GWR - Unacceptable for Xmas Eve.

[PyrahnaRanger]

Essentially, despite what the timetable says, these days trains after about 1900 on Christmas Eve must be treated as 'optional', sadly. The TOCs are driven by contractual penalties, not service pride, and thus the cheapest option for them will be taken - cancelling trains because of a longer-term staffing issue which itself has been driven by cost-cutting - even more so that they know that their tenure is going to end soon anyway.

I'm afraid I already treat timetables as optional these days. I know roughly what time I should be leaving, but 27 delay repay claims in the last 6 months suggest it's a bit of a gamble if you'll get to where you expected to be on time. Incidentally, I've used trains about once a week this year, usually out on one day, back two days later, so that's pretty much every time I've used the train!

But the business is being prevented from offering better incentives to its own staff by the DfT, as has been explained many, many times before. So just condemning it as “a low grade poor quality business” doesn’t really shine a light on matters, does it?



It isn’t the train staff who are making the decisions that have led to the cancelled trains, which are due to insufficient numbers of said staff existing in the first place.

It's not this staff making those decisions, and credit where credit's due, the government seem to be able to make a right dog's breakfast of any thing they touch. However, there are numerous examples of staff who seem to agree with DfT that things would be much easier and simpler if these passengers would just go away, which doesn't create a great impression, as seen in the post you were replying to.

Because it should be treated as a system? There are 41.7 million licenced vehicles in the UK. How much modal shift are you expecting before the railway couldn't cope?

At busy times? I'm not sure it can cope now, never mind if a couple of hundred extra passengers turned up in rush hour. There's probably some leeway outside of that, but even when I try and get off peak Avanti trains, they're still pretty full. Aside from that, it feels like one little incident can knock the railway out of kilter over a huge area - a track defect in the Trent Valley can make trains running between Penrith and Glasgow late, but a pothole in Rugby doesn't affect those in Carlisle, for example.

 

[The Planner]

At busy times? I'm not sure it can cope now, never mind if a couple of hundred extra passengers turned up in rush hour. There's probably some leeway outside of that, but even when I try and get off peak Avanti trains, they're still pretty full. Aside from that, it feels like one little incident can knock the railway out of kilter over a huge area - a track defect in the Trent Valley can make trains running between Penrith and Glasgow late, but a pothole in Rugby doesn't affect those in Carlisle, for example.

And this is my point, the capacity up lifts required are monumental and we are a long way from being subsidy free.

 

[Sly Old Fox]

There is not a driver shortage. There is simply a misue of what driver resources GWR has. At Plymouth for example, on the HSS side, they are now seriously short, yes short of work. The problem is inefficient diagramming, where a driver will be used for just a couple of hours driving during a shift, rather than being used productively, say driving for 6 or 7 hours . The issues began about 7 years ago with the idea that it is better to use 4 drivers to cover a trains journey from say Plymouth to London than 1. Tackle this ineffienct rostering and things would start looking a lot better for zero extra cost to the taxpayer.

Why have three drivers driving three trains when you can have one driver drive and two pass on one train and then cancel the following two trains?

 

[Mark J]

It's not really the Railway's fault if no taxis are available. Of course in this case the OP could have simply caught the next available train but chose instead to curtail their evening's activities, catch an earlier train and then moan about it on an internet forum.

Excuse me?

Another really 'helpful' individual sticking their 1p's worth in.

I curtailed my evening through no other choice. It was either leave early, or risk being stranded somewhere. It is something I should not be forced to do in the first place.

What don't you get about that?

Why should passengers be forced to change their plans for the evening, just because of an inefficient and unreliable train service.

You do not know individual passenger circumstances before coming to the ridiculous conclusion of "moan about it on an internet forum'". What if we had a meal booked at 7pm for example, and had to rely on a later train.

People are more than entitled to make complaints about the state of rail services, whether you like that, or not. This forum is full of such complaints.

As for the other really 'helpful' comments of 'scroll down'.

That would of only of been seen on Oxford to Didcot Parkway. Not Oxford to Reading. The images provided were the furthest I could 'scroll down'.

 

[Clarence Yard]

You are of course right. A service has been advertised, you have made the appropriate arrangements for that day and you are expecting that service to run.

If I had to criticise GWR, I would say they were over optimistic when, months ago, they decided on the service for the day. They did not have enough resources to make it happen. Let’s not get stuck in the rabbit hole of optimised resourcing (which I hate) - they simply didn’t have enough drivers willing to work on Xmas Eve and the shortage got worse during the day. They were dozens, yes dozens, short.

The 2201 was binned off very late in the day and only when all other options had run out. Should it be like this? Of course not. But until the railway can get enough resources and they are so organised (through their conditions of service as well) to guarantee a service, it will always be a bit hit and miss.

I would be very surprised if GWR offered such late trains again. I think they will be forced to look at running less trains and shutting down earlier, like other lines do on Xmas Eve.

 

[12LDA28C]

Excuse me?

Another really 'helpful' individual sticking their 1p's worth in.

I curtailed my evening through no other choice. It was either leave early, or risk being stranded somewhere. It is something I should not be forced to do in the first place.

What don't you get about that?

Why should passengers be forced to change their plans for the evening, just because of an inefficient and unreliable train service.

You do not know individual passenger circumstances before coming to the ridiculous conclusion of "moan about it on an internet forum'". What if we had a meal booked at 7pm for example, and had to rely on a later train.

People are more than entitled to make complaints about the state of rail services, whether you like that, or not. This forum is full of such complaints.

As for the other really 'helpful' comments of 'scroll down'.

That would of only of been seen on Oxford to Didcot Parkway. Not Oxford to Reading. The images provided were the furthest I could 'scroll down'.

Assuming you are in possession of a smartphone, as most people are these days, you would have been able to see there was a later train to Didcot and then ascertain that a connecting service was available to Reading, then onwards to Paddington although of course this would have got you into London rather later than originally planned.

I was simply stating that you claimed you 'had no choice' but to curtail your evening but this was not in fact the case. Even if there was no later train, GWR should do whatever they can to get you home, by whatever means necessary and I would have found a member of staff (or used the help point) and argued this point robustly, as I have done in the past to secure road transport. There should not be any risk of you being 'stranded somewhere' due to a train being cancelled.

 

[Starmill]

You are of course right. A service has been advertised, you have made the appropriate arrangements for that day and you are expecting that service to run.

If I had to criticise GWR, I would say they were over optimistic when, months ago, they decided on the service for the day. They did not have enough resources to make it happen. Let’s not get stuck in the rabbit hole of optimised resourcing (which I hate) - they simply didn’t have enough drivers willing to work on Xmas Eve and the shortage got worse during the day. They were dozens, yes dozens, short.

The 2201 was binned off very late in the day and only when all other options had run out. Should it be like this? Of course not. But until the railway can get enough resources and they are so organised (through their conditions of service as well) to guarantee a service, it will always be a bit hit and miss.

I would be very surprised if GWR offered such late trains again. I think they will be forced to look at running less trains and shutting down earlier, like other lines do on Xmas Eve.

I think this is the best outcome for everyone to be honest. Many people are disappointed by naff timetabled service, I admit, but people are generally much, much more disappointed by the inability to plan in advance around it.

 

[robbeech]

The person on the platform, or their colleague you didn’t see? A phone call to a Control Room? Who would have paid for it? It would have been paid for on account.

We know that is too high a risk to rely on in 2024.

Essentially, despite what the timetable says, these days trains after about 1900 on Christmas Eve must be treated as 'optional', sadly.

We must appreciate that all services on all days are optional. Whilst the vast majority run, run to time and without any issues there are no actual consequences for the railway when they don’t.

Should passengers boycott trains on Christmas Eve?

Absolutely not, that would be quite ridiculous. The real question is should passengers rely on trains on Christmas Eve to which the answer is no.

I think this is the best outcome for everyone to be honest. Many people are disappointed by naff timetabled service, I admit, but people are generally much, much more disappointed by the inability to plan in advance around it.

It’s a financial decision. I suspect offering a rather poor timetable (1tph vs 4tph, finishing at 1700 for example) would incur penalties where as just telling passengers it’ll be a reasonably normal service, perhaps finishing a couple of hours earlier then just simply not doing so will be “one of those things” in the eyes of regulators.

As we see with the vast majority of posts nowadays that relate to a specific situation it is the passenger and only the passenger that suffers.

 

[johncrossley]

Absolutely not, that would be quite ridiculous. The real question is should passengers rely on trains on Christmas Eve to which the answer is no.

That's more or less the same thing as a boycott. If you can't rely on a train, you can't expect people to use it.

 

[robbeech]

That's more or less the same thing as a boycott. If you can't rely on a train, you can't expect people to use it.

Perhaps. I’m more referring to having an independent ‘plan b’ for when the railway throws the towel in, perhaps only for the return part of your journey. As I’ve said before, if you travel outwards by train without the means to look after yourself at your remote destination or get yourself home by other means in 2024 you are taking a risk.

 

[Snow1964]

Perhaps. I’m more referring to having an independent ‘plan b’ for when the railway throws the towel in, perhaps only for the return part of your journey. As I’ve said before, if you travel outwards by train without the means to look after yourself at your remote destination or get yourself home by other means in 2024 you are taking a risk.

If you are going to require people to think of plan B as routine, then the fundamentals change. Effectively it becomes buy a ticket, and you might (or might not) get published train.

Clearly in real world if you advertise something and sell tickets for it, you do not under resource it. You ensure you have resources (human and physical). If can't manage that then you revise achievability 3 or 4 months beforehand, not once people have bought tickets and started their evening, expecting the return train.

 

[12LDA28C]

Clearly in real world if you advertise something and sell tickets for it, you do not under resource it. You ensure you have resources (human and physical). If can't manage that then you revise achievability 3 or 4 months beforehand, not once people have bought tickets and started their evening, expecting the return train.

Of course this is nothing like how the ‘real world’ works on the railway. For decades the railway has run on overtime and until a few years ago this was pretty successful. According to your model if a TOC employed only 90% of its full establishment of drivers, they should reduce the timetable accordingly, when in fact drivers working overtime and rest days meant that they could run the full timetable. Even now, rostering arrangements on the railway mean that a train that is currently unresourced tomorrow evening might be covered by a driver volunteering to work overtime just a few hours before the train is due to run. It’s a risky strategy but that’s the nature of the industry and has been for years.

 

[Snow1964]

Of course this is nothing like how the ‘real world’ works on the railway. For decades the railway has run on overtime and until a few years ago this was pretty successful. According to your model if a TOC employed only 90% of its full establishment of drivers, they should reduce the timetable accordingly, when in fact drivers working overtime and rest days meant that they could run the full timetable. Even now, rostering arrangements on the railway mean that a train that is currently unresourced tomorrow evening might be covered by a driver volunteering to work overtime just a few hours before the train is due to run. It’s a risky strategy but that’s the nature of the industry and has been for years.

Another person who has come out with overtime was sufficient to cover everything years ago. Without explaining why that would still work in mid 2020s

50 or 60 hour working weeks existed in the past too, but world has moved on, and nowadays there is concept of work/life balance. So just because in ancient history lowish paid staff chose to do lots of overtime, doesn't mean it will automatically work in mid 2020s.

These days the amount of overtime taken up is far lower than in the past, so only an idiot (or DfT) would base their staffing levels on what was acceptable decades ago. Unfilled overtime is a form of planning error, a miscalculation where overtime offered is far more than will be taken up, so leaves staffing gaps.

 

[Somewhere]

Trouble is, management finished on Friday lunchtime. Probably sending emails from the pub up until official finishing time on Friday evening.
Expecting those left behind to pick up the pieces when they get back to work on 6th January, when the blame emails start flying around.
That's how it works these days.
I could provide evidence, but more than my job, let alone theirs', is worth

 

[Clarence Yard]

I would be very surprised if the GWR MD and his management team are waiting till the 6th January! I strongly suspect there has been very senior management interaction both on Xmas Eve and today, given what has been going on with the isolation issue on the major NR possession.

I wouldn’t be assuming that a particular TOC is running at 90% of establishment either. It may well have depots at 100% but are all the drivers currently productive? How many are stood off, on the sick or go sick on the day? What are the leave arrangements and agreements on leave pre and post Xmas? What are the spares ratios and how productive can a spare turn be? It all varies from TOC to TOC and sometimes from depot to depot.

Only GWR can truly know these answers and where they were short and for what reason, at each and every depot. But I suspect after this, they will be looking at the Xmas 2025 service with a different and less generous eye.

 

[Haywain]

Trouble is, management finished on Friday lunchtime. Probably sending emails from the pub up until official finishing time on Friday evening.
Expecting those left behind to pick up the pieces when they get back to work on 6th January, when the blame emails start flying around.
That's how it works these days.
I could provide evidence, but more than my job, let alone theirs', is worth

Typical lazy view of management.

 

[12LDA28C]

Another person who has come out with overtime was sufficient to cover everything years ago. Without explaining why that would still work in mid 2020s

50 or 60 hour working weeks existed in the past too, but world has moved on, and nowadays there is concept of work/life balance. So just because in ancient history lowish paid staff chose to do lots of overtime, doesn't mean it will automatically work in mid 2020s.

These days the amount of overtime taken up is far lower than in the past, so only an idiot (or DfT) would base their staffing levels on what was acceptable decades ago. Unfilled overtime is a form of planning error, a miscalculation where overtime offered is far more than will be taken up, so leaves staffing gaps.

Sorry, who mentioned ancient history? I’m talking about pre-Covid and even to a certain extent up until the recent drivers’ pay rise. At some TOCs, a certain reliance on overtime still works perfectly well, as some contributors to this forum will attest. And I’m not suggesting that’s the case everywhere by any means but please don’t misquote me as referring to a system that worked ‘decades ago’, unless you’re suggesting that we have seen mass cancellations due to staff shortages for ‘decades’, which is nonsense.

 

[RisingPhoenics]

It does feel like some are taking issue that a passenger dare not be aware of what their rights are in the event of a cancellation.

If in the space of an hour, 7 of the last 10 trains are cancelled, it's not logical to assume the 3 remaining trains WILL run simply because it currently says they will run. As the 7 cancelled trains also said they would run until they didn't.

Some of the responses I felt were akin to growing up with chopsticks and sneering at people who didn't grow up with chopsticks and therefore aren't as proficient. Why would it be well known that a TOC has a responsibility to get you home still if the last advertised trains are cancelled with insufficient notice? Why would it be known that certain doors are where staff will be within and you just need to knock and they'll help? Why would most passengers know the opening times of every help point of every station from Paddington and Piccadilly to Dunrobin and Sugar Loaf.

I'm not sure if such an attitude helps anyone. This is particularly the case for disabled passengers, who can often be met with derision when various things are mismanaged by staff. Booking support weeks in advance with great details, only to have no staff on the day to help, and not be able to leave a train until a later destination. Or nobody at the station to help board the train despite that being prebooked and double and triple checked.

Not every passenger will know how the trains operate. Not every passenger will know that the physical trains aren't owned by the company that operates the trains. And even when passengers do know their rights that doesn't mean they'll have the service they're legally entitled to provided.

 

[WAB]

Trouble is, management finished on Friday lunchtime. Probably sending emails from the pub up until official finishing time on Friday evening.
Expecting those left behind to pick up the pieces when they get back to work on 6th January, when the blame emails start flying around.
That's how it works these days.
I could provide evidence, but more than my job, let alone theirs', is worth

I'm not quite sure what you expect all of these managers who apparently all went on leave at the same time to have done even if they were at work? Control and Resources won't need managers who'd only get in the way, and their mere presence wouldn't compel traincrew to ditch their families and turn in for RDW. The Control team and the on-call managers are in the best position to make decisions that close to the wire. A few managers could've turned up at Reading and Temple Meads to support the station staff (which they may well have done) but I think overall you overestimate the utility for managers during a spate of cancellations.

 

[Somewhere]

Typical lazy view of management.

Am I wrong?

 

[43066]

The point is, don't publish a timetable that you don't know whether you can deliver until a few days before. Don't get into a position of having agreements with staff which enable that uncertainty. Don't expect customers to just shrug their shoulders and accept the position. Will have That's what's low grade.

But who is it you’re actually criticising?

The timetable is published way in advance (as per DfT requirements?) and resourced a few days before, as per longstanding industry practice that has worked fine for decades. It would work fine if they were allowed to incentivise the staff better, but they can’t do that without DfT permission. It isn’t a question of “agreements”, it’s because the staff have been recruited with Sundays outside their contracts, to change that would require DfT approval. All pointed out many times before.

You always want want to focus on staffing agreements but those aren’t causing the issues here and, as noted upthread, the business itself is simply doing what’s required of it by its main customer (ie the DfT who pays its management fee) and it’s absolutely no skin of GWR’s nose if they cancel trains as they don’t take revenue risk.

It's not this staff making those decisions, and credit where credit's due, the government seem to be able to make a right dog's breakfast of any thing they touch. However, there are numerous examples of staff who seem to agree with DfT that things would be much easier and simpler if these passengers would just go away, which doesn't create a great impression, as seen in the post you were replying to.

I actually don’t think there are many staff like that at all; most are simply trying to do their best while the system around them fails. Pointing out the issues also isn’t the same thing as defending the employers. Of course the issues at GWR lead to a vicious circle, as staff are even less likely to want to spend extra time at work, when they’re on the receiving end of abuse as a result of the service falling down due to insufficient staff.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

For what it’s worth, I would have done what the OP did. I could march down to the station and demand a taxi but I have little trust and faith in our organisations these days so would not be in full confidence one would be called for me.

 

[Taplowgreen]

But who is it you’re actually criticising?

The timetable is published way in advance (as per DfT requirements?) and resourced a few days before, as per longstanding industry practice that has worked fine for decades. It would work fine if they were allowed to incentivise the staff better, but they can’t do that without DfT permission. It isn’t a question of “agreements”, it’s because the staff have been recruited with Sundays outside their contracts, to change that would require DfT approval. All pointed out many times before.

You always want want to focus on staffing agreements but those aren’t causing the issues here and, as noted upthread, the business itself is simply doing what’s required of it by its main customer (ie the DfT who pays its management fee) and it’s absolutely no skin of GWR’s nose if they cancel trains as they don’t take revenue risk.



I actually don’t think there are many staff like that at all; most are simply trying to do their best while the system around the fails. Pointing out the issues also isn’t the same thing as defending the employers. Of course the issues at GWR lead to a vicious circle, as staff are even less likely to want to spend extra time at work, when they’re on the receiving end of abuse as a result of the service falling down due to insufficient staff.

It would be interesting to understand what representation Hopwood (GWR MD) has made to DfT over the years to be allowed to recruit sufficient staff in order to bring Sunday within the working week and settle the issue permanently - if indeed a sincere effort has been made by GWR to resolve this issue - and prior to 2022 when they had more influence on the issue what efforts had been made to resolve the Sunday issue generally - or was it just placed on the "too difficult" pile?

Writing out a cheque for enhanced overtime payments on key Sundays represents a sticking plaster but no more than that - the simple fact is that the drivers salaries are now at a level whereby mostly overtime is neither needed nor wanted.

 

[CC 72100]

Am I wrong?

So, on a previous thread you've lambasted BTP, on this one 'management'.

What role do YOU do, and then we can all pitch in and make stereotypical snipes at your role?

I'm not quite sure what you expect all of these managers who apparently all went on leave at the same time to have done even if they were at work? Control and Resources won't need managers who'd only get in the way, and their mere presence wouldn't compel traincrew to ditch their families and turn in for RDW. The Control team and the on-call managers are in the best position to make decisions that close to the wire. A few managers could've turned up at Reading and Temple Meads to support the station staff (which they may well have done) but I think overall you overestimate the utility for managers during a spate of cancellations.

This is probably more accurate. On the day there's not much that can be done - the debating is about strategic decisions which have resulted in that level of service on that day. Doing so some time around 1900 on Christmas Eve isn't going to help matters!

 

[43066]

It would be interesting to understand what representation Hopwood (GWR MD) has made to DfT over the years to be allowed to recruit sufficient staff in order to bring Sunday within the working week and settle the issue permanently - if indeed a sincere effort has been made by GWR to resolve this issue - and prior to 2022 when they had more influence on the issue what efforts had been made to resolve the Sunday issue generally - or was it just placed on the "too difficult" pile?

Indeed it would, although at least they would have had some freedom to flex incentives offered in order to deliver the service, and some proper accountability if they failed to do so. At the moment it’s essentially a zombie business with no commercial incentive to change anything.

It’s interesting how some TOCs brought Sundays into the week, while some didn’t. Presumably this was just a reflection of different management styles and priorities.

Writing out a cheque for enhanced overtime payments on key Sundays represents a sticking plaster but no more than that - the simple fact is that the drivers salaries are now at a level whereby mostly overtime is neither needed nor wanted.

Not sure this is true - ultimately people at any given salary take on commitments and a lifestyle commensurate with that, and an ability to earn more is very useful. Drivers are paid around the same in real terms as 2018/19 (possibly a little less) and plenty of overtime as being done then. That said, for some post Covid, there is perhaps a a feeling of being less willing to spend time at work for lifestyle reasons, as we are seeing in the wider economy.

The backpay and 60% marginal tax rate will be a factor at the moment, but things will improve in the new year, and even more rapidly after April. That doesn’t excuse the service being allowed to fall apart over Christmas 2024, and virtually every Sunday, though!

 

[Sad Sprinter]

It would be interesting to understand what representation Hopwood (GWR MD) has made to DfT over the years to be allowed to recruit sufficient staff in order to bring Sunday within the working week and settle the issue permanently - if indeed a sincere effort has been made by GWR to resolve this issue - and prior to 2022 when they had more influence on the issue what efforts had been made to resolve the Sunday issue generally - or was it just placed on the "too difficult" pile?

Writing out a cheque for enhanced overtime payments on key Sundays represents a sticking plaster but no more than that - the simple fact is that the drivers salaries are now at a level whereby mostly overtime is neither needed nor wanted.

Be “allowed” to recruit more staff?

 

[Western Sunset]

In the days of relatively low pay, then using overtime was a reasonable way to run things. GF "Tried to run a railway", but even then he faced problems.

Move forward 50+ years... Now with a relatively highly paid workforce in many grades, the appetite for overtime is understandably diminished.

It does feel like some are taking issue that a passenger dare not be aware of what their rights are in the event of a cancellation.

If in the space of an hour, 7 of the last 10 trains are cancelled, it's not logical to assume the 3 remaining trains WILL run simply because it currently says they will run. As the 7 cancelled trains also said they would run until they didn't.

Some of the responses I felt were akin to growing up with chopsticks and sneering at people who didn't grow up with chopsticks and therefore aren't as proficient. Why would it be well known that a TOC has a responsibility to get you home still if the last advertised trains are cancelled with insufficient notice? Why would it be known that certain doors are where staff will be within and you just need to knock and they'll help? Why would most passengers know the opening times of every help point of every station from Paddington and Piccadilly to Dunrobin and Sugar Loaf.

I'm not sure if such an attitude helps anyone. This is particularly the case for disabled passengers, who can often be met with derision when various things are mismanaged by staff. Booking support weeks in advance with great details, only to have no staff on the day to help, and not be able to leave a train until a later destination. Or nobody at the station to help board the train despite that being prebooked and double and triple checked.

Not every passenger will know how the trains operate. Not every passenger will know that the physical trains aren't owned by the company that operates the trains. And even when passengers do know their rights that doesn't mean they'll have the service they're legally entitled to provided.

The most sensible post on this thread, and from a new member with no axe to grind.

Well done sir, or madam.

 

[Haywain]

Be “allowed” to recruit more staff?

Yes, DfT has oversight of recruitment.

Am I wrong?

Yes.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Yes, DfT has oversight of recruitment.


Yes.

I think…I think you might have just turned me into a Thatcherite

 

[Haywain]

I think…I think you might have just turned me into a Thatcherite

Oh, I hope not!