Network Rail boss lined up to lead ‘Fat Controller’ rail shake-up

[Nicholas Lewis]

This in the telegraph this morning

(moderator note : article behind a paywall but an extract has been provided)

The boss of Network Rail is being primed to lead an all powerful "Fat Controller" body in the biggest shake-up of Britain’s train network since the Nineties.

Andrew Haines, former boss of the Civil Aviation Authority, has been asked by the Department for Transport to begin reviewing the train lines as if he had already been awarded control of a railways “guiding mind” body, according to a letter seen by The Sunday Telegraph.

The body is one of two major reforms proposed by an as yet unpublished “root and branch” review. The other is the abolition of rail franchising

A letter from Ruth Hannant and Polly Payne, joint DfT directors general for rail, asks Mr Haines to conduct an analysis of one of Britain’s most troubled train lines, the east coast network that was most recently run by Virgin and Stagecoach.


We would like to make clear that the review should be undertaken from the perspective of a neutral single guiding mind, not in your capacity as CEO of NR,” it reads.
The guiding mind or Fat Controller, named after a senior railway official from the Thomas the Tank Engine stories, was proposed to prevent meddling from ministers. Industry leaders have blamed government micro management for punctuality falling to 13-year lows prior to the pandemic.
Although Mr Haines, the former managing director of South West Trains, has been previously linked to the job, the letter is the first piece of evidence that signals transport officials are preparing him for the role.
Establishing a Fat Controller body continues to face opposition from some parts of the Treasury, according to sources.
A Department for Transport spokesman said: “The DfT has asked one of the leading rail experts in the country to assist in reviewing how best to run a major stretch of railway infrastructure.”

Guess there picking ECML as that was supposed to be a trial for an integrated franchise i recollect

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What exactly is he analysing?
If anything the LNER operation is one of the least troublesome on the network at the moment.
What if he finds that the ECML route and service upgrades currently in progress are not needed?
Is he going to work out the optimum number of operators/concessions on the route, and then let them competitively?
I don't doubt Andrew Haines is one of the best qualified people for the job, but the terms of reference will be interesting.

This is what the DfT said when it set up East Coast Partnership in 2017:

• the first of the new generation of long-term regional partnerships on the East Coast Mainline, which will be introduced from 2020 - the East Coast Partnership between the public sector and a private partner will be operated by a single management, under a single brand and overseen by a single leader

The East Coast Partnership will be responsible for both intercity trains and track operations. It will be set up over the next 2 years as a partnership between the public and private sectors, with responsibility for the lines between London, Yorkshire, North East and Scotland.
The private partner will have a leading role in defining future plans for route infrastructure.

The DfT then said this when it contracted its OLR function to operate the East Coast network in 2018:

When it is fully formed the new LNER operation will be a partnership between the public and private sectors. In all circumstances ownership of the infrastructure will remain in the public sector, but the railway is at its strongest when it is a genuine partnership between public and private.

In some ways it is surprising that someone from the OLR/LNER team is not leading the East Coast review.
I suspect the DfT knows what it wants to do with the railway, but the Treasury and others are not yet on board with the consequences.
This way it can at least be seen as "doing something".

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Well “something “ has to be done. The civil service must stop micro managing.

 

[FordFocus]

Well “something “ has to be done. The civil service must stop micro managing.

I agree. The DfT and Civil Service micro manage too much that it becomes pointless for the private sector to run it. The argument from government is they pump so much money into Network Rail and TOCs, they want a say. That is having a negative effect, recent timetable changes been a key example.

An umbrella organisation that is very much arms length from DfT and the Civil Service is what is needed. Obviously there needs to be some form of oversight.

 

[Bald Rick]

In some ways it is surprising that someone from the OLR/LNER team is not leading the East Coast review.

Would be a rather one sided review of the ECML, no?

 

[Ianno87]

**Fat Controller KLAXON**

 

[geoffk]

An umbrella organisation that is very much arms length from DfT and the Civil Service is what is needed. Obviously there needs to be some form of oversight.

A bit like British Rail, then!

 

[FordFocus]

A bit like British Rail, then!

Maybe

 

[Deepgreen]

A bit like British Rail, then!

Yes, please! Long, long overdue.

 

[LOL The Irony]

BR always needed to have the Chairman on the level of the SoS for Transport, so this is a step in the right direction.

 

[Dr Hoo]

BR always needed to have the Chairman on the level of the SoS for Transport, so this is a step in the right direction.

Salary-wise senior Network Rail staff are already well ahead of the SoS for Transport.

For 2019-20 the SoS was entitled to an MP's salary of £79,468 and a 'ministerial' supplement of £71,090 (according to Gov.uk website), so around £150,000 in total. I am well aware that the SoS has other, personal, business interests and access to wealth.

The Chair of Network Rail, Sir Peter Hendy, got £335,000 for a 'half-time' role, equivalent to £670,000 Full Time.

The Chief Executive, Andrew Haines, got £595,000 (according to Network Rail Accounts).

 

[Non Multi]

Are they willing to take a substantial pay cut then?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Salary-wise senior Network Rail staff are already well ahead of the SoS for Transport.

For 2019-20 the SoS was entitled to an MP's salary of £79,468 and a 'ministerial' supplement of £71,090 (according to Gov.uk website), so around £150,000 in total. I am well aware that the SoS has other, personal, business interests and access to wealth.

The Chair of Network Rail, Sir Peter Hendy, got £335,000 for a 'half-time' role, equivalent to £670,000 Full Time.

The Chief Executive, Andrew Haines, got £595,000 (according to Network Rail Accounts).

Are they willing to take a substantial pay cut then?

This is about power, not pay cheques. However, a pay cut would be desirable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is about power, not pay cheques. However, a pay cut would be desirable.

In principle yes, but the trouble is that if you want the good candidates you have to pay the going rate for that level of seniority. A bit like you won't get good footballers for say £30K a year even if that would be a more reasonable salary for one.

 

[Taunton]

The boss of Network Rail is being primed to lead an all powerful "Fat Controller" body in the biggest shake-up of Britain’s train network since the Nineties.

Andrew Haines ...

I though Peter Hendy was the Chair of Network Rail. Haines is the Chief Exec - which means he reports to the Board, of which Hendy is the Chair.

 

[Djgr]

Salary-wise senior Network Rail staff are already well ahead of the SoS for Transport.

For 2019-20 the SoS was entitled to an MP's salary of £79,468 and a 'ministerial' supplement of £71,090 (according to Gov.uk website), so around £150,000 in total. I am well aware that the SoS has other, personal, business interests and access to wealth.

The Chair of Network Rail, Sir Peter Hendy, got £335,000 for a 'half-time' role, equivalent to £670,000 Full Time.

The Chief Executive, Andrew Haines, got £595,000 (according to Network Rail Accounts).

And people wonder why everything is SO much more expensive to get done than in British Rail days!

In principle yes, but the trouble is that if you want the good candidates you have to pay the going rate for that level of seniority. A bit like you won't get good footballers for say £30K a year even if that would be a more reasonable salary for one.

An argument that you hear a lot to justify the massive societal inequalities and financial excesses but I am not convinced that the best people are totally money motivated. In fact I'd probably argue the opposite.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

And people wonder why everything is SO much more expensive to get done than in British Rail days!

And I believe there are quite a few Network Rail executives who earn more than the Prime Minister.
But then, that was true of Richard Beeching in 1961, where he was paid the same as Chairman of the BTC as at ICI.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

An argument that you hear a lot to justify the massive societal inequalities and financial excesses but I am not convinced that the best people are totally money motivated. In fact I'd probably argue the opposite.

And I would 100% agree with you.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An argument that you hear a lot to justify the massive societal inequalities and financial excesses but I am not convinced that the best people are totally money motivated. In fact I'd probably argue the opposite.

I wouldn't. The only reason most people work is to earn money. Therefore, maximising the amount of money you earn with your skillset and within your desired constraints (e.g. location) is a sensible, and the usual, course of action.

 

[43096]

And people wonder why everything is SO much more expensive to get done than in British Rail days!

If you had BR now, you'd be paying similar for senior executives. You can't buck the market rates if you want the right people.

I would certainly argue that Andrew Haines has done a good job at NR.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I wouldn't. The only reason most people work is to earn money. Therefore, maximising the amount of money you earn with your skillset and within your desired constraints (e.g. location) is a sensible, and the usual, course of action.

People work mostly to earn money TRUE
People are motivated by money - absolutely definitely not true and provable but I won’t even bother posting multiple links that exist.

 

[Speed43125]

People work mostly to earn money TRUE
People are motivated by money - absolutely definitely not true and provable but I won’t even bother posting multiple links that exist.

Paying more money is unlikely to directly make you work harder, I completely agree, but it may well be an important factor in you taking up an offer, especially when more than one is available, which for highly experienced individuals (admittedly my knowledge of this sector is rather patchy) it is relatively common to have.
Why should anyone choose to work for someone when they could do a similar role earning more?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Motivation to work is different from person to person. Some people are only motivated by money it is true, but many people (particularly in the rail industry, NHS and others) are motivated by the desire to provide an excellent service to the public and help other human beings.

 

[strawbrick]

"The East Coast Partnership will be responsible for both intercity trains and track operations. It will be set up over the next 2 years as a partnership between the public and private sectors, with responsibility for the lines between London, Yorkshire, North East and Scotland.
The private partner will have a leading role in defining future plans for route infrastructure."
Presumeably there will also be a "West Coast Partnership", a "GW Partnership", a "Midland Partnership" and a "Southern Partnership" whilst Scotland and Wales do there own thing and the equivalent of Cross Country will not have a private partner.
Lots of lovely connections across Partnerships there, both in terms of delays and also continuation of infrastructure plans into anothe Partnership.
Who will be defining the future infrastructure for Cross Country?
Infrastructure is, by definition, long to very long term. I would therefore suggest that the initial Partnerships will surely need to be in the order of 20 years to start with. Then there is the question of what happens when the Partnership is within 5 years of ending?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

"The East Coast Partnership will be responsible for both intercity trains and track operations. It will be set up over the next 2 years as a partnership between the public and private sectors, with responsibility for the lines between London, Yorkshire, North East and Scotland.
The private partner will have a leading role in defining future plans for route infrastructure."
Presumeably there will also be a "West Coast Partnership", a "GW Partnership", a "Midland Partnership" and a "Southern Partnership" whilst Scotland and Wales do there own thing and the equivalent of Cross Country will not have a private partner.
Lots of lovely connections across Partnerships there, both in terms of delays and also continuation of infrastructure plans into anothe Partnership.
Who will be defining the future infrastructure for Cross Country?
Infrastructure is, by definition, long to very long term. I would therefore suggest that the initial Partnerships will surely need to be in the order of 20 years to start with. Then there is the question of what happens when the Partnership is within 5 years of ending?

West coast partnership franchise exists.

East Coast Partnership I think was scrapped when LNER got an extension to 2025

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Paying more money is unlikely to directly make you work harder, I completely agree, but it may well be an important factor in you taking up an offer, especially when more than one is available, which for highly experienced individuals (admittedly my knowledge of this sector is rather patchy) it is relatively common to have.

I suppose that is true.

Motivation to work is different from person to person. Some people are only motivated by money it is true, but many people (particularly in the rail industry, NHS and others) are motivated by the desire to provide an excellent service to the public and help other human beings.

Exactly

Why should anyone choose to work for someone when they could do a similar role earning more?

Loyalty to a company
Loyalty to a boss
Loyalty period
my father had many offers in his lifetime to move company for more money and chose not to.
I had two offers last week alone and also chose not to. Money really is not the be all and end all in life imho. It really isn’t.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Presumeably there will also be a "West Coast Partnership", a "GW Partnership", a "Midland Partnership" and a "Southern Partnership" whilst Scotland and Wales do there own thing and the equivalent of Cross Country will not have a private partner.
Lots of lovely connections across Partnerships there, both in terms of delays and also continuation of infrastructure plans into anothe Partnership.
Who will be defining the future infrastructure for Cross Country?
Infrastructure is, by definition, long to very long term. I would therefore suggest that the initial Partnerships will surely need to be in the order of 20 years to start with. Then there is the question of what happens when the Partnership is within 5 years of ending?

Avanti West Coast was actually the winner of the 13-year West Coast Partnership franchise, though it did not include infrastructure responsibilities.
It was supposed to play a part in planning HS2/ICWC services (though not the procurement of HS2 rolling stock).
But what its prospects are with the ending of franchising is up in the air.
Its ERMA contract runs at the moment up to March 2022.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Job satisfaction / enjoyment is another big reason for doing a job that isn’t the highest paying option.

 

[Carlisle]

A bit like you won't get good footballers for say £30K a year even if that would be a more reasonable salary for one.

Didn’t the conclusion of a previous thread suggest top sportsmen’s high earnings are mainly due to a short career & individual natural talent few others genuinely possess, whereas availability of prospective candidates suitable for management roles within many organisations should, in theory anyway, be much greater, especially considering the huge expansion of university education in recent times

 

[Bow Fell]

Motivation to work is different from person to person. Some people are only motivated by money it is true, but many people (particularly in the rail industry, NHS and others) are motivated by the desire to provide an excellent service to the public and help other human beings.

We are in a very fortunate position on the railway, that we are paid well. Some people do forget that.

In terms of job satisfaction/money, the job I’m in now is one of the most satisfying/rewarding at the end of it, keeping trains moving/in service/maintenance, keeping passengers moving, putting the job back together after service disruption, it’s very rewarding.

Maybe it’s just me but nothing better than after disruption, you’ve got crews/units everywhere, best part is putting that back together and getting the job back as quick as you can. For me, I really enjoy the pressure.

On a tangent, nearly 2 years ago, I applied for a Controller job with Northern, it wasn’t money related or anything, I fancied a challenge, knowing most days you’d be walking in and the job would be up the wall, I genuinely thought I’d make a difference, and make improvements. For better or worse, I was convinced to stay where I am, I never hated where I was, I just fancied a new challenge.

So there is a lot more than just seeing the pound signs for most people!