How critical is the return of passengers and busy trains for railway jobs?

[Ianno87]

I'm not at all convinced that this is true.

Transport demand is one of the most price sensitive things I can imagine in existance.
Especially when HS2 puts a huge number of people very close to major load centres (London etc).

If cheap, rapid transport is available, people will inevitably build lifestyles that use it - this has happened throughout human history.

I think a model that drives demand sky high with low fares, primarily using crowding to control passenger numbers, could work and deliver relatively low subsidies.

It's not cheapness that is key, it is *Affordability* that is key. Cheap and Afforadable are not necessarily the same thing. Once the price is at a level that people in general feel is reasonable for the journey, then there is no benefit in reducing the fare below this.

 

[HSTEd]

It's not cheapness that is key, it is *Affordability* that is key. Cheap and Afforadable are not necessarily the same thing. Once the price is at a level that people in general feel is reasonable for the journey, then there is no benefit in reducing the fare below this.

Sort of, however cutting fares below that "affordability" floor, will move said floor.

The cheaper the fare becomes, the more journeys will be made.
For example, when I had a staff travel pas, I travelled from Manchester to London to go for coffee with an old friend.

That would be utterly stupid at current fares, but if fares were a small fraction of the current level, that might become a common thing that people might do - especially when HS2 and NPR and similar slash journey times.

 

[SuperNova]

The TOC I work for has had RDW even with our services reduced to 60%, this week we are back to 95% and have all RDW volunteers used plus cross depot cover & still have jobs uncovered.

A lot of posters have a real lack of knowledge regarding how the railways are ran, tocs run under complement of staff to save money. They rely on RDW to run services as a norm, it's the way the system works.

To stop this all depots would need multiple spare traincrew every day just sitting around incase they are required. Running a railway is far more complicated than many people outside the industry realise.

I actually do know of at least three TOC's that have had drivers/conductors sat spare. Just because it's not at your depot doesn't mean it hasn't been happening.

Edit: Oh and I'm a railway worker, so I know a lot more than you think...

 

[miami]

I think a model that drives demand sky high with low fares, primarily using crowding to control passenger numbers, could work and deliver relatively low subsidies.

That may work with HS2 if they actually price it to maximise utilisation. They don't currently price the WCML to do that, hence so many half-empty trains at peak time (why sell 3 tickets at £60 when you can sell 1 at £150 and cram the two £60 tickets on later)

If you lose 1000 passengers a day that used to pay £250 return by dropping to £100 return, you need 1500 new passengers paying £100 return to make up the revenue loss.

Drop the price below that and you're reducing your off-peak revenue too. Make the price £50 return and you need to double your offpeak return customers, in addition to finding 4,000 new customers to replace your loss of revenue from peak.

You'll be looking at needed 10,000 new passengers willing to do a £50 return from Manchester to London every day just to break even - before you factor in the longer term impact of covid.

Even if new people did the trip once a month for fun, you'd need about 10% of Greater Manchester to spend £50 a month to go to London once for coffee. That sounds a little unlikely.

 

[yorksrob]

That may work with HS2 if they actually price it to maximise utilisation. They don't currently price the WCML to do that, hence so many half-empty trains at peak time (why sell 3 tickets at £60 when you can sell 1 at £150 and cram the two £60 tickets on later)

If you lose 1000 passengers a day that used to pay £250 return by dropping to £100 return, you need 1500 new passengers paying £100 return to make up the revenue loss.

Drop the price below that and you're reducing your off-peak revenue too. Make the price £50 return and you need to double your offpeak return customers, in addition to finding 4,000 new customers to replace your loss of revenue from peak.

You'll be looking at needed 10,000 new passengers willing to do a £50 return from Manchester to London every day just to break even - before you factor in the longer term impact of covid.

Even if new people did the trip once a month for fun, you'd need about 10% of Greater Manchester to spend £50 a month to go to London once for coffee. That sounds a little unlikely.

That model only really works if you're fairly certain that the £250 people will turn up.

If they've decided that they have a better way of conducting their business, you're better off using the space for people who are willing to pay something.

 

[Bald Rick]

If last summer is used an example the trains will be full to bursting this summer once the holidays seasons start.

On a handful of lines, at certain times. But get any main commuter service into London at 0800 over the summer and you’ll have plenty of space.

The TOC I work for has had RDW even with our services reduced to 60%, this week we are back to 95% and have all RDW volunteers used plus cross depot cover & still have jobs uncovered.

A lot of posters have a real lack of knowledge regarding how the railways are ran, tocs run under complement of staff to save money. They rely on RDW to run services as a norm, it's the way the system works.

To stop this all depots would need multiple spare traincrew every day just sitting around incase they are required. Running a railway is far more complicated than many people outside the industry realise.

Which TOC is this? Only Wales has had that level of service increase, and it isn’t to 95%.

 

[HSTEd]

If you lose 1000 passengers a day that used to pay £250 return

Those passengers are gone, and probably won't be back in substantial numbers.

The question is how we get best value for money (not necessarily minimum cash subsidy) from the network we have, in the face of this reality.

 

[87015]

On a handful of lines, at certain times. But get any main commuter service into London at 0800 over the summer and you’ll have plenty of space.



Which TOC is this? Only Wales has had that level of service increase, and it isn’t to 95%.

It also suggests massive productivity issues. KPI for actual passenger driving time will certainly come under the microscope.

 

[Starmill]

Having travelled on that train several times before the pandemic I'm well aware, but the issue is that that's only available from Crewe / Stafford themselves isn't it? Unless you know about splitting, and are willing to take the hassle it creates, or use a splitting site and pay a fee. Most people aren't going to be walking distance to Crewe or Stafford.

 

[Ianno87]

Those passengers are gone, and probably won't be back in substantial numbers.

Do we know that for certain at this point? We've yet to really get offices back up and running. Alot of the "popping to London for a once a week meeting and catch-ups" market (Who are the people who pay these fares) may resume doing so, and may be joined by more people who are now no longer daily commuting, preferring a once or twice a week trip instead. Heck some people will even pay those fares for the business-conducted-over-a-coffee sort of meeting.

The question is how we get best value for money (not necessarily minimum cash subsidy) from the network we have, in the face of this reality.

Totally valid question. But we need more certainty of what demand will return, and how. We're still in the very early days of the "road to recovery".

 

[paul1609]

City-to-city driving will likely become less attractive with more and more ultra-low emission zones being introduced.

As for leisure travel returning, until the mask mandate is discontinued there will be plenty who are not interested

You have to be driving a pretty old car for ULEZ charges to apply. Ive no intention of taking it to London but even my 2012 2 stroke enduro motorbike is ULEZ compliant. I think it's only Diesel Cars that are over 5 years old that are likely to be driven by the average motorist.

 

[yorksrob]

To reduce subsidies, the railway needs either
1) passengers to spend more per passegner
2) more passengers to travel

(2) is not going to happen post covid - at least some meetings will no longer be in person, at least some people will no longer commute as often as before, so how is the railway going to get more money from passengers? Already high prices for peak trains are competing with flights (at least from Manchester + Scotland) and cars. They mainly win on time for single travellers. If you have a team of 3 going to an important meeting from Manchester to London to seal the deal on selling a dohicky. You could spend £1500 on a day return for your team on the train - and hopefully you'll get a semi-private table where you can discuss stuff on the way, or you could instead drive down in a fancy car you hire for £300 return including parking, spend £400 on a hotel, and have £500 to spend on a nice preparatory meal the night before.

Actually, 2 is very much likely to happen compared to the present.

We have the immediate problem of the unprecedented subsidy caused by lockdown, and it will very much be 2 that goes towards reducing that. 1 is likely to be a bit of a non-starter, at least while people are either a bit wary of public transport, or experimenting with the alternatives. You could perhaps get some people to pay more - by making them upgrade to 1st, but this will be a drop in the ocean compared to getting people to travel.

 

[Ianno87]

You have to be driving a pretty old car for ULEZ charges to apply. Ive no intention of taking it to London but even my 2012 2 stroke enduro motorbike is ULEZ compliant. I think it's only Diesel Cars that are over 5 years old that are likely to be driven by the average motorist.

It's Diesels that will get hammered; my 64 plate VW will fall foul of the charge.

 

[43066]

Transport demand is one of the most price sensitive things I can imagine in existance.
Especially when HS2 puts a huge number of people very close to major load centres (London etc).

The commuter market, especially in London, has historically been the exact opposite to price sensitive. It has always been a captive audience simply because there’s no viable alternative to using the train.

The railway has arguably been too slow to recognise the structural shift away from the traditional peak time commuting, which Covid has merely accelerated. The challenge will be updating ticketing to better cater for this - eg season tickets based on three day weeks, with two days spent working from home.

I’d more look at some of the security-type roles which seem to have exploded over the last couple of years.

There’s certainly some low hanging fruit there. I don’t mean to wish jobs away, but I’m at a loss as to what many of the pink hi vi brigade actually do, other than staring into their mobiles.

 

[MissPWay]

There’s certainly some low hanging fruit there. I don’t mean to wish jobs away, but I’m at a loss as to what many of the pink hi vi brigade actually do, other than staring into their mobiles.

The railway also isn’t short of managers. So so many layers of management.

They’re very good at emails, and making YouTube videos about how they like to be “out and about,” in the business, and I’m sure a lot of them do important work, but still....

 

[Starmill]

Do we know that for certain at this point? We've yet to really get offices back up and running. Alot of the "popping to London for a once a week meeting and catch-ups" market (Who are the people who pay these fares) may resume doing so, and may be joined by more people who are now no longer daily commuting, preferring a once or twice a week trip instead. Heck some people will even pay those fares for the business-conducted-over-a-coffee sort of meeting.



Totally valid question. But we need more certainty of what demand will return, and how. We're still in the very early days of the "road to recovery".

I got the impression was that it was being pointed out that daily commuting (especially on longer than monthly seasons) and high-value business travel (especially on Anytime and First Anytime) will stabilise at a new equilibrium that's lower in value than previously achieved in 2019. I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that.

There are two key unknowns, one is how much extra money to replace this can come out of the leisure sector, and the other is how much lower the new equilibrium is on work related train travel. If the answers are 'not much' and 'a lot' respectively, we're in big trouble.

 

[Carlisle]

There’s certainly some low hanging fruit there. I don’t mean to wish jobs away, but I’m at a loss as to what many of the pink hi vi brigade actually do, other than staring into their mobiles.

Won’t most of those jobs simply be short term contracts with various service companies for the duration of the pandemic ? Therefore largely irrelevant to any major strategic cost reductions, that may or may not ultimately be necessary

 

[Robertj21a]

The 7.14am Crewe to London this Wednesday its £70 single as just one example, just go to the local ticket office & they are very helpful.

There's so much negativity about the railway, if I walked into a local airport to London & wanted a first class flight at that time the price would be extortionate. But you have to get to the airport & park or get a taxi which all takes more time.

£70 single for Crewe to London sounds ridiculously expensive to me. No wonder I changed to a car.

 

[Horizon22]

It also suggests massive productivity issues. KPI for actual passenger driving time will certainly come under the microscope.

Quite. Looking at the current work some train crew currently doing there's some incredibly inefficient diagrams out there (e.g pass one train, work one back, finish). I know most of that is because planners / rostering have their backs up against the wall with timetables changing on an almost monthly basis, but even in normal times there were many inefficient crew diagrams. This is one of the efficiencies that will be key to reducing costs without necessarily job cuts.

 

[Ianno87]

£70 single for Crewe to London sounds ridiculously expensive to me. No wonder I changed to a car.

Fuel + Central London parking + Lost productive time when driving makes that £70 sound like a bargain to me.

Quite. Looking at the current work some train crew currently doing there's some incredibly inefficient diagrams out there (e.g pass one train, work one back, finish). I know most of that is because planners / rostering have their backs up against the wall with timetables changing on an almost monthly basis, but even in normal times there were many inefficient crew diagrams. This is one of the efficiencies that will be key to reducing costs without necessarily job cuts.

And some of those inefficiencies are driven by particular service requirements. E.g. want a couple of token trains per day somewhere to keep the politicians happy? Chances are that it won't be particularly efficiently crewed.

 

[Robertj21a]

Fuel + Central London parking + Lost productive time when driving makes that £70 sound like a bargain to me.



And some of those inefficiencies are driven by particular service requirements. E.g. want a couple of token trains per day somewhere to keep the politicians happy? Chances are that it won't be particularly efficiently crewed.

I doubt that many car drivers would park in central London. I never do

 

[Ianno87]

I doubt that many car drivers would park in central London. I never do

That's why people pay £70 to get the train then, isn't it?

 

[Robertj21a]

That's why people pay £70 to get the train then, isn't it?

No, they park near to where they want to be. London is a rather large place and few people will need to park by a mainline railway station!

 

[miami]

That model only really works if you're fairly certain that the £250 people will turn up.

If they've decided that they have a better way of conducting their business, you're better off using the space for people who are willing to pay something.

Oh certainly, which means that the railway which already required massive subsidies has suddenly lost a large number of its high spend customers, so it needs to reattract them anyway, or make massive cost cutting.

The 7.14am Crewe to London this Wednesday its £70 single as just one example, just go to the local ticket office & they are very helpful.

I'm not travelling from Crewe. Driving to the station means car park costs and removes the beer option. If I'm getting in a car, why not travel all the way? Taxiing is a hassle (having to book it, stress of it not turning up, extra time if it does turn up but is late -- stress especially increased if coupled with a non-flexible ticket)

And that "bargain" £70 ticket is slow - It means leaving home at 0550 to get the 0609 train to Crewe, or a 0630 taxi to get into the office for just after 10.

Might as well just drive, leaving at 0630 means I'll be in the office just as soon, but have the added comfort of travelling in a nice car listening to the today program.

I'll ignore your suggestion to go to a "ticket office" like it's 1979.

 

[paul1609]

That's why people pay £70 to get the train then, isn't it?

I think that what Robertj21a is alluding to is that they will drive to an Outer London station park and then use the train/ tube to the centre. For us here in Kent it means a car journey to North Greenwich or Orpington (used by people right over in to West Sussex). Im sure there are Outer London railheads in the other directions as well. North Greenwich station parking is 50p per day more expensive than Crewe.

 

[choochoochoo]

I know the thread is about railway jobs in general, but as for driving jobs. The fact that TOCs and FOCs are still advertising trainee driver positions is reassurance enough.

Even if those are just to fill talent pools, to me it means that they are expecting that the reduced demand for drivers due to less trains running is outweighed by the loss of drivers due to natural wastage.

If there was a threat to drivers' jobs there'd have been a recruitment freeze for new drivers. There'd be no need for trainees as they could replace their natural wastage with drivers being made redundant at other TOC/FOCs.

 

[miami]

We have the immediate problem of the unprecedented subsidy caused by lockdown, and it will very much be 2 that goes towards reducing that.

Oh sure, subsidies will be lower than the £100 a journey they were last year - they need to be well on the return to 2019 levels, I suspect far more pressure to cut costs than we've seen before. Crewe ticket office was mentioned - I think there is one, but there really shouldn't be one in the 21st century.

With the pressure of needing to run a commuter service for the city reduced, I can see this government going to war with the rail unions.

I think that what Robertj21a is alluding to is that they will drive to an Outer London station park and then use the train/ tube to the centre. For us here in Kent it means a car journey to North Greenwich or Orpington (used by people right over in to West Sussex). Im sure there are Outer London railheads in the other directions as well.

When I go to London I have considered stopping off near hanger lane, north acton, that sort of area, but the traffic tends not to make it worthwhile until I'm literally in zone 1.

 

[Horizon22]

My local (London metro) was busier at 5pm and 8pm today than I’ve seen it since the pandemic began.

How much of this is pent up demand and a short-term blip and rise of course remains to be seen but seems positive for rail recovery as these aren’t commuter types.

Its going to be very uneven though across the country. But TOCs have a lot of data at their fingertips to adapt to the demand - it’s just the mechanisms of rolling stock / crew / timetable and infrastructure and presumably consultation to adapt to changing patterns aren't as agile.

I know the thread is about railway jobs in general, but as for driving jobs. The fact that TOCs and FOCs are still advertising trainee driver positions is reassurance enough.

Even if those are just to fill talent pools, to me it means that they are expecting that the reduced demand for drivers due to less trains running is outweighed by the loss of drivers due to natural wastage.

If there was a threat to drivers' jobs there'd have been a recruitment freeze for new drivers. There'd be no need for trainees as they could replace their natural wastage with drivers being made redundant at other TOC/FOCs.

Not to mention qualifieds - some TOCs are recruiting for almost all their depots!

 

[43066]

Won’t most of those jobs simply be short term contracts with various service companies for the duration of the pandemic ? Therefore largely irrelevant to any major strategic cost reductions, that may or may not ultimately be necessary

The people I (and I imagine @bramling) are thinking of appeared pre Covid, around the time of the Thameslink “Big Bang” (both on Thameslink stations those of neighbouring TOCs).

Unfortunately at my local station the ticket office will often be closed, yet there will be a guy in a hi vi standing around on the platform staring into his phone! Most of them do indeed appear to be contractors.

 

[Bald Rick]

I know the thread is about railway jobs in general, but as for driving jobs. The fact that TOCs and FOCs are still advertising trainee driver positions is reassurance enough.

Even if those are just to fill talent pools, to me it means that they are expecting that the reduced demand for drivers due to less trains running is outweighed by the loss of drivers due to natural wastage.

If there was a threat to drivers' jobs there'd have been a recruitment freeze for new drivers. There'd be no need for trainees as they could replace their natural wastage with drivers being made redundant at other TOC/FOCs.

Two things here:

1) FOCs are very nearly back at pre pandemic traffic levels, and on some flows it is higher. Barring a complete collapse in intermodal and infrastructure traffic, they will be recruiting as usual.

2) TOCs are still in wait and see mode. There have been no instructions to permanently reduce train services (in this context, ‘permanently’ means more than a couple of years). Until it is clear what changes to demand emerge in the longer term, TOCs will retain their current driver establishments, and indeed be lifting them if required under their contract, and be recruiting to fill vacancies when they appear. However when service reductions happen, and these are in place for more than a couple of years, then establishments will be resized. In my opinion I don’t think redundancies will come, but I imagine a recruitment freeze will happen, and perhaps some encouragement for drivers to swap TOCs.