If London Bus Drivers Can Stop in Unsafe Heat Without Penalty, Why Not Every Bus Driver in Britain?

There are moments in a campaign when something shifts.

Not everything changes.

Not enough changes.

Not yet.

But something moves.

A door opens.

A line is crossed.

A sentence is spoken publicly that cannot easily be put back in the box.

That is what has happened with bus driver heat safety.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has now publicly said that if a London bus driver’s cab or bus is too hot, they should stop and should not be penalised.

That matters.

It matters not because politicians suddenly become heroes.

It matters not because any mayor, minister, operator, authority or institution should now be allowed to rewrite history and take full credit for a position that drivers and campaigners have been fighting for over many years.

It matters because the principle has now been said out loud.

A bus driver should not continue driving if excessive heat makes it unsafe.

A bus driver should not be penalised for protecting their own safety and the safety of passengers.

That is the principle.

And now that principle has been publicly stated in London, it must be applied nationally.

Because a bus driver in Nottingham, Derby, Mansfield, Leicester, Sheffield, Manchester, Leeds, Bristol, Birmingham, Cornwall, Wales, Scotland or anywhere else is still a safety-critical worker.

Heat does not stop at the M25.

Passenger safety does not stop at the M25.

Driver welfare does not stop at the M25.

So neither should protection.

The London statement must become national leverage

The report is here:

https://www.mylondon.news/news/transport/sadiq-khan-tells-london-bus-34192893

In that report, the Mayor of London is reported as telling bus drivers not to drive if the bus or cab is too hot, and that drivers should not be penalised.

That is exactly the clarity bus drivers across the UK need.

Not vague sympathy.

Not “drink plenty of water”.

Not “open a window”.

Not “do your best”.

Not “we will look into it”.

Clear words.

Clear protection.

Clear responsibility.

If it is unsafe, stop.

If a driver genuinely believes excessive cab heat is affecting their ability to drive safely, they should be able to stop, report it, cool down, seek support and only continue when it is safe to do so.

They should not lose pay.

They should not face disciplinary action.

They should not be treated as if they have simply chosen not to work.

They should not be discriminated against.

They should not be left fearing that if something goes wrong, they will carry the blame alone.

No bus driver should be forced to choose between their health, their wages, their licence and public safety.

That is now the challenge to the UK Government.

If this protection is right for London, why is it not right for every bus driver?

This did not happen by accident

I want to be very clear about something.

This moment did not happen because the system suddenly became kind.

Unions, mayors, ministers, operators, regulators and institutions do not change in and of themselves.

They change because people force the issue.

They change because evidence is gathered.

They change because drivers speak out.

They change because campaigners keep going.

They change because people refuse to let uncomfortable truths disappear.

There is a quote often attributed to Margaret Mead:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

Whether we are talking about London bus driver campaigners, trade union activists, safety campaigners, journalists, reps, drivers, or those who quietly keep records and send evidence in when nobody else is listening, that quote captures exactly what this fight has been about.

People like Tom Kearney.

People like Kevin Mustafa.

People like Lorraine.

People like the drivers who keep sending in cab temperatures, photographs, testimonies and lived experience.

People who have hit brick walls again and again.

People who have lost battles.

People who have been ignored.

People who have been dismissed.

People who have been told nothing can be done.

People who have had doors closed in their faces.

But they kept going.

Bit by bit.

Post by post.

Email by email.

Meeting by meeting.

Interview by interview.

Evidence by evidence.

That is how pressure builds.

That is how a local issue becomes a public issue.

That is how a workplace issue becomes a political issue.

That is how the ground moves.

Standing on shoulders

Isaac Newton famously wrote:

“If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”

That line matters in campaigning.

None of us start from nothing.

Every time one of us speaks up, we are building on someone else’s fight.

Every blog, every FOI request, every union motion, every media story, every driver’s testimony, every parliamentary question, every awkward email, every challenge in a meeting, every safety complaint and every refusal to shut up adds another brick.

Those bricks matter.

I have been campaigning hard on bus driver heat safety, cab temperatures, toilet access, fatigue, driver welfare and working conditions. But I am not naïve enough to think I am the first person to raise these issues.

I am standing on other people’s shoulders too.

London campaigners have been pushing these issues for years.

ITV News London has exposed deeply concerning bus driver working conditions this year, including fatigue, welfare issues, toilet access, drivers falling asleep at the wheel, drivers urinating in jars, and sweltering cab conditions.

Those reports helped force the issue into the public domain.

That work matters.

That pressure matters.

That evidence matters.

The London statement exists because people made it impossible to ignore.

So yes, this is a victory.

But it is a victory won by pressure.

It is a victory won by persistence.

It is a victory won by ordinary people refusing to accept that unsafe working conditions are just part of the job.

The RMT AGM has now spoken

This week, the RMT Annual General Meeting unanimously passed an emergency resolution submitted by Nottinghamshire & Derbyshire Bus Branch on bus driver heat safety, cab temperatures and national standards.

I moved that resolution at AGM.

It was accepted as an emergency.

It was debated.

It passed unanimously.

That means bus driver heat safety is now RMT policy.

The resolution calls for excessive cab heat to be treated as a safety issue, not simply a comfort issue.

It calls for national standards on cab temperatures, cab cooling, ventilation, heat mitigation and heatwave procedures.

It calls for proper access to water, toilets, rest facilities and recovery time.

It calls for defective or ineffective cab cooling to be treated as safety-related during extreme heat.

It calls for protection for drivers who genuinely believe it is unsafe to continue because of excessive heat, defective cooling or ineffective ventilation.

That resolution was deliberately bus-specific.

I am a bus driver.

I come from a bus branch.

The evidence I have gathered comes from bus drivers, bus cabs, bus routes, bus operators and bus workplaces.

But the principle is much wider.

Professional drivers across road transport know what it means to be exposed to extreme temperatures, fatigue, pressure, long hours, poor welfare and vehicles that are not always fit for the conditions.

Bus drivers are not alone in that struggle.

But the bus industry is where my evidence is strongest, and that is why this resolution focused on buses.

Why this matters beyond London

London is important because it gives us leverage.

The Mayor’s statement can now be used to ask every politician, every minister, every combined authority mayor, every local transport authority, every bus operator and every regulator a simple question:

If this is right for London, why is it not right here?

Why should a bus driver outside London have less protection?

Why should a driver in the East Midlands, Yorkshire, the North East, the South West or anywhere else be left guessing whether they will lose pay if they stop because the cab is dangerously hot?

Why should protection depend on local political will?

Why should a driver’s safety depend on postcode?

Why should a passenger’s safety depend on the transport model in their area?

That cannot be right.

The UK Government must now issue a clear national statement.

It should say that no bus driver should be expected to continue driving where excessive cab heat creates a genuine safety risk.

It should say drivers must not be penalised for stopping in those circumstances.

It should say operators must have proper heatwave procedures.

It should say defective or ineffective cab cooling must be taken seriously.

It should say heat risk is not just a comfort matter.

It should say this is a driver welfare, passenger safety and public safety issue.

And then it must go further than words.

The East Midlands cannot wait either

This issue is not confined to London.

In the East Midlands, Caroline Mansfield, Branch Secretary of RMT East Midlands Bus Branch and a fellow AGM delegate, has already raised bus driver heat safety directly with Claire Ward, Mayor of the East Midlands Combined County Authority.

Caroline asked the Mayor to stand alongside bus drivers in the East Midlands in the same way the Mayor of London has now publicly stood with London bus drivers.

Mayor Ward acknowledged the seriousness of the issue and made clear that the health and safety of bus drivers across the region is important to her.

She also fairly explained that the East Midlands does not currently have the same transport model as London. EMCCA operates under an Enhanced Partnership structure, meaning bus operators still operate independently, and the Mayor does not currently have the same direct powers to instruct operators as the Mayor of London has through Transport for London.

That matters.

Because it exposes one of the biggest problems in the current bus system.

Protection for bus drivers should not depend on whether an area is franchised, municipally operated, under an Enhanced Partnership, commercially operated, or controlled through a London-style model.

A driver’s safety should not depend on the transport governance structure above their head.

Mayor Ward has indicated that she will raise the issue at the next Enhanced Partnership Board and ask what contingencies are in place for bus drivers during extreme weather warnings.

That is welcome.

But it must now lead to more than discussion.

Operators should be asked clearly what procedures they have in place when cab temperatures reach dangerous levels.

They should be asked whether defective or ineffective cab cooling is treated as safety-related during extreme heat.

They should be asked whether drivers lose pay if they stop or are stood down because of heat-related illness or genuine safety concerns.

They should be asked what welfare arrangements exist around water, toilets, cool rest areas, recovery time and breaks during heat warnings.

They should be asked whether cab temperatures are monitored, recorded and acted upon.

They should be asked what they are doing about older vehicles, poor ventilation, failed fans, inadequate blinds and ineffective cooling systems.

And they should be asked what they will do before the next heatwave, not after the next serious incident.

Worker voice must not be hand-picked by operators

Mayor Ward has also said she wants bus workers’ voices to be heard more directly within regional transport structures.

That is important, and I welcome it.

But I have written to her to make one point very clearly.

If bus drivers are brought into EMCCA transport forums, panels or engagement structures, they must not be hand-picked by the operating companies.

That would risk defeating the whole purpose.

With respect, bus operators are commercial organisations. They will naturally be concerned about cost, lost mileage, vehicle availability, punctuality and operational disruption.

They may not want someone in the room who challenges the status quo.

They may not want someone who raises awkward operational truths.

They may not want someone who says that the timetable does not work, that the stand has no toilet, that the cab cooling fails, that the fan is useless, that the recovery time is not enough, or that drivers are frightened of losing pay if they stop when unwell.

But that is precisely the person EMCCA needs to hear from.

Worker representation must be real.

Not token.

Not decorative.

Not managed.

Not a “yes person” selected because they will cause no discomfort.

The person or people in that room need to understand the job, understand the roads, understand the depots, understand the duties, understand the fatigue, understand the welfare issues, and be prepared to speak honestly.

They need to be able to tell politicians and officials what actually happens in a bus cab during extreme heat.

They need to be able to explain what happens when a driver is 40°C-plus in the cab, stuck in traffic, late on the running board, needing a toilet, unable to cool down, and worried that if they stop they may lose pay or be blamed.

That is the operational reality decision-makers need to hear.

Not a sanitised version.

Not a company-approved version.

The real one.

If EMCCA is serious about hearing from bus workers, then it should work with trade unions and genuine driver representatives, not simply accept names passed over by operators.

The East Midlands may not yet have London-style powers.

But it does have influence.

It does have convening power.

It does have a public transport leadership role.

And if used properly, it can help force this issue into the open.

Because if London’s position is right for London, the principle is right for the East Midlands too.

Every transport mayor should now be asked the same question

The East Midlands is one part of this picture.

But this now needs to go wider.

I intend to write to other combined authority mayors and transport bodies with responsibility for bus services, especially those already operating franchised networks or moving towards franchising and stronger public control.

That includes Greater Manchester and Transport for Greater Manchester, where the Bee Network is now held up as a flagship model of bus franchising.

It includes South Yorkshire, where Oliver Coppard has spoken about the future of the region’s bus network and the need for a better public transport system.

It includes West Yorkshire, where Tracy Brabin has been progressing the Weaver Network and bus reform.

It includes Liverpool City Region.

It includes the West Midlands.

And it includes every authority that wants to claim it is building a better bus system.

Because the question is now unavoidable.

If London can say drivers should stop when cab heat becomes unsafe, and should not be penalised for doing so, why can’t every transport mayor and combined authority say the same?

If mayoral combined authorities are going to take more responsibility for buses, whether through franchising, enhanced partnerships, public control or funding decisions, then driver safety must sit at the heart of that responsibility.

A franchised bus network cannot just be about branding, fares, timetables and political announcements.

It must also be about the human being in the cab.

The driver.

The person carrying the public.

The person managing the risk.

The person dealing with heat, fatigue, traffic, passenger pressure, welfare problems and the consequences if something goes wrong.

So I will be asking these authorities to follow London’s example and make clear public statements that bus drivers should not be expected to continue driving where excessive cab heat creates a genuine safety risk.

I will also be asking what practical protections they expect operators to have in place:

heatwave procedures;
working cab cooling and ventilation;
clear rules on defective or ineffective cooling systems;
access to water, toilets, rest facilities and recovery time;
protection from loss of pay or disciplinary action where a driver stops because of genuine heat-related safety concerns;
monitoring and recording of cab temperatures;
and proper engagement with trade unions and real driver representatives.

This is not about scoring points between regions.

It is about setting a national benchmark.

If London has now been forced to say the words, every other area should be challenged to match them.

Because bus drivers outside London are not worth less.

Passengers outside London are not worth less.

Public safety outside London is not worth less.

And any mayor, transport authority or government department claiming to build a modern bus system must be prepared to answer one simple question:

What are you doing to protect the driver in the cab?

We need law, not just statements

Statements matter.

They shift the argument.

They create leverage.

They give drivers confidence.

But statements are not enough.

We need enforceable standards.

We need legislation.

We need statutory guidance.

We need changes through the Bus Services Bill, through regulations, through statutory instruments, through local transport authority duties, through enhanced partnerships, through franchising contracts and through public funding conditions.

If public money supports bus services, then public safety standards must follow.

If local transport authorities are going to manage, franchise, contract or influence bus networks, then they must understand the safety implications of their decisions.

That means driver hours.

Fatigue.

Recovery time.

Toilet access.

Heat.

Cold.

Vehicle condition.

Cab design.

Timetables.

Layover.

Traffic congestion.

Real operational pressure.

It is not enough to manage a bus network as a spreadsheet.

It is not enough to count lost mileage and punctuality while ignoring the human being behind the wheel.

A bus service is not just a route, a timetable and a contract.

It is a driver, in a cab, in live traffic, carrying passengers, making safety-critical decisions every minute.

Any system that forgets that is already failing.

Simon Lightwood must now act as Minister for Roads and Buses

This now sits squarely with government.

Simon Lightwood MP is the Minister for Roads and Buses.

That means this issue cannot simply be left to operators, local transport authorities, mayors, combined authorities, trade unions or individual drivers to fight out area by area.

The Minister for Roads and Buses should now be looking closely at what has happened in London and asking a very simple question:

If London bus drivers can be told publicly that they should stop when cab heat becomes unsafe and should not be penalised, why is the same message not being issued nationally?

The Department for Transport should now set out a clear national position.

It should confirm that excessive bus cab heat is a transport safety issue.

It should confirm that bus drivers are safety-critical workers.

It should confirm that drivers should not be expected to continue driving where heat creates a genuine risk to safe operation.

It should confirm that drivers should not lose pay, face disciplinary action or suffer detriment where they stop in those circumstances and remain available to work once the risk is controlled.

It should convene HSE, DVSA, Traffic Commissioners, local transport authorities, combined authorities, bus operators and trade unions to establish a national bus driver heat safety framework.

And it should look urgently at whether legislation, statutory guidance, Bus Services Bill provisions, regulations or funding conditions are needed to make this enforceable.

Because warm words will not cool a bus cab.

And appreciation posts will not protect a driver who is 40°C-plus in the cab, unwell, fatigued, worried about pay and still expected to carry passengers in live traffic.

If the Government is serious about bus safety, the Minister for Roads and Buses should now show leadership.

London has said the words.

The RMT AGM has passed the policy.

Drivers are reporting the reality.

Now the Department for Transport must act.

Worker voice must be real

One of the biggest dangers now is tokenism.

Authorities will say they want to hear from workers.

Operators will say they consult.

Forums will be created.

Meetings will happen.

Boxes will be ticked.

But if worker representation is hand-picked by operators, or limited to people who will not challenge the status quo, then it becomes meaningless.

Bus workers need a real voice.

Not a decorative voice.

Not a polite voice.

Not a managed voice.

A real voice.

The people sitting in those rooms must be able to say what actually happens on the road.

What happens when the cab is 40°C.

What happens when the fan does not work.

What happens when the timetable has no recovery.

What happens when the driver needs a toilet and there is nowhere to go.

What happens when a driver feels unwell but fears losing pay.

What happens when a driver is told to keep going.

What happens when the service matters more than the person driving it.

That is the evidence politicians need to hear.

Not just from operators.

Not just from consultants.

Not just from officials.

From drivers.

From reps.

From the people living it.

This is where MPs and ministers must step up

My own MP, Michael Payne, has already taken this issue seriously.

He has written on my behalf to the Health and Safety Executive and to the Department for Transport.

He has raised the lack of bus-specific heat safety guidance.

He has raised the gaps around vehicle cab environments.

He has asked whether excessive bus cab temperatures are being treated as a national transport safety issue.

His support is ongoing, and I am grateful for it.

But this now needs ministerial leadership.

Simon Lightwood MP, as Minister for Roads and Buses, should not wait for a catastrophic incident before acting.

The Department for Transport should not wait until a driver collapses behind the wheel.

Government should not wait until passengers or members of the public are harmed.

It should not wait until campaigners are proved right in the worst possible way.

The warning signs are already here.

The evidence is already here.

The lived experience is already here.

The London statement is already here.

The RMT AGM resolution is already here.

So now the question is simple.

What is the Minister for Roads and Buses going to do?

The next heatwave is the emergency

For years, drivers have been told to cope.

Open a window.

Use the fan.

Drink water.

Carry on.

But hydration is not a full risk assessment.

A fan is no use if it does not work.

A window is no use if the cab is still baking.

A bottle of water does not solve a 10-hour duty in extreme heat.

A poster about hot weather does not protect a driver who fears losing pay if they stop.

A bus driver who becomes unwell in service is not a minor operational inconvenience.

It is a safety warning.

And when multiple drivers are reporting cab temperatures around or above 40°C, exhaustion, sickness, headaches, fatigue, distress and fear about continuing safely, that warning should be taken seriously.

The next heatwave is not theoretical.

The next heatwave is the emergency.

This is not the end of the fight

The London statement is not the end.

The RMT AGM resolution is not the end.

A blog is not the end.

A media story is not the end.

A letter to a minister is not the end.

But each one is a step.

Each one is another crack in the wall.

Each one gives us more leverage.

Each one gives drivers more confidence to speak.

Each one gives campaigners more evidence to use.

Each one gives politicians fewer excuses.

This is how change happens.

Not all at once.

Not cleanly.

Not easily.

But through pressure.

Through persistence.

Through people who refuse to give up.

I have hit plenty of brick walls in this campaign.

So have others.

We have lost battles.

We have been ignored.

We have had to repeat the same basic points over and over again.

But we are still here.

Still pushing.

Still gathering evidence.

Still speaking up.

Still standing on the shoulders of those who came before us.

And still trying to leave this industry better than we found it.

That is what keeps me going.

That is what gives me renewed hope.

Not because everything is fixed.

It is not.

Not because the battle is won.

It is not.

But because progress, however small, proves that pressure works.

And when pressure works, you keep applying it.

The demand now

The demand is simple.

The UK Government must issue a national statement making clear that bus drivers should not be expected to continue driving where excessive cab heat creates a genuine safety risk.

Drivers must be able to stop, report the issue, cool down, seek support and only continue when safe.

They must not lose pay.

They must not face disciplinary action.

They must not be discriminated against.

They must not be blamed for protecting themselves, their passengers and the public.

Then the Government must back that statement with enforceable standards.

Cab cooling.

Ventilation.

Heat mitigation.

UV and solar protection.

Working fans.

Blinds.

Water.

Toilets.

Rest facilities.

Recovery time.

Safe duties.

Clear heatwave procedures.

Real worker voice.

Proper safety competence in local transport authorities.

Transparent safety data.

And national regulation that recognises bus drivers as safety-critical workers.

London has said the words.

Now Britain needs the standard.

Protect bus drivers.

Protect passengers.

Protect the public.

About the author

Lee Odams is a bus driver with nearly two decades of experience in the industry.

He is Branch Secretary of the RMT Nottinghamshire & Derbyshire Bus Branch, Secretary of the RMT National Industrial Organising Conference of Bus Workers, a member of the RMT Bus & Coach Sectorial Organising Committee, a member of the Yorkshire & Lincolnshire Regional Council Executive Committee, a member of the Executive Committee of the RMT Branch and Regional Secretaries Conference, and a Health and Safety Representative.

He campaigns on bus driver welfare, safety, heat exposure, toilet access, fatigue, working conditions, public transport policy and the need for stronger national standards across the bus industry.

Lee submitted the emergency motion on bus driver heat safety, cab temperatures and national standards to the RMT Annual General Meeting 2026, where it was accepted as an emergency, debated and passed unanimously.

Personal capacity disclaimer

This article is written in my personal capacity as a bus driver, trade union activist and transport safety campaigner.

The views expressed are my own.

It is not written as an official statement on behalf of RMT, my employer, or any other organisation unless explicitly stated.

References to campaigners, drivers and public statements are made as part of a wider public interest discussion about bus driver welfare, passenger safety and public transport safety.

Search This Blog

Bus Industry Insights – Analysis and Commentary on Bus Safety, Transport Policy and Governance