The RMT has called of its overtime ban and boycott of the Station Supervisor "development days", due to begin tomorrow (3 September), after London Underground threatened legal action. (See the union's statement for more.)
The details of the legal threats haven't been made public, but presumably LU would have claimed that refusal to attend the "development days" would effectively be a strike, and as RMT didn't issue notice for strike action, the action would therefore be illegal. But the company's own oscillation over whether or not the days were in fact compulsory suggests that this claim would have been shaky, to say the least.
Even if the company's legal case was cast-iron, and the union didn't want a full-on legal confrontation with LU, to call off the action without calling anything else is a big mistake. There is also no reason why the OT ban had to be called off too, as the company's legal threats were only made against the "development days" boycott. Some union officials claimed that, because the boycott and the OT ban were part of the same package of industrial action, if one was legally threatened, they both had to be called off. But there is recent precedent, from an RMT dispute on East Midlands Trains last year, for the union facing injunctions against industrial actions announced as part of a package, but calling off only those elements of the action against which the injunction was sought (and, in that case, granted), and maintaining the rest. See here for more on that.
It is true that TSSA calling off its planned OT ban left RMT in a difficult position. TSSA have let their members down badly, and TSSA activists who want a real fight need to question why their leaders took them to the brink of action but then pulled back without any serious concessions. Uncoupling the "assessment" element from the "development days" is progress, but even TSSA officers must know that the days are all about preparing staff for a new staffing model they're supposed to be still in dispute against! There was a risk that, with TSSA's action off, TSSA members might've picked up the overtime RMT members didn't do. But, while unity is preferable and should be worked towards, if a union has to fight alone, it should. RMT can't be shackled to the slower, more cautious pace of TSSA.
The mere fact that LU was prepared to go to court to get the OT ban and "development day" boycott stopped shows how nervous management are. If RMT names more action now, we could put the pressure back on the company and regain some momentum.
Acting General Secretary Mick Cash's statement mentions a meeting "in September", where LU and RMT will discuss "the outcome of discussions that have already taken place on the final amount of positions reduced under FFTF, guarantees and security around displacements and where the new CSM grades would sit within the machinery of negotiation." Discussing "the outcome of discussions that have already taken place" sounds like going round in circles to us, and "the final amount of positions reduced" sounds like an acceptance of job cuts ("the final amount" should be: ZERO!).
The statement doesn't entirely rule out further action. Cash says: "Should the outcome of the meeting not meet with the aspirations of this union, further industrial action up to and including strike action, will be implemented at the earliest possible date."
Well, unless the "outcome of the meeting" involves management backing down on job cuts and ticket office closures, as far as we're concerned it won't "meet with the aspirations of this union." We should reinstate an OT ban as soon as possible, taking whatever legal advice necessary to guard against the threat of injunctions, and name new strike dates for the coming weeks.