How critical is the return of passengers and busy trains for railway jobs?

[yorksrob]

The information comes from those involved with the response to the expected Government plan. They have no details, just an awareness that there is a great deal of effort going into this and an idea of the timing, magnitude and scope and a focus on the £billion a month price tag.

Are there any clues as to what they are expecting ? Red lines or just "don't care how you save it, just get on with it"

 

[squizzler]

It would be nuts to think about cost savings when the promised fares reform has not yet happened. For that reason I expect the focus to be on the introduction of a dynamic pricing system, along with a return of the turn-of the-millennium idea of integrated transport. The railway as a whole hasn't actually had to market itself particularly hard during the good years which means there are plenty of low hanging fruit for the plucking.

I am confident that there will be no successor to the Serpell report. Fortunately the conservative party running the country has changed from the Thatcher-Major era of the 1980s and 1990s which liked cars and hated public transport to the exact opposite. You might remember the Tory Party were mostly fans of the European Union in those days also!

 

[philosopher]

Are there any clues as to what they are expecting ? Red lines or just "don't care how you save it, just get on with it"

I can see no issue if the cuts are limited to cutting peak time extra services so a consistent timetable throughout the day can be run, given that is where the fall in demand is likely to be greatest.

However if the cuts extend to reducing frequencies of weekday off-peak and weekend services, then I think it definitely is going to drive people off the railway. Leisure travellers may be prepared to wait 15 minutes if they miss a train, but wait 30 minutes they may be thinking whether it was better to drive instead.

 

[yorksrob]

I can see no issue if the cuts are limited to cutting peak time extra services so a consistent timetable throughout the day can be run, given that is where the fall in demand is likely to be greatest.

However if the cuts extend to reducing frequencies of weekday off-peak and weekend services, then I think it definitely is going to drive people off the railway. Leisure travellers may be prepared to wait 15 minutes if they miss a train, but wait 30 minutes they may be thinking whether it was better to drive instead.

I think there are real dangers in cutting services too much. Frequency is an interesting one. Half hourly seems to be the standard but there are places that get by with less and meny that have more.

I think not shortening the service day is the key one.

 

[Horizon22]

Their role may be safety critical with current methods of operation. But the methods of operation aren't necessarily set in stone.

The rationale for having dispatch at certain stations is that it reduces the risk of SPADs (and resultant collisions/incidents). But with the advent of TPWS, the resultant risk is massively reduced. In some cases, a new risk assessment may conclude that dispatch is therefore no longer necessary.

I imagine dispatch will probably remain for most major stations, but there are certainly some places where it could face being scrapped, or at least rationalised.

Not exactly why dispatch exists, although it plays a part. Curvature of platforms, a greater focus on the platform-train interface, longer trains, higher service frequencies (especially terminals) and the increase of DOO services have played a part in additional dispatch staff across the infustry.

 

[bramling]

I can see no issue if the cuts are limited to cutting peak time extra services so a consistent timetable throughout the day can be run, given that is where the fall in demand is likely to be greatest.

However if the cuts extend to reducing frequencies of weekday off-peak and weekend services, then I think it definitely is going to drive people off the railway. Leisure travellers may be prepared to wait 15 minutes if they miss a train, but wait 30 minutes they may be thinking whether it was better to drive instead.

I would imagine some of GTR’s recent timetables are a hint of what might be to come. Essentially Saturday service with a highly limited number of peak extras, or no extras at all.

 

[Watershed]

Not exactly why dispatch exists, although it plays a part. Curvature of platforms, a greater focus on the platform-train interface, longer trains, higher service frequencies (especially terminals) and the increase of DOO services have played a part in additional dispatch staff across the infustry.

True, and in any case dispatch is usually a lower paid role - the biggest savings are likely to be had elsewhere!

 

[PupCuff]

However, surely station platform dispatchers and supervisors would fall into the 'essential' category, because their job is safety critical?

It's worth remembering that safety critical doesn't equal business critical. There's plenty of examples of safety critical roles which aren't 'essential', examples include provision of a guard where DOO is authorised (the guard is still safety critical but the train can simply run DOO if such a method of work is permitted); station dispatch at locations where self-dispatch is permitted (if the station dispatch staff all don't turn up to work one day unless it's a location where platform dispatch is mandatory the conductor will just see themselves off); cleaning staff at some locations are safety critical as they have to take line blocks etc to access the train exterior (if you wanted to do away with that then you'd just clean & service the trains elsewhere, eg at a central location). This shouldn't be taken as me trying to put such roles down or do them out of a job - my ethos is we need to upskill staff, not look to make cuts. But 'safety critical' is one of those terms which is often misused and abused in circumstances to try and infer some kind of additional standing or authority when the reality is if you're managing your staff effectively, the management of non-safety critical staff shouldn't be to a lower standard than that of safety critical staff.

 

[Horizon22]

True, and in any case dispatch is usually a lower paid role - the biggest savings are likely to be had elsewhere!

Quite. Personally I feel those in more obscure middle management roles - such as project management or a plethora of performance positions might see some roles "streamlined". Additionally if NR and TOCs get closer together as this government seems to be keen on, roles such as delay attribution and others where there is considerable overlap (anyone ever heard of the tortuous QX process...) might be more at risk.

That or the government opens the DOO can of worms again...

 

[Bald Rick]

Quite. Personally I feel those in more obscure middle management roles - such as project management or a plethora of performance positions might see some roles "streamlined". Additionally if NR and TOCs get closer together as this government seems to be keen on, roles such as delay attribution and others where there is considerable overlap (anyone ever heard of the tortuous QX process...) might be more at risk.

That or the government opens the DOO can of worms again...

As ever - a significant majority of the roles in DA are there to find out what went on, and are not concerned about the monetary side. Those roles would still exist even if performance regimes (Schedule 8) was to be removed.

QX is a different matter, but there’s not that many people involved full time. Even if you wrapped up everybody in NR involved full time in contract management with the TOCs it would be less than 100 people. And that covers everything - access contracts, station contracts, QX, DA, etc etc.

Project Management however ... as can be seen in Eastern Region.

 

[Horizon22]

As ever - a significant majority of the roles in DA are there to find out what went on, and are not concerned about the monetary side. Those roles would still exist even if performance regimes (Schedule 8) was to be removed.

QX is a different matter, but there’s not that many people involved full time. Even if you wrapped up everybody in NR involved full time in contract management with the TOCs it would be less than 100 people. And that covers everything - access contracts, station contracts, QX, DA, etc etc.

Project Management however ... as can be seen in Eastern Region.

I totally understand the reasons for DA, but the fact remains there is duplication between the NR and TOC sides that may in future not need to be as pronounced. QX also takes up lots of other people's time who are not necessarily directly employed in that area.

 

[Bikeman78]

Are there any clues as to what they are expecting ? Red lines or just "don't care how you save it, just get on with it"

An obvious first step would be to encourage people back on to trains rather than keep scaring them off. The Barry Island trains had healthy loads on Tuesday so there are plenty of people out there willing to use them.

 

[jon0844]

I think that what Robertj21a is alluding to is that they will drive to an Outer London station park and then use the train/ tube to the centre. For us here in Kent it means a car journey to North Greenwich or Orpington (used by people right over in to West Sussex). Im sure there are Outer London railheads in the other directions as well. North Greenwich station parking is 50p per day more expensive than Crewe.

I assume the cost of parking there, the cost of the train/tube ticket and the actual time of using the train/tube (tube trains having more stops, interchanges etc) is factored in to the comparisons?

Given how long it can take from zone 5 or 6 into London, surely that does away with some of the huge savings in time mentioned for using a car versus the train straight into London?

 

[Horizon22]

I assume the cost of parking there, the cost of the train/tube ticket and the actual time of using the train/tube (tube trains having more stops, interchanges etc) is factored in to the comparisons?

Given how long it can take from zone 5 or 6 into London, surely that does away with some of the huge savings in time mentioned for using a car versus the train straight into London?

Pick the right zone 5/6 station and that will only be a 20-30 minute journey. Once you get past the M25 and definitely the north/south circular, you won't be doing much more than 10mph on average.

 

[paul1609]

I assume the cost of parking there, the cost of the train/tube ticket and the actual time of using the train/tube (tube trains having more stops, interchanges etc) is factored in to the comparisons?

Given how long it can take from zone 5 or 6 into London, surely that does away with some of the huge savings in time mentioned for using a car versus the train straight into London?

My house is on the North End of Romney Marsh. The obvious railhead is Ashford International 40 mins away by car. Car Parking is £8 a day there. An Anytime travelcard is £80/£70 hs1/ not hs1. St Pancras is 37 mins, London Bridge around 1h20. Orpington station is 45 miles away and takes on average 1hr20 mins by car. Car Parking is £7.20 there. Orpington is 15 mins by train from London Bridge and I use contactless. Noth Greenwich is 55 miles.and around 1hr 40 mins by car. Car Parking is £12 a day. North Greenwich is around 8 mins from London Bridge by tube, again Id use contactless. Central London Parking is from around £35 a day plus congestion charge plus ULEZ charge. Journey time is from around 2 hours but randomly variable.

 

[yorksrob]

An obvious first step would be to encourage people back on to trains rather than keep scaring them off. The Barry Island trains had healthy loads on Tuesday so there are plenty of people out there willing to use them.

Indeed, but will it be enough !

 

[Robertj21a]

Pick the right zone 5/6 station and that will only be a 20-30 minute journey. Once you get past the M25 and definitely the north/south circular, you won't be doing much more than 10mph on average.

What many people seem to forget is that many travellers don't actually *want* to be at Kings Cross, or Waterloo or Paddington etc. They go there because the train doesn't actually go where they really want to be. It's all very well getting a train from Crewe and paying £70 *single* but I may well want somewhere like, say, Brent Cross or Edgware. Places like that are often easier by car - and I have the option to take other passengers too.

 

[WestRiding]

Speaking of encouraging people back to the railways. Sheffield is my local Mainline Station. £19.50 for a days parking. That will not encourage people back. I nearly fainted when it came to paying, its the first time I have actually parked there.

 

[squizzler]

This forum has not discussed that political viability of some business sectors is more secure than for others. The intercity routes are the ones which exist in he most competitive marketplace with alternatives such as air or coach travel available on most routes. It is also traditionally the most profitable and in BR days operated without a subsidy.

The obvious urban commuting routes are likely to continue the trend of devolution towards municipal control and - as with local stakeholders fighting its cause - will largely be immune for route cuts although service levels might be optimised for demand. Local control also tends to encourage integration with other transport as in Manchester with its recent takeover of bus operations as part of a drive to improve economic competitiveness, reduce highway congestion and improve air quality for the city in question. The regional routes that fall between those stools are likely to progressively become the problem of Subnational Transport Bodies, and whilst not under the same degree of local stakeholder oversight as urban routes, these organisations are still unlikely in my view to allow routes to be lost. This is simply extrapolate of historic trends that has seen the management of rail services progressively move to a regional level, where it is more valued than a distant London (or Milton Keynes) head office.

So it is intercity rail which might ought to be freed up to respond most rapidly to changes in customer demand (reduction of operating subsidy being a happy bonus). This might be achieved by a move to a mixed economy where the franchised service is the bare bones on their particular network and open access operators are allowed to play a greater role. Fortunately, IC uses routes used also by other operators and thus network mileage is unlikely to be affected.

 

[jon0844]

What many people seem to forget is that many travellers don't actually *want* to be at Kings Cross, or Waterloo or Paddington etc. They go there because the train doesn't actually go where they really want to be. It's all very well getting a train from Crewe and paying £70 *single* but I may well want somewhere like, say, Brent Cross or Edgware. Places like that are often easier by car - and I have the option to take other passengers too.

Well of course there are loads of variables. You might want to drive from the north to someone on the edge of south London nearer Gatwick. Do you drive through London or around?

My point was many comparisons aren't really good ones because of these variables. And sometimes it isn't down to cost. People might pay more to work/relax/drink on the train over a drive for those reasons alone.

I hate sitting in traffic or using service stations, so driving is very much a last resort for me. Sometimes it is the only way, but I'd favour rail as my first option whenever possible.

I think it might be easier in the future to have meetings scheduled to suit people travelling in from home, so many may be organised to allow off peak travel. For years I've arranged meetings to avoid the morning peak whenever possible.

I get not everyone can, but I bet a lot will.

 

[Glenn1969]

Northern anybody? Remember the 80s/90s view that we were to be viewed as no growth because the finances were already a black hole?

I do. Which is why I am worried about TfN's aspirations being scaled back to almost nothing because they will seek to slash costs and enhancements will be the first to go. The TRU Huddersfield TWAO has just been submitted. I hope Shapps doesn't sit on it for 7 years like Grayling did with Castlefield. But am not over convinced

 

[dk1]

Northern anybody? Remember the 80s/90s view that we were to be viewed as no growth because the finances were already a black hole?

I do. Which is why I am worried about TfN's aspirations being scaled back to almost nothing because they will seek to slash costs and enhancements will be the first to go. The TRU Huddersfield TWAO has just been submitted. I hope Shapps doesn't sit on it for 7 years like Grayling did with Castlefield. But am not over convinced

Where they not viewed as a ‘no growth’ franchise when let to Serco/Abellio in 2004 too?

 

[Glenn1969]

Yes I believe they were

 

[John Bishop]

Having an extensive public transportation network is very much at the heart of any developed country throughout the world.

There will certainly be a reduced level of subsidy required of the Government once things get back to normal, but the Government will still be required to continue to subsidise the national railway network. The option of simply slash and burn parts of the network as suggested by some on here is just not feasible and would cause public outrage. Given also the increasing ‘Green‘ agenda, public transport will need to be at the heart of future spending to enable increase usage and reduction of road journeys and emission cuts.

I have no doubt some savings will need to be made but the notion of cataclysmic cuts and redundancies within our network just simply wont be allowed to happen.

Perhaps this event is the catalyst required to reshape our railway and bring it into the 21st century with regards to pricing and fare structures etc.

 

[Robertj21a]

Well of course there are loads of variables. You might want to drive from the north to someone on the edge of south London nearer Gatwick. Do you drive through London or around?

My point was many comparisons aren't really good ones because of these variables. And sometimes it isn't down to cost. People might pay more to work/relax/drink on the train over a drive for those reasons alone.

I hate sitting in traffic or using service stations, so driving is very much a last resort for me. Sometimes it is the only way, but I'd favour rail as my first option whenever possible.

I think it might be easier in the future to have meetings scheduled to suit people travelling in from home, so many may be organised to allow off peak travel. For years I've arranged meetings to avoid the morning peak whenever possible.

I get not everyone can, but I bet a lot will.

Quite agree with much of that (though many meetings will probably now remain online/zoom in future). I often drive to the Gatwick area and the M25 is generally ok as I've learnt to use the best days and times. The cost of the railways is not my only issue, in the car I can have my music on, open the windows, divert to do something else, pick up some shopping etc etc - just so much more flexible.

 

[Robertj21a]

You obviously prefer using a car but lots of people don't want the stress & hassle of driving into busy cities. Many people I know don't enjoy driving on the countries roads nowadays, I personally prefer getting a train into London Euston & then using the tube to get to my destination.

I have friends that regularly have to attend meetings in London & none of them use a car. All use the railway as the method of travel for its speed & convenience, they book in advance & don't pay the silly prices you quoted

The £70 figure was a costing for a train that could take someone from Crewe to London Euston as an example on the next day, booking in advance & off peak is the cheapest method.

I've booked in advance & gone from Crewe to London for £55 return, it was off peak but that suited me at that time. I couldn't have done that journey by car & returned for that cost plus watched a movie on my tablet whilst relaxing on my journey.

I agree with that, and have done the same myself when appropriate, and the fare is sensible. The query arose in my mind as the poster appeared to be suggesting that a £70 single was somehow good value.

 

[paul1609]

Well of course there are loads of variables. You might want to drive from the north to someone on the edge of south London nearer Gatwick. Do you drive through London or around?

You drive around London on the M25. Anywhere up to around the M23 Junction and on the M1 or East of you go via the dartford crossing. Any where up the M40 and M6 as far as Penrith you go via Heathrow. On the M6 beyond Penrith you go via Dartford up the M11 and A1 to Scotch Corner then across the A66.

 

[al78]

You obviously prefer using a car but lots of people don't want the stress & hassle of driving into busy cities. Many people I know don't enjoy driving on the countries roads nowadays, I personally prefer getting a train into London Euston & then using the tube to get to my destination.

I have friends that regularly have to attend meetings in London & none of them use a car. All use the railway as the method of travel for its speed & convenience, they book in advance & don't pay the silly prices you quoted

The £70 figure was a costing for a train that could take someone from Crewe to London Euston as an example on the next day, booking in advance & off peak is the cheapest method.

I've booked in advance & gone from Crewe to London for £55 return, it was off peak but that suited me at that time. I couldn't have done that journey by car & returned for that cost plus watched a movie on my tablet whilst relaxing on my journey.

The availability of cheap advance tickets will be strongly dependant on the journey. I used to be able to buy advance tickets for Horsham to Manchester for less than £30 each way, but over the last few years advances for that journey have never been available no matter how flexible I try to be with my journey times, so I have to pay over £100 for a walk-up return. That adds up with a few family visits each year.

 

[Robertj21a]

The availability of cheap advance tickets will be strongly dependant on the journey. I used to be able to buy advance tickets for Horsham to Manchester for less than £30 each way, but over the last few years advances for that journey have never been available no matter how flexible I try to be with my journey times, so I have to pay over £100 for a walk-up return. That adds up with a few family visits each year.

Very true.
Perhaps one thing that could be pursued would be *guaranteed* Advance fare availability at limited off-peak times on *all* routes.

 

[Bald Rick]

Very true.
Perhaps one thing that could be pursued would be *guaranteed* Advance fare availability at limited off-peak times on *all* routes.

When you say guaranteed, I presume you mean until the quota runs out.