Richard George: Rest-day working has always existed on the railway. It has always been there.
Q68 Jack Brereton: It is more the scale of it.
Richard George: It is the reliance on running the core timetable that becomes a problem. That is the problem.
Huw Merriman: Perhaps I could add this, if it helps. It concerns me. I have commissioned some work in the Department. To take one of Mr Smith’s Chiltern lines, when there is action short of a strike, one of those lines just does not work—Princes Risborough. Therefore, you have lost fare revenue. Obviously, you have inconvenienced the passengers and lost fare revenue. You have the cost of the bus replacement service. I want to see how this is all actually computed.
While there has been an assumption that rest-day working is better because there is bandwidth, it is good for the workforce because they can work overtime and it is good for the train operators because they do not have to recruit as much, I don’t believe that all of the costs have been taken into account, so I have asked what the benefits are financially in having rest-day working, and what the costs are. There are also other provisions. For example, with certain operators, if somebody is off sick, they cannot be covered unless there is rest-day working. If there is no rest-day working agreement, it means they cannot be covered, so you have lost revenue there. I want to see all of that calculated so that I can discuss with Treasury officials whether there is more of a case for employing more drivers. Then you can run operations at all times. A driver is contracted to work 35 hours in a four-day week and is paid an average of £60,000. If the feeling is that the drivers do not want to do beyond that, it is my responsibility as Rail Minister to ensure that we have resilience and enough drivers so that we can work to that model. At the moment, I do not feel we do.