensure maintenance of essential services and continuity of basic functions such as transport, energy, finance, law and order, and food supply.
The government will have to make very difficult decisions on matters such as whether or not to close schools and group childcare activities. The decision on this will have a major impact on the ability of not only industry, but also the health service and social services to function. Decisions will also have to be made on access to either vaccinations when they become available, or anti viral medicines. The government is planning to maintain stocks of sufficient anti viral medicines to cover 25% of the population. It is not known whether this quantity will be sufficient or whether the anti virals stocked will be effective against the particular strain of influenza which appears.
In addition to the national framework for responding to a pandemic, the government has also produced an ethical framework against which decisions on such issues should be made.
Why you must act now
It is important that employers do not wait until the outbreak of pandemic flu before considering what measures they need to take. At the same time, it is also important that people do not take panic measures. Although the government response is based on the “worst case scenario”, with the closure of schools, major problems with transport and distribution, and very high levels of sickness, it will be impossible to predict the actual full effect of a pandemic until the beginnings of an outbreak.
That is why forward planning must be flexible, practical, and based on realistic assessments of likely risk.
This does not necessarily mean starting from scratch. Many employers will already have general plans for a major incident so planning for an influenza pandemic can often be incorporated into general emergency planning.
As media attention to the risk of pandemic influenza increases, fuelled by occasional outbreaks of avian flu, employers will become susceptible to approaches from unscrupulous companies who will attempt to sell them anti viral medicine or protective equipment, much of which may have no practical effect or even prove counter productive.
What unions can do
Trade unions should ensure that their employer has in place either a separate policy for dealing with pandemic influenza, or a general policy covering major disasters or incidents that also covers major public health incidents such as pandemic influenza.
It should not be left to employers alone to decide on what is an appropriate response. Unions must also be involved, as any effective policy must have the confidence of the whole workforce.
When considering your employer’s response to pandemic influenza the following are some of the areas that you may wish to address.
Are the employer’s proposals reasonable and practical?
Many employers will have either overly elaborate plans or will simply add “pandemic influenza” onto an existing emergency plan without making any real changes. To be of any use the employer must actually go through the process of considering what effect all the different possible scenarios would have on their staff and how they operate, right up to the worst likely situation of up to 50% of the workforce being off, disruption to transport, and the disruptions to other services that could also arise (such as banking, the internet, supplies etc.)
Among the things that unions should look at are:
• Do the employer’s plans underestimate the possible absence rate in the event of a major pandemic, as a consequence of employee infection and/or if the schools close.?
• Have they looked at issues around supply of materials or services?
• Have all departments been involved in drawing up the plan?
• Does it treat all staff equally?
• Have they considered the operation of functions such as cleaning and catering, if these are not done “in-house”?
Dealing with sickness absence
Some employers are planning for absenteeism rates of up to 50%. This is on the basis that it will not only be those who are ill that are unable to come into work, but also those looking after family members who are ill or those with children in the event of schools being closed. In addition, in the event of a severe pandemic, some staff will be afraid to come into work for fear of contracting the virus. There may also be difficulties with public transport.
While it is impossible to predict the likely rate of absenteeism during a pandemic, trade unions should ensure that employers are committed to equal treatment of all those who are absent. Those who are unable to travel because there is no public transport, or those who have got dependents who they cannot leave, should be treated no differently from those who are themselves ill. It is important that they are not disadvantaged in terms of issues such as pay, compared to those staff who are able to work from home.
Many employers will simply say that they will look at such cases sympathetically but most workers, especially those on low pay, will want to know in advance where they stand, so policies should be agreed beforehand.
Trades unionists will have to ensure that employers do not encourage staff to come in when they are ill and may themselves have to try to ensure that staff do not attempt to come to work through misguided loyalty to their employer or their client or their work colleagues. It is important that all staff who are ill remain at home until fully recovered.
It is likely that increased sickness absence may put pressure on other employees to work longer hours to cover for those who are off. Employers will still be covered by the Working Time Regulations and it will not help if those employees who remain at work find their health being undermined by excessive pressure.
In the event of a pandemic breaking out, unions will want to get involved in discussions with their employers over issues such as staff taking leave.
Does the employer’s plan include remote working?
One of the obvious responses employers are likely to make to a major health crisis is to ensure that staff are given the opportunity of working from home. This should generally be encouraged, but it means that there must be arrangements made to ensure that systems are in place to enable them to do so. That means looking at issues around IT, including broadband capacity and the management and coordination of work.
Another issue for trade unions is the fact that many workers, such as cleaners, are simply not able to work from home.
The TUC is concerned that this may mean that there will be two tiers of staff with those unable to work from home, but who still have domestic responsibilities, being treated differently from those who can work from home if they need to care for a dependant and remote working arrangements should ensure that no staff are disadvantaged through not being able to work at home because of the nature of their job.
Personal protection
Some employers have decided that one of the steps they should take to prepare for a pandemic influenza outbreak is to keep stockpiles of gloves, masks, and hand sanitising liquid. The TUC does not recommend the use of gloves or masks in most workplaces for a variety of reasons. Gloves do not prevent infection as people will still touch their skin with the gloves and then touch another surface or person.
Latex gloves carry significant risks of producing an allergic reaction and were they to be used during an outbreak there would be problems of disposal. There is also no evidence that, outside health care situations, the general use of facemasks has any actual effect on protecting people or reducing the speed of a pandemic’s development. Although the evidence from the recent SARS outbreak suggests that people will seek to use them regardless of any advice on their effectiveness, they are not generally recommended by health professionals. In addition, there is evidence that some people think that if they wear a mask, even if they are ill, they can still come to work. This could lead to increased risk. This is not however the care in health care and where there is likely to be close or frequent contact with symptomatic patients.
The use of hand sanitising liquid is slightly different. It may be that some public organisations will make it available at key entry areas or where there is likely to be contact between people. Public transport systems may use some form of sanitising spray in the event of an outbreak. However, care should be taken to ensure that any products used are fully safe to use and are not likely to exceed their sell-by date within the next few years.
Many employers will also plan to step up their cleaning regimes in the event of an outbreak. However, they should bear in mind that it is likely that the number of cleaning staff may be reduced as a result of illness. Damp rather than dry dusting should be carried out during a pandemic to avoid the generation of dust and it is recommended that the cleaning of surfaces be carried out using a freshly prepared solution of detergent and hot water followed, where necessary, by a chlorine based disinfectant solution.
There may also be proposals to switch off air conditioning systems in large open plan offices or workshops as a way of preventing the virus spreading. The HSE do not recommend this. They state, “the overall effect would be to create more static air which may result in discomfort and ill health effects. The main advantage of air conditioning is that it has a dilution effect on stale/contaminated air and also provides a more comfortable environment overall. Therefore continue running and air conditioning system already provided for the workspace.”
The main type of personal protection that employers are considering is the pre-purchase of anti viral medicines. A number of large employers have already secured sufficient supplies for all their staff and, in some cases, are giving staff the opportunity to purchase supplies for family members in the event of an outbreak.
The TUC has grave concerns over this. It believes that, in the event of an outbreak, the limited stocks of anti-virals that are available should be distributed on the basis of need and effectiveness, and in accordance with an ethical framework. While there is a case for those within the health and social care field and emergency services to be offered treatment as a priority, large corporations keeping supplies simply in order to keep their staff at work could have serious implications for other sectors. The Department of Health does not recommend the stockpiling of private supplies of anti-virals by employers.
Personal hygiene
This is one area which employers can start taking action on straight away. One of the ways in which any virus is likely to spread quickly is through hand to face contact, coughing and sneezing. Employers and union activists can download material from the Department of Health in order to educate people on the importance of hand-washing and the use of handkerchiefs now, rather than waiting for a pandemic to break out.
Many people will simply think that the best way of preventing the spread of the virus is to stay at home while showing symptoms. However many people can be infectious without showing symptoms. This is why unions should support general hygiene campaigns, as a way of slowing the spread of any pandemic should it develop.
Education and Training
Safety representatives are urged to ensure that their employer notifies all their staff of what arrangements they have made to prepare for an outbreak of pandemic flu, including what role they expect individual staff to take. Staff should be given information about pandemic flu and the need for personal hygiene. This should be done in a non-patronising way and with the full involvement of stewards or safety representatives however.
Further information
The HSE has a web page on pandemic influenza which includes advice on what to do in the event of a pandemic being declared:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/biosafety/diseases/pandemic.htm
The Department of Health pandemic influenza website, which includes the current contingency plan is at:
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/PandemicFlu/index.htm
Advice is also available on the Health Protection Agency Website:
http://www.hpa.org.uk/infections/topics_az/influenza/pandemic/default.htm
Model letter to your member of Parliament
Above is a model letter that can be used by members to lobby their MP's on the matter of the workbank deferral's. It ask's them to meet you at the lobby of the Houses of Parliament on the afternoon of 5th, or alternately at the local consituency office at a time convenient to them. Also it asks them to sign and support Early Day Motion 1271.
Network Rail letter to TOC's and FOC's
Letter from Robin Grisby to Train Operating Companies(TOC's) and Freight Operating Companies(FOC's)giving Network Rail's reasoning behind their decision on workbank deferrals. Click on images to enlarge.
Saturday, 11 April 2009
Shameful and undemocratic legal challenge by Tube bosses
LONDON UNDERGROUND’S biggest union today expressed outrage at a ‘shameful and undemocratic’ legal challenge by Tube bosses that has forced the re-run of a strike ballot of more than 9,000 RMT members – despite it yielding a five-to-one majority for action.
RMT today said it would re-run the ballot on the same issues of jobs and pay as soon as possible after the union received a detailed legal letter designed purely to undermine the ballot and as a preliminary to a court challenge.
A separate ballot of several hundred RMT members at Transport for London on similar issues, which also yielded an overwhelming majority for action, will also be re-run to ensure that the two disputes can continue to be run in tandem.
“Our members have given their overwhelming verdict on LUL’s plans to cut jobs and pay, but Tube bosses have used anti-union laws to thwart their democratic will,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today
“LUL’s lawyers have leapt on minor discrepancies that cannot possibly have affected the outcome of the ballot.
“RMT, as it always does, conducted the ballot to the best of its ability in accordance with laws that are designed to make it as difficult as possible for working people to take industrial action – and the bigger the ballot the greater scope for lawyers to find fault.
“The facts remain that LUL and TfL want to axe as many as 3,000 jobs and are looking for pay cuts in order to make our members pay for a crisis that is not of their making when their productivity is at an all-time high.
“The only possible response is to re-run the ballots as swiftly as we can and to urge our members to vent their frustration and anger by returning even bigger majorities for action,” Bob Crow said.
RMT today said it would re-run the ballot on the same issues of jobs and pay as soon as possible after the union received a detailed legal letter designed purely to undermine the ballot and as a preliminary to a court challenge.
A separate ballot of several hundred RMT members at Transport for London on similar issues, which also yielded an overwhelming majority for action, will also be re-run to ensure that the two disputes can continue to be run in tandem.
“Our members have given their overwhelming verdict on LUL’s plans to cut jobs and pay, but Tube bosses have used anti-union laws to thwart their democratic will,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today
“LUL’s lawyers have leapt on minor discrepancies that cannot possibly have affected the outcome of the ballot.
“RMT, as it always does, conducted the ballot to the best of its ability in accordance with laws that are designed to make it as difficult as possible for working people to take industrial action – and the bigger the ballot the greater scope for lawyers to find fault.
“The facts remain that LUL and TfL want to axe as many as 3,000 jobs and are looking for pay cuts in order to make our members pay for a crisis that is not of their making when their productivity is at an all-time high.
“The only possible response is to re-run the ballots as swiftly as we can and to urge our members to vent their frustration and anger by returning even bigger majorities for action,” Bob Crow said.
Friday, 10 April 2009
Strike action is balloted for!
MORE THAN 3,000 rail engineering workers at six of Network Rail’s key contractors are to be balloted for industrial action by Britain’s biggest rail union over jobs after each failed to give assurances that there would be no compulsory redundancies.
Around 1,000 RMT members at Jarvis have already begun voting on action after the company announced plans to axe 450 jobs, blaming NR’s decision to shelve 28 per cent of track renewals this year. The Jarvis ballot will close on April 21.
The union has also now informed bosses at Balfour Beatty (rail plant and infrastructure divisions), Babcock, Colas, Amey Infrastructure and Volker Rail Plant that it is in dispute after each failed to provide assurances that there would be no forced job losses, or that any transfers would come under ‘TUPE’ transfer of undertakings rules that protect conditions.
The Jarvis ballot is also over the company’s failure to observe the legal requirement for a 90-day consultation period over its plans.
“It is absolutely crazy that hundreds, maybe thousands of skilled rail engineering workers are facing redundancy when Network Rail will spend nearly £3.5 billion on this type of work over the next five years,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.
“NR’s decision to defer nearly a third of this year’s renewals is senseless and reckless, but the contractors should be looking at the long-term picture rather than the short-term effect on shareholder dividends.
“These companies have made tens of millions out of the railways, and they should be taking a hit on their profits rather than cutting jobs. But they have failed to give us simple assurances that there will be no compulsory job losses, and we are urging our members in all six firms to vote for action to defend their jobs.
“For months we have been asking the government to step in and save essential rail jobs.
“If the government is serious about bringing forward transport and green projects to help ride out the recession it cannot stand aside and allow skilled rail workers to be thrown onto the dole – not least in an industry already dependent on government subsidy.
“That is why our members across the rail and Tube industry will lobby parliament on May 5 to demand a moratorium on job cuts, a freeze on dividends and a regime for the industry that will help to stimulate the economy rather than subsidise redundancies,” Bob Crow said.
Notes to editors: The ballot of RMT members at Jarvis will close on April 21, and a timetable for the other ballots will be set shortly.
Rally and Lobby to save rail jobs and services and for a People’s Railway
RMT members from across the rail and Tube networks will be lobbying parliament on May 5 to save green rail jobs and services, and for a people’s railway.
RMT general secretary Bob Crow has written to MPs asking for their support for:
1. The government and Mayor of London to impose a moratorium on job cuts on the railways and London Underground and a freeze on shareholder dividends with profits instead invested to protect jobs and services.
2. An industry-wide programme so our railways can provide a stimulus to the economy to help fight the recession.
3. A wholly integrated, publicly-owned and accountable People’s Railway and London Underground which puts people before profit and where passengers and workers have a real voice.
The full text of the letter follows after the EDM below:
Early Day Motion 794
NETWORK RAIL AND THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN
Tabled by David Drew (Stroud) and signed by April 9 by 50 others
That this House welcomes efforts by the Government to lessen the impact of the recession and save jobs by intervening in the private sector industries, such as the car industry; notes with concern that Network Rail, which is heavily reliant on billions of pounds of Government subsidy is deferring 28 per cent. of rail renewals work, such as track and signals replacements; notes that Network Rail has confirmed in its 2009-10 business plan that this huge reduction in track renewals expenditure will have a major impact on the supply chain with 20 to 30 per cent. less heavy materials resulting in supply chain redundancies; is appalled that this will mean massive job cuts and supports the view of the rail unions that Network Rail's actions undermine the Government's stated intentions to use infrastructure projects to boost employment; further notes with concern that Network Rail is cutting the frequency of track inspections and routine signals maintenance which, combined with the reduction in renewals work, will significantly raise safety risks to passengers and workers; urges the Government to use its power as funder of Network Rail immediately to intervene to ensure that this essential rail renewals work is not deferred, to introduce a moratorium on job cuts and to develop an industry-wide strategy to ensure that railways can be managed in a way which mitigates rather than exacerbates the effects of the economic downturn.
For the latest list of signatories please visit:
http://webmail.rmt.org.uk/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=37854%26SESSION=899
Letter from RMT General Secretary Bob Crow to all MPs, April 9, 2009
Thousands of rail and tube jobs lost or under threat – Tuesday 5 May, Rail Union National Lobby of Parliament and Rally.
I am writing to ask you to support the rally and lobby called by RMT on Tuesday 5th May 2009 to defend rail services and rail jobs.
Rail transport is green transport. Rail jobs are green jobs. Our railways and London Underground should be a powerhouse for a green stimulus to the economy to help beat the recession. Instead thousands of jobs on the railways and London Underground are being threatened or have already been lost.
Today we have been forced to announce a national ballot to fight against rail workers being made redundant at companies who are contracted to Network Rail to renew the rail network. Such renewals work includes laying new track and ballast.
These jobs are in part under threat because Network Rail has decided to make short term “efficiency savings” by deferring almost thirty percent of its renewals work for the next year. Network Rail is subsidised to the tune of £4 billion a year and is in effect controlled by the government. For months we have been imploring the government to intervene and defend these rail jobs. Yet for all the talk of bringing forward transport projects and green projects to help beat the recession the fact is the government is standing aside while skilled rail workers are being thrown on the dole.
This is a pattern being repeated across the industry affecting passenger services, rail infrastructure and rail freight. Despite the railways being heavily reliant on billions of pounds of government subsidy we are seeing a paralysis in government while job losses in the industry are being announced on an almost daily basis.
The job cuts will of course impact on services and significantly raise safety risks. This is all happening while many rail companies continue to rake in big profits and pay big bonuses while charging the most expensive fares in Europe.
Our lobby therefore has three demands and I hope you can support all or some of these.
1. For the government and Mayor of London to impose a moratorium on job cuts on the railways and London Underground and a freeze on shareholder dividends with profits instead invested to protect jobs and services.
2. An industry-wide programme so our railways can provide a stimulus to the economy to help fight the recession.
3. A wholly integrated, publicly-owned and accountable People’s Railway and London Underground which puts people before profit and where passengers and workers have a real voice.
Rail and tube workers will be demonstrating outside Parliament from 1pm to 2pm. There will then be a rally in Committee Room 14 from 2pm - 3.30 and then workers will be available to meet from 3.30 onwards in Central Lobby.
I do hope you can attend the rally and Lobby on 5 May and I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
Bob Crow
General Secretary
Around 1,000 RMT members at Jarvis have already begun voting on action after the company announced plans to axe 450 jobs, blaming NR’s decision to shelve 28 per cent of track renewals this year. The Jarvis ballot will close on April 21.
The union has also now informed bosses at Balfour Beatty (rail plant and infrastructure divisions), Babcock, Colas, Amey Infrastructure and Volker Rail Plant that it is in dispute after each failed to provide assurances that there would be no forced job losses, or that any transfers would come under ‘TUPE’ transfer of undertakings rules that protect conditions.
The Jarvis ballot is also over the company’s failure to observe the legal requirement for a 90-day consultation period over its plans.
“It is absolutely crazy that hundreds, maybe thousands of skilled rail engineering workers are facing redundancy when Network Rail will spend nearly £3.5 billion on this type of work over the next five years,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.
“NR’s decision to defer nearly a third of this year’s renewals is senseless and reckless, but the contractors should be looking at the long-term picture rather than the short-term effect on shareholder dividends.
“These companies have made tens of millions out of the railways, and they should be taking a hit on their profits rather than cutting jobs. But they have failed to give us simple assurances that there will be no compulsory job losses, and we are urging our members in all six firms to vote for action to defend their jobs.
“For months we have been asking the government to step in and save essential rail jobs.
“If the government is serious about bringing forward transport and green projects to help ride out the recession it cannot stand aside and allow skilled rail workers to be thrown onto the dole – not least in an industry already dependent on government subsidy.
“That is why our members across the rail and Tube industry will lobby parliament on May 5 to demand a moratorium on job cuts, a freeze on dividends and a regime for the industry that will help to stimulate the economy rather than subsidise redundancies,” Bob Crow said.
Notes to editors: The ballot of RMT members at Jarvis will close on April 21, and a timetable for the other ballots will be set shortly.
Rally and Lobby to save rail jobs and services and for a People’s Railway
RMT members from across the rail and Tube networks will be lobbying parliament on May 5 to save green rail jobs and services, and for a people’s railway.
RMT general secretary Bob Crow has written to MPs asking for their support for:
1. The government and Mayor of London to impose a moratorium on job cuts on the railways and London Underground and a freeze on shareholder dividends with profits instead invested to protect jobs and services.
2. An industry-wide programme so our railways can provide a stimulus to the economy to help fight the recession.
3. A wholly integrated, publicly-owned and accountable People’s Railway and London Underground which puts people before profit and where passengers and workers have a real voice.
The full text of the letter follows after the EDM below:
Early Day Motion 794
NETWORK RAIL AND THE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN
Tabled by David Drew (Stroud) and signed by April 9 by 50 others
That this House welcomes efforts by the Government to lessen the impact of the recession and save jobs by intervening in the private sector industries, such as the car industry; notes with concern that Network Rail, which is heavily reliant on billions of pounds of Government subsidy is deferring 28 per cent. of rail renewals work, such as track and signals replacements; notes that Network Rail has confirmed in its 2009-10 business plan that this huge reduction in track renewals expenditure will have a major impact on the supply chain with 20 to 30 per cent. less heavy materials resulting in supply chain redundancies; is appalled that this will mean massive job cuts and supports the view of the rail unions that Network Rail's actions undermine the Government's stated intentions to use infrastructure projects to boost employment; further notes with concern that Network Rail is cutting the frequency of track inspections and routine signals maintenance which, combined with the reduction in renewals work, will significantly raise safety risks to passengers and workers; urges the Government to use its power as funder of Network Rail immediately to intervene to ensure that this essential rail renewals work is not deferred, to introduce a moratorium on job cuts and to develop an industry-wide strategy to ensure that railways can be managed in a way which mitigates rather than exacerbates the effects of the economic downturn.
For the latest list of signatories please visit:
http://webmail.rmt.org.uk/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=37854%26SESSION=899
Letter from RMT General Secretary Bob Crow to all MPs, April 9, 2009
Thousands of rail and tube jobs lost or under threat – Tuesday 5 May, Rail Union National Lobby of Parliament and Rally.
I am writing to ask you to support the rally and lobby called by RMT on Tuesday 5th May 2009 to defend rail services and rail jobs.
Rail transport is green transport. Rail jobs are green jobs. Our railways and London Underground should be a powerhouse for a green stimulus to the economy to help beat the recession. Instead thousands of jobs on the railways and London Underground are being threatened or have already been lost.
Today we have been forced to announce a national ballot to fight against rail workers being made redundant at companies who are contracted to Network Rail to renew the rail network. Such renewals work includes laying new track and ballast.
These jobs are in part under threat because Network Rail has decided to make short term “efficiency savings” by deferring almost thirty percent of its renewals work for the next year. Network Rail is subsidised to the tune of £4 billion a year and is in effect controlled by the government. For months we have been imploring the government to intervene and defend these rail jobs. Yet for all the talk of bringing forward transport projects and green projects to help beat the recession the fact is the government is standing aside while skilled rail workers are being thrown on the dole.
This is a pattern being repeated across the industry affecting passenger services, rail infrastructure and rail freight. Despite the railways being heavily reliant on billions of pounds of government subsidy we are seeing a paralysis in government while job losses in the industry are being announced on an almost daily basis.
The job cuts will of course impact on services and significantly raise safety risks. This is all happening while many rail companies continue to rake in big profits and pay big bonuses while charging the most expensive fares in Europe.
Our lobby therefore has three demands and I hope you can support all or some of these.
1. For the government and Mayor of London to impose a moratorium on job cuts on the railways and London Underground and a freeze on shareholder dividends with profits instead invested to protect jobs and services.
2. An industry-wide programme so our railways can provide a stimulus to the economy to help fight the recession.
3. A wholly integrated, publicly-owned and accountable People’s Railway and London Underground which puts people before profit and where passengers and workers have a real voice.
Rail and tube workers will be demonstrating outside Parliament from 1pm to 2pm. There will then be a rally in Committee Room 14 from 2pm - 3.30 and then workers will be available to meet from 3.30 onwards in Central Lobby.
I do hope you can attend the rally and Lobby on 5 May and I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
Bob Crow
General Secretary
Tuesday, 7 April 2009
National Rally and Lobby of Parliament for a Publicly Owned People’s Railway
Defend rail and tube jobs services: national rally and lobby of parliament for a publicly owned people’s railway, Tuesday May 5
Rail bosses are using the recession as an excuse to attack jobs and conditions and cut back on services and essential rail works. Thousands of jobs are being threatened or have been lost. At the same time rail fat cats are raking in big profits and bonuses on the back of the most expensive fares in Europe. Make no mistake: as the recession worsens so will the attack on rail workers and rail services.
Join the national demonstration and lobby of parliament to demand
· An end to cuts in rail jobs and services. A freeze in shareholder dividends with all profits instead invested to protect services and jobs.
· An urgent industry-wide programme so our railways can provide a green stimulus to the economy to help fight the economic downturn.
· A wholly integrated, publicly-owned and accountable People’s Railway and London Underground which put people before profit and where passengers and workers have a real voice
Rally and Lobby Details
1.00: Assemble and demonstrate outside Houses of Parliament (nearest tube Westminster)
2.00. Rally in Committee Room 14, Houses of Parliament
3.30 Lobby Your MP
If you intend to lobby your MP write as soon as possible to make an appointment to meet them on the day. I attach a model message you can use to send to your MP. You can find out who your MP is and send an email by clicking on http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/commons/l/. You can also ring your MP on the House of Commons switchboard 020 7219 3000.
Visit www.rmt.org.uk to download other lobby and campaign material and click on the link below to look at the Early Day Motion 1271 in support of the campaign tabled by the Convenor of the RMT Parliamentary Group, John McDonnell MP.
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=38395&SESSION=899
Join the rally. Defend Jobs. Defend Services. For a People’s Railway
Bob Crow
RMT General Secretary
Rail bosses are using the recession as an excuse to attack jobs and conditions and cut back on services and essential rail works. Thousands of jobs are being threatened or have been lost. At the same time rail fat cats are raking in big profits and bonuses on the back of the most expensive fares in Europe. Make no mistake: as the recession worsens so will the attack on rail workers and rail services.
Join the national demonstration and lobby of parliament to demand
· An end to cuts in rail jobs and services. A freeze in shareholder dividends with all profits instead invested to protect services and jobs.
· An urgent industry-wide programme so our railways can provide a green stimulus to the economy to help fight the economic downturn.
· A wholly integrated, publicly-owned and accountable People’s Railway and London Underground which put people before profit and where passengers and workers have a real voice
Rally and Lobby Details
1.00: Assemble and demonstrate outside Houses of Parliament (nearest tube Westminster)
2.00. Rally in Committee Room 14, Houses of Parliament
3.30 Lobby Your MP
If you intend to lobby your MP write as soon as possible to make an appointment to meet them on the day. I attach a model message you can use to send to your MP. You can find out who your MP is and send an email by clicking on http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/commons/l/. You can also ring your MP on the House of Commons switchboard 020 7219 3000.
Visit www.rmt.org.uk to download other lobby and campaign material and click on the link below to look at the Early Day Motion 1271 in support of the campaign tabled by the Convenor of the RMT Parliamentary Group, John McDonnell MP.
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=38395&SESSION=899
Join the rally. Defend Jobs. Defend Services. For a People’s Railway
Bob Crow
RMT General Secretary
London Midland 48-hour strike “absolutely rock-solid”
BRITAIN’S BIGGEST rail union today hailed an “absolutely rock-solid” 48-hour strike by 100 conductors at three London Midland depots in a long-running dispute over Sunday working.
RMT, whose members at Bletchley, Northampton and Watford began their third wave of strike action just after midnight on Sunday, called on the company to recognise the strength of feeling on the issue and to negotiate a settlement based on voluntary Sunday working.
The union also accused London Midland of misleading passengers after it emerged that the railways inspectorate had not approved a three-day training regime for managers undertaking safety critical duties that normally require three months’ training.
The inspectorate has begun an investigation into a dossier of safety breaches the union believes have occurred on strike days, and it has already told the company that its arrangements needed “strengthening”.
RMT added that passengers travelling on Sunday would have been put at additional risk because trains were travelling over diversionary routes for which even fully competent conductors would have required refreshed knowledge.
“Our members have demonstrated once again how determined they are to see justice done over Sunday working,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.
“The company knows it has no shortage of volunteers to work Sundays, yet for some reason it is clinging to the Victorian notion that staff should have no say over working up to 60 hours a week.
“London Midland should be clearing the way towards proper restructuring talks by accepting that compulsory Sundays are not on, and our members have made it clear that the offer put on the table last week simply does not address the basic problem.
“The company has tried to convince the public that giving managers just three days’ training was safe, but now that figleaf is gone I hope that passengers will join us in telling them to stop playing games with people’s safety and negotiate seriously,” Bob Crow said.
Notes to editors: RMT conductors at Bletchley, Northampton and Watford depots began their 48-hour strike at 00:01 on Sunday, April 5.
The conductors have already taken action on March 13 and 16 after voting overwhelmingly for action in January over attempts by the company to pressure staff into working Sundays.
Safety breaches believed to have taken place include a train delayed at Northampton because a retail platform manager doing the conductor’s duties did not know where to insert the key to activate the door controls.
Another reports suggests that a manager on a train departing from Euston gave a dispatcher at Euston a green flag, (safe to proceed), despite the driver’s cab door still being open – indicating that the signal had been given without knowledge that all doors were shut.
Another suggests that a manager in charge of a train from Bletchley gave a ‘ready to start’ signal at Hemel Hempstead while the signal was on red.
The union also understands that stand-in managers involved in incidents have not been tested for drugs or alcohol as normal procedure demands, and that at least one staff member who witnessed a safety breach was asked not to submit a report.
RMT, whose members at Bletchley, Northampton and Watford began their third wave of strike action just after midnight on Sunday, called on the company to recognise the strength of feeling on the issue and to negotiate a settlement based on voluntary Sunday working.
The union also accused London Midland of misleading passengers after it emerged that the railways inspectorate had not approved a three-day training regime for managers undertaking safety critical duties that normally require three months’ training.
The inspectorate has begun an investigation into a dossier of safety breaches the union believes have occurred on strike days, and it has already told the company that its arrangements needed “strengthening”.
RMT added that passengers travelling on Sunday would have been put at additional risk because trains were travelling over diversionary routes for which even fully competent conductors would have required refreshed knowledge.
“Our members have demonstrated once again how determined they are to see justice done over Sunday working,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.
“The company knows it has no shortage of volunteers to work Sundays, yet for some reason it is clinging to the Victorian notion that staff should have no say over working up to 60 hours a week.
“London Midland should be clearing the way towards proper restructuring talks by accepting that compulsory Sundays are not on, and our members have made it clear that the offer put on the table last week simply does not address the basic problem.
“The company has tried to convince the public that giving managers just three days’ training was safe, but now that figleaf is gone I hope that passengers will join us in telling them to stop playing games with people’s safety and negotiate seriously,” Bob Crow said.
Notes to editors: RMT conductors at Bletchley, Northampton and Watford depots began their 48-hour strike at 00:01 on Sunday, April 5.
The conductors have already taken action on March 13 and 16 after voting overwhelmingly for action in January over attempts by the company to pressure staff into working Sundays.
Safety breaches believed to have taken place include a train delayed at Northampton because a retail platform manager doing the conductor’s duties did not know where to insert the key to activate the door controls.
Another reports suggests that a manager on a train departing from Euston gave a dispatcher at Euston a green flag, (safe to proceed), despite the driver’s cab door still being open – indicating that the signal had been given without knowledge that all doors were shut.
Another suggests that a manager in charge of a train from Bletchley gave a ‘ready to start’ signal at Hemel Hempstead while the signal was on red.
The union also understands that stand-in managers involved in incidents have not been tested for drugs or alcohol as normal procedure demands, and that at least one staff member who witnessed a safety breach was asked not to submit a report.
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
RMT tonight expressed its horror at the loss of life involved in the helicopter crash.
Union calls for model involved to be grounded pending investigation
OFFSHORE UNION RMT tonight expressed its horror at the loss of life involved in the helicopter crash that took place in the North Sea off Peterhead this afternoon.
The union tonight urged that the helicopter model involved – the Super Puma AS 332L – be grounded as a precaution pending an investigation into what caused an apparent catastrophic failure of the aircraft before it crashed.
“All our thoughts are with the families of those involved in this appalling tragedy, and our Aberdeen team will be offering whatever assistance and advice it can at this awful time,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said tonight.
“Reports indicate that today’s crash was the result of a catastrophic failure in the aircraft, and it would make sense for the model involved to be grounded until it is clear what caused it,” said RMT offshore organiser Jake Molloy.
“The crash six weeks ago rang serious alarm bells, and today’s will have shattered confidence in helicopter safety that took years to rebuild after a spate of crashes in the 80s and 90s.”
“The industry owes it to those who have died today to show that it is doing everything in its power to pinpoint exactly what went wrong and ensure that it does not happen again,” Jake Molloy said.
OFFSHORE UNION RMT tonight expressed its horror at the loss of life involved in the helicopter crash that took place in the North Sea off Peterhead this afternoon.
The union tonight urged that the helicopter model involved – the Super Puma AS 332L – be grounded as a precaution pending an investigation into what caused an apparent catastrophic failure of the aircraft before it crashed.
“All our thoughts are with the families of those involved in this appalling tragedy, and our Aberdeen team will be offering whatever assistance and advice it can at this awful time,” RMT general secretary Bob Crow said tonight.
“Reports indicate that today’s crash was the result of a catastrophic failure in the aircraft, and it would make sense for the model involved to be grounded until it is clear what caused it,” said RMT offshore organiser Jake Molloy.
“The crash six weeks ago rang serious alarm bells, and today’s will have shattered confidence in helicopter safety that took years to rebuild after a spate of crashes in the 80s and 90s.”
“The industry owes it to those who have died today to show that it is doing everything in its power to pinpoint exactly what went wrong and ensure that it does not happen again,” Jake Molloy said.
RMT Cuba Garden Party
RMT Cuba Garden Party – Wednesday 24th June 2009
In association with the Cuba Solidarity Campaign I am writing to invite you and your colleagues to the seventh RMT annual garden party for Cuba which will take place on Wednesday 24th June 2009 at Maritime House, Clapham, London, commencing at 7pm.
This year tickets are £15 each, including a free bar, buffet and music. We will also once again be joined by a number of distinguished guest speakers.
As well as supporting a good cause the RMT Cuba night provides a wonderful opportunity to socialise with friends from all over the Labour and Trade Union movement
Ticket numbers are limited, so please order as soon as possible.
Tickets can be ordered by post (cheques payable to RMT) from Cuba Garden Party, RMT, 39 Chalton Street, London NW1 1JD. Pleas indicate number of tickets required, with a contact phone and/or email address.
Credit card orders can be made on 020 7387 4771.
In association with the Cuba Solidarity Campaign I am writing to invite you and your colleagues to the seventh RMT annual garden party for Cuba which will take place on Wednesday 24th June 2009 at Maritime House, Clapham, London, commencing at 7pm.
This year tickets are £15 each, including a free bar, buffet and music. We will also once again be joined by a number of distinguished guest speakers.
As well as supporting a good cause the RMT Cuba night provides a wonderful opportunity to socialise with friends from all over the Labour and Trade Union movement
Ticket numbers are limited, so please order as soon as possible.
Tickets can be ordered by post (cheques payable to RMT) from Cuba Garden Party, RMT, 39 Chalton Street, London NW1 1JD. Pleas indicate number of tickets required, with a contact phone and/or email address.
Credit card orders can be made on 020 7387 4771.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)