"WFH is here to stay" - the hypocrisy of HS2.

[HSTEd]

You're not going to build HS2 and close the WCML, that's as silly a proposal as not building HS2.

I didn't say "close the WCML".

I merely pointed out that the current mass of track referred to as the WCML would be a much better place to look for savings than mothballing HS2.

 

[SynthD]

One long term trend to think about is manufacturing reshoring well underway, we're going to be importing a heck of a lot less stuff going forward, so a move to domestic movement of freight away from ports will play a part.

I expect the imports to stay the same while domestic manufacturing grows a tiny bit.

On your original point: are the staffing levels you’re told about before or after covid absences?

 

[thejuggler]

WFH will result in employees spread around the country and needing rail services.

Friend of mine has lived in London for 33 years. As WFH is now the norm for him his plan to move to the south west after retirement has happened 5 years early as he can move and still work.

 

[Ken H]

WFH will result in employees spread around the country and needing rail services.

Friend of mine has lived in London for 33 years. As WFH is now the norm for him his plan to move to the south west after retirement has happened 5 years early as he can move and still work.

but he will move to a small place, not a place with a decent inter city service. If you live away from a main line, you drive. maybe to nearer London then use the train for the last bit.

 

[ar10642]

WFH will result in employees spread around the country and needing rail services.

Friend of mine has lived in London for 33 years. As WFH is now the norm for him his plan to move to the south west after retirement has happened 5 years early as he can move and still work.

I've taken a job that's 100 miles away on the basis it will be WFH with a couple of trips to the office a month, would never have done that kind of trip before. Although I've been told I shouldn't rely on the trains for it on here and I should get another job so they can have a long strike.

 

[Nick Ashwell]

If anything long distance journeys will increase.

We are based in South Wales, we are looking at recruiting nationally now!

This pivot will allow us to attract better talent, with them coming to us for training from anywhere and after that working from home.

They will be needed for actual meetings in the office (Zoom has not replaced real discussion for our business) maybe once or twice a month. If they are in the "North" we can't expect them to drive (nor do we want milage expenses) so long distance trains are the answer.

Admittedly hs2 will have no effect on us but better long distance trains are going to be required more than ever, especially with the shift away from flying!

 

[Arkeeos]

Was having a good old rant with a fellow railway colleague about another work email stating that WFH is here to stay, passenger numbers are still way down, things have changed forever which is why we have to push through all these reforms, adapt, and can't offer a payrise.

If this trend really is the case forever, especially amongst those most able to work remotely, why on earth is HS2 not being mothballed ASAP given it's heavy skew toward the more wealthy business audience? Flies completely in the face of the narrative being pushed to us of the permancy of the downturn in business travel.

Rail travel will reach its pre pandemic numbers, it already has done in other countries, no reason to think we would be any different.
And even if that wasn't true, the population is growing quick so we need to build infrastructure to support that.
And even if that wasn't true, the rail network pre pandemic was unfit for demand, and it still is now, so it still makes sense to build hs2.

 

[raspberrypeel]

Truly staggering how many people on a rail forum are against the idea of rail expansion, let alone expansion in an area that the UK has lacked in compared to comparable European countries in recent years, and would free up considerable space.

 

[yorkie]

Truly staggering how many people on a rail forum are against the idea of rail expansion, let alone expansion in an area that the UK has lacked in compared to comparable European countries in recent years, and would free up considerable space.

Has anyone on this thread argued against HS2?

The opening post was later clarified by the original poster to say they were not making this argument themselves, and was only repeating what others had said to them.

 

[cle]

What an exciting, interesting time for the railways, and for the spread of previously London-centric wealth and opportunity.

Trust us to be grumbling when in fact, the changes from the pandemic, and the flexibility it has cemented - mean more buoyant smaller towns, villages and cities. There is no longer the need for a full brain drain - as flexible working means not everybody decamps to London for higher salaries or diversity of opportunities.

Not to mention, rediscovered domestic holiday-making, love for the outdoors, family time and so forth.

And what could this mean for railways? A renaissance for certain branches and routes - likely to include better service through higher demand to places like Devon, Cornwall, The Lakes and the Cotswolds. And more usage in further flung locations - possibly leading to better London services. More space on the tube, as it reverts to being more for Londoners and for visitors. Maybe even paths out of London termini will be reworked to favour London metro services vs those of Godalming, Tunbridge Wells and so forth - who become more occasional users. Add more inner stops maybe... everything to now call at Orpington for instance.

And similar for smaller cities - live in the Highlands and commute 1x per week to Edinburgh/Glasgow? Sounds amazing.

 

[Barnsey]

On your original point: are the staffing levels you’re told about before or after covid absences?

As of last week, we're pretty much back to our long term average sickness levels for drivers. Very little to no mention at all of covid now.

 

[SuperNova]

Was having a good old rant with a fellow railway colleague about another work email stating that WFH is here to stay, passenger numbers are still way down, things have changed forever which is why we have to push through all these reforms, adapt, and can't offer a payrise.

If this trend really is the case forever, especially amongst those most able to work remotely, why on earth is HS2 not being mothballed ASAP given it's heavy skew toward the more wealthy business audience? Flies completely in the face of the narrative being pushed to us of the permancy of the downturn in business travel.

1) Being on the railway, I can tell you commuting is starting to increase. Friends are expected to be in the office at least 2/3 days a week and there's this new thing called Tuesday Wednesday and Thursday commuters. Not to mention heating bills rising, which I suspect may push people back in the office. Leisure is also through the roof. Mondays are now the quietest on the network from my own two eyes.

2) Business travel is also rising. It probably won't ever recover to 2019 levels, but people are wanting to get out and about again.

3) Hs2 is about capacity not business/commuters. More freight will travel by rail over time and if we ever get a government with balls, we'll see rail take on domestic aviation (and stop the needless subsidy aviation gets)

 

[Sm5]

In our org, we are hiring more people from up north to wfh there, as its cheaper than pre-covid where we were hiring them in London and forcing them to commute from the suburbs.

In both cases rail loses, less Southern commuters, no need for Northerners to travel.

 

[SuperNova]

In our org, we are hiring more people from up north to wfh there, as its cheaper than pre-covid where we were hiring them in London and forcing them to commute from the suburbs.

In both cases rail loses, less Southern commuters, no need for Northerners to travel.

Suspect over time, HMRC will find a way to tax those who WFH, if not at least the companies given the overall impact to the economy.

 

[Ken H]

Suspect over time, HMRC will find a way to tax those who WFH, if not at least the companies given the overall impact to the economy.

There is a risk if you create an office at home in a separate room that has no other purpose, it could be regarded as a business premesis and attract business rates.
You can stop that dead by putting some domestic stuff in there. A wardrobe full of clothers perhaps. But a made up bed makes it a spare bedroom and not 100% office, so business rates wont apply.
I work in the living room cos i hate locking myself away to work. So no worries.

 

[Roast Veg]

Suspect over time, HMRC will find a way to tax those who WFH, if not at least the companies given the overall impact to the economy.

Jobs like mine would move abroad if the tax comes in at all steeply.

 

[A0wen]

What an exciting, interesting time for the railways, and for the spread of previously London-centric wealth and opportunity.

Trust us to be grumbling when in fact, the changes from the pandemic, and the flexibility it has cemented - mean more buoyant smaller towns, villages and cities. There is no longer the need for a full brain drain - as flexible working means not everybody decamps to London for higher salaries or diversity of opportunities.

Not to mention, rediscovered domestic holiday-making, love for the outdoors, family time and so forth.

And what could this mean for railways? A renaissance for certain branches and routes - likely to include better service through higher demand to places like Devon, Cornwall, The Lakes and the Cotswolds. And more usage in further flung locations - possibly leading to better London services. More space on the tube, as it reverts to being more for Londoners and for visitors. Maybe even paths out of London termini will be reworked to favour London metro services vs those of Godalming, Tunbridge Wells and so forth - who become more occasional users. Add more inner stops maybe... everything to now call at Orpington for instance.

And similar for smaller cities - live in the Highlands and commute 1x per week to Edinburgh/Glasgow? Sounds amazing.

BIB - unlikely. Tourism is highly seasonal and the railways aren't good at handling seasonal demands - the cost of doing so more than outweighs the revenue attracted.

And people will quickly fall out of love of domestic holidays when they cotton onto the fact you can get 2 weeks in Brittany for less than 2 weeks in Cornwall (and that includes the cost of the ferry) along with the fact its far quieter, the weather is better and the food nicer.

We are holidaying in the UK this year much to my chagrin, but that's more because of certain family things - if I'd had my way we'd have either been flying off to Florida or heading down to the Atlantic Coast in France.

 

[gg1]

Suspect over time, HMRC will find a way to tax those who WFH, if not at least the companies given the overall impact to the economy.

The overall impact on the economy is minimal. The money a hybrid or home worker saves on transportation, work clothes and overpriced coffee & sandwiches is money which can be spent in other areas of the economy.

 

[The Planner]

The overall impact on the economy is minimal. The money a hybrid or home worker saves on transportation, work clothes and overpriced coffee & sandwiches is money which can be spent in other areas of the economy.

But do they spend it? the amount of people that I know that are just saving or not spending it is quite high.

 

[SynthD]

The overall impact on the economy is minimal. The money a hybrid or home worker saves on transportation, work clothes and overpriced coffee & sandwiches is money which can be spent in other areas of the economy.

Slightly true. People are assuming, with some evidence last year, that the companies losing out are Tory donors.

 

[gg1]

But do they spend it? the amount of people that I know that are just saving or not spending it is quite high.

Based on conversations with friends and family there's definitely an element of that but it's saving rather than investing, ie they do plan to spend the money saved in the forseable future, in our case we're putting money aside for home improvements.

On that basis I'll amend my earlier statement to "The overall medium-long term impact on the economy is minimal"

For many new home workers the money saved will have been swallowed up by rises in cost of living but the principle's the same, if they were still spending the same amount on commuting related costs as they were 3 year ago, they'd need to reduce spending in other areas to a greater degree than is the case now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But do they spend it? the amount of people that I know that are just saving or not spending it is quite high.

People generally save money for things. So it might get spent in a different way or at a different time, but it'll still get spent.

Alternatively it will allow people a better "buffer" so they don't call on benefits as much when things go wrong.

And I'd not get fixated on relatively recent parts of the economy like overpriced sandwich vendors and coffee shops. We didn't have any of these things 20 years ago, so it's not a major problem if they don't survive in macroeconomic terms.

 

[SuperNova]

The overall impact on the economy is minimal. The money a hybrid or home worker saves on transportation, work clothes and overpriced coffee & sandwiches is money which can be spent in other areas of the economy.

I doubt city centre/town centre economies will agree with you. Not the social impact. Again, fully expect HMRC to crack down on this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I doubt city centre/town centre economies will agree with you.

Town and city centre economies are shifting. They are now becoming less places for shopping and more places for people - for an evening out, for example. Things change and we should not cling to an immutable past.

Where large city centres lose, smaller centres may win, e.g. people able to walk into their village centre and use e.g. a traditional butcher, baker and greengrocer on their lunch break.

But even that won't be universal. If I was going into an office daily, I'd likely take sandwiches. If going in once or twice a week, I'd likely go out for lunch with colleagues. That's spending that wasn't there before. And frankly I couldn't care less about Pret and Starbucks, they're a recentish addition to the economy anyway.

Not the social impact. Again, fully expect HMRC to crack down on this.

HMRC will I'm sure tax anything they can think of taxing (e.g. taxing home broadband would be a reasonably easy way to tax WFH), but they have no grounds to penalise WFH.

It's worth noting, though, that business rates (the main tax involved here) is a local tax, not a national one (it's basically Council Tax for businesses), so of no relevance to HMRC.

 

[gg1]

I doubt city centre/town centre economies will agree with you. Not the social impact. Again, fully expect HMRC to crack down on this.

The government didn't 'crack down' on out of town shopping centres in the 80s and 90s, nor did they with online retailers over the past two decades, both of which had huge impacts on town & city centre economies.

With that precedent there there is no justification for applying punitive taxes on home workers using the excuse of "saving the High Street".

 

[Bletchleyite]

The government didn't 'crack down' on out of town shopping centres in the 80s and 90s, nor did they with online retailers over the past two decades, both of which had huge impacts on town & city centre economies.

With that precedent there there is no justification for applying punitive taxes on home workers using the excuse of "saving the High Street".

It's just (anti-WFH, in this case) Luddism again. I find it very curious given that this is an Internet forum, but I have never encountered quite as much Luddism and social conservatism (small C; no idea how those people vote nor is it any of my business) as I encounter daily on this Forum.

 

[SuperNova]

Town and city centre economies are shifting. They are now becoming less places for shopping and more places for people - for an evening out, for example. Things change and we should not cling to an immutable past.

Where large city centres lose, smaller centres may win, e.g. people able to walk into their village centre and use e.g. a traditional butcher, baker and greengrocer on their lunch break.

But even that won't be universal. If I was going into an office daily, I'd likely take sandwiches. If going in once or twice a week, I'd likely go out for lunch with colleagues. That's spending that wasn't there before. And frankly I couldn't care less about Pret and Starbucks, they're a recentish addition to the economy anyway.



HMRC will I'm sure tax anything they can think of taxing (e.g. taxing home broadband would be a reasonably easy way to tax WFH), but they have no grounds to penalise WFH.

It's not clinging to the past. It's realising the cost to the economy, the socio-economic impact, lack of mobility in society and also the environment. A friend works in logistics and his firm has just undertaken an impact study. Of which it shows the environmental impact of shopping from home (mainly fast fashion) and that's more of a worry than swapping your diesel car to an EV...

And smaller centres don't win. Over two years into this new world and the small town I live in has lost its only remaining butcher, and all its banks. Not exactly a win is it?

It's just (anti-WFH, in this case) Luddism again.

No it isn't. Then again, I see the impact through my partner on WFH. The lack of teamwork at their work, the young graduates not getting the support and the hours they have to put in because others don't. If you fail to look at the wider impact and picture, then get ready for a further decline in the fabric of society.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not clinging to the past. It's realising the cost to the economy, the socio-economic impact, lack of mobility in society and also the environment. A friend works in logistics and his firm has just undertaken an impact study. Of which it shows the environmental impact of shopping from home (mainly fast fashion) and that's more of a worry than swapping your diesel car to an EV...

Easier to convert all delivery vehicles to EVs than to get everyone to buy one. DPD in MK are already running a significant proportion of electric vans.

I'd more look into the impact of fast fashion (of a disposable kind) than exactly how one buys it! The likes of Primark must be terrible overall. Stuff gets worn a few times and binned.

And smaller centres don't win. Over two years into this new world and the small town I live in has lost its only remaining butcher, and all its banks. Not exactly a win is it?

Branch banking is dead; I predict there will be no branch banks at all within 10 years. Or maybe one if Metro Bank continue with their business model which is specifically to offer quality in person banking to those who specifically want that service. (I'm fine with that service being offered as a commercial enterprise, but I don't doubt at a price - and not a price I want to pay, having banked online for 20+ years now, my first real move that way being the first online-only bank, the Co-operative Bank's Smile). But most people do not want that service, and to be blunt the people who do - typically older people - are dying off. My parents are the new generation of old people (early 70s now) - and they do everything online they can.

Other stuff comes and goes. I think you will see some businesses reopen like that. We're at a real time of flux (which can be quite an exciting time, but also an unsettling one for some).

No it isn't. Then again, I see the impact through my partner on WFH. The lack of teamwork at their work, the young graduates not getting the support and the hours they have to put in because others don't. If you fail to look at the wider impact and picture, then get ready for a further decline in the fabric of society.

This is a combination of fear of change and people just getting used to how to do it right. It's also easier to manage people in person, so businesses will be learning that typical British mediocrity in middle management simply won't do, and those managers will be shipped out in favour of people who can manage remote collaboration well.

 

[Ken H]

...



This is a combination of fear of change and people just getting used to how to do it right. It's also easier to manage people in person, so businesses will be learning that typical British mediocrity in middle management simply won't do, and those managers will be shipped out in favour of people who can manage remote collaboration well.

I dont think people did manage staff when they were in the office. Unless there was a significant shortfall in productivity. People seem to spend quite a lot of time on social media and ebay etc. and even RailUKforums!!!
But now managers have to put in place monitoring to check people are actually producing their expected output. Rather than look around to see who was asleep.

 

[matacaster]

Town and city centre economies are shifting. They are now becoming less places for shopping and more places for people - for an evening out, for example. Things change and we should not cling to an immutable past.

Where large city centres lose, smaller centres may win, e.g. people able to walk into their village centre and use e.g. a traditional butcher, baker and greengrocer on their lunch break.

But even that won't be universal. If I was going into an office daily, I'd likely take sandwiches. If going in once or twice a week, I'd likely go out for lunch with colleagues. That's spending that wasn't there before. And frankly I couldn't care less about Pret and Starbucks, they're a recentish addition to the economy anyway.



HMRC will I'm sure tax anything they can think of taxing (e.g. taxing home broadband would be a reasonably easy way to tax WFH), but they have no grounds to penalise WFH.

It's worth noting, though, that business rates (the main tax involved here) is a local tax, not a national one (it's basically Council Tax for businesses), so of no relevance to HMRC.

Prat a manger are a bit overpriced.