-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
How critical is the return of passengers and busy trains for railway jobs?
- Thread starter Philip
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
I totally agree ! (better than debates on branding and liveries!)
Many executives within my organisation are NOT returning back to the railway.
First Class fares are now way too expensive, on-board service and qaulity is very poor especially with the new InterCity trains. Parking charges at stations are far too high and overall the train is not cost effective. Green issues of rail are not relevant.
Travel by rail is now discourged as the business is investing in a good number of high spec company cars with the enhanced premiums to staff to offset company car tax. I'm looking forward to the car next month - no masks, greater comfort and qaulity, covid secure with city centre parking availability. Roadside catering offers better quality catering than the railway.
The railway will not see the return of so many passengers as pre covid. That's history now and railways will be in decline.
Not the news that railway supporters will want to hear but it is reality. I for one will only be making a handful of trips by rail compared to pre covid.
First Class fares are now way too expensive, on-board service and qaulity is very poor especially with the new InterCity trains. Parking charges at stations are far too high and overall the train is not cost effective. Green issues of rail are not relevant.
Travel by rail is now discourged as the business is investing in a good number of high spec company cars with the enhanced premiums to staff to offset company car tax. I'm looking forward to the car next month - no masks, greater comfort and qaulity, covid secure with city centre parking availability. Roadside catering offers better quality catering than the railway.
The railway will not see the return of so many passengers as pre covid. That's history now and railways will be in decline.
Not the news that railway supporters will want to hear but it is reality. I for one will only be making a handful of trips by rail compared to pre covid.
May timetable changes are all agreed and published (except SWR, published later this week).
No doubt there will be some business travellers who follow suit.
I do, however, think that many will change their mind after a few months. Principally due to road congestion, which I predict will be back to pre Covid levels pretty quickly.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 18,704
Ultimately the pre coronavirus railway was attempting to get a quart into a pint bottle.
That, plus the huge maintenance budget required for ancient railways that aren't really fit for purpose (and kept operational only through repeated expensive interventions), will hamstring attempts to recover after this crisis.
There are two options - cut costs until the reduced revenue can cover them, or take the alternative high cost route, and try and build a railway suitable for the mid 21st Century.
But the latter would be extremely expensive and likely require a great many sacred cows to be slaughtered
That, plus the huge maintenance budget required for ancient railways that aren't really fit for purpose (and kept operational only through repeated expensive interventions), will hamstring attempts to recover after this crisis.
There are two options - cut costs until the reduced revenue can cover them, or take the alternative high cost route, and try and build a railway suitable for the mid 21st Century.
But the latter would be extremely expensive and likely require a great many sacred cows to be slaughtered
Purple Orange
On Moderation
I think that is highly irresponsible of your employer.
PS running a fleet of company cars is not cheap by any means and businesses are being disincentivised given the introduction of the company car tax. I’d question the commercial awareness of key decision makers.
Last edited:
The company can't adapt, and uses covid as an opportunity for excuses. If the unit needs a physical visit then you don't need an office. If the unit does not require a physical visit then you do not need an office.
"returned to work" suggests they were furloughed rather than working.
Perhaps. Car technology is continuously improving - maps -> satnav -> adaptive satnav, parking sensors -> cameras -> autopark, cruise control -> adaptive cruise control -> autopilot, radio -> cd -> bluetooth, window -> aircon -> climate control
I can't even charge my phone on a typical intercity train.
The distress purchase edge the railway has (people travel by train because the alternatives are worse) is always being eroded.
If you have people needing to travel to many different locations, especially taking equipment, then yes, the train is rarely useful. If it's for occasional trips though, why not simply hire a car?
I'd be surprised if occasional business journeys are replaced by permament company cars, that seems non-sensical. Sure, having enterprise drop a car off for me outside my front door the night before heading to Sheffield for a morning task then Nottingham for the afternoon, then evening function in Birmingham, down to Worcester the next morning and home on the evening sure beats
taxi to the station
a train
another train
taxi to the buisness park
taxi to the station
train
20 minute walk to office
20 minute walk back from office
train
10 minutes to hotel
overnight
10 minutes to train
train
taxi
office
taxi
train
train
train
taxi
Covid doesn't change that calculation though. The railway is not good for multi-point journeys, it's not economical for flexible journeys (if it is at all), but it does work for travelling to limited locations in major cities and very long distance (I wouldn't drive to Glasgow for business when I could get the train from Crewe)
That will only be a problem if the railway doesn't adjust it's prices to reflect new demand patterns and carries on with current pricing. If the railway is responsive then you would expect it to raise ticket prices for Tuesday and Wednesday, or whenever the new peak occurs, raising extra revenue to cover the costs of providing extra capacity and to capture some of the extra value travelling on those days provides. If capacity limits are reached then it should be pricing to limit demand. You'd also expect to see ticket prices fall for the less popular days of the week, to fill the available capacity.
Differential pricing across the week would work against the tendency for everyone to pick certain days and help smooth the demand.
I don'tthink so my friend.
The maths has been done.
One trip from London to Manchester costs £510 which is eye watering. Advance tickets are useless as they have no flexibility.
The monthly lease payments plus tax implications are considerably less. Given that several journeys are made each month the cost of railway travel is too expensive.
Yes there will be days caught up in traffic congestion but the same can and does happen on the railway with service disruption.
dk1
Veteran Member
First day of reduced restrictions & passengers had flocked back to the Norwich-Cambridge route. The weather obviously helped but amazing to think that very little in the way of venues & shops where open in Cambridge itself. One person I spoke to said he just wanted to go somewhere different.
So judging by the comments above, it appears that the future of society will be one that is far more car dependent. Not exactly a good role model for the 21st century environment or social mobility is it?
Part of me wonders where rail demand would be in 20 years time if the pandemic never happened. Would we still be worrying about whether electric cars would remove the environmental case for new rail projects, and whether WFH would still take off but in a more gradual manner. These are questions that have been massively superseded by Covid, and I feel will never be answered as the pandemic has literally scuppered public transport for good.
But amidst all the doom and gloom, there is no reason not to remain optimistic about the future. are some reasons why I think rail usage will recover significantly after lockdown:
Part of me wonders where rail demand would be in 20 years time if the pandemic never happened. Would we still be worrying about whether electric cars would remove the environmental case for new rail projects, and whether WFH would still take off but in a more gradual manner. These are questions that have been massively superseded by Covid, and I feel will never be answered as the pandemic has literally scuppered public transport for good.
But amidst all the doom and gloom, there is no reason not to remain optimistic about the future. are some reasons why I think rail usage will recover significantly after lockdown:
- Not everyone wants to work from home permanently, and some employers would rather that their staff are in the workplace.
- Households with multiple cars will find they only need one as they work more hours from home. It will save them money and where two people need to be in different places at the same time, one will drive and the other take the train.
- Children and teenagers too young to drive still need to get to school and college.
- More households will be worse off from the economic impact of Covid, so will find they need to sell their car.
- People are desperate to get out and explore the country after months of lockdown.
- Increased demand for staycations will clog up local roads, so people will take the train to avoid these.
- Events such as concerts, sports matches and festivals will bounce back, and many people like to enjoy alcohol at these. Drinking and driving don’t mix so attendees will have to find an alternative mode of travel to get there and back.
Last edited:
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Companies, the financially astute ones, establish a travel policy to avoid such costs for train tickets. You should consider looking for a more stable employer perhaps - this bunch don’t seem like they will be around for long if that is their attitude to spend. I doubt your story.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,689
I would suggest that the employer is simply being pragmatic. Train fares can be so high as to justify such action.
Yes and the spontaneity or "pop over for a chat" now requires countless emails or an IM. The fact is humans need a certain level of human interaction. Quite a bit of that came through work, however tedious many may have found it - only now that it has gone do they realise what a benefit it was.
People are going to want to replace this contact elsewhere and that will be in their leisure time, some of which will be on the railway. I think purely WFH or purely working from the office is unlikely and hybrid working is the way forward but honestly who knows what this will look like. The industry is expecting somewhere between 10-40% (my personal guess is 25%) which shows you how much uncertainty there is.
There is a decline coming though, and frankly there's only so much the railway can do about it so we can't just expect it will be rosy and the subsidy keeps coming in. But it might be uneven. Half of Londoners don't own a car for instance - although that may benefit the Underground / TfL not rail services.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 18,704
Ultimately, the railway has to demonstrate that it is still relevant.
It can't hope to beat private transport on simple convenience, so it must beat it on price and/or speed, whilst mitigating the convenience disadvantage.
It can't hope to beat private transport on simple convenience, so it must beat it on price and/or speed, whilst mitigating the convenience disadvantage.
The issue with this is that a car journey often appears cheaper than a rail trip when you count just fuel, especially when going as a group. But if you take into account tax, parking (some of which might be home permits), MOT, insurance, maintenance, the cost of congestion and the wider disbenefits to the environment annualised then it becomes a different story. But most people don't think like that.
City centre to city centre is undoubtedly quicker, but obviously rail can't compete on final mile. This is where wider integration with other modes is needed, but this is again beyond the remit of just the railways although does fit into what should be on any DfT / government agenda, but their record is patchy at best.
I think that as a society we have to remember that the passenger numbers of the last few years have been unusually high.
A fall between 10 - 40% would at worst bring numbers back to where they were in the early noughties. If we thought the railway was worth supporting then, it's worth supporting now.
On the contrary, demanding more money while failing in a large way to make use of what you've already got is a very speedy route out of the door. Indeed, that's pretty much what the industry has been doing, for some time now.
bramling
Veteran Member
The other thing is the railway will need to think again on quality.
A miserable journey on an overcrowded train with poor levels of comfort isn’t going to be as acceptable as it has been over the last decade.
This kind of maths always makes me laugh. Pre-railway I worked at a company where we frequently travelled from the NE to London, and nobody ever paid that much and we always booked advanced tickets with padded time for flexibility. It's a choice by your company and its senior employees to spend those kind of sums.
And added to that, no work can be done in a car, where it can be done on a train - Standard or First class - so productivity will decrease.
Yep, any employer who pushes people to drive when they could be working semi-productively on the train is not seeing the full picture.
Pre-Covid, even my petrol head brother became a train convert when he realised quite how much productive time he was wasting driving to and from London for meetings.
I agree - it hasn't been sustainable if you watched any major city terminal at 8am or 5pm the last few years. However, the funding model of the industry has somewhat absorbed these numbers and accepted them hence why although going back to lower numbers will cause many in operational roles to brief a sigh of relief, that's a drastic restructuring of finance - even if we're able to remove some uneconomic peak workings.
A good point often missed - commuting isn't always "dead time". You can do work on a long distance journey and hell even a commute allows people to read a book, catch up on emails, listen to music, do some research or whatever. It's a disconnect from being switched on from the 1st minute at home.
It is. At the same time the burden of support has shifted away from subsidy to passenger revenue. That has effectively been reset as well.
Philip
On Moderation
It's a risky, devious and cynical strategy, but could a big price rise in local and medium-distance fares make big inroads into paying back the debt?
Reading through this thread, it is clear that there are a significant number of people who have to take the train for their work. Not everyone will want to drive for their leisure travel either, ie. so they can enjoy a drink or two. If the railway can substantially increase it's pricing in these areas, but to a point where it is still cheaper than driving to and parking in city centres, could it be a way of making up the shortfall?
Another option includes cancelling HS2...if long distance and business rail travel isn't going to return to anything like what it was, then why on earth spend billions on a project like this instead of supporting the existing network?
And the guard disputes with Northern and Southern in recent years show that things could get very messy if the unions have to step in to protect jobs.
Reading through this thread, it is clear that there are a significant number of people who have to take the train for their work. Not everyone will want to drive for their leisure travel either, ie. so they can enjoy a drink or two. If the railway can substantially increase it's pricing in these areas, but to a point where it is still cheaper than driving to and parking in city centres, could it be a way of making up the shortfall?
Another option includes cancelling HS2...if long distance and business rail travel isn't going to return to anything like what it was, then why on earth spend billions on a project like this instead of supporting the existing network?
And the guard disputes with Northern and Southern in recent years show that things could get very messy if the unions have to step in to protect jobs.
Give me a couple of hours on a train, and I can get SO MUCH done as the country rolls by.
BUT, the biggest chunk of revenue will need to come back for the railway to have a sustainable future. The current situation isn't sustainable.
What debt? Do you mean the deficit between costs and revenue.?
Rail definitely needs to "know its value" and not undercharged for flows where it has the biggest competitive advantage.
We don't know that for a fact, and contractually HS2 would cost nearly as much to cancel at this point as it would to get built.
in HS2's favour, with people going into the office less often, it may mean people living further away, but only travelling 1-2 days per week. Which is right up HS2's street.
I'm not sure how many times this has to be said, you cannot transfer the budget from HS2 to the existing railway. That's not how it works.
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Hit the nail on the head there - ! (not that it will be sorted overnight) - for example 700 class seat patterns being a fair point of discussion......
- Status