London Tube drivers to go on series of strikes across three months in row over four-day working week

LBC reports the RMT's announcement of eight Tube strike days and gives the union's case at length, mostly in its general secretary's own words. It never reports that London Underground rejected his claims or that Aslef, the other drivers' union, backs the scheme as voluntary with no detriment for drivers who stay on five days. The RMT's description of the scheme as compulsory therefore stands unanswered.

1. Gives a contested claim the last word

   Serious

   “there is nothing voluntary about a scheme that forces drivers to give up existing protections whether they work four days or five”

   Why this matters

   LBC prints Eddie Dempsey's claim that the scheme "forces drivers" and that there is "nothing voluntary" about it. The article then runs on through his quote and ends on strike dates, with no response from London Underground or anyone else.

   The impression it gives

   A reader comes away believing the four-day week is imposed on drivers and that those who keep a five-day week lose protections. Nobody in the article disputes either point.

   The context

   The same day's coverage reports that London Underground rejected his claims. Aslef, which also represents Tube drivers, says management agreed that drivers who keep a five-day week will suffer no detriment. LBC leaves the dispute over whether the scheme is voluntary entirely to one side.

   How we know

   • Evening Standard reported“London Underground rejected his claims”Tube strike bombshell for London as RMT announces EIGHT 24-hour walkouts (opens in a new tab)
   • Daily Mail reported“anyone who wants to keep working a five-day week will be able to do so without suffering any detriment”London Tube drivers to go on strike across three months as RMT union continues fight against four-day working week (opens in a new tab)
   • Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “Aslef”, “rejected” and “detriment”.

   Show it in the article

   Written straight

   The RMT's Eddie Dempsey claimed the scheme was not truly voluntary. London Underground rejected his claims, and Aslef, the other drivers' union, said management had agreed that drivers who keep a five-day week would suffer no detriment.

2. Leaves out what changes the picture

   Minor

   What is missing

   The article never says that Aslef, the other union representing Tube drivers, fully backs the four-day week proposals and describes them as giving drivers 35 extra days off a year. Without this, a reader believes Tube drivers as a whole oppose the scheme, when the drivers' unions are split over it.

   How we know

   • Evening Standard reported“changes which have been fully backed by the Aslef union”Tube strike bombshell for London as RMT announces EIGHT 24-hour walkouts (opens in a new tab)
   • Daily Mail reported“The voluntary four-day week gives Tube train drivers an extra 35 days off every year”London Tube drivers to go on strike across three months as RMT union continues fight against four-day working week (opens in a new tab)

   Show where it belongs