Train Drivers
Strike and the Deteriorating Conditions on the Railways
Train drivers in the South East successfully held a one-day
strike yesterday, January 25. Only one in 10 of the usual number of Connex
trains was running. The train drivers union ASLEF had been attempting to
negotiate a 35-hour week and other improvements to employment conditions but
these negotiations broke down, precipitating the ballot which resulted in the
industrial action. It was the largest such action in the South East since the
signal workers dispute six years ago.
One commuter interviewed in the local press said,
"Its been building up for a long time. Connex cannot relate to their
staff. They are pernickety about uniforms, dictatorial about small things like
what posters can be put up at stations. They are not concerned about improving
the quality of the trains. They are just trying to get as much out of people as
they can. Although London stations were all extended to take 12 cars some time
ago, they are still quite happy to put on short trains on which people are
jammed like sardines. This is the lowest trough, even counting British
Rail."
It is also reported that the governments latest rail
performance figures, to be published next month, will confirm the deteriorating
statistics for many of the mainline train companies which operate into and out
of London. The figures, which cover the last three months of 1999, show amongst
other things that these services manifested the worst service since
privatisation began in the mid 1990s. The punctuality of some services operated
by South West Trains is down to 69%. Connex services also operate at around 85%
for punctuality. On one day in November there was a total of 90,000 minutes of
delays in the southern zone, described by a Railtrack director as "the
worst day in my 25-year career on the railways". Five of the largest
companies which run rush-hour trains into London have deteriorated in terms of
punctuality during the past 12 months.
The chairman of the London Regional Passengers
Committee, Sir Alan Greengross, said that £25 billion of investment is
needed over the next 15 years in the railway infrastructure. He pointed out,
"There is also little incentive for the operators to improve standards as
the first tranche of contracts are up for renegotiation this year, followed by
the other operators in succeeding years, and they are hardly likely to invest
millions if someone else is going to be taking over the line."
These figures and comments underline the problem with the
rail service. In line with the neo-liberal agenda and the doctrine of
privatisation, the rail network has been broken up and handed over to the
highest bidders to make the maximum profit. The mantra that competition will
result in benefits to the people at large is shown not only to be untrue, but
that it has all along been used as a pretext to put the assets of public
services at the disposal of the rich so that they can utilise them for the
maximum capitalist profit. The other issue here is that the government is no
longer prepared to invest in such public services because of the
intensification of the crisis, particularly that of the social welfare state
and nationalisation. The demands of the financial oligarchy in the present-day
situation is not so much for an infrastructure which serves the needs of the
national economy but that they need to reverse their falling rate of profit by
directly benefiting from privatisation, PFI and PPP.
It is in this context both that the train drivers are
taking a stand and also the people as a whole are feeling the brunt of the
crisis. They have a common interest in ensuring that the government as the
representative of society invests in the economy so that the peoples
needs are met.