A four-day week for tube drivers is a slap in the face for Londoners
Christmas has come early for tube drivers, who will now work less for more pay. But the government will regret making a deal that proves that strikes work, says James Ford
More money for less work. If you’re a trade union official, that is the holy grail you are pursuing on your members’ behalf in every negotiation with employers. So, hats off then to the leadership of ASLEF, the trade union representing tube drivers, who have achieved just that. Negotiating with Transport for London in recent weeks, these tribunes of the plebs seem to have pulled off a fantastic coup.
To avert two days of strikes in November, TfL has agreed to allow tube drivers to work a four-day week starting next year. This is in addition to a 4.5 per cent pay rise and an extra week of paid parental leave. Whilst drivers’ total paid hours will remain the same, they will now be paid for their meal breaks, meaning that they will spend 2.5 hours less per week in their cabs while earning over £69,000 a year. For tube drivers, Christmas has come early this year.
But a dream deal for tube drivers is likely to be a nightmare for the fare-payers and taxpayers who will ultimately foot the bill. According to the TfL’s 2024 Business Plan, fares revenue currently makes up about 52 per cent of TfL’s annual income with a further 30 per cent (just over £3bn) coming from the taxpayer, via GLA grants and capital funding from the Department for Transport.
Even before this generous pay deal was done the business plan forecast that, by the end of financial year 2026/27, TfL’s income from commercial operations and the taxpayer would fall whilst its income from fares would rise by nearly £1bn (to £6.2bn a year). TfL’s annual borrowing is set to grow fourfold (reaching a total debt of £14bn). Over the same period, TfL’s annual capital investment – the money spent on new trains and infrastructure, expanding services and upgrading technology – will fall from £1.1bn to £0.9bn. This means that passengers will be paying more and getting less.
London’s fare paying public – would be better served investing their money in driverless trains rather than paying bungs to lazy tube drivers
In fact, it is hard to see any way that Londoners will benefit from this deal. Two days of strikes may have been avoided, but the deal makes no mention of ASLEF (or the other major transport union, the RMT, for that matter) agreeing not to strike going forward or even for a fixed period. Given that balloting for strike action is precisely how ASLEF achieved this great victory over TfL, it is hard to see how the unions can draw any other conclusion than that striking works, suggesting that we can expect more strikes not less. (TfL has already suffered an epidemic of industrial action in recent years losing no fewer than 28,401 days to strike action between May 2016 and June 2022).
It is worth remembering that Tube strikes do not just inconvenience Londoners, they cost the capital’s economy dearly. A 2024 assessment by investment bank Panmure Gordon estimated that the daily cost of a tube strike to the London economy was nearly £100m. (Little wonder, then, that a 2017 London Chamber of Commerce & Industry survey found that 73 per cent of London firms backed legislation to restrict tube strikes). It is possible that both TfL and ASLEF will learn all the wrong lessons from this deal. ASLEF will be emboldened to strike – and threaten strike action – more frequently whilst TfL could be tempted to bribe their way out of trouble. But, as Rudyard Kipling noted: “once you have paid him the Danegeld/ You never get rid of the Dane”. TfL – and London’s fare paying public – would be better served investing their money in driverless trains rather than paying bungs to lazy tube drivers.
James Ford is a public affairs consultant. Between 2010 and 2012 he worked as an aide to then Mayor of London Boris Johnson, advising on transport, environment and digital policy