Should the London Underground be considered an "essential service" which would ban all future worker strikes?

Recognizing the Underground as an essential service, but not banning strikes outright.
• Requiring minimum service levels during strikes (e.g. 30–50% of normal operations), balancing the public’s needs with workers’ rights.
• Establishing stronger mediation or arbitration channels before strike action is allowed.
• Ensuring transparency in negotiations, so the public understands both sides of the dispute.

There should be a minimum service at all times but strikes should be allowed unless a contract states Strikes are inadmissible for a period of time

No, workers have a right to strike if they see unfair conditions within their workplace no matter the service they provide to the general public.

Workers have the right to strike but there should be measures in place to prevent serious disruptions to public transport

It should be considered an essential service. However, every worker in every sector should have the right to strike.

It should be considered as an essential service and the government should increase the worker's pay.

Allow strikes but have the service run but free. So people won't be impacted but the point goes across

This is an essential service, but workers should still have the right to strike, which I fully support.

ALL London transport should be essential service and their employers should be paid and treated well to avoid so much disruption!

Should adopt the approach used in Japan. Still run but not take payment during 'strikes', makes companies react quicker to avoid losing money.

workers should be given as much of a right to strike as protest as everyone else, however, governments should take into consideration that other services like NHS (junior doctors, nurses, etc.) should be seen as arguably more essential and deserving of a higher wage than TFL workers.

It’s a vital service, but the employees shouldn’t be exploited just because it’s an essential service and should valued correctly.

No, if this is the case for the underground it should also be for busses and and train companies both inside and outside of London

No but there should be a clear plan and need in place and there should be regulations of strikes during certain events e.g. Taylor Swift concert and leaving young girls without transport.

People should be allowed to strike but it should be unnecessary to strike because they are listened to by the Government

It should be considered an essential service in that the cost should be lowered for commuters but workers still retain their right to strike

Yes, but all Essential Service workers should be allowed to unionise and strike under a nationalised system - Following the civil service model

Workers should be allowed to strike but the service should be made accessible for key workers only and those who need to operate and can’t strike should be paid double

It should be a functioning service but not at the expense of the people who work there; everyone has the right to be protected in their jobs.

It should be classed as an essential service yet essential services should still allow worker strikes

I agree the London Underground is an essential transport service, however I do not agree with banning worker strikes

I feel it should be considered essential however and strikes aren’t the best course of actionn. However workers should be paid more

Not everything revolves around London, Londoners think they have it bad wait until they see the rest of the countries public transport, they would have heart attack if they had to use public transport in the North of England

The should be allowed to strike as long as the voting majority is and actual majority of the work force.

Yes and all public transport should be classed as essential services with strikes banned on trains, buses, ferries and planes.

Strikes should not be banned, as I feel they are an important part of workers holding owners/managers to account, but it is an essential service

Yes, however all workers should be allowed to strike. There should be minimum service thresholds for essential services to strike

same for all workers which strike really - should be about the priorities of the job, depends on the reason for striking and how serious this is.

It is essential but there should be minimal right to strike (e.g. 10% of the network with pre-announcement).

It is an essential service, but those doing essential work should be entitled to be compensated for performance

No, just treat workers better so they don’t have to cut off services to the public in order to be heard, when it could’ve just been fixed in the first place

Very tricky that and other "essential services" being banned from stricking? Dont like the sound of that. Its a last resort and not undertaken lightly I'm positive and is an individuals right to withdraw their labour but must be decided by unanimous majority vote?

Why should it ever be necessary for people to strike if they have fair working conditions an fair pay?

The strikes have an impact on the economy will thousands of people can't get to work. They are not hurting the companies that they are striking against, but the general public.

Workers have the right to strike, it is an essential service however their right to strike is needed and their needs should be met

Yes, however if this occurs in the future the workers will need to be paid more. They might even need to have lifestyle evaluations.

I think if they were paid fairly and make a decent amount they wouldn't have to strike it is their right

all jobs should be allowed the strike. every person in the world deserve a voice if they being mistreated.

Public transport for London is essential. However the workers have every right to strike if they wish to do

I think matters should put in place in case of a strike so people can still show objection but to the public’s lives are not interrupted as much

Yes, it is an essential service, and they should be paid so they therefore wouldn’t have the need to strike

No, but reduce number of strikes

Workers have only went on strike due to cost of living, which is effecting everyone.

It is an essential service so pay them enough so that they don’t strike

I don't live in London so no opinion

It's important but not 'essential'. Strikes should be allowed but they must be not disruptive to the lives of everyday people.

Pay them farely and they won't want to strike. Or treat them like humans with respect and dignity that everyone deserves

Yes, but greater measures should be taken by government to ensure there is no need for future worker strikes

I’m a northerner, so I don’t care as our public transport systems are dismal in comparison to the South

I fundamentally agree with the statement, they should be considered essential services but I would not ban worker strikes.

The service should be considered essential but if strikes are deemed necessary more warning and alternative options should be given to those who require the service for uses such as work/education etc.

Instead of stopping the trains when striking they should allow free travel as to not stop the public

I think that the workers should have the right to strike however their should be appropriate back up people in place so the transport can still run.

Only if being considered "essential" ensures employees will be treated better and stations will be appropriately staffed. There are barely enough employees to keep stations running as it is.

They should have the right tro fight for their right to have a wage that is deemed justable not what the government that wants everyone’s money.

Yes, and because it is an essential service, pay and conditions should reflect the importance so workers don't feel the requirement to strike.

No, they should have the right to strike, however bud services/other transport services should not be able to strike at the time of the underground doing so as to provide a means of transport for the public that require it.

Yes but workers need to be paid more for their work as well as be able unionise to negotiate for better pay and working conditions. The government should be supportive of their demands.

Yes they should be able to strike, but there should be temporary staff that can cover striking staff

The London underground is very important and vital to many people, there should be a minimum amount of trains per day but its up to the train company wether they do more or not

Should be essential but should be allowed to strike

To some it is, to others it isn’t, it should be equal

Yes, but workers should be payed with respect, and if they aren't and the issue is failed to be resolved, then strikes may be necessary.

Should be an essential service but no banning strikes

Although essential, I believe that it is only right for those who work to be able to demand proper pay.

I do not live in London therefore don’t know the importance or impact of the tube

They shouldn't even have to go on strike, pay them more

Yes but make sure that the workers are paid well

it should be essential service with the right to continue to go on strike

It is an essential service meaning there should be more funding for employees and their wages.

Yes, but they should pay them more.

I support strikes but they should come to a decision

England stuff

No, but there should be temporary, alternative transportation for those who need it.

Yes but be flexible with pay rises.

We need to cut taxes to help them.geberally I am against strikes unless something is extremely bad .

Yes, but increase the salary for a essential service job.

Yes but increase wages and benefits

workers should be given a better work environment then they won’t strike

Should be classed as essential but essential workers should have the right to strike.

Simply do not care

It is an essential service, which is why strikes are effective!

I disagree with many strikes but they should be allowed

Yes but it should be essential

The London underground is an essential service, but nothing should be able to stop workers' strikes.

Workers should be able to strike, however, the strikes should not inconvenience public

No, but limit the number workers allowed to strike at one time

Yes but they should be allowed to strike if they are truly suffering from conditions.

I don't live in London so I do not have an good understanding of the impact the underground has.

It should be essential , but worker strikes shoulf still be allowed

Automated services

No, workers should be able to strike. But disruption to services to be minimised for commuters.

It should be essential but not ban strikes .

Yes, but support workers so they don’t feel the need to strike

No, but the underground should be automated

Need valid reasons to strike