Why Isn't Sadiq Khan Using the Pandemic to Reduce TFL Costs?

The question of why Sadiq Khan hasn’t used the pandemic as an opportunity to cut costs at Transport for London (TFL) is often raised, particularly in light of high ticket prices that some argue are the world's highest. Critics point to the high wages of tube drivers as a significant factor in these costs. However, a closer look at the complexity and financial structure of TFL reveals that the issue is multifaceted and not as straightforward as it may seem at first glance.

The Financial Landscape of TFL

The finances of TFL are intricate and rooted in a complex agreement made in 2013. This agreement, signed by then-Prime Minister David Cameron and London Mayor Boris Johnson, stipulated that TFL's expenses must be covered by income from ticket sales, advertising, and the congestion charge, with no central government funding. This arrangement has been in place since the 1980s, with severe cuts to the number of staff.

According to London Reconnections, around 70% of TFL's expenses were previously covered by ticket sales. However, the pandemic has significantly impacted TFL's revenue. On June 1, 2021, the Department for Transport and TfL agreed on a further funding settlement, with TfL making further financial savings to secure fresh government funding. Among the UK government's proposals is a requirement for TfL to investigate the use of driverless trains.

Driverless Trains: A Profound Impact

The prospect of driverless trains is often seen as a potential solution to reduce costs. However, Boris Johnson, during his tenure as Prime Minister, acknowledged in a July 2020 statement: “So what I will be saying to the London transport authority…is let’s take advantage of this technological leap forward. Let’s not be the prisoners of the unions any more."

Driverless trains could indeed reduce operational costs, but the transition is more complex than it might appear. The London Underground and Docklands Light Railway (DLR) networks are highly automated in varying degrees. Automation depends on factors such as signaling, rolling stock, platform configuration, safety requirements, and daily operational needs. Some trains require a driver to perform most tasks, supported by automation. Others require an attendant to supervise passenger areas, close doors, and manually operate in disruption. Safety, signaling, and network supervisory functions always remain the responsibility of a driver or equivalent personnel.

Altering the automation of the London Underground would change the responsibilities of drivers, platform staff, safety teams, and network control centers. While automation does not alter the balance of power between employer and employee, it does change which trade unions need to be negotiated with most.

Why the Criticism Isn't Well-Founded

The argument that tube drivers are overpaid and that this is a prime opportunity to reduce costs is often based on misconceptions. The drivers responsible for the safety and transport of thousands of passengers every day are paid what they are. The starting salaries and average salaries of these staff reflect the responsibilities and demands of the role. Critics who suggest that these wages are astronomically high often fail to provide context. Additionally, the costs of ticket prices are influenced by more than just staffing wages. There are significant cuts to the number of staff since the 1980s, which have contributed to the complex financial landscape of TFL.

No legitimate solution can be found if one fails to understand the complexity of TFL's financial situation. The current structures are deeply rooted in agreements made for economic and political reasons, and they are not easily altered. There are enough cynical profiteers attempting to capitalize on the situation; thus, it is commendable when public figures such as Sadiq Khan retain a shred of decency.

Understanding the multifaceted nature of TFL's finances is crucial for any critique. The true challenge lies in finding a sustainable solution that balances cost reduction with maintaining essential services and staff welfare.