South Western Railway nationalisation time.

[coppercapped]

I don't agree that every individual element of the overall journey experience has to make money in itself because where do you stop with that? So I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one and just leave it like that.

If each single element of the journey was profitable then there would be no micromanagement from the provider of the (now non existent) subsidy. The railway would be master of its own destiny. What’s not to like?

 

[Goldfish62]

If each single element of the journey was profitable then there would be no micromanagement from the provider of the (now non existent) subsidy. The railway would be master of its own destiny. What’s not to like?

We'd hardly have any rail network left. That's not what to like. But extreme neo-liberal free-marketeers who know the cost of everything and value of nothing would probably approve. The pursuit of maximising profit to the exclusion of absolutely everything else is their nirvana after all.

 

[Gloster]

We'd hardly have any rail network left. That's not what to like. But extreme neo-liberal free-marketeers who know the cost of everything and value of nothing would probably approve. The pursuit of maximising profit for them to the exclusion of absolutely everything else is their nirvana after all.

I have added in bold the words that you accidentally omitted.

 

[SWT_USER]

I've had two on train ticket checks by guards (not revenue protection) on local services (Waterloo to Windsor and Clapham to Guildford) in the past two days. I don't think this has happened in all the SWR years.

Is this a new thing or just coincidence?

 

[norbitonflyer]

I've seen on the Windsor route too. It may be more to do with the extension of contact less. The guard on my train was patiently extricating a fellow passenger from the situation he was in by touching in with an Oyster (which are still not valid beyond Feltham)

İ have noticed this new helpfulness elsewhere, on an LNER service with fellow passengers on a transpennine ticket. No penalty fare, from what I could overhear the inspector even organised a split at York for them.

 

[swr444]

I've had two on train ticket checks by guards (not revenue protection) on local services (Waterloo to Windsor and Clapham to Guildford) in the past two days. I don't think this has happened in all the SWR years.

Is this a new thing or just coincidence?

With the 701 guards training comes training for using the RID's, which are TfLs ticketing checking devices. It was part of the 701 agreement as guards wouldn't be doing safety critical work...

 

[Horizon22]

Realistically catering on a train is going to struggle with niche requirements.

Yes. Really very few SWR services are truly long-distance and people might just stock up from station or local town shops which are pretty well established now.

 

[Meglos]

I've had two on train ticket checks by guards (not revenue protection) on local services (Waterloo to Windsor and Clapham to Guildford) in the past two days. I don't think this has happened in all the SWR years.

Is this a new thing or just coincidence?

Every day since Sunday I've seen travelling cleaners working on the trains operating through Wimbledon. I don't think I've seen working cleaners travelling on the trains on a regular basis before.

 

[RGM654]

with catering, I don’t understand why the rail companies don’t just give the opportunity for a small catering firm or local sandwich man to come onto the train at a particular stop and then get off again at another part of the network.

For that to work, the trolley service would have to be not merely profitable in its own right but sufficiently profitable. Catering provided by the train operator can improve the overall experience of travelling by train and thus help to attract custom. So there's no point on services that are packed, but that's OK because a catering trolley can't move down a packed train.

 

[Lockwood]

Not sure if this is the right place, but...
I am watching a YouTube video. Every 90 seconds, the exact same SWR advert plays. Seen it before, but nothing like this much.

Surprised that they are aggressively pushing old adverts at the moment


Edit... Two SWR adverts. "Chickago" and "Sandy we've got to stop meeting like this."

 

[Carlisle]

For that to work, the trolley service would have to be not merely profitable in its own right but sufficiently profitable.

Yes, the last Scotrail Franchise trialled catering on Carlisle-Glasgow via Dumfries trains but it didn’t last very long so presumably wasn’t profitable.

 

[talldave]

Because that’s privatisation… and if everyone employed on the railway comes under GBR, then it undermines the role of customer hosts on other parts of the network who would have been historically employed under a different TOC.

So all the coffee shops on platforms are going to be run by the government then? Closely followed by the government taking over motorway services?

What's the difference between outlets on station concourses, on station platforms and on trains?

 

[PLY2AYS]

So all the coffee shops on platforms are going to be run by the government then? Closely followed by the government taking over motorway services?

What's the difference between outlets on station concourses, on station platforms and on trains?

Outlets on concourses and platforms aren’t taking jobs away from those already employed on the railway… plus they’re also rented units. So they pay the railway to be there.

Understand why that’s confusing, but let’s not undermine the job security of those who actually work on the railway.

 

[VItraveller]

For that to work, the trolley service would have to be not merely profitable in its own right but sufficiently profitable. Catering provided by the train operator can improve the overall experience of travelling by train and thus help to attract custom. So there's no point on services that are packed, but that's OK because a catering trolley can't move down a packed train.

I would imagine the reason catering is not currently profitable is because the train companies have to pay for the stock and also for the staff to bring the food round, but a local catering firm would have their own stock already and their own staff to deliver it so I can’t see that it wouldn’t be profitable.

 

[greatkingrat]

I would imagine the reason catering is not currently profitable is because the train companies have to pay for the stock and also for the staff to bring the food round, but a local catering firm would have their own stock already and their own staff to deliver it so I can’t see that it wouldn’t be profitable.

Do you think local catering firms get their stock for free? And their existing staff presumably already have things to do, so they would need to hire new people specifically to run the trolley.

 

[Falcon1200]

Outlets on concourses and platforms aren’t taking jobs away from those already employed on the railway… plus they’re also rented units. So they pay the railway to be there.

A private company offering catering on a route where none currently exists - eg on South Western Railway, as per this thread - is not taking jobs away, they are improving the passenger experience.

 

[talldave]

A private company offering catering on a route where none currently exists - eg on South Western Railway, as per this thread - is not taking jobs away, they are improving the passenger experience.

Indeed, I thought we were discussing catering that doesn't currently exist.

It also raises my main gripe with nationalisation, which is the nobody cares attitude. An employee providing catering who's continued employment and success depends on happy customers buying as much as they can be persuaded to will provide a far better customer experience.

Personally, I think on-board trolley catering is dead, when we're in a world where there are more coffee permutations than UK stations. The focus should be on clean trains running as scheduled!

 

[PLY2AYS]

A private company offering catering on a route where none currently exists - eg on South Western Railway, as per this thread - is not taking jobs away, they are improving the passenger experience.

Except that when GBR takes on all TOCs, they will employ customer hosts (and they kind of already do in LNER). So it is undermining the job security of other customer hosts around the country and potentially their own services…

Additionally, I can’t think (personally speaking of course) of a route on SWR that would really require a trolley service, other than to Exeter, due to the length of the journey.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2025 ==

The focus should be on clean trains running as scheduled!

Absolutely.

That’s not to say catering couldn’t be provided, or at least looked at. But clean and on time is a much better and more important performance indicator…

Additionally, GBR (or the DfT) don’t want to be causing issues with current staff or fearmongering redundancies are looming with further privatisation of the railway that some have hoped be renationalised for 30 years.

 

[fandroid]

Additionally, I can’t think (personally speaking of course) of a route on SWR that would really require a trolley service, other than to Exeter, due to the length of the journey.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2025 ==

London to Weymouth is fairly long in time too, but I imagine that passenger numbers for the whole journey are not consistently high through the day/week/year to make it worthwhile.

 

[renegademaster]

Except that when GBR takes on all TOCs, they will employ customer hosts (and they kind of already do in LNER)

What do you base that assumption upon?
Southeastern and Northern haven't suddenly found themselves to have LNER style customer service. I can't envision DfT wanting to upstaff everything.

 

[PLY2AYS]

What do you base that assumption upon?
Southeastern and Northern haven't suddenly found themselves to have LNER style customer service. I can't envision DfT wanting to upstaff everything.

It’s not an assumption, given that there are TOCs that GBR will take on that already employ customer hosts…

 

[JamesT]

It’s not an assumption, given that there are TOCs that GBR will take on that already employ customer hosts…

But what relevance does this have to what will happen to SWR?

 

[PLY2AYS]

But what relevance does this have to what will happen to SWR?

The fact that it will be the same company?
You can’t have uniformity of grades and conditions across the same company and then pick and choose which grades/roles get privatised in certain parts without a lot of contention from the rest of the railway.

 

[Djgr]

The fact that it will be the same company?
You can’t have uniformity of grades and conditions across the same company and then pick and choose which grades/roles get privatised in certain parts without a lot of contention from the rest of the railway.

Who is talking about roles being privatised?

 

[JamesT]

The fact that it will be the same company?
You can’t have uniformity of grades and conditions across the same company and then pick and choose which grades/roles get privatised in certain parts without a lot of contention from the rest of the railway.

That's a very large assumption that there will be such uniformity. There are countless instances across the railway today where staff who belong to the same company do not have the same terms and conditions.

It's also hardly privatisation as the role doesn't presently exist on SWR. In the unlikely event it was decided to introduce catering, why should the GBR bosses be able to decide whether to hire people to run it in-house or put it out to tender?

Similarly, I'm not sure there would be much scope for industrial action (which I assume is what you mean by 'contention') as it would not have any bearing on the employment status or conditions of any existing staff.

 

[PLY2AYS]

Who is talking about roles being privatised?

The suggestion was:

with catering, I don’t understand why the rail companies don’t just give the opportunity for a small catering firm or local sandwich man to come onto the train at a particular stop and then get off again at another part of the network.

Continued here:

A private company offering catering on a route where none currently exists - eg on South Western Railway, as per this thread - is not taking jobs away, they are improving the passenger experience.

Simply put… this is essentially privatising roles which already exist, or will exist under GBR.

Further to this, those working onboard trains will need PTS and unit specific training in an emergency etc. to even be insured to work onboard.
At which point, no ‘small catering firm or local sandwich man’ will find it economically viable, just to orchestrate the training.
So it’s a ridiculous suggestion from the off.

People who work on the railway, should be railway workers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2025 ==

That's a very large assumption that there will be such uniformity. There are countless instances across the railway today where staff who belong to the same company do not have the same terms and conditions.

Because of privatisation.

It's also hardly privatisation as the role doesn't presently exist on SWR.

It’s the very definition of privatisation.

Similarly, I'm not sure there would be much scope for industrial action (which I assume is what you mean by 'contention') as it would not have any bearing on the employment status or conditions of any existing staff.

It’s the erosion of job security for existing workers. It has EVERY scope for contention and industrial action.

 

[renegademaster]

Further to this, those working onboard trains will need PTS and unit specific training in an emergency etc. to even be insured to work onboard.

Do the volunteers who do catering on the Settle and Carlisle require special qualifications?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2025 ==

That (easily replaceable) LNER catering staff working not much above minimum wage will be convinced to strike so people in Exeter can't have tendered catering services is something i find hard to believe.


Was their industrial action when BR wound down Traveller's Fayre and replaced them with private stores ?

 

[Djgr]

The suggestion was:


Continued here:


Simply put… this is essentially privatising roles which already exist, or will exist under GBR.

Further to this, those working onboard trains will need PTS and unit specific training in an emergency etc. to even be insured to work onboard.
At which point, no ‘small catering firm or local sandwich man’ will find it economically viable, just to orchestrate the training.
So it’s a ridiculous suggestion from the off.

People who work on the railway, should be railway workers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 May 2025 ==


Because of privatisation.

It’s the very definition of privatisation.

It’s the erosion of job security for existing workers. It has EVERY scope for contention and industrial action.

I don't think anyone has suggested that this will happen, apart from members of this forum

 

[PLY2AYS]

I don't think anyone has suggested that this will happen, apart from members of this forum

Long may that continue.

 

[ThisIsSurbiton]

There has been a focus on catering here, which I think isn't going to be provided again, but if it were, it doesn't need to be by SWR. Many nationalised railways use contractors for catering. And I'm not holding my breath for other improvements yet either, it just isn't a simple matter to change most things quickly. Removing the pointless operator name from announcements would be a simple start.

Something could be done for the December timetable change although of course the shortage of trains isn't easily fixed within that period. It would be good to be told that evening services, which are often very busy, would go back to the frequency they had before, "nobody travelling" is now a fiction. It's good to see the increased cleaning this week, but I have yet to see a ticket check and that's understandable on a full train.