On 4 June 2008, about 600 fuel tanker drivers at the two haulage companies Hoyer UK Ltd and Suckling Transport Ltd, the sole suppliers of petrol to the UK forecourts of the multinational oil group Shell, voted for a four-day strike after their demand for a 13% wage increase was rejected by their employers. Both companies had offered a pay rise of 6% to the drivers. Talks between managers at Hoyer [1] and Suckling Transport [2] and Unite, the trade union representing the drivers, failed to secure an eleventh hour deal and the four-day strike went ahead on 13 June 2008.[1] http://www.hoyer-group.com/[2] http://www.sucklingtransport.co.uk/
In June 2008, fuel tanker drivers employed at Hoyer and at Suckling Transport, two companies contracted by the multinational oil group Shell to deliver fuel throughout the UK, won a pay rise of 14% over two years. The above-inflation award followed highly publicised industrial action, which lasted for four days and led to a fuel shortage in the UK. The agreement has been welcomed by the parties to the dispute.
On 4 June 2008, about 600 fuel tanker drivers at the two haulage companies Hoyer UK Ltd and Suckling Transport Ltd, the sole suppliers of petrol to the UK forecourts of the multinational oil group Shell, voted for a four-day strike after their demand for a 13% wage increase was rejected by their employers. Both companies had offered a pay rise of 6% to the drivers. Talks between managers at Hoyer and Suckling Transport and Unite, the trade union representing the drivers, failed to secure an eleventh hour deal and the four-day strike went ahead on 13 June 2008.
Background to dispute
Hoyer and Suckling Transport argued that the one-year 6% pay rise it had offered to the drivers was adequate, emphasising that drivers’ wages had increased by 27% over a four-year period, which was ‘twice the rate of inflation’. The companies also asserted that the wage increase offered to the drivers would take the average pay of a driver to GBP 38,500 (€48,416 as at 18 July 2008).
On behalf of the drivers, Unite argued that drivers’ pay had stagnated since 1992 as a result of Shell outsourcing the delivery of fuel. Moreover, the trade union highlighted that tanker drivers deserved higher pay given the security risks involved in transporting large quantities of fuel. The union was also sharply critical of Shell’s unwillingness to intervene in the dispute, and accused the company of ‘hiding’ behind its contractors. In the run-up to the strike, Unite Assistant General Secretary Len McCluskey stated: ‘Only Shell sets the terms of this contract and only it can solve this dispute. [Shell] is one of the most profitable companies on earth and it now needs to provide the financial flexibility to avert this dispute.’ Following the breakdown of talks on 12 June, Mr McCluskey commented: ‘Shell’s failure to intervene in this dispute means that Shell’s drivers have no alternative other than to go ahead with strike action’.
Strike action and resolution
On the commencement of industrial action, the drivers involved in the dispute picketed outside Shell oil terminals. Many tanker drivers employed at other companies also refused to cross the picket lines. Given the position of Shell as a major fuel supplier in the UK, the strike led to widespread concerns that a fuel shortage would occur throughout the country. Such a shortage of fuel materialised to an extent, with about 600 petrol stations running out of standard fuel by 16 June.
Following a threat by the drivers to engage in another round of industrial action during the following week, fresh pay talks began between the two haulage companies and Unite on 16 June and continued into the following day. An agreement was concluded providing for a 14% increase in drivers’ pay over two years, involving a 9% rise in the first year and a 5% rise in the second year. This reportedly raises the average driver’s annual salary to about GBP 41,750 (€52,500).
The threatened industrial action was suspended pending a ballot of the drivers on the new pay proposals, which Unite recommended the drivers to accept. It was subsequently announced that the tanker drivers had voted to accept the deal, by 453 votes to 56, and all parties to the dispute expressed relief at its conclusion.
The lead negotiator for Hoyer, Gerry McKenna, stated: ‘We are pleased our drivers have accepted this competitive pay deal and the threat of industrial action has been lifted’. It was not clear whether Shell was involved in the final settlement, but the company reportedly welcomed the outcome.
Commentary
The dispute between the fuel tanker drivers and Hoyer and Suckling Transport received significant media attention, not least because of its effect on petrol supplies in the UK. Moreover, the size of the wage increase eventually awarded to the drivers attracted considerable attention in the context of the government’s concern over inflationary pay rises. The Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, John Hutton, emphasised: ‘There needs to be discipline in public and private sector pay if we are to keep inflation under control.’ However, the government sought to downplay the significance of the tanker drivers’ pay deal, highlighting that it was ‘particular’ to the sector.
Thomas Prosser, IRRU, University of Warwick
Eurofound recommends citing this publication in the following way.
Eurofound (2008), Fuel tanker drivers win 14% pay increase after strike, article.
