Violence towards public transport workers triggers unofficial strikes

Several unofficial strikes occurred in the public transport sector over the course of one month. The strikes were held to highlight the growing insecurity of transport workers for their safety at the workplace, although statistics show a decrease in aggressive or violent behaviour by passengers. However, according to trade unions, unofficial strikes would inevitably occur if the authorities and public transport services did not adopt new measures to improve workers’ safety.

Occupational hazard of transport workers

Rude and aggressive behaviour from passengers seems to be an inevitable occupational hazard of bus drivers and ticket inspectors, who are being increasingly exposed to such behaviour. While these acts are generally limited to verbal abuse, sometimes they involve physical attacks which can result in severe injuries and psychological damage to the victim. Ticket inspectors and night-time drivers seem to be particularly at risk of these kinds of attacks, which have in turn sparked strong criticisms from transport workers who believe that they have the right to safe working conditions.

Unofficial strike action

In early 2008, several incidents of violent attacks against bus drivers and ticket inspectors were reported on the bus network of the French-speaking Walloon region (Transport en commun en Wallonie, TEC) and on the rail networks of the National Railway Company of Belgium (Société Nationale des Chemins de fer Belges/Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen, SNCB/NMBS).

The attacks generated a heated response from colleagues of the injured workers, who resorted to unofficial strike action to highlight the lack of safety at their workplace and of a concerted effort to address this problem. The colleagues of the injured workers are fearful that they too are at risk of such attacks. This feeling is shared by all public transport workers and numerous strikes were launched spontaneously without any request or notice from the trade unions, taking everyday commuters by surprise.

Although the strikes were unofficial, the trade unions branded such actions as ‘emotional’ strikes and support was offered by both the General Confederation of Public Services (Centrale Générale des Services Publics/De Algemene Centrale der Openbare Diensten, CGSP/ACOD) and the Public Services Christian Union (Centrale Chrétienne des Services Publics/Christelijke Centrale van de Openbare Diensten, CCSP/CCOD). According to the trade union organisations, the strikes are understandable and legitimate.

Safety fears considered unjustified

However, public transport companies insist that they have already invested considerable sums of money in video camera equipment, security agents and training to combat the incidence of violent attacks against transport workers. Moreover, statistics indicate that the number of violent attacks has, in fact, decreased in recent years. For instance, in 2007, the Brussels Transport Network (Société des Transports Intercommunaux de Bruxelles/Maatschappij voor het Intercommunaal Vervoer te Brussel, STIB/MVIB), which counts more than 230 million passengers, reported 85 physical attacks against transport workers, compared with 109 such attacks in 2006 – leading to newspaper headlines proclaiming that ‘Our public transport is safe’.

Nevertheless, the trade unions believe that there has been insufficient action taken to make vehicles safer for transport workers, as well as for passengers. In particular, increased video camera equipment and more security agents, as well as police officers, are deemed essential.

Need for stricter sanctions

For his part, the Walloon Minister for Transport, André Antoine, insists that the courts have been ‘too lax towards the authors of these crimes’. According to one public prosecutor, anyone involved in mugging a transport worker is sued and punished accordingly. However, in many instances, the perpetrator is not caught and no evidence is found.

In 2006, plans were announced to introduce legislation imposing stricter penalties on those who engage in violent behaviour against transport workers on duty. The legislation provides for a doubling of the penalties imposed; however, few judges seem to have applied the regulation.

During a meeting between employee representatives and leaders of the public transport companies, the latter promised to strengthen their efforts to increase the safety of both employees and customers; however, they added that some degree of risk is inevitable and that there is no perfect solution.

Controversy over right to strike

Violence against transport workers was not the only issue which the media and politicians focused on; the matter of increasingly frequent unofficial strikes was also highlighted. A particular grievance was the fact that daily public transport users had to contend with the absence of services for many days and without any prior notice. The Minister for Public Services, Inge Vervotte, highlighted that 11 unofficial strikes had taken place in 2007 alone and underlined that such actions did not respect the obligatory five days’ strike notice.

The series of unofficial strikes also re-launched a previous debate about the establishment of minimal services in public transport (BE0705019I). A spokesperson for SNCB/NMBS commented that ‘violent attacks against drivers and ticket inspectors are unacceptable, but wildcat strike actions are not the adequate answer to this phenomena’. In addion, he emphasised that ‘the company has already invested a lot of money in security’. However, trade union representatives argue that it is difficult to prevent such actions, insisting that: ‘As long as no tangible solutions are proposed, wildcat strikes would continue to happen.’

Emmanuelle Perin, Institute for Labour Studies (IST), Université Catholique de Louvain (UCL)