Could the Caledonian Sleeper go back into the hands of Scotrail?

[Samsanbor]

mods note - split from this thread

Sorry if this is a bit out of topic just now but I wonder what will happen to the service that is now controlled by the Scottish Government? What are the possibilities to see the service going back to Scotrail?

 

[zwk500]

Sorry if this is a bit out of topic just now but I wonder what will happen to the service that is now controlled by the Scottish Government? What are the possibilities to see the service going back to Scotrail?

A merger was very definitely on the cards not long ago, not sure what's happened with that.

 

[Falcon1200]

Sorry if this is a bit out of topic just now but I wonder what will happen to the service that is now controlled by the Scottish Government? What are the possibilities to see the service going back to Scotrail?

AFAIK there are no plans for re-integration and the sleepers will remain a separate operation, for now anyway. Having said that, separating the sleepers from Scotrail in the first place was IMHO a ludicrous decision!

 

[Russel]

AFAIK there are no plans for re-integration and the sleepers will remain a separate operation, for now anyway. Having said that, separating the sleepers from Scotrail in the first place was IMHO a ludicrous decision!

What was the reasoning behind seperating the two?

 

[Speed43125]

What was the reasoning behind seperating the two?

I believe originally it was thought a dedicated franchise could focus better on the niche and transition to a 'hotel on wheels' more premium service that was thought to generate more high value tourism.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A merger was very definitely on the cards not long ago, not sure what's happened with that.

Even if it does stay technically separate, it would make sense to merge things like crewing for economies of scale, and probably the call centre, HR department etc too.

 

[zwk500]

Even if it does stay technically separate, it would make sense to merge things like crewing for economies of scale, and probably the call centre, HR department etc too.

You might save on one or two manager but the Crewing and Call centre would be unlikely to merge given the shift pattern of the former and the specialist knowledge of the latter. HR department could present a bit of a saving though if the additional workload for such a small amount of people could be absorbed without needing to take on every former HR and Accounts person.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You might save on one or two manager but the Crewing and Call centre would be unlikely to merge given the shift pattern of the former and the specialist knowledge of the latter. HR department could present a bit of a saving though if the additional workload for such a small amount of people could be absorbed without needing to take on every former HR and Accounts person.

The internal Scottish portions of the Highlander used to be guarded by ScotRail guards, FWIW. And driven by ScotRail drivers if I recall (not 100% sure on that bit).

 

[zwk500]

The internal Scottish portions of the Highlander used to be guarded by ScotRail guards, FWIW. And driven by ScotRail drivers if I recall (not 100% sure on that bit).

Oh I'm sure there would be some crossovers and what not, but my point is that there's not many trains and they don't run when much else is so you would still have staff that were in effect dedicated to the Sleeper. I guess you'd save on spare cover or something but not much else, especially if the dedicated branding is maintained.

 

[AlterEgo]

I believe originally it was thought a dedicated franchise could focus better on the niche and transition to a 'hotel on wheels' more premium service that was thought to generate more high value tourism.

This was, I think, the right decision - it's just they selected a completely incompetent operator in Serco, the company that does everything and nothing all at once.

 

[Samsanbor]

Drivers are currently GBRF which provides the traction but I wonder how do the CS provide for the training of the guards. I know for sure they have an in-house training for certain roles like shunters for example, but it was different in a not long past when they would have trained by ScotRail still under the Serco franchise. Does anyone know what do they do to prepare in terms of training the Train Managers?

 

[Bletchleyite]

This was, I think, the right decision - it's just they selected a completely incompetent operator in Serco, the company that does everything and nothing all at once.

Culturally a bulk outsourcer was a very odd choice.

Something like a consortium of a TOC and a premium hospitality provider (the likes of Hilton, perhaps) would have been good. Perhaps the approach should have been like these traditionally were in Europe - ScotRail runs the train, providing driver, guard and seated coaches plus the other physical vehicles, and a hospitality provider deals with the hospitality offering in the beds and the restaurant car, in the manner that used to be the case with Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits or Mitropa.

 

[zwk500]

Culturally a bulk outsourcer was a very odd choice.

Something like a consortium of a TOC and a premium hospitality provider (the likes of Hilton, perhaps) would have been good. Perhaps the approach should have been like these traditionally were in Europe - ScotRail runs the train, providing driver, guard and seated coaches plus the other physical vehicles, and a hospitality provider deals with the hospitality offering in the beds and the restaurant car, in the manner that used to be the case with Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits or Mitropa.

It makes perfect sense if the only consideration was headline cost of the bid.

 

[pdeaves]

Something like a consortium of a TOC and a premium hospitality provider

Yes, but only if they get together and put in a bid. I suspect that never happened.

 

[JamesT]

Culturally a bulk outsourcer was a very odd choice.

Something like a consortium of a TOC and a premium hospitality provider (the likes of Hilton, perhaps) would have been good. Perhaps the approach should have been like these traditionally were in Europe - ScotRail runs the train, providing driver, guard and seated coaches plus the other physical vehicles, and a hospitality provider deals with the hospitality offering in the beds and the restaurant car, in the manner that used to be the case with Compagnie Internationale des Wagons-Lits or Mitropa.

At the time Serco were involved in running quite a few rail services in various countries. I'm not sure that they were obviously less suited than First or Arriva.

They're also quite heavily involved in the hospitality business. Just it's rooms with bars over the windows that you get locked in for the night!

 

[Russel]

You might save on one or two manager but the Crewing and Call centre would be unlikely to merge given the shift pattern of the former and the specialist knowledge of the latter. HR department could present a bit of a saving though if the additional workload for such a small amount of people could be absorbed without needing to take on every former HR and Accounts person.

Given the rather large subsidy the sleeper receives, to me, any saving, no matter how small is worth looking into...

 

[zwk500]

Given the rather large subsidy the sleeper receives, to me, any saving, no matter how small is worth looking into...

If you go down that route there's only really one logical answer though....

I personally think it should be merged in for a variety or reasons, some organisation, some operational and some financial, but really the savings would be like having a haircut to lose weight.

 

[jagardner1984]

I’d imagine given the Scottish governments other political “challenges” just now - it’s a question as to how much they can be bothered with “Nationalised Rail service issues threats of redundancy” headlines and the inevitable Union fallout - for a relatively small amount of saving.

Probably as steady as she goes, with a bit of nationalisation thrown in, is the red meat to keep some of the rail unions happy for a while longer.

 

[Sm5]

If you go down that route there's only really one logical answer though....

I personally think it should be merged in for a variety or reasons, some organisation, some operational and some financial, but really the savings would be like having a haircut to lose weight.

can you imagine the political riot that would cause, on both sides of the border.

It is the kind of thing I could have imagined Boris lobbing over the border though.

 

[zwk500]

can you imagine the political riot that would cause, on both sides of the border.

It is the kind of thing I could have imagined Boris lobbing over the border though.

Cancelling it? Very few people even know it runs. 'We've pulled a train that required £1 subsidy for every £1 in tickets it made' would not be a contentious electoral line.

 

[jagardner1984]

Is it not more the signalling of such a move ?

We spent X gazillion on rolling stock 5 years ago with a 30 year life.

We spent Y gazillion trying to make it work.

We have the most stringent climate goals of the UK nations and are the only part of the UK where the Greens are in government.

But hey, let’s park up some new electric trains and let Michael O’Leary give Boeing a ring.

Logically, for example, the cost of running libraries per book borrowed - you’d just give an Amazon voucher for a couple of quid each time someone wanted one. But the signalling of removing community services would be hugely damaging.

 

[zwk500]

Is it not more the signalling of such a move ?

Again, who are you signalling anything to? How many people actually know the sleeper exists? How many are aware of the fact that it has to be effectively subsidised at 100%?

 

[jagardner1984]

Again, who are you signalling anything to? How many people actually know the sleeper exists? How many are aware of the fact that it has to be effectively subsidised at 100%?

I think most of politics is signalling.

I think cold hard political reality is that the signalling of pulling it is deemed to be more damaging than the signalling of keeping it.

“SNP waste another £100 gazillion on transport disaster” etc. “Ferries Scandal on Wheels”

So they just push the prices up with a view to reducing the subsidy and hope no-one notices. Which given the bin fire of lots of other public policy, they largely don’t.

Personally I’d be sad to see it go. For whatever the subsidy argument, reducing rail options, especially in the context of much more widespread domestic air travel, and multiple issues with the day service, (not least, the operator), feels like a very backward step.

 

[Snow1964]

Now back to Scottish Government

Caledonian Sleeper goes back into public ownership

The Scottish government has taken control of the overnight rail service between Scotland and England.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[snookertam]

Is it not more the signalling of such a move ?

We spent X gazillion on rolling stock 5 years ago with a 30 year life.

We spent Y gazillion trying to make it work.

We have the most stringent climate goals of the UK nations and are the only part of the UK where the Greens are in government.

But hey, let’s park up some new electric trains and let Michael O’Leary give Boeing a ring.

Logically, for example, the cost of running libraries per book borrowed - you’d just give an Amazon voucher for a couple of quid each time someone wanted one. But the signalling of removing community services would be hugely damaging.

None of that means that the Scottish Govt wouldn’t try it though. The Greens would just go into their bunker or start talking about active travel instead of transport. It’s what they did when ScotRail services got cut and still haven’t been reinstated.

A Green Party Scottish Government minister took a private boat to one of the isles instead of using the public ferry services - Scottish government owned as well. They’re pretty shameless.

Again, who are you signalling anything to? How many people actually know the sleeper exists? How many are aware of the fact that it has to be effectively subsidised at 100%?

In fairness, a lot of people in Scotland know it exists. Especially along the lines of route the further north you go. Stopping the sleeper wouldn’t go unnoticed. No matter how cynical I am about the Scottish government, they’d need a strategy to make the issue go away and not cause huge political waves.

That it’s subsidised at 100% (if it indeed is) wouldn’t necessarily be an issue. Most ferry services and almost all internal Scottish flights are heavily subsidised as well. That in itself wouldn’t be a controversy nor would it add to demands for its withdrawal.

A lot of Scotland is quite sparsely populated, and heavily subsidised public transport is a necessity here.

 

[takno]

That it’s subsidised at 100% (if it indeed is) wouldn’t necessarily be an issue. Most ferry services and almost all internal Scottish flights are heavily subsidised as well. That in itself wouldn’t be a controversy nor would it add to demands for its withdrawal.

A lot of Scotland is quite sparsely populated, and heavily subsidised public transport is a necessity here.

The trouble is that the ferries, trains and buses are actually public transport. The sleeper is an exclusive government-subsidized hotel that only the affluent can afford to use.

 

[jagardner1984]

I think it perhaps has a wider base than you might initially think - and is, despite all the noise - fairly comparable at a price level with a budget style hotel and an off peak SVR ticket.

Before I’m shot down - absolutely not saying the sleeper offers what a premier inn offers - but beyond the tourists - who presumably they have decided are worth bringing to Scotland using some subsidy - there are people for whom £170 - £200 is not impossible for an expenses claim for travel + accommodation - and speaking personally as a freelancer - the ability to do two working days either side of travel without a mad dash to Central at 6pm or to Luton at 5am - sometimes it has made cold hard financial sense for me to take the sleeper.

Not that a service should exist for one passenger of course - but I’m just stressing there are a wide range of people for whom it may be suitable. The tax office would certainly dispute the term “affluent” when it comes to me !

 

[snookertam]

The trouble is that the ferries, trains and buses are actually public transport. The sleeper is an exclusive government-subsidized hotel that only the affluent can afford to use.

That may be so, but the view will be that the sleeper provides access to remote or rural parts of Scotland that otherwise may not be there if it was withdrawn, even if only a certain section of the population were likely to use it. It would be far from unnoticed if it was withdrawn

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't see in a million years why they'd take it over to close it. They'd end the contract and blame Serco for unaffordability if they wanted to do that.

 

[zwk500]

I can't see in a million years why they'd take it over to close it. They'd end the contract and blame Serco for unaffordability if they wanted to do that.

This. Nobody would want to be the person who is holding the parcel when the music stops.