Brandon To is a Politics graduate from UCL and a Hong Kong BN(O) immigrant settled in Harrow.
Recently, I saw on Japanese News how the Prime Minister, Sanae Takachi, publicly admired Margaret Thatcher and dubbed her a “hero”. I couldn’t help but wonder, if Mrs Thatcher were alive, what she would make of Britain today.
It is easy to forget just how much power trade unions once wielded in this country. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, entire sectors of the British economy could be paralysed by industrial action. Coal supplies, electricity generation, transport – all could be brought to a halt.
Thatcher understood something that many politicians today seem reluctant to admit: when a small group controls a critical part of the national infrastructure, it can hold the entire country hostage.
That thought returned to me this week when I saw the latest news about the RMT and the London Underground.
As I was preparing to return to Britain, reports emerged that Tube strikes were about to shut down large parts of the network again. Like millions of Londoners, I depend on the Underground simply to get home. Anyone who lives in this city knows that when the Tube stops running, London does not merely slow down. It grinds to a halt.
Then, a few hours later, came another announcement. The March strikes would be “suspended”, though further strike dates remained scheduled later in the year, with additional ones added for June.
Londoners were apparently supposed to be grateful.
Grateful that, for now, the capital would be spared from disruption.
It is a strange position for one of the world’s great global cities to be in: anxiously waiting to see whether its transport network will be switched off.
For many of us, this is no abstract inconvenience. I still remember the Tube strike that coincided with my own graduation ceremony. What should have been a one-hour journey turned into three and a half hours. I arrived exhausted and anxious, genuinely worried that I might miss the ceremony entirely.
Millions of Londoners have similar stories. When the Underground stops, the city’s commuters become collateral damage in a negotiation they were never invited to.
Which raises a question we rarely ask directly: how did the capital of the United Kingdom become so powerless before a single union?
The answer is very simple. Leverage.
Strategists have always understood the importance of choke points. From the Dardanelles during the First World War, to the Strait of Hormuz now. Control the narrow passage through which everything must pass, and you gain enormous power. The London Underground is one of Britain’s most important choke points. Millions rely on it every day to reach work, school, hospitals, and airports. When it stops, the entire capital suffers.
A relatively small group of workers therefore possesses extraordinary leverage over one of the world’s largest cities. And they know it.The RMT has been pressing for a reduction in the working week to 32 hours while maintaining the pay of a 35-hour contract. At the same time, London Underground drivers are already among the best-paid public transport workers anywhere in Europe.
According to reporting in the Sunday Times, Tube drivers typically earn around £70k a year, with average pay approaching £80k under recent deals. The average salary in London, by comparison, is roughly £50k.
Supporters argue that train driving is a specialised profession requiring training and responsibility. That is certainly true. But the international comparisons remain striking. Across Europe, train drivers generally earn far less. In Paris, salaries typically range from £20k to £28k a year. In Hong Kong, they average around £25k. In Tokyo the range is usually between £22k and £33k depending on experience.
These figures fall well below the pay levels enjoyed by London Underground drivers, even after adjusting for the cost of living. And yet the demands continue. If a 32-hour working week were introduced without reducing pay, the effective hourly wage would rise to £43 per hour. The Telegraph estimated that the hourly rate could rival, or even exceed, that of surgeons.
That is how insatiable people can be.
Britain has faced this kind of challenge before. The great lesson of the Thatcher years was that governments must reduce the leverage of choke points if they want to restore balance between unions and the public.
First, the capital needs serious contingency planning. Replacement transport should not be improvised at the last minute. Expanded bus replacement routes, increased river services along the Thames, and higher-capacity alternatives such as the Elizabeth Line could all help maintain basic mobility during strikes.
Second, Britain should reconsider how strike laws apply to essential infrastructure. Many European countries already require minimum service levels in essential sectors during industrial action. Britain should consider similar safeguards to ensure that major transport systems never fall completely silent.
Finally, London should reduce its vulnerability by utilising technologies. Paris has already fully automated Line 1 and Line 14, making it driverless. Meanwhile, the modern economy offers tools such as remote work and hybrid offices that enable greater flexibility in how people work. Both can diminish the power of the transport choke point.
When Labour returned to power in 2024, it promised that improved relations with unions would lead to fewer strikes. Instead, the strikes continue. Worse still, appeasement risk encouraging ever greater demands.
Today it is a 32-hour week. Tomorrow it could be 30. And Londoners will once again be asked to feel grateful when the next strike is merely “suspended”.
Britain has solved this problem before. It required political courage, and leaders willing to confront powerful interests.
London needs a Thatcher, not another Chamberlain.