Rail fares to go up by 3.1%

[jamesthegill]

Guards pay of £38,000 is totally overpaid in my opinion . (By about 8k) A nurse starting out will be on c£23k and does far more training and requires qualifications

So why reduce the pay for guards and not lobby for higher pay for nurses?

 

[Esker-pades]

Guards pay of £38,000 is totally overpaid in my opinion . (By about 8k) A nurse starting out will be on c£23k and does far more training and requires qualifications

This ↓ .

So why reduce the pay for guards and not lobby for higher pay for nurses?

Pay people on low wages more, not bring everyone else down to a low wage. Just because one group of people is given a crap deal doesn't mean everyone else should get the same crap deal. The people on the crap deal should get a better deal.

 

[winks]

I’m not saying cut their money but I’m sure they can cope with a couple of years of 0 or 1% pay rises.

 

[dk1]

I’m not saying cut their money but I’m sure they can cope with a couple of years of 0 or 1% pay rises.

But why?

 

[Failed Unit]

Why should rail fares not rise, everything else does, everyone expects an annual pay or benefit rise, why should rail workers and rail shareholders be cut short ? A move to a CPI basis would be a reasonable change given that many personnel now find they are rewarded by cheaper CPI rather than previous RPI.

As another poster has mentioned fuel duty doesn't,

But as a GTR user, we now have a significantly worse timetable then we did this time last year and are now having to pay more for this reduced service. We all know the GTR shambles, but for those not in the region, the weekday service in my area is signicantly worse in terms of number of trains per day / hour. The weekend service is unusable (with no expected date to when it will get better)

How many other services would put up thier price by 3.1% when they have so badly let down thier customers since May (with no date of when they will deliver what was promised). I am not sure if Northern and TPE are also struggling but a 0% increase in those areas would be a nice thank-you for us passengers. Before you say we have go compensated by delay repay - we don't as GTR make it impossible to claim. The season tickets have had money back but us that do the journey on carnets or other non season ticket customs have had nothing.

 

[Railguy1]

But why?

I think the point being suggested is that if the wage already exceeds a typical average wage, then there is no urgency to give those workers a pay rise, thereby saving some money which can be supposedly utilized elsewhere.

 

[717001]

As another poster has mentioned fuel duty doesn't,

But as a GTR user, we now have a significantly worse timetable then we did this time last year and are now having to pay more for this reduced service. We all know the GTR shambles, but for those not in the region, the weekday service in my area is signicantly worse in terms of number of trains per day / hour. The weekend service is unusable (with no expected date to when it will get better)

How many other services would put up thier price by 3.1% when they have so badly let down thier customers since May (with no date of when they will deliver what was promised). I am not sure if Northern and TPE are also struggling but a 0% increase in those areas would be a nice thank-you for us passengers. Before you say we have go compensated by delay repay - we don't as GTR make it impossible to claim. The season tickets have had money back but us that do the journey on carnets or other non season ticket customs have had nothing.

It’s been discussed elsewhere, but phase 3 of the additional industry compensation scheme (for carnet and day ticket holders who travelled at least 3 days a week for 1-4 weeks during the chaos) is open now https://railcompensation.thameslinkrailway.com/

 

[GB]

I think the point being suggested is that if the wage already exceeds a typical average wage, then there is no urgency to give those workers a pay rise, thereby saving some money which can be supposedly utilized elsewhere.

Do those people think that the money "saved" from giving traincrew a 0% rise will go any where near nurses et al?

 

[6Gman]

I think the point being suggested is that if the wage already exceeds a typical average wage, then there is no urgency to give those workers a pay rise, thereby saving some money which can be supposedly utilized elsewhere.

But Guards and Nurses aren't paid out of the same pot. So who is going to force Guards to accept a pay freeze?

 

[dk1]

Oh i just knew this would end in a go round in circles bore-a-thon. Two totally different industries like the rest of life. April is pay rise month on the railway & its always been like that in my 34yrs. Lets just go along with reality.

 

[Failed Unit]

It’s been discussed elsewhere, but phase 3 of the additional industry compensation scheme (for carnet and day ticket holders who travelled at least 3 days a week for 1-4 weeks during the chaos) is open now https://railcompensation.thameslinkrailway.com/

We can maybe apply. But knowing GTR and how they administer delay repay I seriously doubt we will get anything. A fare freeze would be much better considering how poor the service is.

 

[158756]

But Guards and Nurses aren't paid out of the same pot. So who is going to force Guards to accept a pay freeze?

No one, because railways exist in a fantasy land where they can lose billions providing a service to decreasing numbers of customers, be propped up by a state crippled with debt, and yet get a bigger budget to hire more staff on higher pay every year. It is of course the right of rail staff to get the best deal they possibly can, but public goodwill for people who can afford to inconvenience them for 42 days without pay will understandably be limited.

 

[dk1]

No one, because railways exist in a fantasy land where they can lose billions providing a service to decreasing numbers of customers, be propped up by a state crippled with debt, and yet get a bigger budget to hire more staff on higher pay every year. It is of course the right of rail staff to get the best deal they possibly can, but public goodwill for people who can afford to inconvenience them for 42 days without pay will understandably be limited.

At last. A common sense reply. From all rail staff thank you. We like our little land of fantasy.

 

[Deerfold]

I’m not saying cut their money but I’m sure they can cope with a couple of years of 0 or 1% pay rises.

So, in real terms, cut their money.

 

[Gooner18]

well this thread has got interesting, I do some what agree in part that the rail industry may be disconnecting itself from the “ public “ in terms of pay rises and general pay scale , I myself have had two pay rises in 10 years amounting to a total of 3% , this is not of course placing any blame on the employees in the rail industry, who would not take what on offer and have a strong union behind you.
I jusy wonder with all the negative press and the massive disruption to services ( again nothing to do with the average employee) it may of been wiser to freeze fare prices ?

 

[LAX54]

Here here. It's just pointless.

If it were 'pointless' then we would not need Signalmen lol

 

[The Box Photter]

I'd like to see some independent study looking a the impact of railway staff wage rises on fares. I'm willing to wager that as a percentage of the overall increase, staff pay rises form a very small amount. Don'f forget, the Tories delight in the demonisation of Trades Unions and are highly adept at using the "divide and conquer" tactic of trying to turn one group of workers against another.

By diverting the debate away from scrutiny of the monumental waste inherent in the current railway set-up, the government and RDG are free to carry on milking passengers for ever-increasing fares, whilst delivering no appreciable improvements.

 

[lordbusiness]

While I agree that the cost of everything is going up, I do get bored with listening to whinging from those that complain about the price of seasons. It's a lifestyle choice to accept that by wanting to live outside London and enjoy the higher wages paid in the City, you have to pay for the privilege.

Example: BBC quotes that an annual season from Bishops Stortford to LST will cost £4980 from January- Google maps gives a round trip by road of 74 miles.

I commute to Norwich by road from home- a round trip of 50 miles. To do this, by my rough calculation this costs me:
£300 pa car insurance
£1410 pa petrol (£30 pw for 47 weels)
£20pa car tax
£2400 pa car HP
£1175pa Parking (£25 pw for 47 weeks)
£250 pa car servicing
Plus any additional unplanned expenditure on the car like tyres.

Roughly £5555 plus per year for a 50 mile commute.

Before you ask there is no option to use public transport from home. The car is not 'flash'- basic Peugeot 208 and it only gets used for commuting and running around at weekends.

By by reckoning, £4980 is a bargain, maybe the whingers ought to try driving to work in London for a month and then do the maths. It will take them a damn sight longer and they won't get paid compensation when they get stuck in a traffic jam when the council are digging up the road, a lorry breaks down on the M11 etc.

 

[The Box Photter]

While I agree that the cost of everything is going up, I do get bored with listening to whinging from those that complain about the price of seasons. It's a lifestyle choice to accept that by wanting to live outside London and enjoy the higher wages paid in the City, you have to pay for the privilege.

Example: BBC quotes that an annual season from Bishops Stortford to LST will cost £4980 from January- Google maps gives a round trip by road of 74 miles.

I commute to Norwich by road from home- a round trip of 50 miles. To do this, by my rough calculation this costs me:
£300 pa car insurance
£1410 pa petrol (£30 pw for 47 weels)
£20pa car tax
£2400 pa car HP
£1175pa Parking (£25 pw for 47 weeks)
£250 pa car servicing
Plus any additional unplanned expenditure on the car like tyres.

Roughly £5555 plus per year for a 50 mile commute.

Before you ask there is no option to use public transport from home. The car is not 'flash'- basic Peugeot 208 and it only gets used for commuting and running around at weekends.

By by reckoning, £4980 is a bargain, maybe the whingers ought to try driving to work in London for a month and then do the maths. It will take them a damn sight longer and they won't get paid compensation when they get stuck in a traffic jam when the council are digging up the road, a lorry breaks down on the M11 etc.

Most people who commute in and out of London aren't commodity traders on seven-figure salaries. Most jobs in London pay a bit more than those in the provinces, but not enough to allow people to live in London. It isn't a lifestyle choice to commute, it's a necessity to be able to afford to own a home rather than line the pockets of private landlords paying extortionate rents. I could suggest that by commuting 50 miles per day using a car that's a lifestyle choice you made which impacts negatively on others as you contribute to congestion and pollution. Can't you move closer to Norwich or closer to a railway line that serves Norwich?

 

[Meerkat]

The jobs in London don’t pay enough to live there because the state subsidises the workers to live elsewhere.
If the subsidies weren’t there the employers would have to pay more, or move out of London.
Obviously the complication is that they can move out to Frankfurt, Mumbai etc so it isn’t an easy choice, but I think there should be more thought about what the taxpayer is buying with their subsidies.

Also why are the increases national? Couldn’t they be linked to performance/upgrades on individual TOCs/routes? If there is a massive speed up or capacity improvement why shouldn’t fares go up more.
And if services are rubbish then fares and wages on that TOC shouldn’t go up at all. Might concentrate a few minds.

 

[The Box Photter]

The jobs in London don’t pay enough to live there because the state subsidises the workers to live elsewhere.
If the subsidies weren’t there the employers would have to pay more, or move out of London.
Obviously the complication is that they can move out to Frankfurt, Mumbai etc so it isn’t an easy choice, but I think there should be more thought about what the taxpayer is buying with their subsidies.

Also why are the increases national? Couldn’t they be linked to performance/upgrades on individual TOCs/routes? If there is a massive speed up or capacity improvement why shouldn’t fares go up more.
And if services are rubbish then fares and wages on that TOC shouldn’t go up at all. Might concentrate a few minds.

A very interesting free-market suggestion. I think you'll find that the taxpayer is buying the services of police officers, nurses, junior doctors, train, tube and bus drivers as well as other jobs crucial to the effective operation of the metropolis. Don't forget that those people commuting into London to work are earning and thus are also taxpayers. Maybe I'll mutter a sincere prayer of thanks under my breath to the non-rail-using taxpayers of Britain when I hand over my credit card at the end of the month for GTR to extract around £5,500, thankful that it isn't £10,000. Anyway, according to the propaganda, GTR only gets 2% of that £5,500 with the rest going to DfT to squander.

 

[Wombat]

Example: BBC quotes that an annual season from Bishops Stortford to LST will cost £4980 from January- Google maps gives a round trip by road of 74 miles.

I commute to Norwich by road from home- a round trip of 50 miles. To do this, by my rough calculation this costs me:
£300 pa car insurance
£1410 pa petrol (£30 pw for 47 weels)
£20pa car tax
£2400 pa car HP
£1175pa Parking (£25 pw for 47 weeks)
£250 pa car servicing
Plus any additional unplanned expenditure on the car like tyres.

Roughly £5555 plus per year for a 50 mile commute.

Hang on a sec, are you suggesting that after commuting by rail for a few years I own a train at the end of it?

 

[Ken H]

Hang on a sec, are you suggesting that after commuting by rail for a few years I own a train at the end of it?

most people have a car. so putting the costs of owning a car isnt relevant. you need to work out the marginal costs of making the journey. for most, that just means the petrol. And if there are 2 travelling, rail becomes silly money

So 2 day returns today to go shopping ina nearby city - £26.00
I will have to pay to park at the station or its a bit of a walk in the rain. think its £3.00

Its 42 miles by road. I will not spend anything like £29.00 on diesel - Its a 2l turbo, but I dont drive silly fast.
Its £5.50 for up to 5 people go anywhere in the destination county on the buses. So I could dump the car after 25 miles then get the bus. or go a bit further by car to speed things up a little.

I am not saying this is rational - its just how people really think.

 

[LAX54]

Why should staff at the sharp end, suffer through the errors made by Dept of Trans, and the TOC Managers ? but then again, I suppose if we curtail wage rises, we can knock the delay / repay on the head, this would also ease the burden on the TOCs giving away money !

 

[LLivery]

The TfL website has me confused on the fare freeze.

https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/new-fares

It says:

Pay as you go fares for some journeys on London Overground routes to and from Liverpool Street, and on TfL Rail, will change:

But goes on to say:

Pay as you go fares are frozen on National Rail routes where they are set by TfL.... Great Western Railway: West Drayton or Greenford to Paddington

So are they frozen for TfL Rail or not out of Paddington? Or does it literally mean only the West Drayton to Padd fare is frozen, but not the intermediate stations?

Also, what is the reason for pay as you go fares for TfL Liverpool St services and ELL (Shadwell - South) not to be frozen? I know not all fares were frozen but I thought these were. Finally, why are Thameslink core fares set by TfL? Makes it look even more silly the core isn't on the Tube Map.

 

[matt_world2004]

The TfL website has me confused on the fare freeze.

https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/new-fares

It says:


But goes on to say:


So are they frozen for TfL Rail or not out of Paddington? Or does it literally mean only the West Drayton to Padd fare is frozen, but not the intermediate stations?

Also, what is the reason for pay as you go fares for TfL Liverpool St services and ELL (Shadwell - South) not to be frozen? I know not all fares were frozen but I thought these were. Finally, why are Thameslink core fares set by TfL? Makes it look even more silly the core isn't on the Tube Map.

Its saying tfl rail fares from out of Liverpool street will change but that one's out of Paddington will be subject to the fare freeze.

 

[nr758123]

Claiming there's a link between staff wages and fare increases is nothing more than a distraction tactic. They had to think of an alternative pretext because there's only so long that the RDG & DfT can put out press releases claiming fare increases are needed for improvement before passengers notice that the fare increases happen but the improvement doesn't.

The RDG and its predecessor ATOC have been claiming a linkage between fares and improvement for the past 14 years. Passengers across large parts of the country see that, for them, it's demonstrably untrue.

I live in Slaithwaite. My station has over the past six months been the worst in the entire country for punctuality and reliability, and that's against a published timetable which saw a halving of the peak service to and from Manchester. I see no justification for any fare increase, indeed using the RDGs own past arguments we should see a substantial fare reduction.

There may be places where there has been genuine improvement which would justify a fare increase. This is not one of those places.

 

[Mojo]

The TfL website has me confused on the fare freeze.

https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/new-fares

It says:

Pay as you go fares for some journeys on London Overground routes to and from Liverpool Street, and on TfL Rail, will change:

But goes on to say:

Pay as you go fares are frozen on National Rail routes where they are set by TfL.... Great Western Railway: West Drayton or Greenford to Paddington

So are they frozen for TfL Rail or not out of Paddington? Or does it literally mean only the West Drayton to Padd fare is frozen, but not the intermediate stations?

It's badly written, it should say "Pay as you go fares for some journeys on London Overground and TfL Rail routes that operate to and from Liverpool Street, will change."

Also, what is the reason for pay as you go fares for TfL Liverpool St services and ELL (Shadwell - South) not to be frozen? I know not all fares were frozen but I thought these were.

If you look at this document from 2015 regarding the transfer of Greater Anglia services it says that "The terms of transfer of the services require TfL to ensure that fares are set in such a manner as to not create new anomalies in the overall national rail pricing structure (see further details in Appendix B)."
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/def... fares revision paper advice to Mayor PDF.pdf

Finally, why are Thameslink core fares set by TfL? Makes it look even more silly the core isn't on the Tube Map.

It's probably a legacy thing. Before Oyster Pay As You Go was accepted on all National Rail services all fares were charged at the same farescale, as it was usually only available on routes with joint availability and thus charging the same rate as LU made sense. Great Western made a decision to accept PAYG on its line from Paddington before the rest of National Rail and hence it is charged at the TfL farescale (obviously not relevant really except on the Greenford branch now that TfL Rail has taken over). I think the only route from the pre-Oyster on National Rail that charges NR fares is Southern from Balham.

 

[LLivery]

Its saying tfl rail fares from out of Liverpool street will change but that one's out of Paddington will be subject to the fare freeze.

It's badly written, it should say "Pay as you go fares for some journeys on London Overground and TfL Rail routes that operate to and from Liverpool Street, will change."

If you look at this document from 2015 regarding the transfer of Greater Anglia services it says that "The terms of transfer of the services require TfL to ensure that fares are set in such a manner as to not create new anomalies in the overall national rail pricing structure (see further details in Appendix B)."
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/gla_migrate_files_destination/Appendix 1 2015 May fares revision paper advice to Mayor PDF.pdf


It's probably a legacy thing. Before Oyster Pay As You Go was accepted on all National Rail services all fares were charged at the same farescale, as it was usually only available on routes with joint availability and thus charging the same rate as LU made sense. Great Western made a decision to accept PAYG on its line from Paddington before the rest of National Rail and hence it is charged at the TfL farescale (obviously not relevant really except on the Greenford branch now that TfL Rail has taken over). I think the only route from the pre-Oyster on National Rail that charges NR fares is Southern from Balham.

Ah, thank you both.

 

[yorksrob]

The jobs in London don’t pay enough to live there because the state subsidises the workers to live elsewhere.
If the subsidies weren’t there the employers would have to pay more, or move out of London.
Obviously the complication is that they can move out to Frankfurt, Mumbai etc so it isn’t an easy choice, but I think there should be more thought about what the taxpayer is buying with their subsidies.

Also why are the increases national? Couldn’t they be linked to performance/upgrades on individual TOCs/routes? If there is a massive speed up or capacity improvement why shouldn’t fares go up more.
And if services are rubbish then fares and wages on that TOC shouldn’t go up at all. Might concentrate a few minds.

The problem with raising fares by a premium due to service improvements is that that differential becomes baked in and will still be there in forty years time when the route is at the end of the investment cycle.

Local journeys on the ECML still suffer from this.