This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/davehillblog/2015/jul/09/london-tube-strike-is-a-symptom-of-londons-success
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| London Tube strike is a symptom of London's success | London Tube strike is a symptom of London's success |
| (34 minutes later) | |
| At first sight it’s the usual Tube strike tale: the media revel in the “transport chaos”, the Telegraph lists who get paid less than London Underground drivers and Boris Johnson gets belligerent. Then, eventually, everyone who really matters sits down and does a deal. That’s what will happen this time: arcane small print agreements will be reached, small but symbolically important concessions will be made and a Night Tube service will be introduced, which is what the strike is all about in the first place. | |
| Except that it’s about much more than that. The deep backdrop to the dispute, as with so many fraught issues in the capital, are the strains arising from success. London, a global capitalist city growing at a phenomenal speed, is engaged in a constant struggle to meet the demands its triumphs generate. More and better public transport capacity vies with housing and better pay at the top of the list. At the same time, the public money required for meeting that demand has not kept up. Yes, the mayor and Transport for London have secured hefty sums for upgrading the Underground and finishing Crossrail, but if you think that will guarantee you a seat on the Central Line during the morning peak any time soon, think again. | Except that it’s about much more than that. The deep backdrop to the dispute, as with so many fraught issues in the capital, are the strains arising from success. London, a global capitalist city growing at a phenomenal speed, is engaged in a constant struggle to meet the demands its triumphs generate. More and better public transport capacity vies with housing and better pay at the top of the list. At the same time, the public money required for meeting that demand has not kept up. Yes, the mayor and Transport for London have secured hefty sums for upgrading the Underground and finishing Crossrail, but if you think that will guarantee you a seat on the Central Line during the morning peak any time soon, think again. |
| London’s resources may be large and look outrageously unfair to other British cities, but they’re still being stretched thin, including resources of the human kind. London Underground recently shed over 800 of its staff and is replacing traditional ticket offices with more machines in the face of sustained opposition from the RMT and TSSA. But the Night Tube service, a Johnson pledge made with London’s burgeoning night time economy and public appetite in mind, needs staff and money to make it work. Management is required to deliver efficiently before the formal end of Johnson’s City Hall tenure in May next year. With apt terminology, the unions claim that they and the workforce are being railroaded into accepting inadequate terms. Both sides accuse the other of covert political motivation. Neither is willing to play the weakling. The strike, therefore, has the look of destiny. | London’s resources may be large and look outrageously unfair to other British cities, but they’re still being stretched thin, including resources of the human kind. London Underground recently shed over 800 of its staff and is replacing traditional ticket offices with more machines in the face of sustained opposition from the RMT and TSSA. But the Night Tube service, a Johnson pledge made with London’s burgeoning night time economy and public appetite in mind, needs staff and money to make it work. Management is required to deliver efficiently before the formal end of Johnson’s City Hall tenure in May next year. With apt terminology, the unions claim that they and the workforce are being railroaded into accepting inadequate terms. Both sides accuse the other of covert political motivation. Neither is willing to play the weakling. The strike, therefore, has the look of destiny. |
| The big significance of this dispute is, as BBC London’s Tom Edwards documents, that all four of the main Tube unions are involved. That doesn’t happen often and comradely bonds aren’t always warm. The effectiveness of the strike, with every line suspended for the whole of Thursday, is crucially down to the participation of members of Aslef, the union that represents the majority of Tube drivers. Aside from past dust ups over Boxing Day pay, this group of workers doesn’t down tools readily. Its district organiser Finn Brennan chooses the words “sensible and moderate” to describe the organisation, then points to the outcome of the strike ballot: 98% in favour on an 81% turnout. Feelings are running high. | |
| Brennan insists that pay is not the central issue with the Night Tube. It’s about rosters and unsocial shifts and work-life balance in an increasingly pressured system. “There’s an intensification of demands on drivers,” he says. “More and more weekend working, more and more of a squeeze. Throwing money at this won’t help. The London economy is what it is and if you want change, you have to negotiate it through.” | Brennan insists that pay is not the central issue with the Night Tube. It’s about rosters and unsocial shifts and work-life balance in an increasingly pressured system. “There’s an intensification of demands on drivers,” he says. “More and more weekend working, more and more of a squeeze. Throwing money at this won’t help. The London economy is what it is and if you want change, you have to negotiate it through.” |
| London Underground management, of course, contend that they’re the reasonable ones and that the unions have walked away from talks. The blame positioning is nothing new. Neither are the usual cries for “driverless” trains, with their mistaken assumption that greater automation would instantly bring the unions to their knees. As Transport for London will tell you, even “driverless” trains would be staffed and those staff would be free to join unions. Any attempt to take that right away would very properly meet with fierce opposition in a proud London public service where even some station supervisors attach RMT badges to their ties. | London Underground management, of course, contend that they’re the reasonable ones and that the unions have walked away from talks. The blame positioning is nothing new. Neither are the usual cries for “driverless” trains, with their mistaken assumption that greater automation would instantly bring the unions to their knees. As Transport for London will tell you, even “driverless” trains would be staffed and those staff would be free to join unions. Any attempt to take that right away would very properly meet with fierce opposition in a proud London public service where even some station supervisors attach RMT badges to their ties. |
| Whichever side you take, the latest Tube strike is symptomatic of a city trying to manage the implications of its own boundless vigour with limited means. Relations between Tube unions and Tube management are at a serious low, but in the end both are essential to the best possible solution for the city they serve. | Whichever side you take, the latest Tube strike is symptomatic of a city trying to manage the implications of its own boundless vigour with limited means. Relations between Tube unions and Tube management are at a serious low, but in the end both are essential to the best possible solution for the city they serve. |