Chapter One: A Big-Picture Look at the Strikes

In recent times, the word “strikes” has captured the attention of Londoners and UK media alike—particularly when it involves the public transport network operated by Transport for London (TfL). In this article I’ll step you through what’s going on with the situation around the TfL strikes, why they’re happening, what it means for commuters and the city, and where things might head next. Think of this as an expert-voice piece written in casual, accessible language—so you don’t need to be a transport expert to follow along.

When we talk about “TfL strikes,” we’re referring to industrial action taken by staff employed under TfL or working on services under its umbrella, such as the London Underground (the Tube), and other rail-based or station-based services. These strikes are more than mere inconvenience; they reflect deeper issues around pay, working hours, shift patterns, and staffing levels. At the same time, they ripple outwards: affecting commuters, businesses, tourism, and the city’s rhythm.

Across the recent actions, we have seen union demands—such as the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union (RMT) calling for a shorter working week, better fatigue management, improved staffing, and higher pay. Meanwhile TfL responds by balancing the books, emphasising what it can afford, and how to keep the network running. That tension lies at the heart of the strikes: labour versus operational and financial constraints.

In the coming sections I’ll walk through: the causes and the demands, the history of industrial action at TfL, how the strikes are planned and implemented, what the real-world effects are (on commuters, economy, public mood), how TfL and the unions respond, and finally what the future might hold. So let’s dive in.

Chapter Two: Why Are the TfL Strikes Happening?

Underlying Labour Grievances

At the core, the strikes stem from a combination of issues relating to the working lives of staff under TfL’s umbrella. One big complaint is about fatigue and staffing levels. For example, the RMT has pointed out that staff numbers have been reduced (in some cases by around 2,000 since 2018, and the remaining workforce faces extreme shifts—early starts, late finishes, and little rest between.

Another recurring grievance is the length and scheduling of shifts. Workers argue that long hours, “split shifts”, and overnight work are taking a toll on their health and safety. The demand for reducing the standard working week (for instance, from 35 hours to 32) appears repeatedly in union demands.

Then there’s the core matter of pay and conditions. While TfL has made offers (for instance, a 3.4 % pay increase in one recent case), such offers are often seen by unions as insufficient—especially when set against inflation, cost of living increases, and the extra burden staff say they are bearing.

Institutional and Operational Constraints

On the other side of the fence, TfL (and the broader governance structure around London transport) face legitimate operational and financial constraints. TfL has stated clearly that some union demands—such as reducing the working week—are “neither practical nor affordable.”

Also, TfL must maintain safety, reliability and a minimum service level. In a high-density city like London, the transport network is critical infrastructure, and disruptions ripple across many sectors (business, tourism, commuting). Thus, TfL must weigh the labour demands with service commitments, budgetary limits, and long-term sustainability.

Why It Boils Over Into Strikes

So how does this blend of grievances and constraints evolve into full-blown strike action? Typically what happens is that union representatives and TfL enter negotiations. If the union believe that progress stalls or that the offered settlement is unacceptable (for example, insufficient pay rise, no meaningful shift reduction, continued understaffing), then they may ballot their members for industrial action.

Once a strike mandate is received, the union schedules walkouts or other forms of industrial action (e.g., overtime bans, station closures, work-to-rule). The public visibility and impact of the strike become part of the strategy: the aim is to apply pressure—public, economic, reputational—on TfL (and sometimes the government or Mayor of London) to return to the negotiating table with more favourable terms.

In short: staff feel over-worked or under-rewarded, management says it’s financially constrained, negotiations stall, and the union concludes that industrial action is their lever. Meanwhile, the city’s transport users are caught in the middle.

Chapter Three: The History and Pattern of TfL Strike Action

To understand where we are today, it helps to look back at previous strike episodes involving TfL and related unions. These give context to patterns of disruption, responses and outcomes.

Selected Past Strikes

For instance, the Wikipedia article on “London Underground strikes” records several such actions going back a decade. In 2010, for example, one strike was over the removal of safety-critical jobs and resulted in partial Tube closures. Over the years, disputes have centred around job cuts, station staffing, pay, shift patterns, and contractual arrangements.

More recently, planned actions by the RMT (and other unions like the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (ASLEF) in some cases) have included multi-day strike schedules, specific service types (station staff, drivers, signallers), and coordination with broader transport disruptions. For example, TfL issued advice ahead of strikes in 2023 where station staff were to strike on certain dates and TfL urged customers to check before travel.

Recent Major Disruption (September 2025)

Perhaps most illustrative is the industrial action of early September 2025. The RMT scheduled multiple days of strikes on the Tube and the Docklands Light Railway (DLR). The network faced “little or no service” on parts of the network during Monday–Thursday of that week.

Financially, the disruption was estimated to cost the London economy hundreds of millions of pounds, one figure being £230 million.

This recent action illustrates how strike patterns now often involve prolonged periods of disruption, multiple lines or service types, and coordinated scheduling to maximise pressure.

Patterns and Common Features

From the history we can identify typical patterns:

• Pre-strike negotiations: Talks are held, perhaps with offers made (e.g., pay rises, staffing commitments).
• Balloting and mandate: The union gains the support of its members via ballot, authorising strike action.
• Strike schedule announced: Several days/weeks of action announced in advance, often staggered across different service types (e.g., station staff one day, drivers another).
• Impact period: Service reductions, closures, knock-on effects (other lines or services busier, stations crowded).
• Negotiations resume: Often post-strike or during breaks; management may make a revised offer or unions may call further action.
• Aftermath and review: Management, unions and sometimes government review how to avoid future strikes (or at least reduce disruption).

Understanding this pattern gives us greater insight into current and future TfL strike episodes.

Chapter Four: The Planning and Implementation of TfL Strikes

This heading digs into how strikes are planned from the union side, how TfL responds in preparation, and how the logistics play out for commuters.

How Strikes Are Scheduled and Communicated

Union leadership will typically plan the strike dates strategically. They may choose days that maximise disruption (e.g., busy commuter days), or stagger action across multiple days and services to maintain ongoing pressure. For example, in September 2025, the RMT scheduled action starting Sunday evening, then major walkouts Monday through Thursday, and a full restart on Friday morning.

Notice also that sometimes only parts of the workforce strike (e.g., signallers, station staff, drivers, maintenance) on different days. That allows the union to spread disruption and maintain leverage, while complicating mitigation for TfL.

Communication is key. TfL typically issues advice for customers: recommending alternative routes, extra time for travel, and checking updates on their website/app. For example: “TfL advises customers to consider alternative routes during planned RMT strikes”.

TfL’s Preparation and Mitigation Efforts

TfL must prepare for strike action. That involves: identifying which services will run (if any), closing certain stations if they cannot be safely staffed, deploying buses or other alternatives, and heavily promoting travel advice. For example, ensuring that lines not directly struck (e.g., the Elizabeth line) run as close to normal as possible—but still likely busier than usual.

Moreover, TfL often emphasises safety and operational constraints: that staffing minimums must be met, that changes to service patterns may be required, and that certain service reductions are unavoidable when key staff walk out. For instance, TfL declared that the offer of reducing the working week was “unaffordable and impractical”.

Practical Effects on Commuters: What to Expect

When a strike is implemented, usual operations are disrupted in multiple ways:

• Reduced or no service: On strike days, many Tube lines may not run or only have partial service. The 2025 action saw “little to no service” for several days.
• Alternate transport overload: Services that are still running (Overground, Elizabeth line, buses) become heavily crowded. Queues, delays, and capacity issues become commonplace.
• Station closures or early closing: Some stations may close altogether if staffing is insufficient; or open later/close earlier.
• Altered journey times and routes: Commutes become longer, more complex (need to transfer, walk, or cycle part of the route), and time-sensitive. Travel advice often suggests allowing extra time and checking real-time updates. For example: “For those that need to travel, allow extra time and check live updates.”
• Knock-on economic impact: Businesses may suffer due to employees arriving late and clients being unable to travel. The estimated economic cost of one recent strike was massive (£230 m).

Strategic Considerations by Both Parties

From the union side: the strike schedule is chosen to maximise visibility and disruption while deploying limited staff resources. Also, unions evaluate public sentiment—since if the public turns too negative, the union’s leverage may wane.

From the management side (TfL, Mayor, government): there is a balancing act between meeting demands, protecting budgets, maintaining public service, and preventing reputational damage. They must show they are open to talks, but also assert that they cannot simply concede whatever is asked.

Chapter Five: Effects and Consequences of the Strikes

Here we look at the real-world outcomes and broader implications of the strikes: for commuters, the city, economy, transport policies and labour-relations climate.

Impact on Commuters and Daily Life

For the everyday person who relies on TfL services, strikes mean disruption, stress and altered routines. Imagine waking up, heading to your usual Tube station, only to find minimal service, long queues, crowds, or that you must cycle or walk instead.

This not only adds time to your commute, but also saps mental energy. People have reported being “stuck” at stations, rerouting mid-journey, or simply being late to work. As one Reddit user put it:

“There’s no strike on Wednesday … but there is a warning to say services will probably be severely disrupted in the morning due to the previous day’s strike.”

The knock-on effect of previous day actions hits subsequent mornings, as staff rotate, trains are repositioned, and systems recover.

For those who commute weekly or monthly with employers or clients, the unpredictability of transit can lead to missed meetings, lost productivity, and stress. Tourists and visitors are also affected, making the city harder to navigate.

Economic and Business Implications

Strikes of this scale carry significant economic costs. To illustrate: the estimated cost of one week of disruptions in London was around £230 million.

Such a figure comes from lost working days, delayed travel, increased costs for alternative transport, and impact on businesses dependent on staff and customer access. Retail, hospitality, tourism and meeting-events all feel the impact when transport is unreliable.

Businesses may need to offer more flexible working (work from home, shift start times altered), incur extra costs, or suffer from decreased footfall. The city’s reputation for reliability of transport can be impacted—which in a global city like London is not trivial.

Broader Transport System & Image Impacts

Large-scale strikes in a major network like TfL have ripple effects:

• Capacity and crowding: When major services shut or reduce, the load transfers onto remaining lines, bus networks and cycling/walking routes. That can strain those systems, produce bottlenecks, and lower user satisfaction.
• Reliability perceptions: Frequent or intense disruptions may cause commuters to lose faith in the system reliability, consider alternative routes or modes (e.g., car, bike, scooters), and raise questions about future investment.
• Labour relations climate: Strikes and their fallout influence how unions, management and government approach future planning. They may become more entrenched, or perhaps produce more structured frameworks to avoid recurrence.
• Policy and budgeting pressure: When strikes impose huge economic costs, political and public pressure may build to reform transport governance, budgets, staffing models or labour contracts.

Social and Political Dimensions

Transport strikes are not just operational issues—they become symbolic of wider social and political concerns:

• Worker wellbeing and fairness: The union’s grievances raise questions about how we treat front-line, essential service workers: their shift patterns, pay compared to cost of living, health/fatigue impact.
• Public vs private interest: When public transport is disrupted, ordinary commuters bear the cost of industrial dispute. This raises debates around whose rights take precedence (workers vs public service users).
• Governance accountability: With TfL being a public body (with political oversight via the Mayor of London etc), strikes open up scrutiny of governance, budget priorities, and how well public bodies engage with staff.
• Media and public sentiment: How media frames the strike (as a fight for workers’ rights, or as disruption for commuters) influences public opinion and the political fallout.

Chapter Six: How TfL and the Unions Responded — Recent Cases

In this section I’ll review how the recent strikes have played out in terms of the responses from TfL and the unions, especially looking at 2025-period action and how both sides manoeuvred.

Unions’ Strategy and Messaging

The RMT’s messaging in recent strikes has emphasised that the action is not about inconvenience but fairness. For example, they note that workers are suffering fatigue due to extreme shift rotations and that staffing has been cut, leading to greater risk.

Furthermore, unions have targeted services which have high visibility (Tube lines) and timed actions to maximise pressure. Their mandates have come through ballots with sufficient support in many cases. The idea is that by showing the ability to shut down large parts of the network, they force management back to the table.

Unions also handle communication with the public: emphasising they are not acting out of spite, but because other methods have failed, and that they too rely on the city functioning. That helps public sympathy.

TfL’s Response and Options

TfL has approached strike preparedness in several ways:

• Service planning: Identifying which lines may be partially operable, which stations may be shut, and issuing travel advice ahead of schedule. For example, TfL urged that other services (Elizabeth line, Overground) should be used where possible.
• Public communication: Advising users to check updates, allow extra time, use apps and websites for live data. They emphasise that some disruption is inevitable, and that safety is the priority. For example, TfL website crashed due to traffic during one strike onset. the
• Negotiation tactics: TfL has offered pay rises (e.g., 3.4 %) and engaged in talks, but also emphasised limits (“we cannot afford a reduction in working week”).
• After-strike recap and invite to talks: After a major strike episode, TfL often invites unions back to talks. After one week of strikes in 2025, TfL invited the RMT back to the table.

Case Study: September 2025 Strike Week

Let’s walk through how that recent example played out:

• Announcement & buildup: The RMT scheduled strikes for early September (5–11), affecting Tube and DLR.
• Onset of disruption: From Sunday evening, service started collapsing; commuters were warned to finish journeys by 18:00. The Tube network faced “little or no service” for several days.
• TfL’s stance: They offered a 3.4 % pay rise but refused the reduced working week demand, calling it unaffordable.
• Aftermath & talks: After the week’s action, TfL invited the union back to talks and warned that service would gradually resume on Friday.
• Broader impact: A huge cost to the economy, huge disruption to commuters and business, public frustration but also awareness of workers’ issues.

Lessons Learned from the Interaction

From this case and others, some key take-aways:

• Early warning and communication matter: both for the public and for mitigation.
• The union’s leverage increases when the disruption is credible and substantial.
• TfL must maintain credibility of operations: if the public feels service is unreliable, impact stays beyond strike days.
• Negotiations may spike around strike episodes, but the underlying issues (staffing, shift patterns, pay) don’t disappear just because the strike ends.
• Both parties seem to recognise that repeated major strikes damage everyone (public trust, city economy, worker morale), so often finding a settlement is in their interest—but political, financial, logistical constraints remain.

Chapter Seven: What This Means for You (Commuters, Businesses, Residents)

In this section I’ll speak in practical terms: if you are a commuter, a business owner or a resident in London, what should you be mindful of when a TfL strike is on or threatened?

For Commuters

If you rely on the Tube or other TfL-services:

• Plan: When strike dates are announced, check which lines will be affected, what alternative routes exist, and leave extra time. Many official sources advise this.
• Consider alternatives: The Tube may be very limited. Use buses (though they will be crowded), overground rail, cycle, walk, or perhaps remote working if possible.
• Work earlier/later: If you can shift your travel outside peak, you may avoid the worst crowds and delays.
• Stay informed: Use the TfL app, social media, station announcements. Sometimes stations will close, or certain services may skip stops.
• Expect ripple effects: Even on days after strikes you may see delayed recoveries (trains repositioning, stations reopening gradually). For instance, commuters have noted that even on following mornings there are knock-on disruptions.

For Businesses and Employers

If your business depends on worker access, client travel or event attendance:

• Build in flexibility: Allow staff to arrive later, work from home, or use alternative transport modes.
• Communicate with customers: If a major strike is coming, let clients know. Some events may need rescheduling; many customers will factor delay into their planning.
• Budget extra time: Employees arriving late, travel delays, alternative transport costs (taxis, rideshare) may all increase overhead.
• Leverage off-peak: If you can schedule meetings or events outside major strike windows or peaks, you may mitigate the disruption.
• Monitor economic impact: During significant transport disruption, decreased footfall or engagements may occur. For example, the £230 m impact on London’s economy from one strike period.

For London Residents & the City at Large

For residents and the city’s broader ecosystem:

• Quality of life effects: More crowded public transport, potentially increased private car usage (with resulting congestion), and alternative modes (cycling, scooters) may be used more.
• Transport equity concerns: Those with fewer options (e.g., disabled passengers, lower-income commuters) may suffer more when services are disrupted.
• Political and civic impact: Repeated strikes may erode public trust in transport infrastructure reliability. The local government may face pressure to invest more in staffing, modernisation or alternative transport modes.
• Opportunity for change: These events often open discussion about how to redesign shift patterns, improve staff wellbeing, modernise the network, or invest in resilience so future strikes have less impact.

Chapter Eight: What Happens Next – Future Trends and Outcomes

Given what we know, what might we expect going forward with TfL strikes? What are the possible scenarios and longer-term implications?

Possible Scenarios

1. Settlement reached – The union and TfL come to an agreement: pay rise, shift changes, staffing commitments. Strike threat reduces, network stabilises.
2. Interim truce, future action remains possible – A deal is reached but underlying issues still simmer (budget constraints, staffing shortfalls). Future strikes remain a possibility.
3. More prolonged or frequent action – If negotiation fails or issues worsen (e.g., cost of living spikes, staffing cuts), we may see more frequent or longer strike periods.
4. Structural reforms – The city/government may step in with broader reforms: e.g., change to labour arrangements, review of shift patterns, investment in automation or resilience.

What the Broader Transport Landscape Might Look Like

• Shift towards more flexible commuting: More companies may formalise remote work, staggered starts, to circumvent strike risk.
• Modal diversification: More commuters may choose cycling, e-scooters, walking, or private modes for reliability. TfL already advises such in strike contexts (e.g., Santander Cycles).
• Investment in resilience: If strikes become more frequent, pressure grows to build transport systems that can adapt: e.g., better bus routes, contingency rail capacity, improved maintenance to reduce delays.
• Renewed labour negotiations frameworks: Both TfL and unions may adopt more proactive frameworks to prevent full-scale strike action—perhaps more frequent negotiation, clearer working-hour strategies, fatigue programs.
• Public expectation management: Commuters may adjust expectations of what is “normal” on public transport; service reliability may become a stronger political issue.

Key Questions to Watch

• Will TfL’s budget allow meaningful improvements in pay and staffing?
• Will the union’s demands evolve (e.g., from working-week reduction to better shift scheduling, remote-friendly roles)?
• How will the Mayor of London and the government respond in terms of transport policy and labour regulation?
• Will commuter behaviour shift permanently because of strike-risk?
• Will new technologies (automation, signalling upgrades) reduce the extent to which staffing shortfalls create service vulnerability?

Chapter Nine: My Expert Take – Insights and Reflections

Having examined the causes, the history, the practical effects and the potential futures, here are a few reflections from an expert-eye view.

The Complexity of Balancing Rights and Service

One of the key tensions here is that transport networks are essential public services, yet they rely on human labour under often difficult conditions (shift work, nights, early mornings). Unions rightly point out that fatigue, staffing cuts and encroaching demands erode workers’ wellbeing. However, operators like TfL must also manage budget realities and public service obligations. The balance is not easy and the strike phenomenon reflects that complexity.

The Strategic Use of Strike Action

Strikes are not simply reactive—they are strategic. The scheduling (which days, which services), the public messaging, the coordination all matter. In the September 2025 example the union used staged action across different days and services to maintain momentum. From my view, this signals that industrial action is now a more deeply embedded tool within transport labour relations—not a rare outlier, but part of the ecosystem.

The Risk of “Normalised Disruption”

One concern I see is that commuters may come to expect disruption as part of life in London. If major services are frequently unavailable or unreliable due to strikes, that erodes the social contract underpinning public transport. Over time it may push more people to private cars, or to live outside the city centre—but that would have negative consequences for congestion, environment, equity. Maintaining reliability is key for a healthy city.

The Opportunity in Crisis

Every strike is also a moment of potential change. When the system breaks down, it forces stakeholders to re-examine how things are done. From staffing models to shift scheduling, from communications to ride-sharing alternatives, there are opportunities to redesign. If TfL and the unions treat each episode not merely as a conflict but as a prompt for innovation and improvement, that could be beneficial.

My Prediction

• In the short term (next 12–24 months): I expect more negotiated settlements rather than prolonged strike campaigns—because the cost to the city is large, public patience is limited, and both sides realise outcomes matter.
• In the mid-term (2–5 years): I anticipate structural shifts—more flexible working for staff, greater use of alternative transport modes, more contingency planning by TfL, perhaps regulatory tweaks around essential services.
• Beyond that: The underlying pressure (cost of living, demand for flexible working, urban transport growth) will continue. So the transport-labour interface will remain significant. The best outcome is one where workers are fairly treated, the network remains reliable, and the city continues to function with minimal disruption.

Chapter Ten: Key Takeaways and Final Thoughts

To wrap up, here are some of the key points you should remember when thinking about TfL strikes:

• The strikes are driven by legitimate labour concerns (fatigue, staffing cuts, shift work, pay) intersecting with operational realities and budget constraints at TfL.
• Past history shows that strike action is likely to be strategically scheduled, heavily disruptive, and costly to the city.
• For commuters, the impact is real: longer journeys, crowded alternatives, station closures, and uncertainty. For businesses and the city economy, the knock-on effects are substantial.
• Both unions and TfL have to manage not just the immediate dispute but also longer-term trust, reliability, and public perception.
• The future will likely involve more negotiation, more flexible working and transport modes, and perhaps more structural reforms—if the parties take the opportunity.
• From a personal standpoint: if you’re in London or use its transport system, stay alert for announcements, plan ahead for major strike windows, consider alternatives, and be mindful that your travel patterns may need to adapt.

In short: the TfL strikes matter. They’re not just an inconvenience—they highlight key tensions in modern urban transport systems, between the rights of workers and the needs of a vibrant city. Having a clearer understanding of the causes, patterns and implications puts you in a better position to navigate them, whether you’re commuting, working or simply living in London.