Transport Committee warns Government not to overlook risks as it presses ahead with plans for rail ‘strikes’ regulations

The Transport Committee has urged the Government not to overlook risks as it prepares to introduce its Minimum Service Levels ‘rail strikes’ regulations, and be ready to learn lessons where necessary. 

The warning comes as the cross-party Committee publishes the Government’s response (attached) to its recent report into the Minimum Service Levels (MSLs) regulations for rail. 

The report laid out three criteria by which the Department for Transport (DfT) should judge whether the introduction of MSLs has been successful:  

·       Whether imposing the MSLs inadvertently leads to novel forms of protest, or of industrial disputes being further prolonged; 

·       Whether MSLs lead to greater levels of customer satisfaction and reliability on strike days than at present; 

·       Whether the new regulations lead to more effective long-term cooperation and better working relationships between rail unions, the industry and government. 

In response to these points, Ministers issued a one-sentence response: “The Government welcomes these suggested criteria and will carefully monitor the impact of MSLs”.  

The Committee is disappointed that this future-focused aspect of the report has not been fully engaged with. 

Elsewhere in the report, MPs set ministers nine tests for how the MSLs should work in practice. Among them were:  

·       Demands for assurances around safety 

·       That services overall would not become worse than what is already experienced on strike days; 

·       That routes crucial to the night time economy and other disproportionately affected industries, or used by school traffic and hospital patients, would be prioritised;  

·       That passengers with access needs would still be properly catered to. 

Whilst the Government’s response agreed in principle with a number of those tests, the Committee was also concerned that elements of its plans are subject to assertions by the DfT about the likely effects—on access to essential services, for example, and on the night-time economy—that will need to be tested in practice.  

The Government also rejected the Committee’s call for it to carry out further consultation with the sector on how the regulations will work in practice. It said strike action in recent years has had “a significant impact on passengers and the wider economy”, and that it would “therefore be prudent to introduce these regulations as soon as possible”. The Committee’s report had pointed out that the Government’s initial plans were too vague to enable stakeholders to express meaningful opinions on how the regime would work. 

The response also said it would not be possible to carry out a pilot of the MSLs as there is no provision for this in the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act. 

On one of the Committee’s nine tests which concerned safety, the response says that having a more reliable MSL on strike days could help to avoid overcrowding on some services which can occur on strike days. It adds: “MSLs do not override any existing safety rules, or obligations, and staff who are placed on work notices… will follow standard safety practice for their role as normal.” 

Another test stated that “resilience in staffing must be improved” so that there are trained alternatives able to cover for specialised staff who may want to strike. The Government said non-statutory guidance has been issued to employers, suggesting they “may wish to consider” whether any worker has already been identified in previous work notices. However, ministers did not address the point about ensuring resilience. 

Meanwhile, the response expressed confidence that MSLs would achieve a greater level of provision than at present on strike days. It said that during strikes by ASLEF some operators were “unable to run any services at all”. During strikes by RMT at Network Rail, service levels have been around 20%, it said.

Transport Committee Chair Iain Stewart MP said: 

“The Government has signalled its intention to implement MSLs as soon as possible. Given it has an unresolved dispute with the train drivers’ union ASLEF, we could see these regulations in action very soon. 

“My Committee felt that the Government’s plans could have included more detail, as throughout our inquiry voices from the sector were calling out for guidance from DfT on how to prepare for this new way of working. 

“We were disappointed by the Government’s half-hearted response to our recommendation on how it will judge the success or otherwise of MSLs. There is a risk of MSLs worsening worker-employer relations and that, as a result, MSLs could end up making services less reliable. We will watch with interest how the Department intends to assess the success of MSLs as the regulations come into force. 

“I urge the Government to keep a close eye over how this develops and learn lessons where necessary. After all, major changes to timetabling on the rail network haven’t always gone seamlessly in the past.” 

Background on the inquiry and the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 

The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act became law in July. It enables secretaries of state with oversight of several key sectors, including rail services, to the introduce regulations that will enable employers in said sectors to issue work notices to their staff during strikes.  

The Committee launched its inquiry with the aim of unpicking questions around how the regulations could apply to the rail sector – which routes and services should be prioritised, how to ensure safety, or that services don’t end up being worse than what is typically provided on strike days. It also considered how regulations would interact with union members’ right to strike 

Since the Committee published its report in September, the Government has introduced new regulations which, subject to Parliamentary approval, would set MSLs in specified passenger rail services and give in-scope employers the power to require a proportion of their staff to work and provide a minimum level of service. The regulations have been approved by the Commons; its final stage in Parliament before they can be used in practice will be a debate in the Lords, expected in December.