Future of Ticket Office Consultations launched

[A0wen]

That statement was from Chiltern, I've not seen it on any others.

If you know anything about the demographics of most of Chiltern's area, you'll know that the number of people not owning smartphones (likely premium ones at that) will be very close to zero. And they have some spectacularly pointless booking offices, such as Aylesbury Vale Parkway (highly questionable why any sort of building was provided at that station given how recent it is).

Bit in bold - because as I pointed out when you peddled this yesterday, Aylesbury Vale Parkway station opened in December 2008 - that was only a year after the first iPhone was launched. The station would have been planned 4-5 years before then, when nobody had a smart phone and nobody knew what shape they would take.

It's easy to throw stones, but the decision to put a ticket office at that station, particularly given the number of likely season ticket purchases, was sound *at the time the decisions were being made*. Had it been built 10 years later, different decisions could and probably would have been made.

 

[Topological]

I am all for having a visible presence (and it should be visible, not hidden away in a cab or an office) but unfortunately in my experience customers can be treated very poorly at stations when asking to be re-routed; I have very rarely had a good experience. In most cases, if blanket acceptance is not in force, I have more fortune in asking permission from staff on trains (whether that be a Guard, TTI, OBM/OBS is immaterial) than at ticket offices.

The issue you describe occurs irrespective of whether staff are located within ticket offices, at the platform or neither; it's an issue the rail industry needs to address but I don't think it is affected by these proposals in any meaningful way.


But that is assuming the railway has a policy of minimising delay to passengers in order to reduce Delay Repay liabilities; sadly this is all too often not the case. In any case, if this policy was in place, you'd not need staff in an office to communicate this.

Maybe, but does the railway have fewer passengers now than it used to do decades ago? Are ticket office times increased or reduced today compared to decades ago?

I suspect the answer is that ticket office opening hours are reduced and yet more passengers are travelling; that's certainly the case in my area.

Feel free to create a new thread in the appropriate forum section; link to it from here if you like. I'll reply once you've made a new thread as it's a whole new topic in its own right.

Thanks for the detailed response Yorkie, a thread has been posted on digital tickets: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/digital-ticketing-opportunities-and-challenges.251175/

As you say, many of the issues I raised do not require a ticket office per se, they require a member of staff authorised to give permission to travel etc.

The issue is also not numbers using, rather it is the demands and needs of those who do use. That has changed so much since I first started using the railway and the paper ticket from the ticket office is clearly in decline.

 

[Starmill]

Would the provision of a security guard be both cheaper and more effective in deterring ASB, though?

Very possible but they'd need to be of a professional standard. Unfortunately while many things are better than they were I'd absolutely not want to see something important like public transport become like the door staff in Merseyside nightclubs...

Reality is that there's absolutely no chance of professional security staff being provided for railway stations. There will simply be no staff whatsoever outside of the proposed times.

 

[A0wen]

Nonsense. A well-trained member of ticket office staff can explain exactly what a person's options for buying a ticket are, what restrictions apply and make sure the customer is fully aware of that ticket's validity. As well as assisting them with itinerary enquiries and so on.

You were claiming that the railway shouldn't have to cater for the 10% minority, now it's the 1%. Your argument's all over the place. Do you even ever travel by train?

A verbal conversation - no record of what it says.

Whereas with a website or app it shows an itenary detailing each service somebody should be using.

I'm afraid if people are too stupid to understand what's printed in front of them, they're not going to understand the verbal explanation any better.

Oh - and before anyone tries to flame me with "what about blind people who can't see" - mobile phones have assistive technology which can read the details of documents or what's on screen - that alone is far more useful than anyone in a ticket office.

 

[Starmill]

Bit in bold - because as I pointed out when you peddled this yesterday, Aylesbury Vale Parkway station opened in December 2008 - that was only a year after the first iPhone was launched. The station would have been planned 4-5 years before then, when nobody had a smart phone and nobody knew what shape they would take.

It's easy to throw stones, but the decision to put a ticket office at that station, particularly given the number of likely season ticket purchases, was sound *at the time the decisions were being made*. Had it been built 10 years later, different decisions could and probably would have been made.

Interestingly, Burnley Manchester Road was unstaffed with no indoor waiting area from the opening of the current station in (I think) 1986, until the end of 2014, when the current ticket office opened. Some of the staff hours were transferred from Burnley Central though. Also Warrington West had a ticket office built when it opened in 2019, same at Worcestershire Parkway which opened in 2020.

 

[A0wen]

London Underground stations aren't unstaffed, except in out of course situations. Underground ones are never unstaffed because this isn't permitted.

The DLR, Tramlink, Tyne & Wear Metro, Metrolink, Nottingham Express Transit and so on are unstaffed at stations above ground, however, they all offer level boarding.

Bit in bold - which is good you've said that as you've agreed with what I posted: " And London Underground stations don't have ticket offices, nor does the Docklands Light Railway or Tyne & Wear Metro - yet I'm pretty sure people with disabilities use all of those."

It would appear that way I agree. If the changes as currently proposed go ahead I'd say it's likely to make everyone unhappy; including the people who currently buy things through ticket offices, who work in ticket offices, the trade union committees, passenger groups, local politicians and even some of those who use stations but don't buy tickets through ticket offices.

Bit in bold - apart from the ~90% of ticket purchasers who are already buying either online or use a TVM at the station - for whom it makes no odds whatsoever.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Going back to Huyton for a moment as I started talking about that at the start of the thread - currently it is staffed, via ticket office, at all hours that the station open. It seems that after these changes it will only have staff for a few hours in mornings Monday to Saturday.

It's not exactly an up-market area of the country, and has a number of serious problems with drug gangs, stabbings, even shootings, etc. I wouldn't particularly want to be waiting alone there at night without a staff presence, and I'm a confident middle-aged man. There's no doubt in my mind that de-staffing - and that's what this is in many cases - will affect the confidence of many people using the railway. Quite a number of people may well use alternative travel methods for that reason alone.

I'm not sure that somebody sat alone in a ticket office is going to be doing much to prevent you from getting shot, quite frankly.

Granted, at stations where the only way to access the platform is by walking past the booking office window, I can accept that the presence of a booking clerk may be some deterrent for antisocial behaviour.

In situations where it's perfectly possible to access the platforms without passing the booking office, and where most of the platforms aren't directly in view of the booking clerk, I don't see it making a huge difference.

Then of course there are the stations where the booking office is AM only anyway, again making next to no impact on antisocial behaviour.

I suspect a security presence would be both cheaper and more effective in all of the above cases.

 

[Starmill]

Bit in bold - apart from the ~90% of ticket purchasers who are already buying either online or use a TVM at the station - for whom it makes no odds whatsoever.

I disagree, de-staffing the station isn't of benefit to those people. It's clear that's what is planned.

 

[SteveM70]

The issue I was tackling was that the fees are not 'profir' in themselves

Yes they are

they are a fee for the management overheads of running the TOC

No they're not - the running costs for which TOCs are currently reimbursed includes the TOCs' management costs

these fees do not represent any pot of gold that would solve the industry's funding issues

That's true insofar as they aren't enormous amounts of money in the context of the industry's total cost base

 

[Starmill]

Bit in bold - which is good you've said that as you've agreed with what I posted: " And London Underground stations don't have ticket offices, nor does the Docklands Light Railway or Tyne & Wear Metro - yet I'm pretty sure people with disabilities use all of those."

No. I do not agree with you. London Underground's minor stations are all full time staffed. The proposal here involves enormously reducing, or all but removing, staff at minor stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree, de-staffing the station isn't of benefit to those people. It's clear that's what is planned.

Closing the ticket office at Bletchley is neither to my advantage nor my disadvantage, as I never use it. It's just completely irrelevant to me. The only thing that might be would be if they closed the toilets as well, but those are open when the booking office isn't now.

As a taxpayer it's to my advantage, I suppose, as I'd not be paying to subsidise a service I don't use.

 

[Starmill]

I'm not sure that somebody sat alone in a ticket office is going to be doing much to prevent you from getting shot, quite frankly.

Yes, but nobody is going to intervene in a situation where someone is being threatened with a gun except for police officers. I certainly wouldn't, and nobody should be advised to put themselves into harm's way like that.

What they will do, and what any bystanders should do, is call 999.

Closing the ticket office at Bletchley is neither to my advantage nor my disadvantage, as I never use it. It's just completely irrelevant to me. The only thing that might be would be if they closed the toilets as well, but those are open when the booking office isn't now.

As a taxpayer it's to my advantage, I suppose, as I'd not be paying to subsidise a service I don't use.

The station being completely unstaffed potentially is to your disadvantage however. Very unlikely at Bletchley but very likely at say Tring.

 

[JonathanH]

I disagree, de-staffing the station isn't of benefit to those people. It's clear that's what is planned.

While that may be true at some stations, I would imagine that this opens the door to full staffing of stations with gatelines at all times when the station is open.

Indeed, a position where a gateline is staffed at all times of the day reflects much more appropriately the current methods of ticket purchase than a ticket office staffed for part of the day.

For the time being gatelines must be staffed to be operational.

Vandalism and other crime seems to be more common at urban stations at night, rather than at rural stations in the middle of nowhere.

Yes, which is a good argument for full first to last staffing of all gatelines, and installation at more stations.

 

[Trainfan2019]

EMR refer to the following proposals:

Full time staffing, usually 24/7 or first train to last

Staffing for most trains (there's a few like Loughborough where the staff don't stay for the very last service)

Daily visits by mobile teams (presumably some sort of a care bear type)

Weekly visits by mobile teams

In the case of weekly, it doesn't seem to be specified what these teams are but it seems quite feasible to me that the likes of Sleaford and Spalding could effectively be de-staffed bar a weekly pop in.

I'm not quite sure how the EMR weekly visit would work or be worthwhile really.

Kidsgrove for example is currently single staffed 6 mornings per week but is changing to the weekly visit system.

What happens in winter if station platforms need gritting but the weekly visit isn't until say 5 days time? Or someone needs assistance in ticket buying or refunding but no-one there for a few days?

It all seems a bit vague and not many positives. Maybe it would be better to just reduce the ticket office opening hours rather than the drastic step of weekly visits.

 

[Thirteen]

I know this is related to TOCs and NR ticket offices but do any of the TfL run stations have ticket offices?

 

[Philip]

A verbal conversation - no record of what it says.

Whereas with a website or app it shows an itenary detailing each service somebody should be using.

I'm afraid if people are too stupid to understand what's printed in front of them, they're not going to understand the verbal explanation any better.

Ticket offices can print an itinerary or write it down and often passengers find this more useful and easier to follow than the itinerary on the app. The last point you make is mostly wrong from my experience.

Oh - and before anyone tries to flame me with "what about blind people who can't see" - mobile phones have assistive technology which can read the details of documents or what's on screen - that alone is far more useful than anyone in a ticket office.

People with visual impairments can listen to what the ticket clerk has to say and if it is good information and communicated clearly then there is a strong argument that this is more helpful than any kind of mobile phone technology.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm afraid if people are too stupid to understand what's printed in front of them, they're not going to understand the verbal explanation any better.

I would disagree with you there. My day job involves taking complex written information and rendering it verbally in a way that they understand. I have plenty of people bringing letters and forms from government departments who haven't got the foggiest clue what they're on about on arrival but leave understanding what's going on and what they need to do.

To be clear I don't work in a ticket office though

 

[Starmill]

Yes they are



No they're not - the running costs for which TOCs are currently reimbursed includes the TOCs' management costs



That's true insofar as they aren't enormous amounts of money in the context of the industry's total cost base

What you appear to be missing is that the government doesn't have any in-house railway management capability and hasn't done for many years now. Therefore this "profit" can't be kept in the public sector because the capacity to run the railway doesn't exist without contracting it out through the Operator of Last Resort. I'll let you into a little secret, the management fee on the National Rail Contracts might actually be ever so slightly cheaper than the same costs under OLR...

Transferring TransPennine Express from First Group's company to Trans Pennine Trains has increased costs, because handovers cost money and cause disruption to the business e.g. through front-line staff leaving without notice by rejecting the offer if TUPE. Unclear as yet but I'd expect FG's fees would have been cheaper than the OLR's also.

Directly Operated Railways kind of was, but that wasn't terribly efficient because they were only running one operator which still ended up incurring massive re-bid costs anyway.

 

[MikeWM]

Would the provision of a security guard be both cheaper and more effective in deterring ASB, though?

Possibly, but of course that isn't going to happen. It's going to be railway staff or nothing in cases like this.

--

I'm not sure that somebody sat alone in a ticket office is going to be doing much to prevent you from getting shot, quite frankly.

But people are far less likely to be hanging around and misbehaving at a staffed station in the first place, as I'm sure you're well aware.

In any event, perception of safety often isn't entirely rational, but it does affect customer behaviour anyway - or stops them being customers in the first place. To be honest, you're not especially likely to be shot in Huyton in the first place unless you're involved in gang activity, but it is nevertheless rather more likely there than in say Ely, to the degree that makes people wary. Having a member of staff present increases the perception of safety and hence confidence in using the railways.

 

[miklcct]

My main concern is that how can I buy a season ticket for immediate travel tomorrow without relying on the unrealisable postal system? They can only be posted if bought online.

 

[Lewisham2221]

I disagree, de-staffing the station isn't of benefit to those people. It's clear that's what is planned.

Your original post mentioned making everyone "unhappy", not whether it was of benefit.

Either way, closing the booking office at one of my local stations would make absolutely no difference to me. It certainly wouldn't make me "unhappy". Nor do I "benefit" from it remaining open. It's supposed to be open breakfast till lunch, 6 (I think) days a week. On any attempt I've made to actually use the booking office, it's been closed when it should be open. I've coped. Presumably, from the number of people who, like me, totally bypass the booking office and head straight to the platforms even on the occasions when it is open, there are many others who would not be "unhappy" if it closed nor "benefit" from it remaining open.

 

[Starmill]

Your original post mentioned making everyone "unhappy", not whether it was of benefit.

Either way, closing the booking office at one of my local stations would make absolutely no difference to me. It certainly wouldn't make me "unhappy". Nor do I "benefit" from it remaining open. It's supposed to be open breakfast till lunch, 6 (I think) days a week. On any attempt I've made to actually use the booking office, it's been closed when it should be open. I've coped. Presumably, from the number of people who, like me, totally bypass the booking office and head straight to the platforms even on the occasions when it is open, there are many others who would not be "unhappy" if it closed nor "benefit" from it remaining open.

Removing the staff completely, which is what I said, rather than closing the ticket office, is bad, and will make passengers less happy. I don't see how that's in any way up for dispute to be honest.

You can be all contrary about that if you want, presumably you think that makes you sound big and manly or something? But whatever, I'm not going to argue with you about it, you're just wrong.

 

[MikeWM]

Well, I've added my 2p-worth to the consultation response (including completing a Captcha - aaaagh). For all the good it will do.

 

[12LDA28C]

A verbal conversation - no record of what it says.

Whereas with a website or app it shows an itenary detailing each service somebody should be using.

I'm afraid if people are too stupid to understand what's printed in front of them, they're not going to understand the verbal explanation any better.

Oh - and before anyone tries to flame me with "what about blind people who can't see" - mobile phones have assistive technology which can read the details of documents or what's on screen - that alone is far more useful than anyone in a ticket office.

If people are too stupid to understand simple instructions given in face to face conversation then maybe they shouldn't leave the house. These people probably can't spell 'itinerary' either.

 

[Starmill]

I would imagine that this opens the door to full staffing of stations with gatelines at all times when the station is open.

Sure that would be an improvement over the current position. But that's absolutely not going to be what happens at the minor stations which are the ones going to quasi-unstaffed.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Removing the staff completely, which is what I said, rather than closing the ticket office, is bad, and will make passengers less happy. I don't see how that's in any way up for dispute to be honest.

My point was that the station I was talking about, closing the booking office = complete de-staffing. And that I and many others would not be "unhappy*" about that, as we do not "benefit" from the current arrangement anyway. *except, perhaps, in a nostalgic or sentimental way.

You can be all contrary about that if you want, presumably you think that makes you sound big and manly or something? But whatever, I'm not going to argue with you about it, you're just wrong.

Wrong.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The station being completely unstaffed potentially is to your disadvantage however. Very unlikely at Bletchley but very likely at say Tring.

Wouldn't bother me. It's not in a bad area, demonstrated by the building being left open 24/7/363 (might even not be locked on Xmas Day/Boxing Day).

There is a signalling centre and traincrew depot next door, but the only staff normally on the station itself are the booking office staff (when open) and the coffee kiosk (same). Pre COVID there was also a contract security guard who was primarily there to dissuade suicides but there isn't any more.

 

[A0wen]

Ticket offices can print an itinerary or write it down and often passengers find this more useful and easier to follow than the itinerary on the app. The last point you make is mostly wrong from my experience.

Right - so what's the difference between printing it at home and getting the station to print it ? Same information - so no difference.

And AI will, in the next 5 years, improve beyond recognition the quality of information presentation on a mobile device.

People with visual impairments can listen to what the ticket clerk has to say and if it is good information and communicated clearly then there is a strong argument that this is more helpful than any kind of mobile phone technology.

Except half an hour into the journey when they can replay the information on the phone - no way of doing that when the bloke you spoke with is 20 miles back at another station and the guy at the next station doesn't have the foggiest what the first guy said to you......

If people are too stupid to understand simple instructions given in face to face conversation then maybe they shouldn't leave the house.

Well, that is the approach we take with children until they reach a certain age. And indeed with adults who may be unable to follow simple instructions.

These people probably can't spell 'itinerary' either.

Yep, typo on my part. However, I'm quite capable of using a mobile phone to buy my train tickets and presenting them when asked by a ticket inspector or at a gate - so that doesn't really work, does it ?

 

[BrummieBobby]

As an aside, am I correct in thinking that the TOC managing a station have to provide the means to pay in the manner that I want?

So if I turn up at my local station (Ungated, soon to lose its ticket office, already has a card only TVM) and want to pay in cash to travel to another ungated station, am I correct in thinking that I am allowed to board without a ticket?

 

[Bletchleyite]

As an aside, am I correct in thinking that the TOC managing a station have to provide the means to pay in the manner that I want?

So if I turn up at my local station (Ungated, soon to lose its ticket office, already has a card only TVM) and want to pay in cash to travel to another ungated station, am I correct in thinking that I am allowed to board without a ticket?

Yes, you have to pay at the first opportunity. You may need to get a Permit to Travel or Promise to Pay if applicable to that TOC. (The main reason for these is to evidence where you came from so you can't short-fare).