Rail bosses spend £10,000 a week on flights – because it’s cheaper than trains

[tomuk]

It is not a 'sad indictment' . We don't know where Michelle Handforth lives, or where she was going. But if you live in London or even Birmingham, and have to go to Scotland for the day, travelling by train is an exhausting, long trip with little time for meetings. Flying is the obvious choice for such journeys, unless you are an enthusiast and are happy to use up your home time in railway carriages.

We do know where she lives or did Aberdeen. She was chief exec of Aberdeen Harbour Board and before that Babcock Helicopters also based in Aberdeen. He current role as head of Wales and Western Route so it would seem a long commute is required to the other end of the country.

 

[BluePenguin]

When FG had Scotrail and I lived in Watford, it was a no brainer to get on the M25 to get the red eye from Heathrow for a meeting and be back at Watford early that evening.

Imagine the time I would have lost going by train. It would have wrecked my work diary for the day before and possibly the day after.

Never had to do any other work journey by air, even the ones to Brussels to visit the Commission. I used Eurostar for those.

Watford to where? Not clear where you flee to from Heathrow

 

[185]

Time for some modernisation. These are the ones essentially achieving nothing that need the sack, one of her is probably worth about ten ticket offices.

Foreign flights?! Where do the UKs trains run abroad?! More dodgy drunken junkets on the taxpayer. Fire them all.

 

[WAB]

Utterly insulting to suggest that the meeting attendees they are talking about are even remotely worth the money and perks paid. This nonsense about "international competition for top staff" is betrayed by the consistently poor results they turn out.

I'm sure everyone in the industry would be keen to know where this magic cupboard of cheap skilled managers is?

Time for some modernisation. These are the ones essentially achieving nothing that need the sack, one of her is probably worth about ten ticket offices.

Sufficient managers are needed to run the railway - cut them too thin and decision-making becomes poor and chaotic.

 

[railfan99]

Yes it's a sorry state that numerous other countries just got on and built a High Speed network and we've still got a long wait for HS2!

UK's geographical area is far smaller, but at least you have Eurostar.

Australia (with three east coast conurbations of c.5.1 million for Sydney and Melbourne, and around 3.1 million for Brisbane) lacks any. Cue constant, annoying airline delays.

Nor does Canada. In both nations, politicians refuse to fund and build true HSR. They prefer to spend their time away from the hoi polloi in special airline lounges such as in Oz the Qantas Chairman's Club.

Canada's Toronto - Quebec City 'fast trains' proposal appears limited to a maximum speed of 200kmh; in Australia, 160kmh is current max speed but only on portions of routes in NSW, Queensland and Victoria, and one line in Western Australia. South Australia and the small island state of Tasmania don't even have any local rural passenger trains!

Yorkie, count your blessings that you, your countrymen and visitors can use Eurostar, and otherwise trains operating at up to 225 kilometres an hour (missing from Oz and Canada).

 

[Krokodil]

We will get headlines that we use open or off peak returns soon instead of advances...

Why should the cost of a train ticket paid by Network Rail matter now that it's not a private company who will benefit? The money just comes out of HM Treasury, through Network Rail's budget, into the (de facto nationalised) TOC and back into HM Treasury. Taxpayers aren't being fleeced for it.

UK's geographical area is far smaller, but at least you have Eurostar.

Australia (with three east coast conurbations of c.5.1 million for Sydney and Melbourne, and around 3.1 million for Brisbane) lacks any. Cue constant, annoying airline delays.

Nor does Canada. In both nations, politicians refuse to fund and build true HSR. They prefer to spend their time away from the hoi polloi in special airline lounges such as in Oz the Qantas Chairman's Club.

Canada's Toronto - Quebec City 'fast trains' proposal appears limited to a maximum speed of 200kmh; in Australia, 160kmh is current max speed but only on portions of routes in NSW, Queensland and Victoria, and one line in Western Australia. South Australia and the small island state of Tasmania don't even have any local rural passenger trains!

Yorkie, count your blessings that you, your countrymen and visitors can use Eurostar, and otherwise trains operating at up to 225 kilometres an hour (missing from Oz and Canada).

Saying "your public transport is slightly better than two countries with very poor public transport" isn't a very high bar.

 

[Bald Rick]

Didn’t this story do the rounds just before the pandemic?

It’s an annual thing.

There’s a News agency that FOIs NR (and other organisations) every year on stuff like this, to generate stories that they then sell to the papers. There’s similar annual FOIs on things like how many staff have been dismissed for being under the influence of drugs, how much was spent on alcohol, etc etc.

 

[yorksrob]

Obviously it would be more meaningful to look at proportions of longer distance journeys not undertaken by train.

However, isn't this high powered business travel exactly the sort of travel that the industry (and consequently the Government) are always complaining about not coming back (and hence running the service into the ground for the rest of us ?)

Perhaps the industry doesn't have far to look to find out why the mythical business traveller hasn't returned.

 

[dk1]

It’s an annual thing.

There’s a News agency that FOIs NR (and other organisations) every year on stuff like this, to generate stories that they then sell to the papers. There’s similar annual FOIs on things like how many staff have been dismissed for being under the influence of drugs, how much was spent on alcohol, etc etc.

So tedious. Perhaps they should have a look in their own backyard.

 

[yorksrob]

So tedious. Perhaps they should have a look in their own backyard.

The news agency would be better off doing a survey of how many of its employees read a newspaper.

 

[Reliablebeam]

I made this mistake of relying on the train yesterday for travel. Wish I'd booked a domestic flight but our government travel booking system discourages it... And that is largely because of headlines like this, which generate knee jerk reactions, 'seen to be doing something' and all that....

 

[railfan99]

Saying "your public transport is slightly better than two countries with very poor public transport" isn't a very high bar.

Oz has good public transport overall, but like Canada we lack HSR/true HSTs.

Good point, but I set the bar a little higher.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In 1974 the last through train was 17:45 from Glasgow to Birmingham

Plus a 1735 Edinburgh portion added at Carstairs which I often used - only stopped at Preston, Crewe and Wolverhampton.

Today, Edinburgh does rather better than Glasgow with 1652 and 1852 Avanti services to Birmingham (plus a slower 1707 XC via York).

 

[dk1]

The news agency would be better off doing a survey of how many of its employees read a newspaper.

Haha that would be interesting.

 

[Starmill]

It is still bad optics in my opinion.

It sure is. It's just that so are most things.

When I worked for Network Rail (7+ years ago), I found the most productive means of getting to London for a morning meeting was the sleeper from Glasgow and the 1630 back - although that was better when it delivered a 4 hour 10 min journey when the Virgin WCML timetable was at its best. The sleeper didn’t suit everyone but I found it less disruptive to my life than getting up in the middle of the night to catch a 0600 flight to London!

The Caledonian Sleeper will usually be far more expensive than flying. Could be worth it, but only if you get a night of sleep both nights which leaves you feeling refreshed ready to work all day.

 

[dangie]

Whenever the media compare rail travel vs flying they always pitch the most expensive rail ticket against the cheapest flight ticket. For example from the newspaper article ‘….with one-way tickets costing up to £206.’ I just did a quick Google and found a return Birmingham to Glasgow train ticket for approx £80 which by my maths is £40 one-way.

 

[Starmill]

Whenever the media compare rail travel vs flying they always pitch the most expensive rail ticket against the cheapest flight ticket. For example from the newspaper article ‘….with one-way tickets costing up to £206.’ I just did a quick Google and found a return Birmingham to Glasgow train ticket for approx £80 which by my maths is £40 one-way.

None of those are really the correct figures for comparison though.

The appropriate figures will be whatever is available at the point the journey becomes committed. Usually, for work, this will be the night before, or even the morning of departure. The Off Peak Return is £160.10 for example, which is an appropriate comparison if Standard is OK, although realistically for a four hour journey if you're wanting to work on the train you need Standard Premium, which would be £210.10. A round trip by air will easily cost more than that though booked right before departure.

 

[Trainbike46]

If network rail staff are flying because it is cheaper than taking the train, as the headline and the first paragraph of the article state, that is unacceptable.

I understand there might be time constraint reasons meaning flying is way more practical, and that is fair enough though not ideal.

Personally I think the policy should be something along the lines of: "take the train, unless time, connections or similar reasons mean it is not practical to do so. Cost should not be a reason to choose other options over the train."

None of those are really the correct figures for comparison though.

The appropriate figures will be whatever is available at the point the journey becomes committed. Usually, for work, this will be the night before, or even the morning of departure. The Off Peak Return is £160.10 for example, which is an appropriate comparison if Standard is OK, although realistically for a four hour journey if you're wanting to work on the train you need Standard Premium, which would be £210.10. A round trip by air will easily cost more than that though booked right before departure.

It is very annoying though that the press keeps comparing highly flexible train-tickets bought last-minute with specific-flight-only air tickets bought well in advance. Either compare the flexible fare for both, or the bought well in advance fare for both.

Then again, I have lost hope in almost all of our press. Given how often they get the basics wrong on subjects I know stuff about, I'm assuming they must make mistakes in other areas as well, but I just don't realise because I don't know what the real situation is

 

[geoffk]

France has had a ban on short-haul domestic flights since May. Journeys that are possible in less than two-and-a-half hours by train cannot be taken as a flight. Paris - Marseille is not covered by the ban, nor are connecting flights. This shows what's possible with a high-speed rail network developed over many years. Even with a "watered down" HS2, London - Glasgow will be over 3 hours. Difficult to see how UK can follow France's example.

 

[Facing Back]

If network rail staff are flying because it is cheaper than taking the train, as the headline and the first paragraph of the article state, that is unacceptable.

I understand there might be time constraint reasons meaning flying is way more practical, and that is fair enough though not ideal.

Personally I think the policy should be something along the lines of: "take the train, unless time, connections or similar reasons mean it is not practical to do so. Cost should not be a reason to choose other options over the train."

As TOC revenue is in effect passed straight back to the treasury I would tend to agree that price itself isn't the real issue, although if you travel on a full peak hour train then I guess you might be stopping a real fare-paying passenger from making their valuable contribution. Its mostly wooden dollars though, although I'm sure NR have a duty to be cost effective with their travel policy. I'd agree with many posters that there are many times where train travel is not the most practical approach so I wouldn't take the headlines at face value and personally have no issue with people flying.

Our policy is to book practical and cost effective travel - if a meeting is fixed (a conference say) book an advance ticket as soon as you can. If its a client who changes their mind and moves meetings then its a walk up fare. We often travel the night before on a cheap ticket and have a bit of internal catch-up (in a pub or restaurant) with it still working out cheaper than the morning train fare - although lots of people would prefer to be at home so the expensive fare is still fine for them. I'm happy to trust NR management to make sensible decisions on the best way for their staff to travel.

 

[Broucek]

Silly, lazy journalism

Like the silly headlines about MPs claiming for an overpriced KitKat from a hotel minibar when it's 75% cheaper in Tesco. I do that sort of stuff all the time when I'm travelling for work because my time is worth more than the £2 saved by going for a 10 minute walk to a supermarket!

 

[AlterEgo]

"As a public body, with understandable restrictions on salary and rewards compared to the private sector, we have to be innovative and flexible in order to secure the services of great people from across the internationally competitive market, as we have done here.”

Utterly insulting to suggest that the meeting attendees they are talking about are even remotely worth the money and perks paid. This nonsense about "international competition for top staff" is betrayed by the consistently poor results they turn out.

Time for a maximum public wage!

A maximum public wage would simply shrink the talent pool, exacerbating the problem.

 

[nlogax]

The sleeper didn’t suit everyone but I found it less disruptive to my life than getting up in the middle of the night to catch a 0600 flight to London!

I still get more ZZZZs (quality and quantity) if I need to wake up early for a flight to London than if I use the Sleeper. Am envious of anyone who can fall asleep at the drop of a hat on the CS and be fresh for work the next morning. Horses for courses, naturally.

 

[Parjon]

A maximum public wage would simply shrink the talent pool, exacerbating the problem.

It would put top jobs within the reach of the people actually able to do them. And send parasites packing elsewhere. There are plenty of smart, skilled people in all industries that care enough about what they do to want to become leaders.

A handsome maximum wage, lower than that which attracts the average spiv, would increase the quality of the talent pool and contribute towards a promotion pipeline.

 

[richw]

I’m flying to Milan for £20 each return in august. Without a railcard that gets me 50-60 miles from home by train.

Last October I flew Newquay to Manchester. Train was several hundred pounds return. Flight was £34 return with EasyJet. If you’re responsible for a companies finances and getting best value, the flight wins every time. 6-7 hours versus 45 mins plus check in time (half hour in theory on domestic flights)

 

[MarkWi72]

It's political will holding back faster and cheaper public transport, both short and long distance. That is the take away from this. There is a climate emergency and this attitude towards it from Governments and individuals alike ("I want to get home quicker etc") won't help us when we are upa certain creek without a paddle or water.

Some events need you to be physically at a site, but I wonder how many trips were for face to face meetings that could have been performed equally well - and a lot cheaper - via the internet?

This exactly, too. If one postitive came out of the pandemic, it was hybrid/remote working.

 

[Bald Rick]

France has had a ban on short-haul domestic flights since May.

No, they haven’t.

Journeys that are possible in less than two-and-a-half hours by train cannot be taken as a flight.

Yes they can, so long as they are into a connecting flight one end or the other.


It will be interesting to see the reduction in flights this has caused in France. It appears to be negligible.

 

[AlterEgo]

It would put top jobs within the reach of the people actually able to do them.

No, it wouldn't. How does that work? You lower the salaries to "put jobs in reach"? How?

And send parasites packing elsewhere.

So in your world, parasites are qualified professional people who take important and very responsible jobs for large salaries, and actually by lowering salaries you get... better... quality... candidates?

There are plenty of smart, skilled people in all industries that care enough about what they do to want to become leaders.

...at the expense of being paid the market rate? No.

A handsome maximum wage, lower than that which attracts the average spiv, would increase the quality of the talent pool and contribute towards a promotion pipeline.

Wishful bunkum.

Yes they can, so long as they are into a connecting flight one end or the other.


It will be interesting to see the reduction in flights this has caused in France. It appears to be negligible.

The ban affects only a small fraction of flights into and out of Orly and has no realistic prospect of reducing domestic flights by any significant degree.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Watford to where? Not clear where you flee to from Heathrow

Always Glasgow Airport, then taxi to/from Scotrail HQ.

It always seemed to bring back memories of my elderly grandfather visiting his relations in SW Scotland in the early 1960’s. After he was widowed, he didn’t drive anymore and my father used to drive him from Harrow to Heathrow and, as a treat, I got to watch his plane depart, in those far off days of easy access and little security!

On visits to Newcastle or Manchester, I never used air because the journey time for rail didn’t usually mean a night away and having to rejig my diary for the previous or following days.

Nowadays, Zoom and Teams has taken away the need for most face to face meetings on the railway.

 

[Bald Rick]

The ban affects only a small fraction of flights into and out of Orly and has no realistic prospect of reducing domestic flights by any significant degree.

Indeed - the ban on flights means that there’s ‘only’ 6/7 flights a day each way between Paris and Bordeaux…