Sample Answer
Critically Evaluating the Role of Employee Engagement within Transport for London (TfL)
Introduction
Transport for London (TfL) is the main body responsible for operating the majority of London’s public transport system, including the London Underground, buses, trams, and other services. TfL states in its values that it aims to “put customers and staff first,” ensuring safety, inclusivity, and respect within its workforce (TfL, 2023). In its employee relations policies, TfL claims to value fairness, open communication, and collaboration with trade unions. However, in practice, challenges such as pay disputes, strikes, and allegations of poor treatment have raised questions about whether TfL effectively applies these values.
This essay critically evaluates the role of employee engagement (EE) within TfL by examining key employee relations (ER) issues such as pay disputes, industrial strikes, and workforce treatment. The discussion integrates psychological and employee engagement theory to assess the organisation’s current practices, before offering recommendations to strengthen employee relations.
Employee Relations Issues at TfL
Salary and Pay Disputes
One of the most persistent ER issues in TfL concerns salary negotiations. Over the last decade, unions such as the RMT (Rail, Maritime and Transport Union) have organised strikes due to disputes over pay rises not keeping up with inflation. According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, salary disputes affect the basic physiological and safety needs of workers. When employees feel financial insecurity, their motivation and engagement are reduced (Maslow, 1943). The lack of alignment between TfL’s financial offers and employee expectations highlights a disconnect between management and staff.
Employee Strikes
Industrial action has become common within TfL, especially during disputes over working hours, pensions, and job security. Strikes are an indicator of weak employee engagement, as they demonstrate a breakdown in communication and trust. The organisation’s leadership style often appears transactional, focusing on negotiation and enforcement rather than building mutual understanding. From a pluralist perspective, TfL’s structure recognises multiple interests, management, unions, and workers, but conflict is managed through bargaining rather than collaboration. This approach sometimes worsens tensions, leading to recurring disputes.
Treatment and Dismissals of Employees
Reports of unfair dismissals and allegations of heavy-handed management further complicate TfL’s ER environment. A servant leadership approach, where managers prioritise the growth and wellbeing of employees, is not always visible. Instead, action-oriented leadership, which focuses on operational outcomes, dominates. This may resolve short-term efficiency issues but undermines long-term engagement. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory suggests that job security and recognition are hygiene factors, when these are poorly managed, dissatisfaction rises even if other motivators are present (Herzberg, 1959).
The Role of Employee Engagement in TfL
Employee engagement plays a crucial role in how TfL manages its large and diverse workforce. EE is more than job satisfaction; it involves emotional commitment, trust in leadership, and alignment with organisational goals (Kahn, 1990). Within TfL, engagement could serve as a tool to reduce industrial conflict by fostering stronger relationships between staff and leadership.
Currently, the evidence suggests that TfL’s engagement strategies are inconsistent. For instance, although the organisation promotes diversity and inclusion policies, the practical handling of disputes reveals a more transactional and adversarial relationship. This is not unusual in public transport organisations, where pressures from budgets, safety regulations, and political oversight are significant. However, research shows that organisations adopting a more transformational leadership style, emphasising vision, trust, and support, can achieve higher engagement, leading to reduced turnover and less conflict (Bass, 1990).
