Covid-19 Public Inquiry Module 10
Evidence paper – The experience of keyworkers
Introduction
RMT welcomes the Covid-19 Inquiry and in particular, Module 10’s focus on the experience of keyworkers.
RMT represents over 80,000 workers in the public transport and logistics systems of the UK. The experience of these workers during the pandemic was strongly determined by public policy and the preparedness, the resilience of society and the economy and the structure of the transport system.
On March 20, 2020, transport was deemed an essential service, which reflected its importance in keeping supplies and other essential workers moving and this was a point stressed by the Secretary of State for Transport, who called transport workers ‘true heroes’.
The flow of food supplies depended on aviation, ferry, logistics and rail workers, the movement of other essential workers into hospitals and schools depended on public transport workers. But it was also recognised, including in the government’s own prepandemic exercises, that transport systems were and are key vectors of transmission, both for workers and passengers, so that developing safe systems of operating them would be essential.
Exposure to Covid-19 and excess mortality
For those who work in public transport, their essential status meant that had to keep coming into work while others worked from home and send their children into education. Staff were in the public-serving frontline alongside other keyworkers such as health, education and retail workers. Data from the Annual Population Survey showed that, during 2020 over 80% of full-time workers in transport and storage reported never working at home (ONS, 2021).1
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/occupational-impact-of-covid-19-in-the-transport-andeducation-sectors/occupational-impact-of-covid-19-in-the-transport-and-education-
Accordingly, they saw high levels of infection in the early stages of the pandemic. In late March 2020, the Mayor of London reported that 1 in 3 Transport for London staff were self-isolating. There were disproportionately high levels of fatality among bus drivers and taxi and private hire vehicle drivers.
Although less exposed than health and social care and education workers, transport workers were more at risk than non-essential workers. Subsequent studies have reported higher levels of excess mortality among transport workers throughout the pandemic than non-essential workers. Overall mortality rates for transport workers in England and Wales were increased in 2020 and 2021, and the proportion of deaths associated with SARSCoV-2 infection was also more than doubled up to May 2021. This mortality rate was particularly concentrated among bus and taxi workers.2
Government policy, heightened tensions in transport and rising levels of workplace violence
From the outset, RMT argued that transport keyworkers who were expected to come into work to keep vital critical national infrastructure operational should be subject to mass testing. The union called for this and surveyed members, 93% of whom agreed. While the government made positive noises about testing, no coherent programme of mass testing for transport workers was every implemented.
As restrictions were eased and more businesses wanted workers to return to workplaces the safe use of public transport became an issue of real concern for millions of people returning to their workplaces. Understanding that public transport was a vector of transmission led to heightened anxiety about transport use as well as heightened stress, anxiety and conflict on public transport as guidance changed.
RMT made a series of representations to the government about the impact of implementing changes in its guidance. This mostly turned on changing guidance around the wearing of face masks and the maintenance of social distancing. With the rapid changes in policy on restrictions on movement, from December 2020 onwards, these concerns became particularly acute.
On 16th February 2021, RMT wrote to the DfT protesting that government guidance permitted Train Operating Companies (TOCs) to resume revenue collection services, which had been suspended during the first lockdown, in spite of the spread of the new more infectious variants. This resulted in some TOCs sending Conductors and Guards back into crowded trains to collect tickets while others, including in Scotland and Wales which were under the control of the Scottish and Welsh governments respectively, continued to suspend these duties. RMT asked the DfT to suspend these duties.3
The DfT declined to do so, preferring to ‘support’ any TOC that opted to suspend these duties. This suggest that the government was making a conscious decision to prioritise
sectors#occupational-impact-of-covid-19-in-the-transport-and-education-sectors
2 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/occupational-impact-of-covid-19-in-the-transport-andeducation-sectors/occupational-impact-of-covid-19-in-the-transport-and-education-sectors#occupationalimpact-of-covid-19-in-the-transport-and-education-sectors
3 Mick Cash Letter to Grant Shapps, 16th February 2021 - On-board revenue protection and ticket examination duties during Covid-19.
rail recovery (i.e. revenue recovery) as opposed to the Scottish Government and Welsh Governments who took a difference assessment of the risks and priorities.
On 14 May 2021, as the government was implementing its roadmap for opening up, announced in February that year, RMT raised concerns at the Rail Industry Coronavirus Forum that the government was announcing changes to rules concerning social distancing, the wearing of face masks and travel without giving the industry time to influence these decisions or to discuss its response.
On 9thh July 2021, ahead of Step 4 of the Roadmap, the RMT wrote to the Prime Minister noting that many of the measures in place in the transport sector had been agreed with unions and that these must stay in place unless there was agreement with the unions to remove them. This included the requirement to wear face masks and observe social distancing. The letter also pointed to the different approaches of the devolved governments and the likelihood of confusion in public messaging. The government did not respond to this letter4 .
The rapidity with which guidance changed caused problems for Network Rail and the Train Operating Companies at times. In July 2021, for example, Network Rail reps attending a meeting with management to discuss the government’s plan to bring in exemptions were told that NR had only heard about this the night before and were still trying to work out what the government were saying they had to do. They claimed it was ‘presented to us on Sunday and no time for informing or consulting’.5
For our members, the increased tension associated with travelling, the confusion over changing guidance and ‘police function’ being placed on transport workers combined to raise levels of aggression encountered by transport workers. This was further aggravated by the concern among transport authorities (presumably conscious of Treasury pressure) to resume revenue collection duties at gatelines and on trains. This resulted in an increase in workplace violence, attested to in two major surveys run in September and October 2021.
In September 2021, RMT ran a survey of members across all sectors of transport on their experience of violence in the workplace. More than 5,200 workers responded to the survey over 4 days.6 This revealed that:
• 58% of public transport workers report that they had been subjected to workplace violence from passengers since the pandemic began.
• More than half reported being threatened with physical violence, 10% had been physically assaulted, while 16% reported being spat at or targeted with bodily fluids.
• 88% had been verbally abused, 13% reported being racially harassed and 6% had been sexually assaulted.
• Staff attributed this to having to implement Covid safety rules, the lack of any action against perpetrators, lack of support, rising aggression levels and mixed messages to the public
4 Mick Lynch letter to Boris Johnson MP, Prime Minister, Nicola Sturgeon MSP, First Minister of Scotland Mark Drakeford MS, First Minister of Wales, ‘Changes to Covid Restrictions, 9th July 2021
5 Internal notes of Network Rail meeting with RMT reps, 20th July 2021.
6 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-supports-mps-call-to-protect-public-facing-staff/
• The majority of respondents (53%) believe that workplace violence had worsened since the pandemic and when asked why they thought this was, the biggest reasons given were the fact that no action is taken against perpetrators (71%), the reduced presence of BTP and police (64%) and the need to remind passengers about Covid safety measures (62%).
• 73% said that they believed that the lifting of Covid-19 restrictions in July 2021 and mixed messaging created by this had led to an increase in violence at work.
RMT ran a similar survey of members working in London. conducted a survey of members working on London Underground, Overground and Transport for London rail services between 20 October and 5 November. More than 1,000 workers responded to survey.7
• 63% of all workers surveyed across London Underground, Overground and other TfL services report that they have been subjected to workplace violence from passengers since the pandemic began.
• 76% of those employed in public-facing roles, including station staff, drivers and cleaners, report that they have been subjected to workplace violence from passengers since the pandemic began.
• 56% reported being threatened with physical violence, 87% reported verbal abuse, 14% reported being spat at or targeted with bodily fluids.
• 28% reported being racially harassed and 7% had been sexually assaulted.
Staff attribute this to having to implement Covid safety rules, the lack of any action against perpetrators, lack of support, rising aggression levels and mixed messages to the public.
• 60% of the respondents said that they believed that workplace violence had worsened since the pandemic.
• When asked why they thought this was, the biggest reasons given were the reduced presence of BTP and police (78%), the fact that no action is taken against perpetrators (75%), the need to remind passengers about Covid safety measures (66%) and cuts to station staffing (60%).
• A massive 82% said that they believed that the lifting of Covid-19 restrictions in July 2021 and mixed messaging created by this had led to an increase in violence at work.
Fragmentation in the Transport Industry
Our members’ experience of the Covid-19 pandemic was heavily conditioned by the structure of the transport industry. In particular, one of the key determinants was the level of fragmentation or centralisation of their part of the industry.
1. Sub-sectoraldivisions
In the rail industry, on 23rd March the government stepped in to move rail operating companies from already government-controlled Franchises onto new Emergency Measures Agreements, which placed them under even greater control from the Secretary of State. While this stopped short of the nationalisation that RMT called for, it built on financial and
7 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/3-in-4-tube-staff-subjected-to-violence/
contractual levers which already existed which the government could, at least in theory use to ensure compliance with government policy. This underpinned the government’s instruction to the industry to set up the Rail Industry Coronavirus Forum, an industry-wide body that brought together franchised train operating companies and the publicly owned rail infrastructure owner Network Rail and the Rail unions to develop jointly agreed principles and ways of working during the emergency. Consequently, the industry was able to coordinate and work together to a degree unseen since rail privatisation, mitigating to some degree, the fragmentation and silo working that characterises privatised passenger services and enabling the unions to raise workplace issues highlighted by Health and Safety Reps on the ground with a centralised industry body.
There were still persistent problems with profit-oriented companies, possibly under pressure from the Treasury, pursuing their own short-term interests and attempting to resume revenue collecting duties in spite of the emergence of new and highly contagious variants. For example, RMT declared a dispute with Cross Country Trains over its insistence on revenue collection staff returning to their duties collecting revenue in crowded carriages in spite of new Delta variant in January 2021. Cross Country refused to suspend these duties and review its risk assessments.8 In December 2021, RMT wrote to all TOCs calling for suspension of all non-essential duties like revenue collection because of spread of Omicron variant.9
Nevertheless, the bus industry was far more deregulated. The government’s decision not to take a greater control in the bus sector or to convene an equivalent to the RICF created a very different environment for bus workers and their unions. On 19th March 2020, as it became clear that operators were considering cutting essential services because of falling revenue, RMT called for the government to step in and introduce ‘emergency powers to allow local authorities to take control of their bus services and ensure our communities and the most vulnerable in society do not become isolated.’ The government opted instead for lighter-touch emergency subsidies to operators.
RMT made repeated calls on the government to establish a bus sector forum similar to the Rail Industry Coronavirus forum on rail. On 6th April 2020, RMT wrote to Secretary of State Grant Shapps highlighting the different approach in the bus sector: “Whilst the rail industry is at least seeking to adopt a joined up approach to the Coronavirus crisis the national bus industry in contrast is a complete free for all and the RMT is calling on the Government to use this national funding to also enforce a national charter of protection for bus workers and bus passengers as part of the fight against the spread of Covid-19 Given the funding announcement, and the vital importance of our bus networks, I am disappointed that, despite multiple requests to do so, the DfT has not yet initiated sectoral discussions for the local transport sector.”10 On 27 May, Mr Shapps replied describing transport workers as ‘true heroes’ but ignoring the call for a forum in favour of his view that ‘transport organisations are best placed’ to translate government guidance properly. This resulted in significantly different experiences for mainline rail workers and bus workers. For example, of respondents to a survey conducted in April 2020, only 1 in 5 bus workers reported that they would receive full sick pay if they were required to self-isolate,
8 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-declares-dispute-on-cross-countrytrains/?msclkid=13b5bd6db1a811ec841ec2df359bf874
9 https://www.rmt.org.uk/about/health-and-safety/health-and-safety-circulars/carrying-out-of-non-essentialduties-when-the-omicron241221/?preview=true
10 Letter to Grant Shapps from Mick Cash,’ Protecting bus workers during COVID-19’, 6th April 2020
compared with more than 60% of rail workers. 1 in 5 reported that they had received no PPE at all, while 47% reported that they believed that their employer was animated more by business and profit than safety during the pandemic.11
On 2nd February 2021, RMT wrote to the Bus Minister Baroness Vere seeking an urgent meeting based on a results of a new survey of bus workers12 .
• 80% thought that enforcement of face coverings on bus services was inadequate
• 70% of bus workers thought enforcement of social distancing on bus services was inadequate
• Only a quarter of bus workers knew who was responsible for enforcing Covid-19 safety measures on the bus network
• 60% of bus workers said their employer had taken no additional steps to protect staff safety since the emergence of the more infectious strain of Covid-19
• Nearly 70% of bus workers thought their employer had put business priorities before safety during the pandemic.
Similarly, there was no coordination in the Maritime sector. While there was DfT-level engagement with civil servants, the absence of an industry or sector level body coordinating employers and working jointly with unions meant that maritime employers had a freer hand to respond in line with commercial imperatives rather than in line with safety and public service duties. A significant number of maritime workers responded to the April 2020 survey by reporting that their employers were trying to worsen sick pay, pay and hours of work during the pandemic. 40% highlighted attacks on sick pay arrangements.13
At the start of March 2020 Stena Line cut the sick pay scheme agreed with unions so that workers would only be entitled to Statutory Sick Pay. In December 2021, there was an outbreak of Covid-19 amongst crew on the Stena Edda between Birkenhead and Belfast, yet the company continued to deny RMT members demands for the restoration of full sick pay. Stena subsequently made 150 redundancies.14
Similarly, in a foreshadowing of its later actions in firing and replacing its crew, P&O Ferries took the opportunity of the pandemic to propose a series of changes to Ratings’ terms and conditions, including pay cuts, replacement of UK seafarers with foreign crew, no strike clauses, statutory redundancy, cuts to the sick pay scheme, scrapping benefits for long service, leave restrictions. In the end, 500 jobs were cut as a consequence of P&Os actions.15
2. Outsourcing
The other major fault line running through the transport industry workforce was based on the outsourcing of major functions. While workers employed in ‘Tier 1’ train operating companies or directly employed by Network Rail were effectively covered by the existence of the Rail Industry Coronavirus Forum, the rail industry has outsourced a range of
11 RMT Covid-19 Survey 15-17 April 2020.
12 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-bus-worker-survey-reveals-wild-west-approach/
13 RMT Covid-19 Survey 15-17 April 2020.
14 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-announces-dispute-with-stena-line-over-pandemic-sick-pay/
15 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-reacts-with-fury-to-pando-all-out-assault-on-jobs/
ancillary functions and engages in large-scale sub-contracting. On the passenger operations side, Train operating companies have outsourced extensively in their cleaning, catering and security functions, as well as some station roles. RMT estimates that there are at least 10,000 such workers engaged through contracts with the train operating companies.
On the infrastructure side, Network Rail subcontracts most of its track renewals work. There are an estimated 80-100,000 such workers engaged through subcontracting arrangements with Network Rail. These workers are all employed by outsourcing firms or labour supply companies for profit. With their chief cost being labour, these workers typically get poor or inferior terms and conditions, often low pay and, particularly on the infrastructure side, precarious ‘zero hours’ contracts.
In April 2020, only 10% of cleaners reported that they had received any PPE, compared with 44% of traincrew and 38% of station staff. Outsourced cleaners and security guards were far more likely to report that their companies put profits before safety in their response to the virus, with 50% agreeing in both cases and less than 20% disagreeing.16
The absence of decent sick pay was a major issue for these outsourced workers. Already low paid by having their wages anchored to the National Minimum Wage, these workers did not and still do not get occupational sick pay. They were reliant on the statutory minimum and as a consequence faced a perpetual dilemma when testing positive or being ‘pinged’ by the government’s Test and Trace software.
In July 2021, RMT surveyed Churchill cleaners working on Southern and Southeastern trains and stations.
• 61% reported that they sometimes or regularly struggle to get by;
• 69% reported that they have gone into work while sick because they couldn’t afford not to work.17
In March 2022, RMT conducted a survey of Atalian’s cleaners working in Avanti West Coast depots. This showed that:
• 91% of Atalian Servest cleaners said they were struggling to make ends meet, with 68% saying they were regularly struggling;
• 94% of Atalian cleaners said they had had to come into work while sick because they couldn’t afford not to.
RMT collected personal testimony of this dilemma:
• “CountlesstimesIhaveworkedwhilefeelingbadIcan'taffordlosingaday.The lasttimewasduringCovid19restrictions,Ifacethedangerofcatchingitontopof everything.”
• “IhaveworkedwhilesicklotsoftimebecauseIcan’taffordtostayoffandIknow peopleinmydepotthathaveworkedwithCovidwhenthegovernmentstopped paying80%.”
• “Inevertookalateralflowtestas80%offmypaywouldhavefinanciallyhave
16 RMT Covid-19 Survey 15-17 April 2020
17 https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/publications/churchill-cleaners-in-their-own-words/
finishedme.”
• “Theoptionofstayingathometorecoverfromanyillnessisjustnotavailableto me.Mybillswon'tsimplygoawaysoIhavetogotowork,evenifI'mthrowing up.”
• “IcamebackafterhavingCovidandwasexperiencinglongCovidsymptoms.Iwas actuallyvomitingonthetrainanddizzy,butcouldnotaffordtotakeanyextratime off.”
• “Oneofthetimes,Iwasfeelingverybadatwork,andtheywantmedoadouble shift,Iwasstrugglingalreadyjustwithmyhours,butIfinishedmyshift.WhenI wenthomeIdoneaCovidtest,andwaspositive.Ilostafewdays.Itwasverybad forme,becauseIdon’tgetenough.”18
It is also the case that outsourced workers have fewer Health and Safety reps than workers in the ‘core’ of the railways. Because collective bargaining arrangements within outsourced companies tend to be weaker and often non-existent, the density and power of health and safety reps in these workplaces are correspondingly less than in the ‘core’ workforces.
RMT attempted to negotiate within the Rail Industry Coronavirus Forum to ensure protection for outsourced and sub-contracted workers. The union was able to reach agreement to cover some workers as follows:
“For direct contractors employees e.g. those undertaking cleaning and catering on trains for DfT franchised train operating companies, all unavailability for work due to Coronavirus sickness or self isolation or a reduced requirement to work due to a revised level of train service will be paid by their employer as a minimum the equivalent they would receive under the Government’s Furlough scheme being 80% of their basic pay. All sickness absence related to Coronavirus will be excluded from sickness absence monitoring procedures.”
This did not cover all outsourced workers though and in practice, as we have seen, the power imbalance characteristic of low paid jobs, the need to access full pay and the absence of strong union and health and safety structures meant that these workers rarely felt able to stay off work. Network Rail refused to extend even these partial arrangements to its extensive sub-contracted supply chain.
The different experiences of ‘Tier 1’ and outsourced workers can be gauged also in the below testimonials, one from a member of traincrew employed on Northern Trains and one an outsourced cleaner working in London.
18 https://issuu.com/rmtunion/docs/rmt-policy-update-striking-atalian-cleaners-in-the
The traincrew member:
“I worked as a Guard on Northern Trains and we had a series of outbreaks of Covid over the period of the pandemic which obviously led to numerous people going off sick so it certainly felt real and people were nervous overall. We had a good Safety Committee which was where we took issues members raised and on the whole it worked pretty well. Normally it sits 4 time a year and is comprised of Reps, full time officials, Directors and Executive Managers. During COVID, it used to sit fortnightly I would say on average.
It was important that we had that because we did have disagreements - So, for example, we had a disagreement over the types of masks to be used by revenue collection staff. We insisted as a Union that anyone tasked with collecting revenue from the public must have the ability to use an FFP 3 mask. These were thought to be more robust. This measure was inserted into the risk assessment eventually. However, they weren't suitable for everyone as a successful face fitment test was needed to ensure they worked properly. We also had on-train removable barriers installed on Northern Trains. These allowed Train crews to barrier off a section of a carriage to themselves. The company kept trying to get us to agree to remove them but we refused until I think all COVID restrictions were eventually lifted.
Unlike the outsourced workers who we often worked alongside, we got sick pay in line with contractual arrangements. The main concerns for our members came from those with vulnerable families. We had members with family members who suffered from immune suppressed conditions. The company insisted these people came to work. This I feel placed a significant mental strain on those members.”
The outsourced cleaner:
“I worked nights cleaning/disinfecting trains for an outsourced company during the pandemic. Most COVID measures were followed only to the extent that the client company of my employers could claim plausible deniability.
There was a portacabin/demountable break room that should only have had 3 occupants, and there was much signage to that effect. There was up to 7 cleaners employed there, and no alternative break facilities. We would crowd in there and eat unmasked most breaktimes, especially in winter, and all tumble out if we knew a manager or an assessor from the parent company was coming. We were always pre-warned.
After COVID tests became available, everyone was distributed multiple and forms were provided to my supervisor, that everyone had to take a test on a weekly basis. It was never adhered to my knowledge, and this was on a relatively small site. The introduction of this testing facade came at the same time as the announcement that people would only receive statutory sick pay for a positive test, and then only if you were off for 10 days, due to a change in the wishes of the client, who had that point had paid us in full. This was around April '21. At that point we were almost guaranteed to not reveal a positive test, as it would have led to 2 weeks of 80% lost earnings, and we were paid very little anyway, so there was no question of safety, our livelihoods were at risk. I raised this to a manager, and he said 'Well, it certainly looks that way.'
We were discriminated against through our low pay, for our role as outsourced cleaners, and through the introduction of sanitising duties, which were only carried out half the time, and only earned us an extra 10p an hour pay increase. Masks were available at the beginning of the shift, but due to the physically demanding nature of the job were unsuitable for how sweaty and out of breath you'd become, so were rarely used properly.
Ironically my nights disinfecting trains became the only part of my life when I could feel like COVID didn't exist. Due to my need for the job and to my employer's complete disregard for our safety in obeying those restrictions, we had to treat it as a myth.”
Summary:
We believe that the pandemic has major lessons to teach about not just about government decision-making but about the preparedness and resilience of essential services like transport. Our experience is that government’s response to the pandemic was shaped by critical assumptions about the transport system which the pandemic threw into question. We believe that the transport system was not prepared for the pandemic and showed major weaknesses in large part as a consequence of government policy-making over a longer period.
The pandemic rapidly exposed the lack of resilience in the transport system. When infection levels rose it placed the running of critical infrastructure in question at several points. Lean staffing models practiced over years as part of responses to government austerity policies left the rail system with only just enough staff and no ‘slack’ for responding to crises. Government and industry policy attempted to get around this by amending agreed procedures on test and trace weakening the demand that people selfisolate when alerted to a contact by the government’s App. This obviously increased risk and anxiety for our members. Confused and changing government guidance over passenger conduct on public transport did the same and heightened tensions on the railway, placing our members in more physical danger.
The fragmentation of public transport was another major factor shaping our members’ experience of the pandemic. It created a constant tension between the short-term interests of companies and the safety of workers. This was mitigated to some extent by the centralisation of passenger rail in the pandemic and the existence of a single industry forum convened jointly with unions. But this did not extent to buses or maritime transport, nor did it cover the outsourced and sub-contracted supply chains of the train operating companies and Network Rail. In these areas, workers were left exposed to the full force of the pandemic with little protection. The fact that these workers were the lowest paid keyworkers in the economy and were also disproportionately BAME workers, should be a mark of shame to the government and the industry. Tackling this toxic employment model should be a priority.
The pandemic also showed the value of health and safety reps. Where the arrangements in place in rail worked best, was where health and safety reps were able to raise issued through a joint industry forum and agree arrangements for safe working. Where they were absent, there were no safe workplaces.