Commentary: Just 280 members vote for action ... this is about politics, not pay

Last week the RMT got what they wanted: the go-ahead for yet more strike action on the Tube. As a result of just 280 of their members voting to strike, millions of Londoners face disruption going to work on Wednesday.

The RMT has said this strike is about pay and conditions. But the low turnout in favour of a strike tells a different story. This strike is about politics, not pay. The RMT is up to its old tricks.

The figures bear this out. We have offered our maintenance workers a pay rise of 4.95 per cent, an increase we think they deserve. Every night while the rest of us sleep, they go into the hot tunnels to do some of the toughest work I've ever seen.

Their hard work means our trains run each morning. But I reckon a lot of Londoners would think 4.95 per cent was pretty generous in current economic conditions.

The RMT has argued that its members at Tube Lines do the same work as colleagues at Metronet and therefore should be paid the same. But, again, look at the figures and it doesn't appear as though equality with Metronet is really at the heart of this strike. How could it be, when 95 per cent of our frontline grades will actually be paid more than their equivalent at Metronet if our offer is accepted?

In the run-up to the mayoral election, Ken Livingstone did what the RMT asked him and promised all Metronet employees the same benefits as London Underground staff once they had been returned to the public sector, even on a temporary basis. This promise was subsequently delivered by TfL at some cost to the taxpayer.

The RMT has now said that it thinks Tube Lines employees should get all the same benefits - pensions and free travel - and it is also asking for a shorter working week. Let's put the cost of that on one side for a moment - although we reckon that it would add 10 per cent to our wage bill, money which would have to be cut from our investment programme.

What the RMT is effectively saying is that a private firm should not be allowed to set its own terms and conditions. It didn't even bother to present the details of the offer we made to its members on the ballot paper. This is a strike that the RMT was determined to have, and any excuse would do.

Some think that the union couldn't resist throwing down the gauntlet to the new Conservative Mayor. That's possible. But an even stronger motivation is its desire to return all Tube work to the public sector by destroying Tube Lines.

Union stewards have told us outright: the RMT wants to bring us down. But destroying us wouldn't help London. The Tube needs our investment and the improvements we are bringing about. There are now half the delays on our lines that there were when we took over. Services are more reliable.

The RMT's campaign against us won't help its members who work for us. We have spent huge amounts on training to help our teams develop new skills so that they can keep up with technical advances and innovation while they continue to improve the Tube.

We have also challenged our employees to identify ways of improving the way they work in order to provide better passenger services. Their innovations and suggestions have speeded up maintenance.

The union is entitled to its view that the Tube should be re-nationalised, but the place to argue that case is in the political arena.

The 280 people who voted for the RMT's action should not ask their many hundreds of colleagues to give up their pay by striking. And such a small proportion of people should not try to mess up the week of millions of Londoners.