Back to the bad old days’: swingeing rail cuts set alarm bells ringing

[Bletchleyite]

And the resulting increase in costs paid for by who? Taxpayers or passengers?

In this context it seems clear that the solution is to reduce services permanently until you are fully staffed for operating a less frequent service with longer train lengths. See XC (mostly).

 

[Moonshot]

In this context it seems clear that the solution is to reduce services permanently until you are fully staffed for operating a less frequent service with longer train lengths. See XC (mostly).

Indeed ......a 10% cut in the number of UK train services would actually kill the overtime and not incur any redundancy costs

 

[dk1]

Why should staff work rest days? The clue is in the name.....rest day. Of course those who want the money are perfectly entitled to put there name forward to work overtime, however there are increasing numbers of staff who are realising the time off is far more valuable.

It's the usual tactic from this poster. Just puts these comments to get a bite. Don't fall for it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed ......a 10% cut in the number of UK train services would actually kill the overtime and not incur any redundancy costs

Then add the bonus that a less congested network is more punctual and it is a "no brainer".

If it is made permanent, you can then modify timetables to suit, e.g. to fix the current poor Manchester to Bristol connections.

 

[Peterthegreat]

Then add the bonus that a less congested network is more punctual and it is a "no brainer".

If it is made permanent, you can then modify timetables to suit, e.g. to fix the current poor Manchester to Bristol connections.

And (some) trains get even more overcrowded.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And (some) trains get even more overcrowded.

Some would, but in principle if you use XC's current stock to run a half frequency service at double lengths overall it would not make that much difference.

 

[RPI]

Well the fact Plymouth are regaining London work again does suggest to me that it has been realised that obviously it isn't overall productive across the board to have 3 drivers driving one train. No real reason for Bristol drivers to work on the b and h. The fast London trains driven by Plymouth drivers with the slower ones driven by Exeter drivers (coupled with say an Exmouth trip) is surely the best way of diagramming b and h work, with Paddington taking some of the early down and late up trains as well.
Hopefully it will be this type of diagramming which was successfully employed for many years until recently that will return and enable money savings without the need for job losses, or ticket price increases.

Likewise I don't see why Bristol have so many turns over the B&H (TM's), we had an incident at the end of 2019 at a crossing between Taunton and Tiverton Parkway (which you'll no doubt remember!) and two trains were stranded near Castle Cary, one ended up getting sent back to Westbury as it was a Bristol guard who didn't sign the route via Yeovil, yet the train behind had Exeter crew and went immediately down that route. I seem to remember that one train that had made it to Taunton got sent back to Castle Cary (or Westbury? Not sure what shunt involved at Castle Cary) and then down Via Yeovil.

Also daft how you guys no longer sign Taunton to Bristol!

Although I digress it is relevant to the conversation as there does seem to be many unproductive turns at some depots

 

[Peterthegreat]

Some would, but in principle if you use XC's current stock to run a half frequency service at double lengths overall it would not make that much difference.

Two things:-
1) A less frequent service, including loss of direct trains, equals fewer passengers
2) You don't save very much. Same amount of rolling stock, same amount of wear and tear on the track, same number of guards. Perhaps slightly fewer drivers.

 

[43066]

Costs DO need to be cut. The current highly restrictive 'route knowledge' can be solved with technology. Train simulators, in-cab rolling roads with safety and other commentary can cut costs.

ERTMS will reduce (not eliminate) reliance on route knowledge over time as it’s gradually rolled out, but that won’t be happening overnight, in fact it will take decades and the current financial woes will slow that down if anything. DVDs are already used in some situations but are far from ideal. I have no idea what an in cab rolling road is (a treadmill for the driver?!).

Reducing route knowledge also reduces flexibility - as per the current GTR woes. You can end up with drivers at one depot sitting around when another depot is short, because drivers cannot cross other depots’ work.

The problem here is that they want their cake and to eat it, i.e. for it always to be available when they want but only when they want. I would like to see full staffing with overtime only for unexpected high sickness (e.g. the pingdemic) and delays.

Who is “they”? For about the fifty millionth time on here, the unions are in favour of full staffing and zero overtime. On here the view seems to be that staff are either greedy for working rest days or lazy for not doing so.

For the record there are some drivers and guards who probably are too reliant on overtime. Ultimately it is never guaranteed so if it’s taken away and they can’t rely on their basic salary to live they will have no cause for complaint.

It's the usual tactic from this poster. Just puts these comments to get a bite. Don't fall for it.

Indeed so.

 

[Goldfish62]

Two things:-
1) A less frequent service, including loss of direct trains, equals fewer passengers
2) You don't save very much. Same amount of rolling stock, same amount of wear and tear on the track, same number of guards. Perhaps slightly fewer drivers.

Agreed.

It's not the overcrowding, unreliability or ever increasing fares that have attracted more and more passengers over the past couple of decades. It's the increasing frequency of services. Take that away and the railways become an unattractive option for many.

 

[ComUtoR]

In this context it seems clear that the solution is to reduce services permanently until you are fully staffed for operating a less frequent service with longer train lengths. See XC (mostly).

It doesn't work and it too much of a simplistic view.

I've said it numerous times regarding staffing. It is more about the rosters and stupid railway culture than just throwing staff at it. My depot's roster tomorrow has 14 working duties off 'spare' and we still have someone working a rest day and requests sent out this morning with uncovered work.

We are still running a reduced timetable and are fully staffed !

I think you need to understand the rostering issues that the railway suffers with to truly understand 'staffing' Some TOCs are better than others and some depots work well in the same TOC where other depots continually struggle. Even during the height of Lockdown, we still needed rest day workers.

 

[Grumpy Git]

In some places (mainly urban / suburban) they're dispatching so often its pointless. A move to an Southern "OBS" type role with driver dispatch would resolve these sorts of issues and might (I'd say should) improve revenue collection too. In other places the lazier ones tarnish the good ones with a bad brush.

All it needs to increase revenue, is for the chancers to know there is a good chance there will be a check. When you can travel from Liverpool to Euston and back with no checks it really is taking the pee.

 

[74A]

Why should staff work rest days? The clue is in the name.....rest day. Of course those who want the money are perfectly entitled to put there name forward to work overtime, however there are increasing numbers of staff who are realising the time off is far more valuable.

Staff were happy to work rest days. It is the union who told then to stop doing so.

 

[Ex-controller]

I agree to an extent that depot productivity isn't always great. At Plymouth we used to go to London regularly. That was extremely productive for the company, they got a bloody good days work out of the driver and one driver drives the train for its entire journey.
In past couple of years there has been a trend to use 3 different drivers to cover a Plymouth to London leg, changing often at Exeter then Reading. Why? I don't know if truth be told.
Signs of changes with the new roster changes in mid December with Plymouth drivers re gaining some more of our highly productive Plymouth-London-Plymouth diagrams, as much as its a pain doing lots of London work, at least the passenger is getting value for money from their driver.
So for me, more cases of traincrew working a trains entire journey and fewer crew changes on route would be one way in which crewing costs can be cut.

Dont know why they did that with rosters there, but at ScotRail they cut Glasgow Queen Street & Edinburgh drivers route knowledge back to Dundee having previously worked through to Aberdeen. Reason being that they wanted to minimise risk of SPADs, TPWS interventions etc. Whether it would have had an affect I don’t know - the drivers were obviously competent for the route, but a very risk averse culture came in. Safety obviously has to be paramount but this seemed to remove a lot of flexibility for minimal gain.

To be honest, I’d suspect they’ll be going after pay and conditions, which will just lead to strikes. Not sure the government will understand the concept of route knowledge and operational flexibility. Dept of Transport might, but it’s a difficult concept to explain to the public. The fact that drivers tend to earn £52k plus might become an oft repeated point.

 

[robert thomas]

Sorry, moved my post to the speculative thread as it was mostly suggestions. But as this isn't...yes, a few people will, but the increasing majority will prefer online, and if contactless was introduced as will happen soon enough and Trainline fixed their e-ticket issue then ticket office usage will plummet to next to nothing.

Why would anyone want to use trainline. It is cheaper to buy from your local station or online from a TOC.

 

[Ex-controller]

The problem here is that they want their cake and to eat it, i.e. for it always to be available when they want but only when they want. I would like to see full staffing with overtime only for unexpected high sickness (e.g. the pingdemic) and delays.

Getting to spend time with their families when the roster allows them is ‘having their cake and eating it’?

 

[Moonshot]

Staff were happy to work rest days. It is the union who told then to stop doing so.

As I have pointed out, there are increasing numbers of staff ( and I am one of them ) who are quite happy to work the basic roster. This has manifested itself ( as a lot of posters have noticed ) in the increased cancellation of services......I note that Avanti cancelled at least 3 Euston to Piccadilly services yesterday simply because of that issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Two things:-
1) A less frequent service, including loss of direct trains, equals fewer passengers
2) You don't save very much. Same amount of rolling stock, same amount of wear and tear on the track, same number of guards. Perhaps slightly fewer drivers.

Only if you have the stupid and unnecessary policy of requiring two guards for a double set. Remember no guards are required for a triple set at some TOCs. This rule needs to go.

The other saving is as I've pointed out overtime.

Not slightly fewer drivers, a lot fewer drivers. Probably not half as the diagrams wouldn't just be half the current ones, but certainly a significant reduction.

 

[Ken H]

As I have pointed out, there are increasing numbers of staff ( and I am one of them ) who are quite happy to work the basic roster. This has manifested itself ( as a lot of posters have noticed ) in the increased cancellation of services......I note that Avanti cancelled at least 3 Euston to Piccadilly services yesterday simply because of that issue.

maybe they have done their sums. Marginal rate of tax is the rate you pay on any extra earnings. If a driver is paying higher rate tax, the tax and NI can take 51% of his extra earnings. include travel to work and other work expenses (child care?), and they may be working for nearly nothing.

 

[WelshBluebird]

What I am saying is that "cut branch lines" is a valid potential answer to the question "how do we reduce the amount of money by which the Treasury subsides railways" even if in doing so there are negative impacts.

But it isn't a valid answer because cutting those lines will further reduce traffic on other lines which means the subsidy would have to increase unless more cuts are made (and the cycle continues).

 

[quantinghome]

A lot of forum members are assuming that the changes in demand since covid are permanent. Given we're now back at 70% of pre-covid passenger levels this conclusion would seem somewhat premature. And that's before we consider the need to encourage substantial modal shift away from cars.

 

[87015]

A lot of forum members are assuming that the changes in demand since covid are permanent. Given we're now back at 70% of pre-covid passenger levels this conclusion would seem somewhat premature. And that's before we consider the need to encourage substantial modal shift away from cars.

Yet again, its revenue that matters and thats way off 70%. You need to sell a lot of cheap weekend returns to revenue match whom was previously buying a £5k or whatever season ticket.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yet again, its revenue that matters and thats way off 70%. You need to sell a lot of cheap weekend returns to revenue match whom was previously buying a £5k or whatever season ticket.

That isn't actually true. Most season ticket holders pay about the same per day as an off peak day return, sometimes quite significantly less than that. Thus provided you get the same passenger numbers you'll get about the same income.

 

[87015]

That isn't actually true. Most season ticket holders pay about the same per day as an off peak day return, sometimes quite significantly less than that. Thus provided you get the same passenger numbers you'll get about the same income.

Used to spend £5k man isn't spending that any more - revenue is down.

 

[Mat17]

It doesn't help when governments interfer with lockdowns and restrictions.

Look over the past two years after the first lockdown was lifted. Passenger numbers and the economy start to pick up then... LOCKDOWN. Numbers fall in response. Restrictions start to lift and things start to creep back then bang... Another lockdown.

Now we have the face coverings back etc. Overcrowding problems in some areas/services, cancellations etc. Possibly putting some passengers off from using the trains, why bother if you can take the car instead and not have to wear a face mask when doing so?

I'm sure passenger numbers will return eventually, the government has to stop interfering though for that to happen. 100% service won't happen while there are restrictions/service reductions in place. Or if shops in town/city centres are closed.

As for rail cuts, well cuts and 'nationalisation' go hand in hand. As soon as the government has a direct hand in anything it becomes about 'value for money' and 'making it pay'. When it's privatised they're happy to throw money at it no end.

 

[Goldfish62]

A lot of forum members are assuming that the changes in demand since covid are permanent. Given we're now back at 70% of pre-covid passenger levels this conclusion would seem somewhat premature. And that's before we consider the need to encourage substantial modal shift away from cars.

I am unconvinced that working from home will become the "new normal" (I loath that term). By this time next year many employers and employees will be tired of it. All of course coinciding with SWR's permanent cut-backs!

Regarding modal shift I don't think this government has any interest in that whatsoever. It merely wants to decarbonise the private car rather than shift people away from it.

 

[squizzler]

If the Government want's to be taken seriously about levelling up, it has to maintain the regional railway. Anything else would be politically unacceptable.

As the boomer generation who make up the quorum of electorate behind the present government have to surrender their licences due to age related health problems, public transport in the regions where they live becomes a politically more relevant issue. If the implementation of "brexit", in which we left the free trade community and hobbled our ability to work with the EU unnecessarily is a guide, once the same generation as voted for that are not allowed to drive due to medical issues, they will make it very difficult for younger people to be motorists too. "If I can't have it you can't either" seems to be the guiding mindset of our right wing commentariat, just look at the situation regarding fishing in the Channel.

This is why I remain so bullish about the railways. Also, as others have implied, the railways are such a bloated organisation 10% less funding is not a big deal. It will not remove the fat, never mind damage the muscle (service quality) or bone (fixed infrastructure).

As a predominantly leisure user, I am satisfied that the post-pandemic railway is becoming more focussed on serving people like me, and I won't in all honesty notice a loss of some peak hour services.

 

[quantinghome]

Used to spend £5k man isn't spending that any more - revenue is down.

We know revenue is down, but it's the trend that matters, and the trend over the last year is increasing back towards pre-covid levels. The drivers for long term growth of rail are still there. If anything, the current situation simply gives the railways a bit of breathing space to build capacity for the future. Unfortunately the increasingly anti-rail government are using the temporary set back in passengers as an excuse for cuts.

 

[squizzler]

Now we have the face coverings back etc. Overcrowding problems in some areas/services, cancellations etc. Possibly putting some passengers off from using the trains, why bother if you can take the car instead and not have to wear a face mask when doing so?

I don't want this to become a discussion of the merits of face coverings, but I am interesting to see if their reintroduction will put off passengers (as indeed speculated in the guardian article). I think (also basing my assumption on trains used recently in the EU) that it will increase confidence amongst the travelling population, even amongst many who like to say they hate them. Would it be possible to capture any such sentiment from the passenger data, or are there too many variables?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Used to spend £5k man isn't spending that any more - revenue is down.

Passenger numbers are down 30%. But if you can get them back up, it doesn't matter if they are leisure travellers or commuters, as both pay about the same. Commuters are a solid income but they aren't a goldmine.

What are a goldmine are occasional business travellers as they do tend to pay higher fares. Reduced commuting is likely, in time, to result in increased numbers of those as people go into the office maybe 2 days a week.

Let's use Bletchley-Euston as an example:

12 month season is £4904.00. There are apparently 255 working days in 2021, so if we assume 25 days holiday which is pretty average that means 230 working days for your commuter. That's £21.32 per day.

The Off Peak Day Return is, wait for it, £21.30 - exactly the same, pretty much! There is a Super Off Peak at £16 but it's not valid until the afternoon including Saturday restrictions so is only really much use for evenings out or Sundays, so is a minority "headline fare" ticket rather than commonly used. (There is a way to pay that fare without the Saturday restrictions but you have to know what it is and so most people won't do that, so it's even more niche than actually using the super off peak).

The Anytime Day Return, however, is £42.10, which is very close to twice that. So if that previous season ticket holder goes into the office twice a week but paying that fare (yes, there's a way to get it cheaper, even more so if you have a Network Railcard, but again most people won't) is bringing in £84.20 as against £106.60.

This is a reduction, but not as much as you might think, you only have to sell one and a bit more leisure travellers an Off Peak Day Return to pick it back up (and you'll sell the odd few more to now non-season holders who might buy the odd one on a weekend instead of using the season they used to have). And if you consider that there is likely to be a move away from London due to not needing to be in every day, the overall take might actually end up higher.

There are various complicating factors e.g. monthly and weekly seasons and Railcards, but this should give an idea.

(I deliberately didn't use MKC as this has lower leisure fares, but that's as a result of direct on-rail competition, which is available at a tiny minority of stations - the majority of South East commuter stations will look more like Bletchley)