Following RMT's lobbying of Greater London Assembly members on the issue of "snow day pay", both Labour's Valerie Shawcross and the Green Party's Darren Johnson have offered to raise the issue with the Mayor.

Darren Johnson asked the following question and got the following reply:

London Underground pay – Question No 1789/2009, July Mayor’s Question Time

Question by Darren Johnson:

Has London Underground decided to deduct pay or leave from around 500 staff who were unable to attend work on February 2 due to heavy snowfall, despite your promise that no staff in this situation would be penalised?

Answer by Boris Johnson:

London Underground encouraged all staff to make best efforts to get to work on 2 February. Where staff could not get to their usual place of work they were encouraged to get to their local station to help with providing customer information.

Of the 573 staff absent from work on 2 February, 442 chose to take annual leave; 58 chose to take unpaid special leave; 57 were granted special paid leave; 12 were absent for defined reasons e.g. hospital appointments, parental leave and 4 were marked absent without pay.

No blanket policy was applied and managers were encouraged to use their discretion to ensure that those with legitimate reasons for not being able to report for work were not penalised.

Darren's office has asked me if I would like him to pursue this issue. Yes, indeed. I have replied with the following letter, which should help him when he raises the issue at the next Mayor's Question Time in September ...

The Mayor's reply outlines that London Underground has explicitly broken the Mayor's promise that no staff would be penalised. It is explicitly not the case that "those with legitimate reasons for not being able to report for work were not penalised". The Mayor states that "442 chose to take annual leave; 58 chose to take unpaid special leave". The fact is that the only "choice" they were offered was between losing pay or losing leave - both of which, in my book, count as being "penalised". If you offered someone a slap round the face or a punch in the guts, you might find that, say, 71% of them opted for the slap. Then, you could report that 71% of people chose to be slapped in the face - but only if you worked from LUL senior management's dictionary.

I would also point out that the Mayor's statement that "Where staff could not get to their usual place of work they were encouraged to get to their local station to help with providing customer information" is misleading, as LUL in fact did not publish this advice until the afternoon of 2 February, and it was therefore unavailable to the vast majority of staff affected.

I also contest the assetion that "managers were encouraged to use their discretion to ensure that those with legitimate reasons for not being able to report for work were not penalised". When one manager - the Group Station Manager for Gloucester Road group of stations - exercised his discretion in this manner by awarding paid special leave to staff, he was over-ruled by a more senior manager (the Line Performance Manager) and forced to dock his employees' pay or leave instead.

I would also remind the Mayor, and GLA members, that other employers within the TfL family, including TfL itself, honoured the Mayor's stated policy and granted staff paid special leave. But London Underground management are reneging on this assurance and insisting on deducting a day's leave or pay from staff who were genuinely unable to attend work. One notable thing about the Mayor's reply is how near-identical it is to sections of the reply of London Underground's Employee Relations Director to a letter from RMT (read it here: http://www.rmtplatform.org.uk/node/533). I would have hoped that the Mayor would strive to ensure that London Underground senior management apply his policies rather than simply repeat their explanations for not doing so.

We have members who spent hours trying to get to work only to be forced to turn back; members unable to get to work because TfL cancelled the buses; members who were physically snowed in and unable to leave the road on which they live. And yet London Underground insists on treating them as though they had a day's holiday!

RMT has pursued this issue vigorously through the channels of negotiation and representation available to us in London Underground. Political leaders such as yourselves continually urge us to seek resolution of our grievances through such channels, rather than through more confrontational and disruptive methods. However, it is not very encouraging when reasonable, persistent, fact-based representation in an entirely just cause achieves so little.

Despite the Mayor's promise, 500 staff have been penalised for being unable to attend work due to circumstances entirely beyond their control. It seems to them and their workmates that as soon as the snow melted and the media looked elsewhere for news, that promise was readily abandoned.

I hope that you will pursue this issue, as with London Underground management behaving in such an intransigent and unreasonable manner, those staff are relying on their elected representatives to stand up for their right to reasonable treatment.

Thank you
Janine Booth
Secretary, RMT London Transport Regional Council