Could we see a "Head Out to Help Out" scheme?

[Class195]

It's been mentioned on BBC News 24 this morning that the government could follow their successful ”Eat Out To Help Out” scheme with a travel-based one under the ”Head Out To Help Out” branding.

Nothing officially confirmed but 50% off off peak train fares was discussed.

I hope this happens because the capacity of some train services I've been on in the past week have still been around 30% of what they normally would be.

‘Head Out to Help Out’ campaign is needed

www.passengertransport.co.uk

Transport Focus is calling for:

cut price deals to entice passengers back to rail travel following the impact of coronavirus, starting with the launch of a ‘Head Out to Help Out’ scheme....

 

[satisnek]

Well I for one won't be partaking so long as this face covering law persists.

 

[JonathanH]

Nothing officially confirmed but 50% off off peak train fares was discussed.

I'm wary of whether this directs people towards the right spare capacity on the railway. The current issues are not about the cost of travel.

There is a danger here that all this does is reduce the revenue from people who are travelling without replacing it with more people making journeys.

 

[DarloRich]

Well I for one won't be partaking so long as this face covering law persists.

Why? It is hardly a massive imposition. I have done several long distance journeys for work recently and it has been no trouble

That is the world we live in right now.

 

[bramling]

It's been mentioned on BBC News 24 this morning that the government could follow their successful ”Eat Out To Help Out” scheme with a travel-based one under the ”Head Out To Help Out” branding.

Nothing officially confirmed but 50% off off peak train fares was discussed.

I hope this happens because the capacity of some train services I've been on in the past week have still been around 30% of what they normally would be.

What needs to happen is not all these silly schemes, but a concerted effort to get things back to as close to normal as possible.

Packing restaurants out on three days of the week is simply a silly rearranging of deckchairs rather than a serious attempt to offset some of the mess created over the last six months.

 

[yorksrob]

It's been mentioned on BBC News 24 this morning that the government could follow their successful ”Eat Out To Help Out” scheme with a travel-based one under the ”Head Out To Help Out” branding.

Nothing officially confirmed but 50% off off peak train fares was discussed.

I hope this happens because the capacity of some train services I've been on in the past week have still been around 30% of what they normally would be.

Well, that would certainly be a good thing, both personally and nationally.

Incidentally from what I've seen over the past couple of weeks, the regional railway seems to be reasonably busy. Doubtless it would still be first for the chop in the event of any cutbacks !

 

[Ken_Ilworth]

I would welcome such a scheme and I feel it would go someway to making up for my months of "wasted" railcards - without having to buy a new railcard.

 

[David Goddard]

Its a passenger focus idea:

‘Head Out to Help Out’ campaign is needed

www.passengertransport.co.uk

As with all of the schemes, we will, unfortunately, pay for it ourselves eventually somehow.

 

[yorksrob]

Its a passenger focus idea:

‘Head Out to Help Out’ campaign is needed

www.passengertransport.co.uk

As with all of the schemes, we will, unfortunately, pay for it ourselves eventually somehow.

As with other sections of the economy, we'll pay in terms of unemployment benefits, social unrest etc anyway if numbers aren't boosted.

 

[JonathanH]

Anecdotally off peak travel isnt the problem. Peak hours is.

The issue there is many have been able to work from home and have found it to he of benfit. There is no desire to get back to the old ways despite what our Tory overlords might want. They are already trying to suggest home working is cowardly and lazy.

Even if people haven't found home working to be of benefit, many offices simply aren't open. I personally have had no indication at all of a timescale for my office opening (not that I need to use a train to get there, it being ten minutes walk away).

One thing I'd consider is "all week Saturdays", i.e. remove all off-peak restrictions across the network for a period of time, and reprice Advances down accordingly. (Super Off Peaks could remain where they would be restricted on Saturdays).

This perhaps makes some sense but as with any scheme you can find a pitfall. What are you going to do about those people who are travelling at the moment to their workplace who have paid for a season ticket to travel at peak times and suddenly find the base fares are cheaper. Would they get a refund? Who is going to pay for that?

 

[Bletchleyite]

This perhaps makes some sense but as with any scheme you can find a pitfall. What are you going to do about those people who are travelling at the moment to their workplace who have paid for a season ticket to travel at peak times and suddenly find the base fares are cheaper. Would they get a refund? Who is going to pay for that?

Monthly and longer season tickets are mostly cheaper or a similar price to an Off Peak (Day) Return for the same journey 5 days a week (and do carry a bit of added flexibility as well as reduced hassle). But if they aren't, just refund the season ticket by the usual method and purchase daily tickets as every season ticket holder is entitled to do. Weeklies are typically more expensive but as long as it's announced a week before it applies it's not like anybody is going to have one!

I would figure that there are relatively few active season tickets at present.

 

[E16 Cyclist]

Is the notion of social distancing on trains dead now? There is something slightly amusing having trains with signs on saying don’t sit here only for people to then sit on them (off peak of course)

On a more serious side, as previously said it’s peak services where usage has fallen off a cliff so maybe tocs now need to have more dynamic peak periods and have the rest off peak, there’s no point charging peak fares for a dozen people at 8am

 

[DB]

Have they even considered how many people aren't travelling because they consider trains 'unsafe', and how many simply won't because of the masks rule?

If the main reduction is people not travelling for work, it's not clear how reduced prices will make much difference.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is the notion of social distancing on trains dead now? There is something slightly amusing having trains with signs on saying don’t sit here only for people to then sit on them (off peak of course)

Compulsory reservations are a solution to that, as is using Advances to smooth demand across trains.

 

[yorkie]

I'm wary of whether this directs people towards the right spare capacity on the railway. The current issues are not about the cost of travel.

There is a danger here that all this does is reduce the revenue from people who are travelling without replacing it with more people making journeys.

I did of course did expect you to be against this, which makes me think even more that this would be a positive thing to have!

As is the case with almost anything related to leisure and tourism, we will have to agree to disagree.

Is the notion of social distancing on trains dead now?...

The whole point of masks is where social distancing isn't possible:
https://www.who.int/emergencies/dis...wers-hub/q-a-detail/q-a-on-covid-19-and-masks

for areas of widespread transmission, with limited capacity for implementing control measures and especially in settings where physical distancing of at least 1 metre is not possible – such as on public transport, in shops or in other confined or crowded environments – WHO advises governments to encourage the general public to use non-medical fabric masks.

... therefore the only logical conclusion is that social distancing is not required on trains. That said, on quieter trains, people should practise social distancing where possible.

Have they even considered how many people aren't travelling because they consider trains 'unsafe', and how many simply won't because of the masks rule?

This is certainly a deterrent to travel, but I'd argue that it's not a big deal for short distance journeys; any further debate about this really needs to take place in the relevant thread: UK face coverings discussion

If the main reduction is people not travelling for work, it's not clear how reduced prices will make much difference.

I believe this is mostly down to employers preferences (See https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/remote-working-preferences-in-the-longer-term.203448/ ) but I think it's best discussed elsewhere as it's beyond the scope of this scheme.

Compulsory reservations are a solution to that, as is using Advances to smooth demand across trains.

There are several threads that cover these areas such as:

• Can public transport ever recover from COVID-19
• Cut fares (Transport Focus) and open station facilities (my plea)
• COVID19 and compulsory reservations

I think "Head out to Help out" is well worthy of consideration and a thread in its own right; I am keen for all the other matters - which are already under discussion elsewhere - don't end up taking place in this thread, causing unnecessary duplication, and the matter of discussion to be diluted, if at all possible.

 

[BJames]

I like this idea and if it was implemented I would be making extensive use of the scheme. I can imagine though a lot of criticism around crowding etc being attracted.

Compulsory reservations are a solution to that, as is using Advances to smooth demand across trains.

And although I'm usually against this I suspect this is how criticism around crowding would be managed under this potential scheme, with compulsory reservations used on more long distance journeys in order to encourage people that travel is Safe.

 

[DB]

And although I'm usually against this I suspect this is how criticism around crowding would be managed under this potential scheme, with compulsory reservations used on more long distance journeys in order to encourage people that travel is Safe.

But that could equally drive people away - especially those travelling for work,and even more so those who don't know exactly when they will be returning.

 

[squizzler]

I hope this happens because the capacity of some train services I've been on in the past week have still been around 30% of what they normally would be.

Pedant alert! - I presume you didn't mean to say the trains are all short formed of a third their usual length, rather that they have a third their former patronage.

I would rather they implement any such promotion as part of the long discussed fares reform, and reduce the yield for a period after the transition. This reduced yield would be sold to the public as a promotion to encourage travel, but would really be a means to train the yield management system's computer brain. After this spell of setting the fares at a low set rate per mile the AI can start to jack them up till it reaches optimal levels, once it has a handle on where the demand lies.

 

[fgwrich]

Well I for one won't be partaking so long as this face covering law persists.

I don't have a problem with it, Having done Winchester - London - Edinburgh - Stirling last month. You can take it off to eat or drink, and just stick your earphones in and read a book for the rest of the journey. Just find a face covering that is more comfortable.

 

[DB]

I don't have a problem with it, Having done Winchester - London - Edinburgh - Stirling last month. You can take it off to eat or drink, and just stick your earphones in and read a book for the rest of the journey. Just find a face covering that is more comfortable.

Fair enough - but please accept that some of us do have a problem with it and will not use trains while this rule remains in force.

 

[yorksrob]

Pedant alert! - I presume you didn't mean to say the trains are all short formed of a third their usual length, rather that they have a third their former patronage.

I would rather they implement any such promotion as part of the long discussed fares reform, and reduce the yield for a period after the transition. This reduced yield would be sold to the public as a promotion to encourage travel, but would really be a means to train the yield management system's computer brain. After this spell of setting the fares at a low set rate per mile the AI can start to jack them up till it reaches optimal levels, once it has a handle on where the demand lies.

Ooh, that sounds fiendish !

But really, I think that with the current (pre Covid) AP regime, we've seen the limit to which yield management can provide a benefit to all without becoming a pain in the arse that prospective passengers see as trying to catch them out.

What we need is reform that makes the railway seem consistently competitive to other modes.

 

[yorkie]

Fair enough - but please accept that some of us do have a problem with it and will not use trains while this rule remains in force.

This is true, but some (perhaps many) of those who have not yet returned would return if this scheme is adopted.

I agree not all would return, but that isn't necessary for the scheme to be considered a success.

....I would rather they implement any such promotion as part of the long discussed fares reform....

Feel free to use any of the existing threads to discuss this further, or create a new one, if appropriate.

 

[DB]

This is true, but some (perhaps many) of those who have not yet returned would return if this scheme is adopted.

But would then? Has there been any sort of study into why people aren't using trains? Some of the reasons - not wanting to wear masks, not needing to travel for work, regarding trains as 'unsafe' - are probably not going to be affected by financial incentives.

 

[yorkie]

But would then? Has there been any sort of study into why people aren't using trains? Some of the reasons - not wanting to wear masks, not needing to travel for work, regarding trains as 'unsafe' - are probably not going to be affected by financial incentives.

People made similar arguments against "Eat out to Help out" and look how popular that was!

You are right that some people will still claim rail is "unsafe", some will be insistent on not wearing masks, but I think there is a huge number of people at neither end of these extremes who will return to rail if incentives are offered.

 

[yorksrob]

But would then? Has there been any sort of study into why people aren't using trains? Some of the reasons - not wanting to wear masks, not needing to travel for work, regarding trains as 'unsafe' - are probably not going to be affected by financial incentives.

At the same time, there are probably people who've been put off using the train for donkeys years by high fares who don't see rail travel as a particular COVID risk. If you need passengers, you're better off getting them from one group of people than neither.

 

[DB]

People made similar arguments against "Eat out to Help out" and look how popular that was!

You are right that some people will still claim rail is "unsafe", some will be insistent on not wearing masks, but I think there is a huge number of people at neither end of these extremes who will return to rail if incentives are offered.

Not the same thing though, is it? And with the food bribe it doesn't appear to have been universally popular with providers - a number have dropped out of the scheme, and in some cases it seems to have moved demand from the weekend to earlier in the week, limiting the actual gain.

If one of the main reductions is due to people not commuting, which it does sound that it is, then this won't make much difference.

 

[yorksrob]

Not the same thing though, is it?

If one of the main reductions is due to people not commuting, which it does sound that it is, then this won't make much difference.

If rail becomes less competitive in the commuter market, it may be comparatively more competitive in the leisure market, in which case why not play to that strength.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fair enough - but please accept that some of us do have a problem with it and will not use trains while this rule remains in force.

Does it cause you "extreme distress" rather than mild discomfort? It sounds like it probably does, because if it only caused you mild discomfort you'd put up with it. So in that case don't wear one.

 

[DB]

Does it cause you "extreme distress" rather than mild discomfort? It sounds like it probably does, because if it only caused you mild discomfort you'd put up with it. So in that case don't wear one.

Yeah, and potentially have confrontations with various jobsworths and self-appointed vigilates! Not something I'll do unless I really have to, especially as likely journeys involve changing at Leeds which is reported to be bad for this.

 

[Darandio]

Does it cause you "extreme distress" rather than mild discomfort? It sounds like it probably does, because if it only caused you mild discomfort you'd put up with it. So in that case don't wear one.

Ahh, but then they would leave themselves open to the abuse and vigilantism that we occasionally read about anecdotally, but that the overwhelming majority of us have never seen.

Seems you got a reply just as I posted, bingo! Reliable as ever.