Northern Rail Strikes 2024: How Industrial Action by Train Drivers and Guards Continues to Disrupt UK Transport

Rail strikes have become a defining feature of UK transport in 2024, with ASLEF train drivers and RMT guards and station staff taking repeated industrial action in disputes over pay, working conditions, and the future of the railway. The strikes, which began in summer 2022, have caused widespread disruption, cancelled thousands of services, and cost the economy an estimated £3 billion. Despite some progress in negotiations, national disputes remain unresolved as of March 2024, leaving millions of passengers facing continued uncertainty and frustration.

The strikes reflect deeper problems in Britain's railways: a fragmented industry structure with 14 different train operating companies, chronic underfunding, poor industrial relations, and a workforce that feels undervalued and under attack. They also highlight a fundamental question about the future of rail: should it prioritise shareholder returns and cost-cutting, or investment in staff, services, and infrastructure?

The disputes: what are they about?

The rail strikes involve multiple unions and employers, each with distinct grievances, but common themes emerge:

ASLEF train drivers: pay and conditions

ASLEF, the train drivers' union, represents approximately 20,000 drivers across passenger train operators in England, Scotland, and Wales. The union has been in dispute with the Rail Delivery Group (RDG), which negotiates on behalf of train operating companies, since June 2022.

The core issues are:

1. Pay: ASLEF is seeking pay rises that restore real-terms losses since 2010. The union argues that drivers' pay has fallen by approximately 15% in real terms due to below-inflation pay settlements over more than a decade. The median driver salary is around £59,000, but ASLEF points out this has not kept pace with the cost of living. The union initially sought an 11% rise, later moderating to 8-10% depending on the operator.

2. Working conditions: Employers have proposed changes including increased Sunday working, reduced rest periods between shifts, and changes to overtime and rest day working arrangements. ASLEF argues these would worsen work-life balance and compromise safety. The union has rejected deals that tie pay rises to accepting these changes.

3. Driver-only operation (DOO): While primarily an RMT issue, ASLEF also opposes the extension of DOO, where trains run without guards, on safety grounds.

Negotiations have been complicated by the fragmented structure of the industry. ASLEF must negotiate separately with 14 different train operating companies, each with different terms and conditions. Some operators, including ScotRail and Transport for Wales, have reached agreements, but others, particularly those in England, have not.

RMT: guards, station staff, and job security

The RMT (Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers) union represents approximately 40,000 rail workers, including guards, station staff, signallers, and maintenance workers. The union has been in dispute with both train operating companies and Network Rail (which manages the track and infrastructure).

The RMT's grievances include:

1. Driver-only operation: The RMT opposes DOO, arguing that guards play a critical safety role in emergencies, assisting disabled passengers, and preventing platform accidents. The union points to incidents where guards have intervened to prevent injuries or deaths. Employers argue that DOO is safe, widely used internationally, and necessary to reduce costs.

2. Job cuts: The RMT opposes plans to close ticket offices and reduce station staff, arguing this will make stations less safe and accessible, particularly for disabled and elderly passengers. The government and train operators argue that only 12% of tickets are now bought at ticket offices, and that staff can be redeployed to assist passengers on platforms.

3. Pay: Like ASLEF, the RMT is seeking above-inflation pay rises to restore real-terms losses. The union has rejected offers of 4-5% as inadequate when inflation has been running at 8-11%.

4. Terms and conditions: The RMT opposes changes to working practices, including compulsory redundancies, reduced sick pay, and pension changes.

The RMT has taken strike action against both Network Rail and train operating companies. In January 2023, the union suspended strikes against Network Rail after receiving an improved pay offer, but disputes with train operators continue.

The impact: disruption and economic cost

The rail strikes have caused massive disruption:

• Strike days: ASLEF and RMT have coordinated strikes on multiple dates, with some months seeing several days of action. On strike days, most train services do not run, and those that do operate are severely reduced.
• Passengers affected: An estimated 15 million passenger journeys have been disrupted since June 2022, with commuters, businesses, and leisure travellers all affected.
• Economic cost: The Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) estimated in February 2024 that rail strikes have cost the UK economy £3 billion since 2022, including lost productivity, cancelled business meetings, and reduced consumer spending in city centres.
• Revenue loss: Train operating companies have lost approximately £500 million in ticket revenue, though this is partially offset by reduced costs (staff wages, fuel) on strike days.

The disruption has been particularly severe for commuters in major cities like London, Manchester, Birmingham, and Glasgow, where rail is the primary mode of transport for many workers. Some employers have shifted to permanent remote working to avoid strike disruption, accelerating a trend that began during the pandemic.

Businesses have also suffered. Retailers, restaurants, and entertainment venues in city centres report significant revenue losses on strike days. Conferences and events have been cancelled or relocated. The strikes have damaged the UK's reputation as a reliable place to do business.

The politics: government, unions, and public opinion

The rail strikes have become intensely political. The Conservative government (in power until July 2024) took a hard line, arguing that unions were holding the country to ransom and that large pay rises were unaffordable and would fuel inflation. Ministers accused unions of "Luddite" opposition to modernisation and refused to intervene directly in negotiations, insisting that disputes were between unions and employers.

However, critics pointed out that the government effectively controls the purse strings: train operating companies are heavily subsidised by taxpayers (the rail industry received £16 billion in government support in 2022-23), and major decisions require government approval. The government's refusal to negotiate directly was seen by unions as a political choice to prolong the dispute.

Public opinion has been divided. Polling by YouGov in early 2024 showed:

• 48% of the public sympathise with rail workers' grievances, citing years of pay restraint and difficult working conditions.
• 52% oppose strike action, arguing it punishes passengers rather than employers and that rail workers are well-paid compared to other sectors.
• 65% believe both sides are to blame for failing to reach agreement.

Support for strikes is higher among Labour voters (62% sympathetic) and lower among Conservative voters (28% sympathetic), reflecting broader political divides over unions and workers' rights.

The fragmented industry: a barrier to resolution

One reason the disputes have been so difficult to resolve is the fragmented structure of the UK rail industry. Since privatisation in the 1990s, the network has been split into:

• Network Rail: A public body that owns and manages the track, signals, and stations.
• 14 train operating companies (TOCs): Private companies that run passenger services on franchises or concessions. Examples include Avanti West Coast, Great Western Railway, and Northern.
• Freight operators: Private companies running freight trains.
• Rolling stock companies (ROSCOs): Private companies that own trains and lease them to operators.

This fragmentation means that unions must negotiate separately with multiple employers, each with different terms and conditions. It also creates perverse incentives: train operators have little reason to invest in long-term improvements or staff relations when franchises are short-term and profits depend on cost-cutting.

The Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail, published in 2021, proposed creating Great British Railways (GBR), a new public body to oversee the network and coordinate services. This would simplify industrial relations by creating a single employer for many staff. However, the plan has been delayed repeatedly, and as of March 2024, GBR has not been established.

The Labour government, elected in July 2024, has pledged to bring the rail industry back into public ownership as franchises expire, which may improve industrial relations by aligning incentives and creating a single employer. However, this will take years to implement.

Progress and stalemate

Some progress has been made:

• ScotRail (publicly owned) reached an agreement with ASLEF in October 2023, offering a 10% pay rise over two years with no strings attached. Drivers accepted, ending the dispute in Scotland.
• Transport for Wales (publicly owned) reached a similar deal with ASLEF in November 2023.
• Network Rail reached an agreement with the RMT in January 2023, offering a 9% pay rise over two years plus guarantees on job security. The RMT suspended strikes against Network Rail.

However, disputes with English train operating companies remain unresolved. The RDG has offered pay rises of 4-5% conditional on accepting changes to working practices, which ASLEF and the RMT have rejected as inadequate and unacceptable.

The stalemate reflects a fundamental disagreement: unions argue that years of pay restraint and cost-cutting have left the railway understaffed and workers demoralised, and that investment in staff is essential for a reliable, safe service. Employers argue that the railway is loss-making, heavily subsidised by taxpayers, and cannot afford large pay rises without productivity improvements.

International comparisons

The UK's rail strikes stand out internationally. Most European countries have stronger labour protections and more cooperative industrial relations, reducing the frequency and severity of strikes. In Germany, France, and Switzerland, rail workers are generally better paid, have stronger job security, and are consulted on major changes, reducing the need for industrial action.

However, France has experienced significant rail strikes in recent years, particularly over pension reforms. The difference is that French strikes are often shorter and more focused, with unions and government negotiating intensively to reach resolution. In the UK, the fragmented industry structure and adversarial industrial relations culture make resolution more difficult.

The future: what happens next?

The rail strikes are unlikely to end quickly. As of March 2024, ASLEF and the RMT have both indicated willingness to continue industrial action until acceptable agreements are reached. The unions have strong financial reserves and member support, and the disruption gives them leverage.

Possible paths to resolution include:

1. Government intervention: The Labour government could instruct train operators to offer improved pay deals and withdraw controversial changes to working conditions. This would require additional taxpayer funding but could end the disputes quickly.

2. Public ownership: Bringing the railway into public ownership could simplify negotiations and align incentives, making resolution easier. However, this will take years.

3. Attrition: The strikes could gradually peter out as members tire of lost wages and public support erodes. However, there is little sign of this as of March 2024.

4. Compromise: Both sides could moderate their positions, with unions accepting smaller pay rises in exchange for guarantees on job security and working conditions, and employers withdrawing the most controversial changes. This is the most likely outcome but requires political will.

The bottom line

The rail strikes of 2024 reflect deep-seated problems in the UK railway: fragmentation, underfunding, poor industrial relations, and a workforce that feels undervalued. ASLEF train drivers and RMT guards and station staff are fighting for pay rises that restore real-terms losses, protection of working conditions, and job security in the face of cost-cutting and automation.

The strikes have caused massive disruption, costing the economy £3 billion and affecting millions of passengers. Public opinion is divided, with sympathy for workers' grievances balanced against frustration at the impact on daily life.

Resolution requires political will, adequate funding, and a willingness to prioritise investment in staff and services over short-term cost-cutting. The Labour government's plans for public ownership may help in the long term, but in the short term, the strikes look set to continue, leaving passengers facing ongoing uncertainty and disruption. The UK's railways are at a crossroads: invest in staff and infrastructure for a reliable, modern service, or continue down a path of fragmentation, underfunding, and conflict. The outcome of the rail strikes will help determine which path is taken.