What was the motivation for including station management in TOC franchises?

[py_megapixel]

As much as opinions differ on the merits or otherwise of the privatisation of train operations in the 1990s, and as much as we can speculate about what ulterior motives there could have been, and bemoan that what was promised is not necessarily what materialised in reality, the public-facing goal is quite clear - the intention was that competition between train companies would drive up standards and drive down costs.

What I don't understand is what was hoped would be achieved by making the management of stations part of the TOC contracts. Why was it not instead the responsibility of the infrastructure operator - Railtrack when it was first sold off, then later Network Rail? In particular an open access operator can't exactly set up a new station to compete with one of the TOC ones.

Look at buses, for example. Their privatisation was a lot more drastic than that of the railway, sweeping away almost all regulation, but bus stops are still considered part of the highway infrastructure and managed by the local council or PTE, rather than the bus operating companies.

 

[Magdalia]

What I don't understand is what was hoped would be achieved by making the management of stations part of the TOC contracts. Why was it not instead the responsibility of the infrastructure operator - Railtrack when it was first sold off, then later Network Rail? In particular an open access operator can't exactly set up a new station to compete with one of the TOC ones.

At privatisation all stations did not go to the TOCs. Railtrack had responsibility for the biggest stations with multiple TOCs, for example the big London termini. Railtrack was a company with first duty to its shareholders, and saw that as an opportunity to exploit the commercial value of the property, with running the railway a secondary consideration. It isn't comparable with bus stops being managed by local councils.

So it was a hybrid approach, and, with hindsight, it is easy to argue that the boundary between Railtrack and TOC responsibility was drawn in the wrong place. That's a different matter to whether it would be worthwhile to try to move that boundary now.

 

[James H]

Different countries have taken different approaches. In Spain, stations are run by the infrastructure operator.

 

[ScottGallagher]

I've often wondered this

What are the boundaries for example is repainting stations done by a contractor for the TOC or do the TOC request this from Network Rail and specify the colours etc?

Similarly if a waiting shelter is replaced on a platform is that the property of the TOC or Network Rail?

 

[Elecman]

Maintenance responsibility depended on the Franchise terms, some were let as full Maintaining Leases others just day to day minor repairs

 

[WesternLancer]

I'm guessing they expected the TOC to bring their wonderful levels of service quality to the stations they operated, making them lovely comfortable environments with super clean toilets, comfy warm waiting rooms, 1st class lounges (and other waiting rooms for secretaries) etc etc

This would have been at the franchise concept stage of course, ie before they gave a franchise to Connex for South Central say.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I'm guessing they expected the TOC to bring their wonderful levels of service quality to the stations they operated, making them lovely comfortable environments with super clean toilets, comfy warm waiting rooms, 1st class lounges (and other waiting rooms for secretaries) etc etc

Like has been the case at Ardwick and Flowery Field on the Manchester Piccadilly to Glossop/Hadfield line?

 

[Dr Hoo]

Like has been the case at Ardwick and Flowery Field on the Manchester Piccadilly to Glossop/Hadfield line?

Having had the doubtful pleasure of being an official ‘mystery shopper’ on the South Manchester suburban network in BR days I’m not sure that post privatisation/current facilities are any worse.

 

[JonathanH]

Their privatisation was a lot more drastic than that of the railway, sweeping away almost all regulation, but bus stops are still considered part of the highway infrastructure and managed by the local council or PTE, rather than the bus operating companies.

Are they? There are many instances of bus stop 'flags' carrying the name of the local operator, although I agree the council has a role in many places. Some privatisation of bus operators came with bus stations included, and often those sites have been sold off for redevelopment, with buses leaving from the street and councils picking up the costs.

On balance, back on the railway, having the operator involved at smaller stations does make some sense, with them managed as part of the overall service provision and carrying the branding of the operator. It avoids a bit of a blame game about the facilities on offer.

 

[Route115?]

The London terminii (apart from Marylebone, Nirmingham New St and possibly a couple of others were managed by Railtrack later Network Rail although the lead TOC operated the booking office (sometimes other TOCs also had their own office) and would supply some staff.

I know that in Germany DB had a separate subsidiary to operate stations. I don't know if this is still the case.

 

[WesternLancer]

Like has been the case at Ardwick and Flowery Field on the Manchester Piccadilly to Glossop/Hadfield line?

are you thinking they could have been pilots for what was achievable?

Having had the doubtful pleasure of being an official ‘mystery shopper’ on the South Manchester suburban network in BR days I’m not sure that post privatisation/current facilities are any worse.

are you suggesting the entrepreneurial flair of the private sector didn't get unleashed there back in the 90s?