• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Availability of accessible rail replacement coaches

Status
Not open for further replies.

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
The answer is that no-one knows for sure. There are people stating things as fact here that are actually their own interpretation rather than fact.

As a rail replacement practitioner for over 15 years in all capacities, I’ve never seen a definitive statement of law about which rules apply where.

I’ve always adopted the pragmatic view that a timetabled service less than 50km in length can be worked under domestic hours and I think that’s the generally common approach.

My view is that anything longer than 50kms must be worked under EU hours.

I have encountered every possible interpretation of emergency work at various times in various places - some day domestic is okay, others that it must be EU, others that no rules apply. The only one I’m really comfortable with is the middle one, but could I honestly say I’ve never worked an emergency turn under domestic hours? No, I couldn’t

Of course, even if a duty can be worked under domestic hours, coach operators will usually choose to work it under EU hours anyway, because all the rest of their work is EU so it makes the record keeping too complex if they do occasional domestic work. Some operators are more comfortable mixing than others.

I have often found myself in a situation as a supervisor where duties have been prepared under domestic hours, and the buses and bus drivers are ploughing up and down quite happily, but the coaches and coach drivers are needing extra breaks because they’re under instruction to work to EU hours regardless of what the duty says (and that’s one sure fire way to get the bus drivers’ backs up!)

Despite the statements of certainty further up this thread, unless there is a definitive source that has eluded me for the last fifteen years, this will continue to be a matter of interpretation until either the authorities issue a definitive ruling (as they did with PSVAR in the autumn) or until an issue arises that leads to it being tested in the courts - and I doubt any bus or train operator has the stomach for that fight.

Thanks, Phil, you've accurately summed up what I felt most people had taken to be the generally accepted approach for some years.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Cesarcollie

Member
Joined
5 Jun 2016
Messages
524
There is no legal basis under which a route of under 50km, operating to a pre-defined timetable, and regularly (open to definition, but certainly covering multiple journeys a day operating on multiple days), can be required to operate under EU hours. The rest of what Phil says, I agree with.
 

PhilStockley

Member
Joined
21 Jun 2016
Messages
75
...regularly (open to definition)...

That neatly sums up my point. The weak point in domestic hours has always been the definition of the word ‘regular’. And until a suitable authority *does* define it, any reliance on it to support domestic operation makes it a matter of interpretation rather than fact - and therefore potentially open to challenge.

But for what it’s worth I completely agree with your interpretation!
 

Deafdoggie

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2016
Messages
3,035
That’s a fair interpretation. All the RRB work our way is over 50km so I forget there are shorter routes out there! But a bus company with spare buses can operate short RRB routes (under 50KM) with no issues which is why London work can be bused I guess.

In reply to the “why aren’t all coaches fitted with toilets” question. The problem is emptying them. A coach can be away from depot for several days or even weeks or months at a time. There are places they can be emptied, but at a price! Our toilets are kept locked, if people want to use them they have to ask the driver, that way the number of times they get used decreases.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Our toilets are kept locked, if people want to use them they have to ask the driver, that way the number of times they get used decreases.

This really, really gets on my nerves. It's awful customer service and bean-counterism and smacks of "miss, miss, can I go for a wee please".

Coach toilets are nasty so nobody uses them unless they have to anyway.
 

JamesT

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
2,640
Were they? I'd love to see (evidence of) this advice if you or anybody has it. (genuine request)
From 2.11 of https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pd...ccessibility-of-rail-replacement-services.pdf
2.11 We received a number of responses specifically on the implications of applying
PSVAR to rail replacement services rather than on the legal advice. A number of
train operators indicated that our provisional advice went against established
industry practice and understanding of the legal position over two decades. These
responses provided us with detail about the degree to which their rail replacement
services are already available, and the implications for their services if ORR’s legal
advice is correct.
To me this says the new legal advice commissioned by the ORR saying PSVAR applied was new and different, implying any previous advice they'd had was it didn't. FoI time to ask ORR or some ToCs what their previous advice was?
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
The answer is that no-one knows for sure. There are people stating things as fact here that are actually their own interpretation rather than fact.

As a rail replacement practitioner for over 15 years in all capacities, I’ve never seen a definitive statement of law about which rules apply where.

I’ve always adopted the pragmatic view that a timetabled service less than 50km in length can be worked under domestic hours and I think that’s the generally common approach.

My view is that anything longer than 50kms must be worked under EU hours.

I have encountered every possible interpretation of emergency work at various times in various places - some day domestic is okay, others that it must be EU, others that no rules apply. The only one I’m really comfortable with is the middle one, but could I honestly say I’ve never worked an emergency turn under domestic hours? No, I couldn’t

Of course, even if a duty can be worked under domestic hours, coach operators will usually choose to work it under EU hours anyway, because all the rest of their work is EU so it makes the record keeping too complex if they do occasional domestic work. Some operators are more comfortable mixing than others.

I have often found myself in a situation as a supervisor where duties have been prepared under domestic hours, and the buses and bus drivers are ploughing up and down quite happily, but the coaches and coach drivers are needing extra breaks because they’re under instruction to work to EU hours regardless of what the duty says (and that’s one sure fire way to get the bus drivers’ backs up!)

Despite the statements of certainty further up this thread, unless there is a definitive source that has eluded me for the last fifteen years, this will continue to be a matter of interpretation until either the authorities issue a definitive ruling (as they did with PSVAR in the autumn) or until an issue arises that leads to it being tested in the courts - and I doubt any bus or train operator has the stomach for that fight.
Even when an issue is decided in the courts, like in the final ruling on the case of the wheelchair passenger taking on Firstgroup after being denied access to a bus, it can still remain unclear. In that case, the judges found in favour of the wheelchair user but were outspoken on the poor wording of the Act under which his case was brought i.e. although the bus company had to make provision there was nothing to say that another individual on the bus refusing to make way for the wheelchair user was either committing an offence or could be made to move: they merely had to be asked to, and if they refused.... The strong suggestion was made to amend the Act, or introduce a new one, but needless to say it hasn't happened and, in practice, it was a pyrrhic victory only.
 

kingqueen

Member
Joined
12 Apr 2010
Messages
421
Location
Wetherby, North Yorkshire
From 2.11 of...
Thank you.
To me this says the new legal advice commissioned by the ORR saying PSVAR applied was new and different, implying any previous advice they'd had was it didn't.
I can see where you're coming from. However I don't think the ORR has ever solicited or given an opinion before, as to whether PSVAR applies to RRB.
The question as to where the industry blanket assumption came from, that PSVAR doesn't apply to rail replacement services, doesn't seem to be straightforward. I'm fairly certain I can remember somewhere in the consultation documents a reference to some TOCs having based their assumption on a legal opinion they solicited some years ago, but it was a very non- direct claim and also said advice doesn't seem to have surfaced... and now I can't find the reference in the docs myself.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
Thank you.I can see where you're coming from. However I don't think the ORR has ever solicited or given an opinion before, as to whether PSVAR applies to RRB.
The question as to where the industry blanket assumption came from, that PSVAR doesn't apply to rail replacement services, doesn't seem to be straightforward. I'm fairly certain I can remember somewhere in the consultation documents a reference to some TOCs having based their assumption on a legal opinion they solicited some years ago, but it was a very non- direct claim and also said advice doesn't seem to have surfaced... and now I can't find the reference in the docs myself.

I recall the same point about TOCs having received different advice on how to interpret the issues. You're not imagining it !
 

HH

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Messages
4,505
Location
Essex
When you say that 99% of buses are old and non compliant I assume you mean coaches. Buses are now 100% required to be compliant.
This is simply not true. Most bus services are required to be compliant, which is a different thing altogether.
 
Last edited:

HH

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Messages
4,505
Location
Essex
Were they? I'd love to see (evidence of) this advice if you or anybody has it. (genuine request)
It was a report on the ORR website, I see somebody has found the relevant section.
 

Deafdoggie

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2016
Messages
3,035
This really, really gets on my nerves. It's awful customer service and bean-counterism and smacks of "miss, miss, can I go for a wee please".

Coach toilets are nasty so nobody uses them unless they have to anyway.

But it’s better than being on a coach with a full toilet tank! The smell of being on a voyager would be welcome.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
But it’s better than being on a coach with a full toilet tank! The smell of being on a voyager would be welcome.

It's not better than being on a coach where someone has wet themselves.

It is discriminatory, pure and simple. For some reason, only wheelchair users seem to be considered when dealing with discrimination. This is wrong.

There will be more people with a toilet urgency disability on an average train service than wheelchair users.
 

Deafdoggie

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2016
Messages
3,035
RRB rarely (ever?) pay the toilet coach rate. They get what they pay for. If they want to provide the extra cost they can. But they choose not to.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
This is simply not true. Most bus services are required to be compliant, which is a different thing altogether.

You said that 99% of buses are old and non compliant. Which buses (over 22 seats) do you believe are not compliant ?
 

richw

Veteran Member
Joined
10 Jun 2010
Messages
11,213
Location
Liskeard
You said that 99% of buses are old and non compliant. Which buses (over 22 seats) do you believe are not compliant ?

a few cowboy operators are your limit. I’ve seen two cowboy operators pulled to public enquiry after local authorities reported them for non compliance in last 6 months
 

HH

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Messages
4,505
Location
Essex
You said that 99% of buses are old and non compliant. Which buses (over 22 seats) do you believe are not compliant ?
I said buses used on rail replacement are old and non-compliant. This is because their normal use is not bus services and so they are not covered by the requirements.

BTW these are not my numbers, they are ORR's.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
3 isn’t sustainable for long before getting a PR backlash.
How difficult can it be to have PRM taxis on call? As the driver licensing is easier it would be a good gig for a national company to provide them.

Pretty hard unless a national company is set up to do this. Most TOCs use an company that are trying to source taxis (albeit in bulk) from firms that are also keen to provide taxis as normal to locals.

When there's major disruption, it's quite likely many firms will not give up all their taxis. I don't know how they're paid (per mile, at an agreed rate or whatever) but it seems taxi firms will prefer to give taxis to passengers who book direct, than the likes of CMAC.

You then have drivers who also work for Uber, and where surge pricing kicks in very quickly once there's a sniff of delays. I don't know how much more they make, but I assume they earn more if it is percentage based.

If there's a shortage of accessible coaches, it will see a marked reduction of coaches in use. It might be why there was only an hourly bus service this weekend just gone during the ECML blockade, instead of two buses per hour. A marked reduction in capacity to comply.

Perhaps the only compromise can be that if a non-compliant bus is operating, it must be accompanied by an accessible bus at the same time. Thus you can double capacity at any given time, and not leave someone without a form of transport. This then needs proper co-ordination to ensure passengers are divided up as necessary.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
I said buses used on rail replacement are old and non-compliant. This is because their normal use is not bus services and so they are not covered by the requirements.

BTW these are not my numbers, they are ORR's.

If that's what you're now saying then it appears that the ORR is totally ignoring all the RR work carried out in London (and many other cities). Totally useless data.
 

vlad

Member
Joined
13 May 2018
Messages
749
This really, really gets on my nerves. It's awful customer service and bean-counterism and smacks of "miss, miss, can I go for a wee please".

Coach toilets are nasty so nobody uses them unless they have to anyway.

The last rail replacement coach I went on (Dyce to Inverurie last year) didn't have an on-board toilet, so we stopped in a lay-by for one passenger to run out and hide behind a bush....
 

markymark2000

On Moderation
Joined
11 May 2015
Messages
3,535
Location
Western Part of the UK
It doesn’t matter if it’s planned or not, bus companies simply don’t have spare buses sat around. Sunday sees a few spare but most have work done on them then as they are already off the road. And where are you producing drivers from?




EU hours apply for RRB and therefore tacho required. It is possible (but complex and messy) to do it on ‘paper records’ if the bus doesn’t have a tacho, but given this complexity most operators avoid it as it simply isn’t worth it.
Drivers are then stuck with EU driving hours for 14 days so most bus shifts don’t suit them. Another reason operators aren’t keen, and drivers neither as it means their hours, and therefore pay, is less.



The complexity of a coach company providing drivers and a bus company providing buses (as suggested upthread) is just so complex as to be not worth being considering. Even if there were these mythical spare buses.

The harsh reality is that RRB is just a bit extra work for coach companies. And work that doesn’t even pay all that well. they can take it or leave it. If you force them to spend hundreds of thousands on coaches they have no other need for, they’ll simply leave it. It’s not they’ve been ignoring this problem, they just have no need to be part of the solution. Either they can use the coaches they have now on RRB or they can’t. If they can’t they don’t do RRB and that’s the end of the matter. There isn’t a coach company out there that waits for RRB work to come in, they’ll manage happily without it. Anyone who thinks they’ll suddenly buy a fleet of new coaches is wrong.

The rail industry will have to solve this, and there are only three possible solutions
1) Convince government that all RRBs don’t need to have wheelchair access.
2) Recast timetables so that there are less trains and long periods when no trains at all, to allow maintainence to be carried out without altering the timetable.
3) Offering no replacement to passengers when trains cancelled. Adopting a hardball ‘tough’ approach.
Options 2 & 3 won’t go down well with the public, and will more than likely force to government into doing option 1. The common sense option all along.

The answer is that no-one knows for sure. There are people stating things as fact here that are actually their own interpretation rather than fact.

As a rail replacement practitioner for over 15 years in all capacities, I’ve never seen a definitive statement of law about which rules apply where.

I’ve always adopted the pragmatic view that a timetabled service less than 50km in length can be worked under domestic hours and I think that’s the generally common approach.

My view is that anything longer than 50kms must be worked under EU hours.

I have encountered every possible interpretation of emergency work at various times in various places - some day domestic is okay, others that it must be EU, others that no rules apply. The only one I’m really comfortable with is the middle one, but could I honestly say I’ve never worked an emergency turn under domestic hours? No, I couldn’t

Of course, even if a duty can be worked under domestic hours, coach operators will usually choose to work it under EU hours anyway, because all the rest of their work is EU so it makes the record keeping too complex if they do occasional domestic work. Some operators are more comfortable mixing than others.

I have often found myself in a situation as a supervisor where duties have been prepared under domestic hours, and the buses and bus drivers are ploughing up and down quite happily, but the coaches and coach drivers are needing extra breaks because they’re under instruction to work to EU hours regardless of what the duty says (and that’s one sure fire way to get the bus drivers’ backs up!)

Despite the statements of certainty further up this thread, unless there is a definitive source that has eluded me for the last fifteen years, this will continue to be a matter of interpretation until either the authorities issue a definitive ruling (as they did with PSVAR in the autumn) or until an issue arises that leads to it being tested in the courts - and I doubt any bus or train operator has the stomach for that fight.

Stagecoach ran a Blackburn to MCV rail replacement about a year ago and that was all under domestic rules. Metrolink and Merseyrails (both emergency and planned) rail replacements are all done under domestic rules. Stagecoach and Arriva are very big companies so there must be a very grey area or the rules are that under 50km is domestic hours.
 

jumble

Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,098
Pretty hard unless a national company is set up to do this. Most TOCs use an company that are trying to source taxis (albeit in bulk) from firms that are also keen to provide taxis as normal to locals.

When there's major disruption, it's quite likely many firms will not give up all their taxis. I don't know how they're paid (per mile, at an agreed rate or whatever) but it seems taxi firms will prefer to give taxis to passengers who book direct, than the likes of CMAC.

You then have drivers who also work for Uber, and where surge pricing kicks in very quickly once there's a sniff of delays. I don't know how much more they make, but I assume they earn more if it is percentage based.

If there's a shortage of accessible coaches, it will see a marked reduction of coaches in use. It might be why there was only an hourly bus service this weekend just gone during the ECML blockade, instead of two buses per hour. A marked reduction in capacity to comply.

Perhaps the only compromise can be that if a non-compliant bus is operating, it must be accompanied by an accessible bus at the same time. Thus you can double capacity at any given time, and not leave someone without a form of transport. This then needs proper co-ordination to ensure passengers are divided up as necessary.

I still don't understand how this helps if the only accessible spaces are already occupied by other wheelchair users.
Common sense dictates that one cannot prevent the situation where someone is left without a form of transport
The only question is how often it occurs.
This situation is a mighty mess and I am guessing that unfortunately derogation will carry on being offered for the foreseeable future as I note that no one on this thread has any answers as how any real world alternative may be reached
 

HH

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Messages
4,505
Location
Essex
If that's what you're now saying then it appears that the ORR is totally ignoring all the RR work carried out in London (and many other cities). Totally useless data.
No. that's what I said all along. You just misinterpreted it.

What RR work carried out in London? TOCs don't even supply RR buses in London.
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,346
No. that's what I said all along. You just misinterpreted it.

What RR work carried out in London? TOCs don't even supply RR buses in London.

We’ve definitely had possessions on GW patch where there’s been what Id term “service buses” running in lieu of stopping services out to Slough. Last time it happened it was predominantly Abellio vehicles from their Hayes (WS) base.

They were procured through the ordinary RRS procurement process for GW (through First Travel Solutions).
 

Temple Meads

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2010
Messages
2,230
Location
Devon
. But a friend who owns a coach company is on standby today and thus has no running board or planned timetable so would be EU.

There has been a recent period of RRS where buses from a major operator not fitted with tachos have been on standby duties.

Driving hours rules for RRS is another minefield, where no consensus ever seems to be reached!

Back on topic, the PSVAR exemption for rail replacement services has been extended to 30th April of this year.
 

kevjs

Member
Joined
4 Sep 2013
Messages
401
I still don't understand how this helps if the only accessible spaces are already occupied by other wheelchair users.

You ensure that there are the same or more accessible spaces on the coaches than there were on the trains they are substituting, should there were suddenly 15 wheelchair users turning up for a train with 4 spaces on it some of those would be left stranded under regular circumstances wouldn't they? If 15 turned up and there were 6 spaces on the coaches (for instance) fewer customers would be left stranded. If there were to be more wheelchair users than could be accommodated on the trains what happens today? If alternative arrangements are made then do that with the RR services. If nothing then do the same, or actually try and find an alternative arrangement for those customers.

The upper deck of a double decker bus doesn't make the bus non-compliant because not all customers can access of the upper deck, so why should a train replaced by 5 coaches (for example) have three of the coaches replacing it ruled non-compliant because not all customers can access them? As long as customers which require those accessible spaces are given priority on the vehicles with those available the end result is all customers get moved from A to B.
 

HH

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Messages
4,505
Location
Essex
Back on topic, the PSVAR exemption for rail replacement services has been extended to 30th April of this year.
Yes, this happened yesterday. Typical DfT behaviour - kick it down the road 3 months, by which time nothing much will have changed. I wonder how many further derogation extensions we will see?
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,530
What RR work carried out in London? TOCs don't even supply RR buses in London.

Most TOCs supply RR buses in London unless there is a very close parallel route or the engineering can be covered by two-track railway.
 

Temple Meads

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2010
Messages
2,230
Location
Devon
Yes, this happened yesterday. Typical DfT behaviour - kick it down the road 3 months, by which time nothing much will have changed. I wonder how many further derogation extensions we will see?

Indeed, I certainly wouldn't be surprised to see a 6 or 12 month extension next time. I'm not sure what else the DfT can realistically do though - ruling that PSVAR should not apply to rail replacement due to the lack of accessible vehicles is unlikely to go down well with the campaigners, but the alternative of refusing another extension will mean that either engineering work has to be postponed, or passengers just go without alternative transport in some areas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top