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

No but restrict union power

Yes but worker strikes should be allowed

essential service but don’t ban strikes

It should be an essential service. Not for the purpose of banning strikes

Should be essential but allow strikes

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

Worker strikes are important for those who feel they deserve better, as much as there is a high usage of people who use the Underground - industrial action within businesses is commonplace and therefore should not be restricted

The right to strike is available to all workers, the right to strike can be ignored. Striking is a form of protest, you don't ask permission to do so

Yes, on the proviso that workers are paid and treated well, and that annual reviews of pay and welfare be held

It should be considered an essential service so we should pay them more and give them better holidays

It is an essential service, and the right to strike should be observed. Improving pay and conditions, supporting ticket office staff, and protect them from abuse is paramount.

It should be considered an essential service but if the strikes are important to the workers in order to get paid more or treated fairly, I think there should be ways around it.

should be considered an essential service, but being able to strike is important to ensure workers are not taken advantage of

It’s an essential service but doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed to strike for bettering their income and hours

I would prefer organizations that are considered important or essential to have multiple Unions and only legislate that only certain Unions could vote on a particular day, thereby allowing some limited service to continue, as has happened with Teaching unions that allow some Teachers to attend School if others are on strike

No, but strikes ensure public transport continues but no payment systems costing the government more until they pay workers fairly

Yes they should be considered as an essential service but limitations on striking should be put in place to avoid major disruption to the public

Everything is a bit silly no? The fact we have trapped ourselves with the need and temptation of money. As long as there is war, and the world leaders are sending hundreds of thousands of people to die and indirectly killing families and children, London Underground strikes are the least of our problems. You're all children. Including me. But can you admit that you're naïve, or does your pride think you're smart?

I believe it is essential however everyone should have the right to strike for better pay and working conditions

No, but it should be publicised. Workers have a right and should be allowed to strike, they should still be paid while striking too.

I believe that the government should listen to the people working and do what they can to make them not strike as it is unfair when prices increase due to strikes or the interruptions for people trying to go to work and back

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

Dont live in London so couldn't care but for the size of the city people should be paid for the service they contribute

No but they should be limited with the amount per year they are allowed to strike, how and when they are allowed to strike. ie not doing so to disrupt a whole week and striking on weekends.

I believe that it is an essential service but I don't believe banning future worker strikes will solve anything. In fact, it just allows the government to continue ignoring these problems rather than listening and fixing them.

Yes, it is an essential service. However, it shouldn't impede on a workers right to protest against their working conditions.

No. There would be no need for strikes if public services were invested in properly, we pay enough taxes to support such services, the money is just mismanaged by the crooks in charge of our Government.

I believe it is an essential service but I support the right to strike for better working conditions/pay.

They should be considered and essential service, but I don't believe in banning strikes. All industries should have that right, but perhaps have a minimum level of service that must be provided in those instances.

Yes but there should be an annual pay increase to keep workers happy as it is an "essential service"

Yes, provided sufficient alternate means are provided for protest, and other public transport is included

yes it's essential but you can't ban all strikes either. just work out a better way to keep everyone happy

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.

yes is the london underground is an essential service but workers should still have the right to strike

It should be considered an essential service, but the right to strike should remain. They should be able to strike if they give perhaps a 1 or 2 month notice in advance to the strike.

Yes, assuming there is a government-facilitated roundtable for mediation. If the employer violates the agreement, workers may go on strike.

London Underground workers should be paid enough and have good quality working life so that there would not be a need to strike anyways. If there was a need to strike then they should be able to exercise that right.

I would stat it is an essential service however if people are treated right and fairly paid they wouldn't want to strike

They should still be able to strike but continue to run the underground without requiring the public to pay for the service

It is an essential service but if workers aren't paid fair, I would support just giving them compensation for anything out of their control.

No, but strikes should be clearly announced and alternatives provided, or a limited service must still be ran

The London Underground is an essential workforce but she not be banned on protesting in correlation with other essential services such as nurses. It is somebody’s sovereign right to protest and this should not be taken away

It is an essential service to many however so is getting paid for workers so they should be fairly compensated fir what they do so they don't have to go on strike and cause disruption.

YES should be Essential service, and should not allow strikes, if they are not happy with the pay they received go and find job somewhere else, they have sign up for this job in the first place and then can't complaint later, as far as I know they are getting most paid job compare to other sectors.

The underground is essential but workers rights are important and need an alternative to strikes to be heard

Strikes are necessary industrial progression but it's undeniable that strikes cause more issues for the public than the government

Trains should gradually become driver less and previous train drivers should be trained to fix the trains if something goes wrong