RMT Extends Strike Action on Network Rail to Dec 24-27

[Nicholas Lewis]

Whilst the biggest financial savings come from the second and third changes as described above, driver release/close would mean significant benefits for dwell times, increasing reliability across the country without needing to change the timetable. Even just driver release would have an appreciable benefit.

Indeed even before we went DOO on Southern driver door release was transformational on reliability and its pretty naff the industry collectively hasn't standardises these arrangements. It drives me potty the operators where the guards has get out of their door check train is in right place and then perform door release absolutely wasteful on dwell times. I appreciate they are only observing TOC rules.

 

[uglymonkey]

No business could survive 75% increase in costs? What!

 

[VC00]

Firstly, if the driver releases and closes the doors, there is a time saving at each stop, as there is no need for wait for the guard to undertake these tasks and give two on the buzzer before the train can depart. Some operators already have driver release and/or allow guards to release doors as soon as the train comes to a stop, but there are still many operators/traction types where this is not the case.

Can't comment on guard release, but I've hard this said before but thameslink trains where I am regularly leave 30-60 seconds early despite being DOO. By leave I mean depart the platform, not close the doors, surely DOO should wait til 10-15 seconds before?

 

[800001]

No business could survive 75% increase in costs? What!

How much of the extra cost is down to DFTs own fault? Like the stupidly expensive Intercity Express Programme?

 

[uglymonkey]

But is it this, eg GwML electrification and the like, cost overruns etc. Or running costs of the network ongoing say to day?

 

[800001]

But is it this, eg GwML electrification and the like, cost overruns etc. Or running costs of the network ongoing say to day?

I would say day to day costs, all these new fleets of trains am sure will come with higher costs than the fleets they replace.

 

[Bald Rick]

What has been the biggest cause of that? That'd be where to start.

Some will not like to hear this, but it’s staff costs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some will not like to hear this, but it’s staff costs.

Because of increased numbers, or because of increased wages, or 50-50 both?

Regarding DOO, it surprised me that even for Merseyrail a choice between staffed stations and guards would come out massively in favour of guards*...maybe they got some things right in the 1980s when some of the major station destaffings happened. Of course that had downsides with some stations becoming a vandalised mess, but in the 1980s we didn't have widespread CCTV, plus there wasn't the sense to lease out/sell the buildings for homes and businesses, they were just left to rot. Plus a good number of Merseyrail booking offices are quite distant from the platforms and so don't bring any deterrent anyway.

* Ormskirk line - 5 diagrams (so 5 guards at any one time), 13 stations, though it's likely 3 of those would retain booking offices or at least some form of station staffing (Ormskirk, Moorfields and Liverpool Central), but even so. Have those guards bring value by going up and down the train all the time selling tickets to the "pay if challenged" chancers**, catch the remaining few at the central Liverpool gatelines, perhaps gate Ormskirk too and this is bringing in real value.

** Not PFs, as that would likely cause assaults, but Anytime Day Singles. Cheaper if you buy before boarding to get a day ticket instead...

 

[NorthernSpirit]

I know I've mentioned this before but would it make sense to train up both drivers and guards into doing each others role (similar to the Stourbridge shuttle) and are paid x amount per year, station staff meanwhile are trained up into cleaning and catering duties (the latter where a station has a cafe/buffet) and again are paid x amount per year. Including natural wastage (e.g. staff retiring or changing industry) this could solve part of the issue, when it comes to maintenance, do away with ROSCO's (rolling stock companies) and get orange army/wombles/team orange to maintain both units, track and infrastructure and again are paid x amount a year.

This would overall reduce strikes and also reduce cancellations since the onboard staff would be flexible.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I also assume it doesn't include capex (e.g. electrification projects) as it's a bit unfair if it does; those projects can be scaled back or dragged out if you need to reduce that.

No, but it will include Network Rail's interest payments on its £50-odd billion debt, the rate of which has increased steeply recently.
Somebody has to pay for the GW electrification overrun... And Crossrail (shared with TfL)...
"Free borrowing" has vanished, probably for good.
All the premiums coming from the lucrative franchises has vanished/been crippled (eg LNER, Avanti, SWR).
There is also more rolling stock than presently needed, still with leasing costs despite sitting in sidings for nearly 3 years (eg TPE's Mk5s).
No doubt there are many other causes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is also more rolling stock than presently needed, still with leasing costs despite sitting in sidings for nearly 3 years (eg TPE's Mk5s).

A sensible national policy on rolling stock would reallocate most of what's spare or likely to be spare bar the 1980s DMUs and EMUs which need to go in the bin. This thread isn't the place for discussing what to and where, but it could be done.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==

No, but it will include Network Rail's interest payments on its £50-odd billion debt, the rate of which has increased steeply recently.
Somebody has to pay for the GW electrification overrun... And Crossrail (shared with TfL)...
"Free borrowing" has vanished, probably for good.

So that's not actually increased spending, but the change in accounting of Network Rail that occurred a few years back?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Fare income now is roughly the same in cash terms as it was in 2012/13 (£8bn)

Industry costs in 2012/13 were £12bn.

Now they are £21bn. That’s a 75% increase in cost, for no increase in revenue.

The latest ORR review of 2021/22 NR costs is shown as 13.1B of which 2.8B was financing charges which itself was up 1B on 2020/21. Financing costs are increasing as NR has too much inflation linked debt so this is only going to get worse in the short term and these costs need ring fencing from the industry to have to fund albeit i get it will have to covered by central government.

 

[dk1]

Some will not like to hear this, but it’s staff costs.

I don’t mind hearing it but my salary as a driver has not gone up by anywhere near that in those 9 years. Is that more down to an increase in staffing would you say? I was thinking of increased costs coming more from the very large new fleets of trains that have been introduced across the country with the expensive long term maintenance packages that accompany them. There is also then the increased energy costs if they have filtered through yet.

 

[Bald Rick]

Because of increased numbers, or because of increased wages, or 50-50 both?

Both, but principally because of higher pay, and consequential costs (pension contributions and employers NI have both gone up as well).

 

[Robertj21a]

Fare income now is roughly the same in cash terms as it was in 2012/13 (£8bn)

Industry costs in 2012/13 were £12bn.

Now they are £21bn. That’s a 75% increase in cost, for no increase in revenue.

This is precisely the type of information that should be in the public domain. People appreciate being given hard facts.

 

[mandub]

Think I'd want to see a breakdown in "staff costs" at Network Rail and at the TOC's from the 2 quoted dates to see how much of the revenue shortfall falls in each part of the network.
The inference here is that it's TOC's staff costs that is the major driver of the shortfall

 

[alistairlees]

Both, but principally because of higher pay, and consequential costs (pension contributions and employers NI have both gone up as well).

This assertion that it's staff costs driving the majority of the 75% increase in overall costs does not feel right to to me. Perhaps you could provide some evidence?

Using data from the ORR website:

2015/16, franchised TOCs only
staff: £3,170m
rolling stock: £1,606m
total operating expenditure: £10,141m

2021/22, franchised TOCs only
staff: £3,617m
rolling stock: £2,990m
total operating expenditure: £12,998m

I'm not sure if this is nominal or inflation-adjusted. Clearly, it does not include Network Rail (or any other) staff costs. And, also, it is not over the same time period as Bald Rick is quoting. There are other costs too, of course - I just provide these two as they seem most relevant to discussion.

Nevertheless, this does not seem to support the assertion that it is staff costs that is driving overall costs.

 

[Bald Rick]

The inference here is that it's TOC's staff costs that is the major driver of the shortfall

If I’ve inferred that, I apologise it wasn’t my intention. It’s staff costs across the whole industry.

it’s also true that rolling stock and borrowing costs have increased.

Energy costs will feed through in next years numbers.

 

[Old Shire]

I need to clear my mind. If staff turn up over Xmas for Maintenace work etc. and are not on strike, but can't work because of possession has not happened due to other staff being on strike. Do they get paid and bonus's

 

[Bald Rick]

This assertion that its staff costs driving the majority of the 75% increase in overall costs does not feel right to to me. Perhaps you could provide some evidence?

Sorry, I didn’t say staff costs was the majority, just that it was the biggest factor.


Also those ORR numbers don’t take into account staff costs in renewals and projects, and these have shot up (hence why projects are more expensive).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2022 ==

I need to clear my mind. If staff turn up over Xmas for Maintenace work etc. and are not on strike, but can't work because of possession has not happened due to other staff being on strike. Do they get paid and bonus's

If they are confirmed rostered on, and do not strike, and turn up, then yes.

 

[irish_rail]

Passengers deserve the same level of Sunday service from 10am as a weekday.

Indeed. But the DFt are not interested in making Sunday like the other days. The unions have been pretty clear they would LIKE Sundays to be a part of the normal working week, but the daft don't want to know. No , they want to compel already fatigued rail staff to HAVE to work Sundays as overtime. I for one know my limits and have no desire to work most Sundays on top of already working 5 days a week. Safety first and all that!

 

[Magdalia]

Using data from the ORR website:

2015/16, franchised TOCs only
staff: £3,170m
rolling stock: £1,606m
total operating expenditure: £10,141m

2021/22, franchised TOCs only
staff: £3,617m
rolling stock: £2,990m
total operating expenditure: £12,998m

Let's do those as percentages of the total.

2015/16, franchised TOCs only
staff: 31%
rolling stock: 16%
other: 53%


2021/22, franchised TOCs only
staff: 28%
rolling stock: 23%
other: 49%

In 2015/16 rolling stock costs in comparison with staff costs were a bit more than half, by 2021/22 that was more than three quarters.

 

[HSTEd]

2015/16, franchised TOCs only
staff: £3,170m
rolling stock: £1,606m
total operating expenditure: £10,141m

2021/22, franchised TOCs only
staff: £3,617m
rolling stock: £2,990m
total operating expenditure: £12,998m

I'm not sure if this is nominal or inflation-adjusted. Clearly, it does not include Network Rail (or any other) staff costs. And, also, it is not over the same time period as Bald Rick is quoting. There are other costs too, of course - I just provide these two as they seem most relevant to discussion.

Nevertheless, this does not seem to support the assertion that it is staff costs that is driving overall costs.

Do we know how the continuing shift from TOC-managed rolling stock maintenance to manufacturer-led maintenance has impacted things?

A lot fewer TOC-side depot staff than there used to be aren't there?
How is that accounted for here?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Sorry, I didn’t say staff costs was the majority, just that it was the biggest factor.


Also those ORR numbers don’t take into account staff costs in renewals and projects, and these have shot up (hence why projects are more expensive).

This sums up some of the cost creep in NR nicely from ORR review of NR finances 2021/22

Network Rail’s average headcount remained unchanged from 2020-21 but has increased by 9% since the start of CP6. The average number of staff in senior management grades increased by 12% in the year to around 660, a 22% increase since the start of CP6

NR have subsequently pushed the numbers down with redundancy programme but thats costed plenty to implement. So given enhancements have drifted through CP6 you would have expected headcount to have reduced but no doubt many people have been under employed pending DfT decision on what they are going to proceed with.

 

[BPN2022]

to those mentioning being imposed; is that even a possibility? Surely that’s illegal?

 

[lineclear]

to those mentioning being imposed; is that even a possibility? Surely that’s illegal?

'Fire and rehire', although they'd be daft to do that; most railway staff are either able to retire now or have a previous career or qualification to fall back on.

 

[pt_mad]

to those mentioning being imposed; is that even a possibility? Surely that’s illegal?

'Fire and rehire', although they'd be daft to do that; most railway staff are either able to retire now or have a previous career or qualification to fall back on.

Presumably not a viable option for that reason.

If enough staff dug their heals in and didn't sign up for new roles, would an enforcement continue, knowing there may not be enough people to operate the service? Or continue to go through with it knowing that if enough people let themselves be made redundant, there might not be enough safety critical staff to operate under the existing arrangements (well before the new working practises can be introduced)?

Besides that, look how the vast majority of the country viewed P and O. For a government to actually push through a fire and rehire on an industry in those numbers could be massive political problem for them with an election coming soon.

 

[dctraindriver]

Let's do those as percentages of the total.

2015/16, franchised TOCs only
staff: 31%
rolling stock: 16%
other: 53%


2021/22, franchised TOCs only
staff: 28%
rolling stock: 23%
other: 49%

In 2015/16 rolling stock costs in comparison with staff costs were a bit more than half, by 2021/22 that was more than three quarters.

The TOCs in general their staff costs are considerably less compared to other organisations, something that isn’t really highlighted which might stop people jumping to conclusions and spin from govt etc. Compare the 30% staff costs of TOCs to that of say police staffing costs which are around 80% of their budget.

 

[pt_mad]

The TOCs in general their staff costs are considerably less compared to other organisations, something that isn’t really highlighted which might stop people jumping to conclusions and spin from govt etc. Compare the 30% staff costs of TOCs to that of say police staffing costs which are around 80% of their budget.

Presumably if the costs were as high as all that, then the government would want to strip out the profit in order to bring the costs down? Surely they could just reduce the subsidy by the level of current profits being made and take the operations in house?
Or it envisaged by the government that a profit is always a necessity for idealistic reasons?

 

[fishwomp]

'Fire and rehire', although they'd be daft to do that; most railway staff are either able to retire now or have a previous career or qualification to fall back on.

If a previous career/qualification offers more and staff move on or retire, the salaries will go up - that's how the market works.

[..]
Besides that, look how the vast majority of the country viewed P and O. For a government to actually push through a fire and rehire on an industry in those numbers could be massive political problem for them with an election coming soon.

That was due to illegal lack of process - failing in their legal obligation and to all it was unfair. After months of failing to reach resolution on the railways, the sympathy will not be the same - and there is no talk of a completely new crew coming in from overseas on fractions of the pay, hidden in the wings.