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

[Bletchleyite]

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

Certainly, but most people won't go for massively lower pay, just a bit lower. So if you end up paying peanuts, what does that get?

 

[RT4038]

Certainly, but most people won't go for massively lower pay, just a bit lower. So if you end up paying peanuts, what does that get?

These are jobs in the public eye, where when things go wrong you will be publicly pilloried and humiliated, and likely sacked or made to resign. You will not get decent talent without paying good money to take such positions, with the attendant risks.

The world is a different place to that of 40+ years ago.

 

[Bald Rick]

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.

You’d be surprised how many people at the top of organisations don’t need to work. Quite a few in the rail industry are in that position.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

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!

I take my hat off to people who do real-time decision making and enjoy it to boot. I‘m very much back-office staff material, I doubt I could handle the pressure in real time. The fear of getting it wrong would be too much.

 

[RT4038]

You’d be surprised how many people at the top of organisations don’t need to work. Quite a few in the rail industry are in that position.

But not needing to work, but still getting paid handsomely is a different proposition to not needing to work and getting paid peanuts, in jobs with high profile , big responsibility and high risk of humiliation !

 

[tbtc]

These are jobs in the public eye, where when things go wrong you will be publicly pilloried and humiliated, and likely sacked or made to resign. You will not get decent talent without paying good money to take such positions, with the attendant risks

That's exactly what this job sounds like - a "lightening conductor" role, where you'll be the focus of ire from anyone with a chip on their shoulder about their local line not being a national priority, expected to resign the moment there's a major accident - you'll be public enemy number one when there's an RPI pay rise each year (in fact, three times a year - there's media hysteria when the September RPI is announced, then when the railway/Government agrees to the appropriate level then again in the quiet days at the end of December when there's very few stories in the press so they can recycle last year's story about the hundreds of pounds extra that someone will have to pay if you accept that a hundred miles is a typical distance to commute).

You'll be a punch bag for MPs too - someone they can blame for any problems (even when the real reason is lack of investment caused by politicians starving the railway of sufficient funds)

Back in the 1970s/1980s, the average person would generally ignore the railway other than when strikes made headlines. Nowadays, in a world of Twitter outrage and millions of furious petitions and 24hr news channels, you'll be bumping from one "scandal" to another - you'll need the skin of a rhino to take that level of public visibility - if you give the public the idea of a "Strongman" then you give them the idea that this one person can Make Things Happen and raise expectations to unrealistic levels.

That kind of job will attract a certain kind of person but not the kind best suited to actually tackling the root causes of why things currently go wrong - you need a mediator, someone who can negotiate with stakeholders, a diplomat - instead you're more likely to get someone who thrives on Being The Story and getting attention.

But that's one of the problems with the "nationalise" brigade - it was easy to find faults in the privatised railway but very hard to come up with a solution fit for the modern world (a structure that apparently worked in the 1980s isn't a blueprint for something fit for the 2020s)

(tl;dr version - I'd do it for a million quid a year and a bag of pork scratchings)

 

[Taunton]

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

Bear in mind that of this salary £268,500 goes straight back to the government in tax and NI. Almost, but not quite, half of it.

 

[185]

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

Quite the opposite - the civil service (DfT officers, probably on the instruction of a minister) are rightly reviewing expenditure. I heard some weeks ago, there was an urgent financial and organisational review coming of the 'broader railway' ie- not just DfT & NR. Scanning the forums around the same time, there were at least 4 (coincidental) references to "Manager Of No Consequence" mentioned - which I'm guessing refers to roles such as a social media & vertical integration audit process lead manager.... most operators are, at a time of major financial crisis, still recruiting hundreds of senior people into well paid roles which are not self-financing and basically ...not necessary.

My worry is Mr Haines is from a TOC group background and may be reluctant to upset the proverbial applecart.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Certainly, but most people won't go for massively lower pay, just a bit lower. So if you end up paying peanuts, what does that get?

I was taught that if you pay peanuts you end up with monkeys. So yes there is obviously a balance to be struck.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Quite the opposite - the civil service (DfT officers, probably on the instruction of a minister) are rightly reviewing expenditure. I heard some weeks ago, there was an urgent financial and organisational review coming of the 'broader railway' ie- not just DfT & NR. Scanning the forums around the same time, there were at least 4 (coincidental) references to "Manager Of No Consequence" mentioned - which I'm guessing refers to roles such as a social media & vertical integration audit process lead manager.... most operators are, at a time of major financial crisis, still recruiting hundreds of senior people into well paid roles which are not self-financing and basically ...not necessary.

My worry is Mr Haines is from a TOC group background and may be reluctant to upset the proverbial applecart.

All TOC recruitment now has to be signed off by the DfT franchise managers (a.k.a. “minders” or “the real TOC MD’s”) so there is no free hand in recruitment anymore and Andrew Haines is unlikely to be given control of the TOCs by the DfT - he’ll likely be put in total charge of the timetable as the “fat controller”, thereby relegating the TOCs to being delivery units for, in the case of England, the DfT.

The DfT show absolutely no sign of giving up any real power over the railway and are seemingly intent on tightening their grip. It will take a substantial political decision for the DfT to be stripped of their power.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

My worry is Mr Haines is from a TOC group background and may be reluctant to upset the proverbial applecart.

He has had senior management positions at SWT (Stagecoach) and at First Group, but more recently he had 9 years as CEO of the Civil Aviation Authority.
Almost immediately he had to deal with the Icelandic ash cloud aviation crisis, so is familiar with "events".
He also took the Network Rail role at a 27% lower salary than his predecessor Mark Carne.
He was also on the board of Eversholt Rosco before taking on Network Rail.
Reading a Guardian article after his appointment, he had a reputation for cost-cutting at the CAA.

Network Rail appoints new chief – with smaller pay packet than predecessor

Andrew Haines takes job after eight years at Civil Aviation Authority marked by cost cutting

www.theguardian.com

Haines arrives with a reputation for cost-cutting and transformation during his eight-year stint at the CAA, which earned him warm praise from the transport secretary, Chris Grayling. He said Haines had “done an outstanding job at the CAA”.
But he angered many within the organisation, who warned that its safety functions were being impaired as senior staff were made redundant and average salaries were slashed. A leaked internal report obtained by the Guardian last year showed inspectors under Haines believed they no longer had sufficient resources to do the job properly.

 

[SynthD]

Presumably someone who's worked their way up this high likes the job and if they detect enough freedom to get the job done then the satisfaction of the progress is almost payment enough.
The key part of that is whether the government is serious about who's in control and how they relay that message. This role needs a level of independence near what the Bank of England governor has.

They need some early test of their freedom, like publishing that Williams report in full.

 

[Taunton]

He also took the Network Rail role at a 27% lower salary than his predecessor Mark Carne.

This is quite common with top exec positions. You get given a graduated pay contract at the beginning, which states (say) £300k in first year, £400k in second year, £500k in third year, etc. This means there can be virtue news articles at the start about how the salary is lower than before, and thereafter no need for negotiations or news articles about getting a raise, because it was all agreed years ago. People at this level are not silly ...

 

[LAX54]

So is this what is termed (for a new thing coming in) '21st Century Ops' ?

 

[Bald Rick]

My worry is Mr Haines is from a TOC group background and may be reluctant to upset the proverbial applecart.

He has worked in BR, Railtrack, TOCs, owning groups, the CAA and now NR. You’ll struggle to find someone with that breadth of senior experience in the railway and with ability to deal with Governement at the very highest level.

 

[Mojo]

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.

I was in the same boat too. I applied for a job nearly three years ago with a different railway company. The salary was not listed on the job advertisement but I knew it would be lower than my current salary, but without sounding cliched I was getting bored and wanted a challenge and to work for a Toc where I knew I would be able to bring over the skills from my previous job and actually change things and make a difference for the better, and I was also sick of London a bit and wouldn't mind taking a paycut if it meant I could afford to buy a house.

I arrived at the company's HQ and just walked in off the street. No receptionist just a telephone & phone directory, and a few chairs scattered around the 'reception' area. No answer from the person I was due to be interviewed by on their landline number or mobile and I was just sat there for 40 minutes and nearly walked out. Eventually the person I was due to be interviewed by came out to say hello with an apology they were running late. The immediate manager and their boss spent the whole interview talking me out of taking the job saying how difficult it would be because the opening was only there because they had reorganised their control room and none of the existing postholders were good enough to get this new job so effectively I'd be managing people that are disgruntled and difficult; no problem for me but it seemed a strange interview technique. I was called back for a second interview which was pretty much like the first, and two days later I was offered the job which I rejected.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Crikey. If it's the TOC I suspect it is, small wonder their service is more than a little lacking if that's how good their management is.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I was called back for a second interview which was pretty much like the first, and two days later I was offered the job which I rejected.

Sorry to everyone if I sound perverse but it is strangely satisfying to refuse a job when it has been offered!

 

[35B]

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

No, the SoS is the elected politician responsible for transport policy; the head of BR/A N Other transport body has by definition to be subordinate to that politician - in exactly the same way that the CDS is subordinate to the SoS for Defence and the PM.

Now, I wouldn't argue that there isn't a separate issue regarding the way that transport policy is shaped, and the railways suffer particularly from civil service intervention.

 

[theageofthetra]

He has had senior management positions at SWT (Stagecoach) and at First Group, but more recently he had 9 years as CEO of the Civil Aviation Authority.
Almost immediately he had to deal with the Icelandic ash cloud aviation crisis, so is familiar with "events".
He also took the Network Rail role at a 27% lower salary than his predecessor Mark Carne.
He was also on the board of Eversholt Rosco before taking on Network Rail.
Reading a Guardian article after his appointment, he had a reputation for cost-cutting at the CAA.

Network Rail appoints new chief – with smaller pay packet than predecessor

Andrew Haines takes job after eight years at Civil Aviation Authority marked by cost cutting

www.theguardian.com

I read that to mean our pay deals in the driving grade will be severely limited

They know that there are plenty of new drivers to bring in plus it would be political suicide for a union to call strike action over pay at present.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Pay deals will be DfT decisions, enacted through the DfT TOC "minders" and not done via any NR "fat controller", who won't have any direct control over the TOCs, for now.

 

[MarkRedon]

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?

A lot of us have been altruistic arseholes for a large part of our working lives. Reasons are legion, motivations various and sometimes complicated - but being paid more money is a long way from being the only reason for accepting a job offer. You are of course familiar with Maslow's hierarchy of needs? Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is used to study how humans intrinsically partake in behavioral motivation. Maslow used the terms "physiological", "safety", "belonging and love", "social needs" or "esteem", and "self-actualization" to describe the pattern through which human motivations generally move. This means that in order for motivation to arise at the next stage, each stage must be satisfied within the individual themselves. Additionally, this theory is a main base in knowing how effort and motivation are correlated when discussing human behavior. Each of these individual levels contains a certain amount of internal sensation that must be met in order for an individual to complete their hierarchy. The goal in Maslow's theory is to attain the fifth level or stage: self-actualization.

Maslow's theory was fully expressed in his 1954 book Motivation and Personality. The hierarchy remains a very popular framework in sociology research, management training and secondary and higher psychology instruction. Maslow's classification hierarchy has been revised over time. The original hierarchy states that a lower level must be completely satisfied and fulfilled before moving onto a higher pursuit. However, today scholars prefer to think of these levels as continuously overlapping each other. This means that the lower levels may take precedence back over the other levels at any point in time.

 

[swt_passenger]

Roger Ford‘s email summary of his Dec Modern Railways column has arrived today and it includes his take on this story.

He reckons its real purpose is to try and get out of the service pattern that ORR agreed a few years ago, (ie 8 tph total 6.5 tph ECML and 1.5 tph OAO), because there are still problems providing the necessity capacity on the route. As we know there are power supply restrictions, and an upgrade to that is in hand (although running late IMHO).

But most of the other infrastructure changes assumed to be required are already underway? Is there still some upgrade required for a reliable 8 tph that DfT haven’t allowed yet?

 

[Bald Rick]

Roger Ford‘s email summary of his Dec Modern Railways column has arrived today and it includes his take on this story.

He reckons its real purpose is to try and get out of the service pattern that ORR agreed a few years ago, (ie 8 tph total 6.5 tph ECML and 1.5 tph OAO), because there are still problems providing the necessity capacity on the route. As we know there are power supply restrictions, and an upgrade to that is in hand (although running late IMHO).

But most of the other infrastructure changes assumed to be required are already underway? Is there still some upgrade required for a reliable 8 tph that DfT haven’t allowed yet?

It’s not just the core 8tph, but the combined service spec north of York that is also an issue. The power supply element is in hand, but I’m not sure there is a proposed infrastructure solution to 4tph Newcastle - Edinburgh plus the Northumberland line service plus the ECML local plus calls at the new stations Transport Scotland wants to throw in.

IMHO there is simply no need for 4tph Newcastle - Edinburgh anyway. Something this exercise will no doubt test.

Separately, 8tph ‘intercity’ through Digswell - Woolmer Green in the peak requires a reduction of the normal state of GTR services. (4 to Peterborough, 6 to Cambridge or beyond, 2 peak extras to Royston), and there is (obviously) no live proposal to resolve that unless you count the HS2 NE branch. Something else to test.

As an aside, it’s not about ‘getting out’ of the previous service spec, it’s about delivering a reliable service. This will be a good half chapter in my book, as this specific issue has been bubbling around for 7 years.

 

[swt_passenger]

It’s not just the core 8tph, but the combined service spec north of York that is also an issue. The power supply element is in hand, but I’m not sure there is a proposed infrastructure solution to 4tph Newcastle - Edinburgh plus the Northumberland line service plus the ECML local plus calls at the new stations Transport Scotland wants to throw in.

IMHO there is simply no need for 4tph Newcastle - Edinburgh anyway. Something this exercise will no doubt test.

Separately, 8tph ‘intercity’ through Digswell - Woolmer Green in the peak requires a reduction of the normal state of GTR services. (4 to Peterborough, 6 to Cambridge or beyond, 2 peak extras to Royston), and there is (obviously) no live proposal to resolve that unless you count the HS2 NE branch. Something else to test.

As an aside, it’s not about ‘getting out’ of the previous service spec, it’s about delivering a reliable service. This will be a good half chapter in my book, as this specific issue has been bubbling around for 7 years.

So should he really be analysing why DfT and ORR, acting together, have such a different view of what’s possible?

 

[35B]

So should he really be analysing why DfT and ORR, acting together, have such a different view of what’s possible?

He should. But the terms of reference reported in that newsletter suggest something else - that Haines’ actual remit is to find evidence that will support legislative change over how the railways are run and regulated. Given the tight control seen from DfT wherever possible, I’m a little dubious about being anything other than bad for our railways.

 

[Bald Rick]

So should he really be analysing why DfT and ORR, acting together, have such a different view of what’s possible?

Well I don’t think he’ll be investigating why they ignored the advice they were given (repeatedly).

 

[High Dyke]

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

Don't forget continued Government interference.

 

[Class 170101]

It’s not just the core 8tph, but the combined service spec north of York that is also an issue. The power supply element is in hand, but I’m not sure there is a proposed infrastructure solution to 4tph Newcastle - Edinburgh plus the Northumberland line service plus the ECML local plus calls at the new stations Transport Scotland wants to throw in.

IMHO there is simply no need for 4tph Newcastle - Edinburgh anyway. Something this exercise will no doubt test.

Separately, 8tph ‘intercity’ through Digswell - Woolmer Green in the peak requires a reduction of the normal state of GTR services. (4 to Peterborough, 6 to Cambridge or beyond, 2 peak extras to Royston), and there is (obviously) no live proposal to resolve that unless you count the HS2 NE branch. Something else to test.

As an aside, it’s not about ‘getting out’ of the previous service spec, it’s about delivering a reliable service. This will be a good half chapter in my book, as this specific issue has been bubbling around for 7 years.

20tph every 60 minutes means a train every 3 minutes over the two track Welwyn Viaduct. I'm not sure thats even possible with 125mph operation nevermind with Welwyn North Station added to the mix. Could ETCS operation even achieve that?

 

[Bald Rick]

20tph every 60 minutes means a train every 3 minutes over the two track Welwyn Viaduct. I'm not sure thats even possible with 125mph operation nevermind with Welwyn North Station added to the mix. Could ETCS operation even achieve that?

It could be done if nothing stopped at Welwyn North. As it is, two trains do stop, hence the limit is 18tph.

The technical headway is actually around 75seconds at linespeed (115 down, 105-115 up)