|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
Strike looms over safety on London Underground following privatisation
By Tony Robson
20 January 2001
Use
this version to print
Workers on the London Underground (LU) are balloting for strike
action over the threat posed to safety by the Labour government's
partial privatisation of the network.
Negotiations between management and the two main unions on
LUthe Rail Maritime and Transport union (RMT) and the Associated
Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (Aslef)broke
down on January 3. Management had failed to give an undertaking
that there would not be a lowering of safety standards once the
Public-Private Partnership (PPP) comes into effect on March 31.
The results of the vote will be announced later this month,
but previous ballots by the RMT have produced clear results in
favour of industrial action, and it is thought that the latest
will also return a majority in favour of a strike. Two days of
industrial action in February 1999 caused considerable disruption
but failed to close the network.
The RMT and Aslef ballot covers approximately 9,000 LU employees.
The RMT represents general staff grades and also covers around
50 percent of LU drivers, whilst Aslef is the traditional union
for train drivers. Joint action would have a major impact, particularly
in central London as one million commuters a day use the underground.
Among the preferred bidders under PPP to run the 30-year contracts
for infrastructure maintenance on the Underground are companies
who have been implicated in disasters on the country's privatised
railway network. Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance, a member of
one consortia shortlisted last May, is among the private operators
responsible for the recent derailment at Hatfield which claimed
four lives.
Even government rail inspectors have rejected London Underground's
safety case for PPP. Peter Hornsby, principal inspector for the
Health and Safety Executive, wrote to LU on January 12 airing
fears over driving, signal operation and track maintenance amongst
others, stating: It is not clear who does what, how and
when.
Despite this refusal to give a health and safety approval to
PPP, Hornsby has waved the customary requirement that entirely
new safety plans be submitted, on the pretext that there is insufficient
time.
The undertakings sought by the RMT and ASLEF from management
and the infrastructure companies (Infracos) included:
* The establishment of a joint body between the unions, LU
and the Infracos to ensure that safety is maintained when using
external contractors and sub contractors to carry out maintenance
and renewals.
* No compulsory redundancies.
* Workers' terms and conditions should not be undermined to
the detriment of safety.
Although the workforce are adamantly opposed to PPP on the
grounds that it will undermine their safety, as well as that of
general public, and threaten existing working conditions, union
demands are aimed solely at preserving the union bureaucracy's
niche within the LU operation.
Over an extended period LU has contracted out work to private
companies, mainly in the engineering section. This has led to
major job losses, with the workforce being reduced by a quarter
between 1985 and 1999. Restructuring of terms and conditions has
led to a loss of entitlements and the lengthening of the working
day. The RMT has gone along with all of these changes.
Even when faced with a clear threat to safety through the introduction
of PPP, the RMT and Aslef have refused to tie any industrial action
to defeating privatisation plans. The unions say that were they
to do so, the strike would be deemed political and
therefore illegal under Tory anti-union legislation kept on the
statute books by New Labour.
But the union's refusal to challenge the undemocratic anti-union
laws is bound up with their own desire to avoid any action that
could arouse a broader questioning of the profit motive and the
extension of the market into the public sector.
At a joint union rally on January 8, the Assistant General
Secretary of the RMT stated that the strike was about fragmentation
not privatisation. He went on, We have always worked
with the private sector, i.e. when we need new investment. The
private sector will have to do this, I do not have a hang up about
this.
The union's slogan safety is not negotiable is
belied by their support for London Mayor Ken Livingstone's bond
scheme proposal for financing the Underground. Unlike the government's
plans to separate the basic infrastructure from the operation
of the trains, Livingstone proposes keeping a unified network,
but he still envisages a major role for outsourcing work to private
contractors. The need to satisfy private financial investors through
a bond scheme also means that profit not public service will be
the order of the day.
The unions have also maintained a conspicuous silence over
the inflated salary of Bob Kiley, who last week took up his post
as the new Commissioner for Transport overseeing the Underground.
The November edition of RMT News carries a report conducted
by the TUC into the growing pay gap between the highest paid directors
and their workforce. It cites figures showing that directors'
pay has grown from 15.7 times that of the average company employee
in 1994 to 20.7 today.
However, in a page devoted to the appointment of Kiley it quotes
Livingtone's comment that "his high salary is a reflection
of the fact that whether you're in the public or private sector,
if you want to recruit the best person for the job, you have to
provide a package that can compete internationally.
This passes without comment even though Kiley's £500,000
per annum salary is approximately 28 times that of an Underground
station assistant and 18 times that of a train driver.
See Also:
The privatisation of the London Underground:
Mayor Livingstone offers Labour government a lifeline
[10 January 2001]
Paddington train disaster inquiry hears
how rail companies "put profit before safety"
[20 May 2000]
Privatisation,
deregulation and the London rail disaster
[14 October 1999]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |