JB111

I'm simply trying to provide slightly more facts than the RMT leadership likes Joe Public to see. Frankly I'm neutral on privatizing the tube. As are most people. As I'm not wedded to a single doctrine of 'public sector good' v private sector bad'. It's what works best ... What I am against is a senior Union rep calling another employee a 'scab' and a 'traitor' (this is on the record and admitted) in his place of work and expecting to be let off scott free because he's got powerful allies and the RMT think they can bully LU and it's customers. Let's also not confuse the important role of Unions - absolutely agree v abuse of power (which this case is all about). What the RMT have cleverly done is switch the abuse of power question to make it look like the poor little union rep is being mistreated. BS.

The tribunal process is still underway. Yes LU were offered to reinstate Arwyn into his role as part of the interim judgement, but were perfectly within their rights not to. Especially after he had called another worker on duty a 'scab'. If they had, the abused employee would be within his rights to sue LU. Funny how these details are kept out of the press by the RMT. Less than 30% of membership voted for strike action. 55% didn't even bother (or decided not to go up against their militant leaders). Arwyn is also a well known RMT activist, a member of the socialist party and CATP (campaign against tube privatization). His motivation - like Crow and the rest of the RMT leadership - has little to do with customers and everything to do with keeping themselves in power and causing LU grief. How is it that Crow remains the RMT Union boss after so many years - because he is doing such an excellent job in ensuring his members get a good deal whilst maintaining a productive working relationship with management??? Or the RMTs biased voting system and his cadre of supporters stitch it up? You decide.