Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
The 24-hour industrial action is part of an ongoing dispute over staffing and the role of conductors. A strike planned for 4 April on Southern routes was moved to 8 April after the company offered fresh talks. NAME_1 said coinciding a strike with the race meeting would damage Liverpool's reputation. Speaking after its failed talks with the union on Monday, NAME_1's managing director NAME_2 said the strikes would "do immeasurable damage" as the "eyes of the world will be on Liverpool" during the Grand National. RMT general secretary NAME_3 said the "cynical and hostile stance from NAME_1" left the union "with no option but to put on this additional strike action". He said the RMT "recognises the severe impact that the action will have" but asked the public "to understand that we have no option but to take this high-profile action to force the company back

Summary:
1. A strike by NAME_1 conductors on the same day as the grand national has been announced by the rmt union.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
 Please use JSON format in your answer.
user