Railway subsidies: Worth it or not?

[WessexEclectic]

Given the way these 'franchises' seem to operate, and the way Government controls them, they are little more than management contracts dressed up in wordplay.

The only part of the system that was privitised was the debt to get it off the national accounts. Do you really think that Whitehall would have jeopardised such an asset to those in power the nation as the railways. Do keep up, Bernard.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

So many threads on here are turning out like this one with complete drivel being written by those who just have some axe to grind for whatever reason. My employer decides what to pay me, it has nothing whatsoever to do with you (in the same way that I shop at tesco but have no interest in what their staff are paid-I'm sure my shopping would be cheaper if they were paid half what they are but it's none if my business) whatsoever and it seems completely pointless constantly ranting on here and in the daily mail about it!

I agree with you to the extent that there is uninformed comment about drivers' pay. However I'm not sure that I'd agree that it's no one else's business. 'No-one else's business' is certainly not an argument that I've ever heard when people talk about bankers' pay or MPs' pay, and I'm not sure why rail drivers should be any different in that regard. And I'm not trying to single out rail drivers here - the same argument would apply to what people in almost any industry get paid. Like it or not, salary levels in any industry do have an impact on wider society, and in my view that does make salaries a fair topic for debate (though admittedly an off-topic debate for this thread).

And FWIW if I go to a supermarket I *would be* slightly interested in what people are paid - at least to the extent that I'd have some preference to avoid shops that try to act unethically - for example zero-hours contracts, or poverty level salaries.

 

[KA4C]

and yet another post degenerates into a rail staff (esp driver) bashing thread

This is getting very boring

I suspect that most posting some of this anti staff stuff have never done the job, do not know the background as to why things are how they are
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well if anyone honestly thinks that the pay drivers get is the problem with the railways and that we are responsible for high fares and lack of development then you have no idea what you are talking about.

If we all signed contracts to be paid 20k for a 6 day week of 14hr shifts you still wouldn't see ticket prices come down or more money spent on infrastructure. You would just see even more profits to shareholders.

You lot really do speak a load if nonsense don't you.

And as for comparing driving a road vehicle to a train yet again-they are not comparable. The only similarity is that they both move. That's it. The rest is completely different. Nothing in common whatsoever. Most of us drive both cars and trains and both have areas that make them easier and areas that make them harder but comparing the 2 is like comparing the job of a butcher and a florist.

I don't see the constant need to compare bus drivers and train drivers, completely different jobs-completely different industries, completely different day to day work, completely different background knowledge etc.

So many threads on here are turning out like this one with complete drivel being written by those who just have some axe to grind for whatever reason. My employer decides what to pay me, it has nothing whatsoever to do with you (in the same way that I shop at tesco but have no interest in what their staff are paid-I'm sure my shopping would be cheaper if they were paid half what they are but it's none if my business) whatsoever and it seems completely pointless constantly ranting on here and in the daily mail about it!

A very good post

 

[carriageline]

It makes me laugh, so many people in this place would PAY £9 an hour to be a train driver, desperate to get into the grade, yet they are constantly ripped into and undermined. Possible jealousy? I wonder.

 

[notadriver]

I've just come back from a 5 day coach tour. Tour coach driving is different to bus driving in that the passengers tend to be nicer and that there are no fares/ticketing involved. But I'm responsible for most other aspects of the tour including route planning and excursions, fuelling and cleaning of the vehicle and I'm first point of contact if there's a problem with the hotel or food or even illness (even if that means ultimately passing the buck on). Those that go abroad have even more responsibilities. A tour coach driver makes around £70-80 a day with tips and any optional excursions boosting net pay by up to 25%. There's a shortage of tour coach drivers mainly because the money is so low and yet its probably the hardest coaching work to get into as they want experienced drivers since passengers are paying over £100 each for a holiday sometimes a lot more.

So the jobs can't be compared. They are totally different. And if you've driven a train under supervision at 25 mph as part of some railway driving experience it doesn't mean you know how to drive a train or what its like.

Its the training time required which separates road vehicle drivers from train drivers. There's also the need to speak clear English and be able to pass the medical. Train drivers have to pass exams to progress with their training and this continues after they get their licence as they will need to pass written exams on every route they will drive over.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It makes me laugh, so many people on this place would PAY £9 an hour to be a train driver, desperate to get into the grade, yet they are constantly ripped into and undermined. Possible jealousy? I wonder.

Jealousy from train drivers or from those desperate to get into the grade?

 

[carriageline]

Those desperate to get in of course. That's why they are constantly ripping into drivers/pay, as they can't get there themselves.

 

[A-driver]

Those desperate to get in of course. That's why they are constantly ripping into drivers/pay, as they can't get there themselves.

I don't think it is just that, although it is a factor. I think there is also genuine ignorance amongst people who actually do believe that their ticket prices and the lack of investment is a direct response to our pay. As I keep saying, it isn't.

Plus you have people who genuinely think that train driving can be compared to car driving (just easier as you don't need to steer) and that think that as they have driven a train once before or played a train simulator game they know what is involved in being a train driver. And they have read the rule book online and believe they understand it all and could put it into practice.

Plus you also get those who just go out of their way to be awkward, argumentative or anti union who refuse to believe that anything can not be the fault if the unions or 'drivers greed'. And of course refuse to listen to how it really is when staff put facts and experiences across.

Basically sadly this forum has become little more than an anti-staff website attracting people with some sort of grudge against us which is a real shame as there are some very good and interesting threads and posts on the site.

 

[carriageline]

If it carries on this way, I know some rail staff will be leaving, and not coming back. Which would be a massive, massive shame, such a huge amount of knowledge will be lost. But I guess that's what "they" want, as then the spotters can chat all the rubbish they want uncorrected, and impress each other, pretending to be whatever they want.

 

[asylumxl]

and yet another post degenerates into a rail staff (esp driver) bashing thread

This is getting very boring

I suspect that most posting some of this anti staff stuff have never done the job, do not know the background as to why things are how they are

The irony of this post.

You've joined in on the battle and not really contributed with regards to the original subject. How are you any better?

With regards to the original subject, it seems hard to really draw an opinion on these things when the figures are not openly published. I can understand why though, the media would have a field day. They seem to expect everything to be run for free.

 

[KA4C]

The irony of this post.

You've joined in on the battle and not really contributed with regards to the original subject. How are you any better?

With regards to the original subject, it seems hard to really draw an opinion on these things when the figures are not openly published. I can understand why though, the media would have a field day. They seem to expect everything to be run for free.

I don't think so

 

[CockneySparrow]

There are a lot of people in the press, twitter and on here who complain about the amount of subsidies the TOC's receive. My question to people is this:

Would you rather TOCs stopped operating services that are loss making or would you rather the same level of service was kept with the TOCs getting the subsidies to run services that run at a loss?

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't some franchises awarded with a mixture of good earners and a few loss making lines, also the terms of the franchise stipulate what level of service you have to provide minimum

So in other words you bid for the Norwich to London service and you have to take the seaside branch lines end of

Its then down to the company in this case GA to make it work, which will mean a range of ways from advertsing the lines, injections from the local authority and increasing the fares slightly on busy routes such as Ely to Norwich/Ipswich to balance the books

Not forgetting the premium fares people pay before 9am, that's why trains run late into the night and buses dont as buses charge the same all day

One other note I dont think there is a poor TOC profits are sky high these days

 

[tbtc]

One other note I dont think there is a poor TOC profits are sky high these days

Apart from the TOCs that are losing money?

 

[Dave1987]

Correct me if I am wrong but aren't some franchises awarded with a mixture of good earners and a few loss making lines, also the terms of the franchise stipulate what level of service you have to provide minimum

So in other words you bid for the Norwich to London service and you have to take the seaside branch lines end of

Its then down to the company in this case GA to make it work, which will mean a range of ways from advertsing the lines, injections from the local authority and increasing the fares slightly on busy routes such as Ely to Norwich/Ipswich to balance the books

Not forgetting the premium fares people pay before 9am, that's why trains run late into the night and buses dont as buses charge the same all day

One other note I dont think there is a poor TOC profits are sky high these days

I was under the impression there were only two profitable TOCs at the moment.

 

[westv]

Which ones are running a profit and which aren't?

 

[transmanche]

Which ones are running a profit and which aren't?

Go-Ahead (who own 65% of Go-Via, which operates the London Midland, Southern and Southeastern franchises) reported £40M operating profit for rail in 2012, with a margin of 2.3%.

FirstGroup (who operate three franchises, co-own another and have one open access operation) reported £63.2M operating profit for rail in 2012.

Stagecoach Group (who operate two franchises and co-own another [*] and have one tram operation) reported £49.9M operating profit for rail & tram in 2012/2013, with a margin of 4.2%.

Virgin Rail Group (who operate one franchise and are co-owned by Stagecoach) reported £12.8M operating profit in 2012/2013, with a margin of 2.9%.

Obviously, with the exception of VWC, that's not broken down per franchise - but overall the big groups are all in profit on their TOCs.

[*]I'm not sure if these figures include Stagecoach's share of VWC or not.

 

[87015]

I was under the impression there were only two profitable TOCs at the moment.

The vast majority make a profit which goes out of the industry to shareholders - very few are 'truly' profitable in that they also don't get an access grant via Network Rail. Just FCC I believe from previous threads on here.

The bid teams arguably have far more input into what is 'profitable' in premium/subsidy profiles they sign up for than what actually happens on the ground.

 

[LateThanNever]

Go-Ahead (who own 65% of Go-Via, which operates the London Midland, Southern and Southeastern franchises) reported £40M operating profit for rail in 2012, with a margin of 2.3%.

FirstGroup (who operate three franchises, co-own another and have one open access operation) reported £63.2M operating profit for rail in 2012.

Stagecoach Group (who operate two franchises and co-own another [*] and have one tram operation) reported £49.9M operating profit for rail & tram in 2012/2013, with a margin of 4.2%.

Virgin Rail Group (who operate one franchise and are co-owned by Stagecoach) reported £12.8M operating profit in 2012/2013, with a margin of 2.9%.

Obviously, with the exception of VWC, that's not broken down per franchise - but overall the big groups are all in profit on their TOCs.

[*]I'm not sure if these figures include Stagecoach's share of VWC or not.

Which I think I'm correct in saying is in all cases better than Tesco, which suggests the taxpayer is paying too much subsidy!

 

[455driver]

How much subsidy do those TOCs get from the DaFT in cap and collar payments and Access rebate compared to the "profits" made?

 

[transmanche]

Which I think I'm correct in saying is in all cases better than Tesco, which suggests the taxpayer is paying too much subsidy!

Tesco's operating margin is normally in the 5-6% range, but they have suffered problems lately - so it was just 3.3% in the 2012/2013 set of accounts.

How much subsidy do those TOCs get from the DaFT in cap and collar payments and Access rebate compared to the "profits" made?

That's the part that seems impossible to work out.

It's almost as if the politicians designed the system especially to obfuscate the true level of subsidy... :roll:

 

[455driver]

It's almost as if the politicians designed the system especially to obfuscate the true level of subsidy... :roll:

Not very often I agree with you but nail hit fair and square with that one.

Of course as all the politicians mates are making a fortune out of privytisation it wont be changing anytime soon, I mean we (the great British taxpayer) are ploughing all this money into the railways as (hidden) subsidy which is being paid out as dividends to the shareholders, heads they win tails we lose.

 

[transmanche]

Not very often I agree with you but nail hit fair and square with that one.

It was bound to happen eventually!

Of course as all their mates are making a fortune out of privytisation it wont be changing anytime soon, I mean we (the great British taxpayer) are ploughing all this money into the railways as (hidden) subsidy which is being paid out as dividends to the shareholders, heads they win tails we lose.

Which is why I'd prefer a 'concession' system (like TfL use for LO, DLR and the buses) rather than a franchise.

Fares and service levels would be set by PTEs and regional transport authorities (based on say the English Government Regions) for local, regional and inter-regional services. Not sure what's best for InterCity LDHS services though.

 

[tbtc]

Go-Ahead (who own 65% of Go-Via, which operates the London Midland, Southern and Southeastern franchises) reported £40M operating profit for rail in 2012, with a margin of 2.3%.

FirstGroup (who operate three franchises, co-own another and have one open access operation) reported £63.2M operating profit for rail in 2012.

Stagecoach Group (who operate two franchises and co-own another [*] and have one tram operation) reported £49.9M operating profit for rail & tram in 2012/2013, with a margin of 4.2%.

Virgin Rail Group (who operate one franchise and are co-owned by Stagecoach) reported £12.8M operating profit in 2012/2013, with a margin of 2.9%.

Obviously, with the exception of VWC, that's not broken down per franchise - but overall the big groups are all in profit on their TOCs.

[*]I'm not sure if these figures include Stagecoach's share of VWC or not.

The worst performing appear to be the DB/ Arriva ones, not listed.

In the grand scheme of things, there are a lot of savings that could be made irrespective of TOC profits.

 

[455driver]

It was bound to happen eventually!

Which is why I'd prefer a 'concession' system (like TfL use for LO, DLR and the buses) rather than a franchise.

Okay thats twice now, pack in in or else!

 

[Dave1987]

Go-Ahead (who own 65% of Go-Via, which operates the London Midland, Southern and Southeastern franchises) reported £40M operating profit for rail in 2012, with a margin of 2.3%.

FirstGroup (who operate three franchises, co-own another and have one open access operation) reported £63.2M operating profit for rail in 2012.

Stagecoach Group (who operate two franchises and co-own another [*] and have one tram operation) reported £49.9M operating profit for rail & tram in 2012/2013, with a margin of 4.2%.

Virgin Rail Group (who operate one franchise and are co-owned by Stagecoach) reported £12.8M operating profit in 2012/2013, with a margin of 2.9%.

Obviously, with the exception of VWC, that's not broken down per franchise - but overall the big groups are all in profit on their TOCs.

[*]I'm not sure if these figures include Stagecoach's share of VWC or not.

Sorry but recently Crow said that the TOC were raking in massive profits of rail passengers. All those figures are less than 5%! That's hardly anything really. The argument that TOCs are raking it in just doesn't stand up.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not very often I agree with you but nail hit fair and square with that one.

Of course as all the politicians mates are making a fortune out of privytisation it wont be changing anytime soon, I mean we (the great British taxpayer) are ploughing all this money into the railways as (hidden) subsidy which is being paid out as dividends to the shareholders, heads they win tails we lose.

I think the ASLEF propaganda has worked on you

 

[transmanche]

Sorry but recently Crow said that the TOC were raking in massive profits of rail passengers. All those figures are less than 5%! That's hardly anything really. The argument that TOCs are raking it in just doesn't stand up.

For what is essentially a utility, 3% isn't a bad return in the present economic climate.

 

[455driver]

I think the ASLEF propaganda has worked on you

Yeah whateva! :roll:

its called research, why dont you try it sometime!

 

[Bevan Price]

There are a lot of people in the press, twitter and on here who complain about the amount of subsidies the TOC's receive. My question to people is this:

Would you rather TOCs stopped operating services that are loss making or would you rather the same level of service was kept with the TOCs getting the subsidies to run services that run at a loss?

If there were no subsidies, there would be very few passenger services. Many suburban passenger services in London & other cities would disappear. In general, the huge numbers travelling only at peak hours do not contribute enough to make all-day suburban services profitable.

There would be up to one million extra cars trying to get into London each working day. Thousands more cars would want to enter Birmingham, Manchester & other major cities.
Road congestion & atmospheric pollution would become even more horrendous. A few main lines would survive, probably including, for example, Euston to Birmingham, Manchester, Preston & Liverpool; Kings Cross to Leeds & Newcastle; Paddington to Cardiff & Bristol; Glasgow to Edinburgh; Manchester - Leeds & York; etc., etc.

 

[Dave1987]

Yeah whateva! :roll:

its called research, why dont you try it sometime!

That comment was make in jest, sorry if you took offence. Like I've said before one of my relatives has worked in the industry for 35 years. They have said they have seen the changes in the industry from the days of BR in 80's till now and they feel the industry is in a lot better shape now than it was in those days. I never saw what things were like in BR days so I don't know. But the way I look at it is if the current system doesn't work why are passenger numbers increasing?

I created this thread because I see a lot of people complaining about the subsidies TOCs get but I've seen the services which hardly get used. I'm curious as to whether people believe these services should continue.

 

[yorksrob]

I created this thread because I see a lot of people complaining about the subsidies TOCs get but I've seen the services which hardly get used. I'm curious as to whether people believe these services should continue.

Out of interest, where are these services that hardly get used ?

 

[Dave1987]

Out of interest, where are these services that hardly get used ?

I'm sure there are lots around the country but there are quite a few late at night on GA that have a handful of passengers at most on them.