Great Western Coffee Shop

All across the Great Western territory => Across the West => Topic started by: Dark Star on March 04, 2014, 09:00:12



Title: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Dark Star on March 04, 2014, 09:00:12
With only 18 months left I find it beyond belief that on 1st April both the APCOA car park and Building Maintenance contacts (Lorne Stuart) change.
OK re Car Park, it's new signage with new uniform and vans  for staff.
That will cost hundreds of thousands ^, but to change maintenance contract will cost heck of a lot more. Maybe ^2M plus.
For 18 months CRAZY.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: ChrisB on March 04, 2014, 09:05:18
Hmmm - there's another Direct Award coming before the new franchise ....


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: BBM on March 04, 2014, 10:39:42
With only 18 months left I find it beyond belief that on 1st April both the APCOA car park and Building Maintenance contacts (Lorne Stuart) change.

I wasn't aware that there's going to be a change in the car park contract, who will take over from APCOA?


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: paul7575 on March 04, 2014, 11:21:32
It's only odd if you think for some strange reason that these sort of contracts align exactly with franchise changes - and they don't actually need to.   Although the franchise dates keep being changed, why would anyone expect the parking and maintenance contracts to change to follow as well?

Paul


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: John R on March 04, 2014, 11:30:26
Indeed, it would make a franchise change even more difficult if every contract came up for renewal at that point. Much better that they straddle the franchise.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: grahame on March 04, 2014, 12:34:46
With only 18 months left I find it beyond belief that on 1st April both the APCOA car park and Building Maintenance contacts (Lorne Stuart) change.

Just six months into a franchise seems to be the natural time to change sub-contracts.  That's in very much the same way that timetables don't change over on day 1 of a franchise, but rather a few months later, once the new operator has come in and worked out what's their style.

Perhaps the problem identified by Dark Star comes because of the length of the contract. When (question for Dark Star) is best to change subcontracts in a situation where the main contract is a series of lets of just under 2 years?


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: ChrisB on March 04, 2014, 12:48:23
APCOA are hated by customers....generate a lot of complaints.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: grahame on March 04, 2014, 13:26:59
APCOA are hated by customers....generate a lot of complaints.

But is that 'just' the nature of the business of selling car parking spaces ... and not unique to APCOA. I remember NCP not exactly being a loved company, and our local council gets a lot of flack over car parking charges, enforcement which at times is lacking and at other times is over pedantic, etc.

Who are the big players in this business theses days?   I couldn't find a current list but did come across
http://data.gov.uk/dataset/car-parks (which would need analysis of the operator field)
http://www.davidlawson.co.uk/Files/Parking3_117.htm (which is very old)


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: phile on March 04, 2014, 17:28:20
With only 18 months left I find it beyond belief that on 1st April both the APCOA car park and Building Maintenance contacts (Lorne Stuart) change.
OK re Car Park, it's new signage with new uniform and vans  for staff.
That will cost hundreds of thousands ^, but to change maintenance contract will cost heck of a lot more. Maybe ^2M plus.
For 18 months CRAZY.

Where ?


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Dark Star on March 04, 2014, 18:40:32
To change Car Park contract will cost ^100000 plus just on new signage and it's install costs.

To set up new maintenance contract will cost ^millions because of all the computer time in setting up a maintenance program.

Wessex Trains wanted to change Maintenance Contract in 2004 but DfT stopped it on set up cost.

Anyway remember the Contractors Golden Rule on reactive works,
Why do it in an hour when the client will pay for Four hours.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Electric train on March 04, 2014, 19:02:41
There is probably a break clause in the contracts relating to change of franchise


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: grahame on March 04, 2014, 20:51:27
To change Car Park contract will cost ^100000 plus just on new signage and it's install costs.

To set up new maintenance contract will cost ^millions because of all the computer time in setting up a maintenance program.

May I re-ask my earlier question, as I don't see an answer there - just a criticism of what's happening with no suggestion of what should be done instead ...
When (question for Dark Star) is best to change subcontracts in a situation where the main contract is a series of lets of just under 2 years?
... are you suggesting that car parking and maintenance contracts should be left unchanged (and uncompeted for and - you suggest - expensive) until such time as a longer TOC franchise is in place?


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: broadgage on March 04, 2014, 20:56:33
Why on earth should changing the maintenance contractor cost millions ?
Some years ago I worked for Lorne Stuart, at present I am employed by one of their competitors.
Maintenance contracts change hands fairly regularly and I am not aware of ANY significant cost to the customer.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: phile on March 04, 2014, 21:04:56
With only 18 months left I find it beyond belief that on 1st April both the APCOA car park and Building Maintenance contacts (Lorne Stuart) change.
OK re Car Park, it's new signage with new uniform and vans  for staff.
That will cost hundreds of thousands ^, but to change maintenance contract will cost heck of a lot more. Maybe ^2M plus.
For 18 months CRAZY.

Where ?

Realise now general.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Dark Star on March 05, 2014, 15:28:14
In reply to Broadgage, to Transfer Staff under TUPE, costs a lot. New Uniform, Vans and Equipment.
New Maintenance (PPMs) have to be set up, that costs big bucks.

As I said Wessex Trains wanted to change Maintenance provider for it's last 20 months but DfT stopped it because off the change over costs.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: grahame on March 05, 2014, 15:46:53
In reply to Broadgage, to Transfer Staff under TUPE, costs a lot. New Uniform, Vans and Equipment.
New Maintenance (PPMs) have to be set up, that costs big bucks.

As I said Wessex Trains wanted to change Maintenance provider for it's last 20 months but DfT stopped it because off the change over costs.


And you still haven't answered my question "if not at this point in a franchise, then when".  You appear to be saying "this is no good" but not coming up with any alternative suggestion.  I'm happy for you not to answer (I won't nag again), but if you don't it will be clear to readers that you've not got any better alternative to offer.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Dark Star on March 05, 2014, 17:28:52
For 18 months, why not just keep the Status Quo.
When the New Franchise is awarded that's the time to change Contracts.
Even if FGW saved 10% on the Charges made by the New Contracter it would need to be a
^million a month contract to recover the set up costs.
And if a New Company wins the Great Western franchise let them change Contracts in their own time.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: ellendune on March 05, 2014, 21:18:52
In reply to Broadgage, to Transfer Staff under TUPE, costs a lot. New Uniform, Vans and Equipment.
New Maintenance (PPMs) have to be set up, that costs big bucks.

As I said Wessex Trains wanted to change Maintenance provider for it's last 20 months but DfT stopped it because off the change over costs.


Yes a TUPE transfer does cost a bit - depends on the conditions of service you have to inherit, but it can be cheaper than a recruitment exercise if the conditions are similar. As for Vans - they are probably leased anyway and if there was a break clause in the contract at this time then the existing contractor will only have a lease up to this time anyway.  Uniforms are replaced regularly anyway. So for the parking it is just the signs and these could be done with plastic overlay just as they do on trains.

Not sure what the maintenance contract covers so not sure what that would involve.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Electric train on March 05, 2014, 22:17:02
In reply to Broadgage, to Transfer Staff under TUPE, costs a lot. New Uniform, Vans and Equipment.
New Maintenance (PPMs) have to be set up, that costs big bucks.

As I said Wessex Trains wanted to change Maintenance provider for it's last 20 months but DfT stopped it because off the change over costs.


Yes a TUPE transfer does cost a bit - depends on the conditions of service you have to inherit, but it can be cheaper than a recruitment exercise if the conditions are similar. As for Vans - they are probably leased anyway and if there was a break clause in the contract at this time then the existing contractor will only have a lease up to this time anyway.  Uniforms are replaced regularly anyway. So for the parking it is just the signs and these could be done with plastic overlay just as they do on trains.

Not sure what the maintenance contract covers so not sure what that would involve.

I agree, the change of contractor is not always that expensive, TUPE only applies if 60% or more of that staff members work is in that contract.
Van are not an issue as you  said ellendune they will be leased.

Dark Star I am not sure DfT could stop a TOC changing its maintenance contractor unless the TOC was trying to bill it back to DfT which might happen if the TOC had inherited a previous franchise maintenance contractor.

These changes happen all the time the likes of MITE, Lorne Stewarts etc bid and retender for this type of work all the time


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: broadgage on March 06, 2014, 08:26:10
As others post, vans are probably leased, and anyway could be re-used on other contracts.
Uniform is cheap and needs regular replacement anyway, I fairly recently moved from one maintenance contractor to another, and they bought me 6 polo shirts, cheap and nasty I doubt that they cost more than ^30 in total.
Uniform trousers are almost allways black or navy blue and sometimes outlast the contract !

TUPE is unlikely to cost much as terms and conditions are broadly similar with all the major maintenance contractors.

PPM schedules are generally drawn up by a consultant who will as part of their contract supply a copy to the new maintenance contractor.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: paul7575 on March 06, 2014, 12:15:52
If the existing term contract is coming to an end there's always the possibility that the contractor himself doesn't want to renew.

It worked for FGW after all...

Paul


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: broadgage on March 11, 2014, 11:04:12
If the existing term contract is coming to an end there's always the possibility that the contractor himself doesn't want to renew.

It worked for FGW after all...

Paul

Agree, my present employers did not re-tender for an about to expire contract as they felt they could not make a profit on it.


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: Dark Star on March 25, 2014, 09:17:57
Just been speaking to the APCOA cap park man at my local Station.
This time Next week (s)he will be working for a New Unknown company.
Now what's that about Minimum notice of TUPE.

M & E contract has gone to Integral.
3 years contract so how long has First got Great Western for?


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: ChrisB on March 25, 2014, 09:52:47
If they don't get a 5ye extension Direct Grant then it'll presumablty be a TUPE again....


Title: Re: Wasting a ^Milllion or Two.
Post by: TonyK on March 25, 2014, 18:49:39
TUPE or not TUPE, that is the question.

TUPE was, IIRC, mainly designed to deal with privatisation of formerly public services, so giving transferring employees the rights to their leave, pensions, repugnancy terms, etc. New employees, not subject to the former gilt-edged promises, get less. broadgage points out correctly that amongst contractors at car park level, Ts & Cs vary little. TUPE is unlikely to cost anyone much.



This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net