As the RMT kicked-off the biggest national rail strike in a generation, millions have struggled to get to work, hospital appointments and school exams at an estimated cost to the British economy of £100 million in this week alone.
Labour MPs have given the strike their tacit support, declaring themselves to be: “on the side of workers”. But that begs the question “which workers?” Working people have to get to work. And for lots of us in West Berkshire – that means by train. In fact, in the aftermath of the pandemic, it is office workers who are most likely to have the flexibility to work from home and minimise the impact. But it is those who are performing manual or public-facing roles – many of them key-workers on modest pay - who are most likely to be required on site and facing the greatest difficulties. Therefore the strike is not just a strike for working people, it is also a strike against working people. And many of those inconvenienced the most, may well be on worse terms and conditions than the rail workers on the picket line.
Of course it is understandable that rail workers would like higher pay. Current inflation rates are hurting everyone. However it is notable that Network Rail managers have said that when they began negotiations with the RMT it was clear that strikes were “a first resort” rather than a last. Moreover, Pay Review bodies have assessed pay on the railways just as they do for other public sector workers. It is hard to see why this should be disregarded, and difficult negotiations around pay settled by displays of industrial muscle and public upheaval? And given that rail workers have received an overall pay increase of 39% in the last decade (bringing their average pay to £44,000) ahead of teachers, nurses and many other public sector workers it is questionable whether they should be first in line for pay rises anyway.
It is never easy for any sector to adapt to new ways of working. The £16 billion bailout that the railways received during the pandemic may have kept all staff employed but it could not change the reality that passenger numbers have declined by 20%, and 90% of all tickets are now bought online. It was sadly inevitable that some changes to staffing structures were going to be necessary. Whilst of course I want the two sides to keep talking, the reality is that any pay rise will have to be paid for. And if that can only be achieved with higher ticket prices, it risks deterring people from using the trains just when we most want to make train travel more attractive.
The Labour Party may be financially dependent on the trade unions but their failure to stand up to them exposes the weakness of their defence of working people. A return to the industrial battles of the 1970s isn’t just bad for train passengers, it is bad for the railway workers themselves.