Great Western Coffee Shop

From the Morning Star (https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/rmt-pledges-co-ordinated-action-bust-transport-pay-freeze)

It reads better if you whistle the "Internationale" at the same time  ::)

'Privateer train-operators'? Have the RMT not noticed that the environment in which their members are employed has changed somewhat?

To be fair to the bruvvers, isn't that the Morning Star chucking in a bit of gratuitous Soviet style rhetoric rather than the Union?

It's interesting - Firstly I must point out that I am happy to admit that first under Andrew Haines, and then up to the present day Mark Hopwood, GWR has improved out of all recognition since the shambles that was mid-2000s FGW. However, this does remind me of a conversation I once had with an FGW executive of that era, who when asked why the fares under FGW control had been whacked up on a certain line despite the shocking service on offer at the time, replied "because that's what a marketeer would do". "Marketeer" vs "Privateer", you say potato, I say potato?

I guess it all depends on whether you think things run better that way or not - The Morning Star and RMT clearly think not, but others would obviously disagree.

Similarly, the soon to be GBR-rebranded Network Rail is about to get into the business of train service specification and fare-setting, and will be letting out concessions to companies that will still be private and will still be train operators.

Will that make Network Rail a "Privateer train-operator" ? The Morning Star clearly thinks so, but others would obviously disagree.

I guess it all depends on whether you think things  are going to run better that way or not. People like me clearly have their doubts, but others think the second coming is just round the corner.

We will only find out for sure once the GBR system is up and running.

It's worth bearing in mind that the Morning Star follows the line of the British Communist Party (what's left of it) and has a tiny, tiny circulation - even smaller since the Soviet Union cancelled their bulk order which pretty much kept it afloat - even now it only keeps going thanks to Trade Unions and activists.

It's quite amusing to ponder its occasional outbursts, but they're not really to be taken seriously.

If you read Private Eye, think Dave Spart.

I think Bob Blakey has hit the nail on the head.

It is becoming clear, I think, that the transport sector may actually be the biggest loser from the Covid pandemic, notwithstanding the protests of leisure and hospitality. At least when Covid is conquered, or we have a new normal that enables us to live with it at an acceptable level, people will want to get back to eating out, going to meet up with their friends, going on holiday, going to sports fixtures etc, and there is likely to be a somewhat smaller high street shopping sector, more focused on the shopping experience, after the pandemic accelerated a shake out that was already under way.

It is clear that the fall off in passenger numbers has been catastrophic, but also that the signs are that there may now be a substantial shift in working patterns that may not fully reverse. There will also be a proportion of the public for whom travel by public transport will mean "exposure to risk of illness" and who will avoid its use for leisure and recreation, whatever the statistics say. This means that capacity requirements, and fare revenues might be impacted considerably. Cynically, I expect that the users of public transport will be seen as a less important part of the electorate to mollify, which could cancel out any growth in supporting public transport on environmental grounds (or wanting to be seen to support it). I cannot see anything other than the return to cost control impacting on public transport investment.

I understand that those in the railway industry who have skills in short supply have enjoyed some good years when it comes to pay (and good luck to them too). But if there is now no shortage of drivers and other staff, whatever the colour of the politics of the government there will not be support for increased pay, and a campaign of industrial action will only further harm the prospects of any recovery in passenger numbers and in the industry as a whole - who wants to take a train that is not running? Who wants to book a holiday by train if there is a risk that there might be a day of "industrial (in)action" when you want to go or come back? Ray Buckton, this is not your hour!

Still a few local services cancelled by crewing deficits.

They're already taking industrial action in Scotland

https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/next-phase-of-strike-action-goes-ahead-on-scotrail/ (https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/next-phase-of-strike-action-goes-ahead-on-scotrail/)

I'm not entirely sure what about which is never a good sign. As eightonedee says reducing the service to protest about the governments inaction about improving services seems a bit counter intuitive.

And with both ScotRail and Transport for Scotland not interested in resolving the dispute I would have thought the message is loud and clear. 

I think the RMT have had it very good for a long while but despite the pandemic, I think they believe they can call all the shots.  As someone posted earlier, times have certainly changed.  They would be wise to try and encourage passengers back to the railway, not to drive them further away.