46 grand pay cut on basic salary from 2018 to 2019 according to figures published. Still getting too much mind you.
-
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!
TPE 'Abysmal' Performance
- Thread starter BenW390Fan
- Start date
- Status
46 grand pay cut on basic salary from 2018 to 2019 according to figures published. Still getting too much mind you.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
C J Snarzell
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 1,506
Still a ridiculous salary - more than what the Prime Minister is on!
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
TPE has always seemed to lead a charmed life compared to other TOCs, particularly Northern.
SRA/DfT wanted them to pick off all the prime routes in the north, and then to be serious low-cost competition for Virgin on the northern WCML.
They got the pick of new rolling stock deals (twice, three times if you count the 350s).
They were reducing the subsidy nicely year on year.
But then came the Nova introduction fiasco and the 2018 timetable change (largely engineered for their benefit), and they haven't recovered.
First Group posted a huge provision of £106m in 2018, and more costs are in prospect.
I'm surprised it took First Group this long to make changes.
Interesting that they haven't got a new MD in the wings.
Maybe they are waiting for the Williams review fallout.
Keolis are probably glad they didn't partner with FG this time round.
SRA/DfT wanted them to pick off all the prime routes in the north, and then to be serious low-cost competition for Virgin on the northern WCML.
They got the pick of new rolling stock deals (twice, three times if you count the 350s).
They were reducing the subsidy nicely year on year.
But then came the Nova introduction fiasco and the 2018 timetable change (largely engineered for their benefit), and they haven't recovered.
First Group posted a huge provision of £106m in 2018, and more costs are in prospect.
I'm surprised it took First Group this long to make changes.
Interesting that they haven't got a new MD in the wings.
Maybe they are waiting for the Williams review fallout.
Keolis are probably glad they didn't partner with FG this time round.
Spartacus
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 2,928
In fairness they've been done over a few times too, given the Manchester - Scotland services while the stock which worked it moved away, forcing them to use their existing fleet, short forming services existing for years (despite publicly 'boosting capacity' the 350s were only ordered to remedy this loss of 22xs, delivered 6 years after the problem had arisen), and promises of extended 185s and new 172s repeatedly broken, not to mention the ongoing questions over electrification.
I'd argue the Dec 2018 timetable wasn't for TPE's benefit either, it was merely to satisfy some mandarin's whim for 6tph (which goes back to well before the May 2014 timetable change, it was requested when that was first mooted), without any consideration for TOCs, FOCs, passengers or infrastructure.
I'd argue the Dec 2018 timetable wasn't for TPE's benefit either, it was merely to satisfy some mandarin's whim for 6tph (which goes back to well before the May 2014 timetable change, it was requested when that was first mooted), without any consideration for TOCs, FOCs, passengers or infrastructure.
47271
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 2,983
They're not happy in Lockerbie. And who can blame them.
And to make matters worse, the group's earlier attempt to meet someone from Transpennine had to be postponed because their train was cancelled...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-51767756
And to make matters worse, the group's earlier attempt to meet someone from Transpennine had to be postponed because their train was cancelled...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-51767756
The groups earlier attempt was postponed because the wiring went down on the WCML...
47271
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 2,983
Maybe so, but the population of Dumfriesshire won't be interested in which part of the railway failed to deliver.
It's most unlikely that they'd cancel due to staff shortages when a manager was on board to meet an angry user group. That would be too funny.
Of course sometimes infrastructure is why TPE's trains don't turn up. But when you add infrastructure to all the self inflicted reasons why they don't turn up then you can see why the station's users are at the end of their tether. And why it's worth a rolling of the eyes at the postponement of the meeting.
Millisle
Member
One of the treats special to Lockerbie as we wait for bus or taxi for TPE cancellations is the opportunity to see Avanti whizzing by at speed.
47271
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 2,983
Cheer up, arguably it used to be worse. In BR days the Euston trains often whizzed by because they forgot to stop. Now they don't stop in line with the timetable.
Killingworth
Established Member
Here on the South Pennine route between Manchester and Sheffield we have to endure the failings of both TPE and Northern. And we catch 25% of all the delays on trains operated by the entire East Midlands franchise as well!
Apparently we are the best TPE line. Not much consolation if you want to rely on these trains. (I was booked on a Northern service this morning that finally arrived 55 minutes late, apparently after skipping many stops. I went for the bus.)
The whole railway system is so interlocked that it's often hard to sort out where the blame lies. Network Rail, FOCs, TOCs, the public, the weather, illness, it's all the same when you want to be somehere and you can't rely on getting there.
Here are the stats for the last 4 weeks (from Recent Train Times), only one train averaging less than 5 minutes late (at 4 minutes). If you had access to another means of making that journey you'd think hard before not using it. Rail won't improve ridership without improving reliability. On this corridor the potential is great. At least the train capacity issue is almost resolved.
Apparently we are the best TPE line. Not much consolation if you want to rely on these trains. (I was booked on a Northern service this morning that finally arrived 55 minutes late, apparently after skipping many stops. I went for the bus.)
The whole railway system is so interlocked that it's often hard to sort out where the blame lies. Network Rail, FOCs, TOCs, the public, the weather, illness, it's all the same when you want to be somehere and you can't rely on getting there.
Here are the stats for the last 4 weeks (from Recent Train Times), only one train averaging less than 5 minutes late (at 4 minutes). If you had access to another means of making that journey you'd think hard before not using it. Rail won't improve ridership without improving reliability. On this corridor the potential is great. At least the train capacity issue is almost resolved.
Millisle
Member
I lived here then too, but BR stopped the next train.
They should be interested in what part of the railway failed to deliver. That's why I have a fair bit of sympathy for Northern, along with other TOC's, who've been dealt a bad hand. Shame that journalists who should be digging into that are instead are putting the blame at the wrong hands - the same goes for stakeholders too but that's usually to detract from their own failings. That's not to say that TPE aren't culpable for the past 4 months of poor performance, which has been embarrassing at times (and quite a bit self-inflicted).
Nicholas Lewis
Established Member
Rail Partnership North have a committee meeting next week and the Jan/Feb performance report is here
The performance figures are poor as expected although the significant deterioration in Feb is due to weather. Nevertheless it states that TPE were still cancelling 28 trains a day in Feb from there own issues although whether this includes preplanned cancellations isnt made clear.
First TPE have made a hash of getting the new stock in and its surprising First Group didnt bring in staff from GWR who made a good job of getting the IEPs into use along with 387's, the Castle conversions and the move of turbos down West have all gone pretty well.
The MD leaving and pursuing other opportunities is code for your no longer required here is your contractual entitlement to having your employment terminated which are always written into exec contracts.
The performance figures are poor as expected although the significant deterioration in Feb is due to weather. Nevertheless it states that TPE were still cancelling 28 trains a day in Feb from there own issues although whether this includes preplanned cancellations isnt made clear.
First TPE have made a hash of getting the new stock in and its surprising First Group didnt bring in staff from GWR who made a good job of getting the IEPs into use along with 387's, the Castle conversions and the move of turbos down West have all gone pretty well.
The MD leaving and pursuing other opportunities is code for your no longer required here is your contractual entitlement to having your employment terminated which are always written into exec contracts.
Clarence Yard
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 2,494
GWR people were bricking it as no-one wanted that poison chalice. In any event the challenges on GWR are still there and taking key staff out of GWR wouldn’t be a great move.
Similarly the FG HQ staff that also played a part in the GWR cascade plans were very wary of getting involved. Some have had to since December but the former MD was the driving force behind the bid strategy and it’s implementation and doing something different wasn’t encouraged.
Similarly the FG HQ staff that also played a part in the GWR cascade plans were very wary of getting involved. Some have had to since December but the former MD was the driving force behind the bid strategy and it’s implementation and doing something different wasn’t encouraged.
Oxfordblues
Member
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 664
I love it when the managers of failing organisations blame the weather, Brexit, their suppliers, outside agencies, the government, trades unions - everyone but themselves. They never say "It's our fault. We're totally incompetent."
One of the Labour candidates who lost his "safe" Northern seat in December was asked whom he blamed for his failure. His reply: "The voters"!
One of the Labour candidates who lost his "safe" Northern seat in December was asked whom he blamed for his failure. His reply: "The voters"!
Take it from me - GWR and TPE have very little in common with regards to new fleet introduction and refurbishment. GWR are a much larger organisation and delivered their introduction over a much longer period.
GWR experienced (and continue to experience) many challenges with their new stock. I’ve heard all kind of things about stock running around with polythene taped to the floor covering damaged carpet, toilets locked OOU and hazard tape securing panels as well as covering holes in cabs floors. I’m yet to ride on an IET with working PIS and Seat Reservations.
Not only are GWR a different type and size of operator, the IET is virtually like-for-like in terms of capacity when replacing a HST. TPE’s capacity deficit has been a priority for this rolling stock to solve, not to mention the fact that they are introducing three different fleets.
I’ve known people from GWR charge into TPE to “fix things” and then realise that they’re out of their depth. The introduction of this stock has been subject to numerous delay outside of TPE’s control. In hindsight, I could criticise some of the business decisions as there have been a number of examples of where an even slower introduction would have meant more stability, but it’s always a balancing act. I’m not the person who has to explain where the new fleets are to the client, or to FG when the projected revenue isn’t flowing in. Mr Goodwin has tried to keep all these plates spinning and we’ll never know if the decisions he made were the right ones or whether an alternative path could have been taken. At this point in time, all the hard work has been done so whoever the successor is, they can sweep in and take the credit when TPE gets back to being a +90% PPM operator with the youngest train fleet in the country.
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
There were a few TPE staff members who did attend training courses run by GWR and were passed out on GWR 802s which enabled them to then start training TPE crews on the type. TPE and HT 802 fleets are essentially follow on production runs of the GWR batch and virtually identical
It’s blatantly obvious that CAF not delivering a good enough product on time has left TPE (and Northern) in a pickle.
47271
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2015
- Messages
- 2,983
Their dodgy late output hasn't been too good for Caledonian Sleeper either.
NoMorePacers
Established Member
It really is a nice situation we have.
We have the DfT who are ideological destructive slimeballs, TPE who are hopelessly incompetent, ditto Network Rail, and new stock (built to a poor quality) that has had predictable issues.
Real good fun.
We have the DfT who are ideological destructive slimeballs, TPE who are hopelessly incompetent, ditto Network Rail, and new stock (built to a poor quality) that has had predictable issues.
Real good fun.
Yes I’m sure that’s a factor , alongside perhaps a slightly misguided belief by management that their ability to simply poach other TOCs drivers with superior T&Cs & stay well clear of any tricky & lengthy DCO disputes, would be sufficient to ensure almost everything else went smoothly.
Last edited:
superkev
Established Member
But TPe, Serco, Northern all chose CAF who I seem remember had an empty factory at the time. So like horses if you backed the wrong one it's only yourself to blame if its a loser.
K
This isn’t gambling, this is business. When I enter into a contract with a supplier, I expect that product to be delivered on time. If not there will be financial penalties for the supplier, which I suspect CAF will be burdening currently. Deflect on the TOCs all you want, for me when they enter into a contract with a supplier, the supplier must deliver.
And what should happen to suppliers who cancel almost 10% of their services due to their own causation?
NoMorePacers
Established Member
I noticed 1 6 car set out of about 5-6 Hull services I spotted on Saturday. And further to that, there were single 185s running around on Scarborough and Newcastle services.
Unless there was some issues grounding the new trains, clearly the promises are being fulfilled.
Unless there was some issues grounding the new trains, clearly the promises are being fulfilled.
Then the MD gets pushed... which has already happened.
Nicholas Lewis
Established Member
He will have been paid off handsomely on rather more generous terms than delay repay
Their PIS was showing a 15-minute threshold this evening while at the same time the PA was announcing 30 minutes! Par for the course, I'm afraid, although I did actually see one 6-car DMU leave Leeds westbound in the rush-hour, a first for me!
I’ve heard that CAF have pretty much paid out to the contractual cap of their delay penalties, so any further delays don’t really cost them much, except in lost industry confidence (which is still a big loss).
I’ve also heard that Hitachi aren’t that great at providing the trains to service on a day to day basis either, both on GWR and and TPE, although TPE’s other failings kinda hide that at the moment.
- Status