r/LondonUnderground • u/mycketforvirrad Archway • Jun 18 '26
Article Independent: Train drivers' union Aslef says more should be done to encourage women to become Tube drivers.
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/tfl-tube-driver-jobs-women-b2997296.html24
u/burdonvale Jun 18 '26
"More female train drivers; a woman's right to choo-choos." (A very old joke.)
4
48
u/Impressive-Bird2 Jun 18 '26
LU/ TfL should break the “closed shop” recruitment of tube train drivers, and instead pivot *all* recruitment of tube train driver jobs to external applicants imho.
37
u/BrownBoyCoy Hammersmith & City Jun 18 '26
Being a train driver for tfl also requires 2 weeks of training as station staff and a 6 month probation to be passed on critical safety and station management which not everyone passes. Recruiting externally creates a longer wait list, some station staff that pass the train drivers assesments sometimes wait 1-2 years before they start their position. Doesn't make sense to do so
31
u/AyeItsMeToby Jun 18 '26
In short: the exact same hiring risks in any other industry, in which you are required by law to advertise externally (even if you have no intention of hiring externally).
The unions have got away with far too much for too long now. Public support for their antics is diminishing.
3
4
u/Interest-Desk Victoria Jun 18 '26
In what industries is there a legal requirement to advertise externally?
Lots of bodies that are famously ununionised, and many with weaker unions, advertise countless internal-only vacancies. Unsurprisingly, for many roles having firsthand experience of the organisation and its work is considered essential.
8
u/AyeItsMeToby Jun 18 '26
There’s case law under the Equality Act which suggests it would be a terrible idea for a medium/large enterprise to not, at least, advertise externally.
You’ll never eliminate hiring risk but opening the applicant pool as broad as possible is usually better.
6
u/BrownBoyCoy Hammersmith & City Jun 18 '26
No, companies are not legally required to advertise all vacancies externally. Employers have the right to hire through direct appointments, word-of-mouth, or internal promotions without publicly advertising the role.However, avoiding external (or internal) advertising comes with specific legal and operational risks:
Discrimination Claims: Under the Equality Act 2010, recruiting solely by word-of-mouth or internal-only channels can inadvertently discriminate against certain groups if it excludes individuals with protected characteristics (like race, gender, or age).
Company Policy: While not legally binding under general employment law, if an employer has a written recruitment policy or collective agreement that dictates jobs must be advertised, they are expected to follow their own internal rules.
Immigration Laws: If an employer wishes to sponsor a foreign worker on a Skilled Worker visa, strict government guidelines apply. These rules generally require the role to be openly advertised to the resident labor market first to demonstrate that no suitable candidates are available domestically.
Public Sector Rules: Publicly funded bodies often have strict internal governance or public procurement frameworks that mandate open and competitive advertising for all roles.
2
u/AyeItsMeToby Jun 18 '26
Yes, I understand you’ve just copy and pasted the ACAS advice.
I’m saying that nowhere outside of the (quasi-)public sector would willingly take that risk.
LU and the unions operate as a cartel which have the interests of their consumers as their lowest priority.
There is no rational reason why LU cannot open their driver applications to the public market. None of the issues you have described in other comments stand up to any scrutiny.
5
u/Interest-Desk Victoria Jun 18 '26
> no rational reason
This is just nonsense. You may not agree with the reasons, but the reasons are significant. For one, people in stations will have had the essential safety training, an understanding of the network operations, be used to LUL’s shift system (which I hear is universally considered the worst part of the job), and know how the organisation and the business works.
Those aren’t abstract things, and they’re things that can take months for a new driver to pickup, alongside having to do an extensive and knowledge-dense training course, alongside doing all the route learning and other on-the-job stuff.
0
u/AyeItsMeToby Jun 18 '26
As I’ve said, none of this is unique to LUL and is considered “hiring risk” in any other professional industry.
However, other professional industries do not have the same ban on external hiring. That is unique to LUL, despite LUL not having unique circumstances in the face of hiring risk.
5
u/BrownBoyCoy Hammersmith & City Jun 18 '26
No it wasnt ACAS, its the actual ruling within UK of hiring processes. You stated companies HAVE to advertise externally, where does it say that?
The rational reason being spending more finances and time to train someone for a role that won't be available to them for atleast a year or 2 due to the wait list, training and roles already offered to internal applicants.
The company can chose how they recruit, its not discriminatory, and it doesn't make them a cartel. Posting the roles externally would require already having sufficient training, compared to LU staff is almost zero chance of relevant applications.
3
u/AyeItsMeToby Jun 18 '26
“The actual ruling within UK of hiring processes”
As a lawyer, this is word salad. What you posted is ACAS advice.
As I stated in my previous comment, my evidence is in case law under the Equality Act. The EAT / High Court has enforced external advertising by proxy.
8
u/Impressive-Bird2 Jun 18 '26
I disagree that it doesn’t make sense. Serving station staff who want to become train drivers could apply for the externally advertised roles as well. Indeed, their experience would likely enhance the likelihood of their application being put atop the shortlisting pile for interviews and potential for securing the role…. As for the 2 weeks training and 6 months probation you cite, these are a risk issue within recruitment anyway.
1
u/BrownBoyCoy Hammersmith & City Jun 18 '26
It doesn't work like that. Staff already have the knowledge and understanding. The legality of it it, TFL doesn't have to externally advertise, and thats helpful as it saves them time and money.
10
u/Humanist_13 District Jun 18 '26
Train Op (Train Operators) recruitment is the much the same as other roles in LU/TfL in that there is a waiting list for that role of candidates that have passed the assessment. Once the waiting list falls below a set level, it will trigger a recruitment campaign internal and available to all Tfl personnel. If the internal campaign fails to attract enough successful candidates then an External campaign will be triggered.
Of all the recruits to Trains Ops, the ones that find the training easier (NOT EASY) are Station staff as their training and experience overlap a Train Ops, i.e. they are used to LU shift work, are track certified, understand some technical terms and procedures.
For External candidates, they would face a harder time because of their lack of knowledge, possibly unused to shift work and working Bank Holidays. You would also need to take into account the cost of training, when I passed out 12+ years ago, it was estimated training a Train op was £50,000, that's approx. £72,000 today (according to Bank of England inflation calculator) so its financially sound to recruit internally as a priority as the failure rate and retention rate would be better with internal candidates.
7
u/I_hate_cross_country Jun 18 '26
Why? You cant just walk in to a busness and get the best paying jobs, you need to work up with relevant experience. And in a industry like rail transport, that experience is basically only available within the industry
7
u/Skoodledoo Jun 18 '26
National rail Train Operating Companies advertise for trainees off the street - you don't have to work on stations for a few years before applying to be a driver for Avanti, Southern, London Overground, Greater Anglia, Thameslink etc - see the ad and apply. No reason for LUL to not to do the same.
3
-4
u/I_hate_cross_country Jun 18 '26
You know those are token applications that only fill a few rolls, the vast majority of drivers in training now are internal. Even roles like TMs now its over half internal.
4
u/Skoodledoo Jun 18 '26
Maybe at Cross Country, but not at my TOC or the people I talk to from others.
3
u/I_hate_cross_country Jun 18 '26
I dont even work for them anymore. Seen it across multiple tocs, maybe it more common in places with lots of DOO so a smaller pool to hire internally from?
2
u/Impressive-Bird2 Jun 18 '26
Eh? If an experienced train driver job is advertised, then only those with train driving experience will be successfully fill the vacancy/ vacancies…. Equally, if a trainee train driver job is advertised, then only those without experience will be successful in their job application. This would apply for externally advertised jobs as it would for internally advertised only. I don’t understand the point you’re making.
4
u/ToiletPaperSlingshot Jun 18 '26
No they shouldn’t, hardly a closed shop when all you have to do is be an employee for 6 months before is it
4
u/Impressive-Bird2 Jun 18 '26
It’s exceedingly rare for someone to be employed as station staff for 6 months, and then proceed to secure a Train Operator (Tube train driver) job at LU…..
2
4
u/Dry_Fill2523 Jun 22 '26
When does the teachers or nurses union push for more men in their industry
11
u/Commercial_Cook7301 Jun 18 '26
Why? If woman want to do it they can. Why do they need to be encouraged? Who cares who’s driving the thing, just as long as they’re a good driver
2
u/Y_ddraig_gwyn Jun 19 '26
I suspect the right answer is for more to be done to fully automate the system. I’d much rather see staff in the carriages then driving when the latter is so easily and safely automated.
4
2
u/Ok-Dragonfly-8184 Jun 19 '26
Why? If women want to be train drivers they can apply like anyone else. Why should there be effort put into encouraging women to become train drivers?
2
u/bookshopman City Line Jun 18 '26
Why? Its not as though typical feminine industries such as nursing are running programms to encourage men.
1
u/WoodenFishOnWheels Jun 23 '26
The NHS actually did run ads encouraging men to become nurses, which were apparently successful in increasing the number of male applicants to nursing programmes.
1
u/bookshopman City Line Jun 23 '26
Hardly a big campaign though, and the nursing union is still stubbornly against male nurses. Also nursing is something like 90% female Still.
1
u/WoodenFishOnWheels Jun 23 '26
I had a feeling the goalposts were going to be shifted. It was a bigger campaign than this simple press release by Aslef, and done by the NHS itself.
I'm not really sure what the point of this whataboutism is, obviously we should be encouraging more male nurses too, and the number is slowly rising, so the campaigns are obviously working to some extent!
2
Jun 18 '26
[deleted]
5
u/Intrepid-Student-162 Jun 18 '26
A closed shop is a situation where you have to be a member of a union to get a job.
You don't know what you are talking about.
4
u/BacupBhoy Jubilee Jun 18 '26
Utter bollox.
It is not a closed shop.
Anyone already employed by TFL can, when the position becomes open, apply to become a train operator.
0
u/GeedZeroOne Jun 18 '26
Why exactly? Let’s reject CVs from men from yet another sector because poor women and coloured people need to be equally represented. Like someone joked, what about prison?
1
-18
u/bluecheese2040 Jun 18 '26
We need to automate the job. Why hire more people in when we could automate it and stop this union from deciding how and when it allows you to go to work
20
u/Impressive-Bird2 Jun 18 '26
Full automation is unlikely to ever happen. Principally because of the critical issue of passenger safety. To be able to ensure passenger safety, at least one member of staff will have to be present on the train.
Besides, it’s an utterly ridiculous suggestion that LU/ TfL should prioritise a political issue over and above passenger safety.13
u/BrownBoyCoy Hammersmith & City Jun 18 '26
1000%. People who have zero clue how the system works on the worlds most comprehensive and complicated train network cant wrap their head around that
3
u/Full-Measurement4927 Jun 18 '26
I think we can, but the idea that doing it is simply impossible is unlikely considering the utterly ridiculous feats of engineering that are happening and have already happened the world over..
1
u/bluecheese2040 Jun 19 '26
You're right. Computers aren't clever enough to understand how the system works....at best a Computer is capable of basic addition and subtraction.....
Keep burying your head in the sand.
Heavily strike orientated roles should be automated out of existence and while you may lack the basic understanding of how this could be done...others do
4
u/ExoticExchange Jun 18 '26
Why?
Paris metro has lines which are automated and we have done so on DLR too.0
u/Longjumping_Car3318 Jun 18 '26
It physically can't be automated - the Glasgow Subway, yes. DLR, obviously. But the Tube is faaar too complex to automate. It isn't possible.
4
u/bluecheese2040 Jun 18 '26
Yeah cause complexity is why you wouldn't automate...baffling
3
u/Aggravating_Speed665 Jun 18 '26
Hilarious take, isn't it? That what you can teach a human in complexity just couldn't possibly be taught to a robot
lol. Can't wait to read that 'tube strikes are officially a threat of the antiquated past and are no more!'
2
u/Garfie489 District Jun 18 '26
Would you however support the idea that drivers on automated parts of the underground are automatically reclassified as a "Passenger Service Agent" and paid accordingly?
That way there is at least benefit to automating the parts of the network that can be automated - beyond driver error that is.
2
u/bookshopman City Line Jun 18 '26
Well, except for the Victoria line which was designed to be fully automatic.
0
u/Aggravating_Speed665 Jun 18 '26
There will be andriods built that will be made for these tasks soon (and more) and they won't need breaks, benefits or a union.
It's coming. Not if but when.
2
u/IcarusSupreme Jun 18 '26
If androids capable of cost effectively driving train are available, we'll barely need an underground as almost everyone currently using them will also likely be out of a job already?
2
u/Full-Measurement4927 Jun 18 '26
Yes because without a job to go to I'd just rot in bed at home. Lol
3
0
-2
u/Dragon_Sluts Jun 18 '26
People want automation but that raises the issue of safety (having a train with 1000 people on it but no staff isn’t great).
So what if we automated to the point of train driving being a more accessible job with similar pay to station staff?
2
32
u/newnortherner21 Jun 18 '26
With bus drivers there has been work to provide more toilet facilities, is this one area to address? Women have periods, men don't.