"LNER is planning to impose compulsory seat reservations on their trains" ...

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From Railfuture media ... LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) based story, but reflects to Cross Country and perhaps GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) too ...

FEARS OF COMPULSORY SEAT RESERVATIONS ON TRAINS

Railfuture has discovered that LNER is planning to impose compulsory seat reservations on their trains, saying that the Covid pandemic had given them the opportunity to introduce these sooner than intended. 

“Compulsory reservations will seriously disadvantage passengers making short journeys”  said Railfuture director Allison Cosgrove “The journey from Durham to Newcastle is only 12 minutes for example – and other connections are also quite short between Alnmouth, Newcastle, Durham and Darlington, or between Grantham, Newark and Retford. Passengers making unexpected or unplanned journeys could be forced onto other slower services if they have neglected to reserve a seat, and this could result in them abandoning the idea of travelling by rail.”

“They claim that passengers are more likely to make a long distance journey if they are guaranteed a seat, but this ignores the fact that seat reservations are already available to those who want them.”

LNER is the only company currently to insist on seat reservations when travelling: other train companies strongly advise reservation, but it is not compulsory. “We fear that this will be the thin end of the wedge, and that other train companies will follow suit if this goes ahead”

“Although LNER has introduced a smartphone app that allows seats to be booked up to 5 minutes before departure, not everyone has a smartphone and may not have the physical ability to use all its functions if they do possess one. The ability to have a turn up and go railway will be lost.”

“ What are the railways for? Public transport is meant to be a public service that is accessible to all who need to use it.  The convenience of the travelling public should come first, ahead of the wishes of the rail companies. This idea is misguided and will serve to drive people away from the railway if they cannot use it on a turn up and go basis; particularly on the many short journeys between stations on the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line).”

Additional information:

Background.

On the 6th March 2021 Railfuture Lincolnshire branch held a webinar with a speaker from LNER: Matthew Trigg (MT), Public Relations/Stakeholder Liaison. There were 49 participants, mostly Railfuture members from the Lincolnshire, East Midlands, Yorkshire and North East branches. By far the most contentious part of the LNER presentation concerned its plans to introduce compulsory seat reservations, with MT stating that LNER had intended to introduce compulsory seat reservations before the covid pandemic, but that covid had given them the opportunity to introduce them soon. Even more alarmingly, MT stated that other long distance TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) were planning to follow LNER’s lead. Every questioner at the webinar stated their opposition to this move, and many who did not have the opportunity to speak subsequently emailed Railfuture Lincolnshire stating their opposition. LNER have attempted to justify compulsory seat reservations by citing a You Gov poll showing that people were more likely to make a long distance train journey if they were guaranteed a seat: this ignores the fact that it is already possible to make seat reservations, and indeed these are required for passengers booking advance purchase tickets. Has their survey asked how many people would not travel if they did not have the freedom to choose their travel time at the last minute, particularly for the return?  If not, LNER don’t know how much revenue they will lose as a result.

Current position.

Whilst in the past some long distance trains have been subject to compulsory reservations, this did not apply to every long distance train on the route. Indeed, even with the current covid travel restrictions and social distancing measures, LNER is the only long distance TOC to require compulsory reservations on its services. According to their websites Cross Country, Avanti West Coast and GWR strongly advise passengers to reserve a seat in order to ensure that social distancing is maintained, and warn that if passengers do not have a reservation for their preferred train there is no guarantee that they will be able to board. It should also be noted that LNER has one coach on its trains where seats cannot be reserved, this is to ensure that seats are available for their own staff travelling for work.

Railfuture’s view on compulsory seat reservations.

The railway, and this includes long distance rail services, should remain predominantly turn up and go, with passengers having the option of reserving seats on their chosen train if they want to.

Accordingly, train operators should advertise the fact that it is already possible to reserve seats on long distance trains and make it easier for passengers to be able to do so; and even offer inducements for passengers to reserve seats for their journey. For passengers making long distance journeys, particularly those travelling in a group, or with children; having reserved seats provides peace of mind and makes the journey less stressful by removing the uncertainty about whether they will be able to find a seat or be able to sit together.

However we strongly oppose the introduction of blanket, compulsory seat reservations on all long distance trains; particularly where long distance train operators provide the only service on a given route or section of route.

In our view making all long distance trains subject to compulsory seat reservations would have the following disadvantages:

1) There are stations where high speed, long distance operators provide the only service for passengers making short journeys: for instance on the ECML between Grantham, Newark and Retford; and also on the ECML between Alnmouth, Newcastle, Durham and Darlington. It is in our view ridiculous to require passengers to make seat reservations for a journey that only takes 12 minutes: as in the case of Durham to Newcastle.

2) Compulsory seat reservations could force passengers making short journeys onto other services on the same route that are slower or have fewer seats. The former making the journey less convenient and the latter leading to overcrowding; and in both cases making rail a less attractive travel option. There is already evidence of this happening in Yorkshire where compulsory seat reservations on LNER services have resulted in passengers being lost to Northern services between Doncaster, Wakefield and Leeds with the result that the Northern trains get heavily loaded.

3) If passengers currently making short journeys on long distance trains (and where these trains provide the only service available for that journey) are no longer able to turn up and go they may decide to drive or travel by bus in future, leading to those journeys being lost to rail.

4) Compulsory seat reservations could also lead to confrontations between passengers and staff if passengers without seat reservations are prevented from boarding trains or are turned off trains; or if other trains on the same route are too crowded to board.

5) Enforcement of compulsory seat reservations would be extremely difficult where passengers making short journeys board at open stations without ticket barriers and where there are few if any platform staff.

6) Whilst LNER has introduced a smartphone app that enables passengers to book seats up to 5 minutes before departure, not everyone has a smartphone or is able to use all its functions: smartphones can for instance be difficult for disabled passengers to use.

7) Whilst seat reservations can also be made at ticket offices or by LNER staff on the platform, not all ticket offices at stations managed by LNER are staffed throughout operating hours and not all stations served by LNER have platform staff.

Compulsory seat reservations would also cause problems for passengers using rover tickets who will typically make several journeys on the same day. If the flexibility to board any train is lost then this would deter this type of traveller.  There could also be problems where a passenger is travelling with a friend who is joining the same train at another station: what happens if that friend is unable to get a seat on the same train?

9) Compulsory seat reservations also raises the issue of what happens when services are disrupted. For instance if services on one route are disrupted will passengers still be able to complete their journey using services on another route: in these circumstances most passengers would rather risk standing than being left behind.

10) Compulsory seat reservations also raise the issue of what happens when services are fully booked. For instance, if a passenger arrives at a station to find there are no seats available on the next train then they could face a long wait for the next train, and on days when there are major events taking place passengers may find that they are unable to travel at all if the only trains with unreserved seats run at a times that make the journey impractical. In these circumstances many passengers would rather risk having to stand than face either a longer than expected journey or not being able to travel at all.

Public passenger train services are an essential public service.

Finally and most importantly the issue of compulsory seat reservations raises the fundamental question of what the railways are for, and it seems that both government and the rail industry are losing sight of the fact that public transport is meant to be a public service that is accessible to all those who need to use it. These proposals smack of an exclusionary policy that treats long distance trains as if they are planes where if services are fully booked then passengers are turned away even if they are making essential journeys, and there is no obligation placed on operators to make all reasonable endeavours to accommodate extra demand at busy times: for instance by lengthening trains or running extra trains. This is an abdication of responsibility on the part of the government and rail industry to ensure that public transport is easily accessible to those who need to use it: or for that matter want to use it.

This is not to suggest that train operators should be expected to accommodate unlimited numbers of passengers on trains as severe overcrowding is obviously undesirable for reasons of both safety and passenger comfort. This may mean that at times of exceptionally high demand specific trains on a given route are subject to compulsory seat reservations in order to spread demand more evenly across other services on that route. But we strongly object blanket, compulsory seat reservations being introduced on all long distance services, particularly for short journeys from stations where long distance operators provide the only services or the majority of services.

In conclusion, we want to retain a turn up and go railway, where passengers are able to make seat reservations on long distance services if they choose to and where it is easy for them to do so, and where train operators advertise the fact that seats can be reserved on long distance trains; but where passengers also have the freedom and flexibility to be able to travel on long distance trains without making seat reservations.

Public passenger train services are an essential public service and as such should be open and accessible to those who need or want to use them, and where passengers are able to travel when they need to, or when they choose to travel. This means that the convenience of the travelling public comes first, and accordingly train operators should make all reasonable endeavours to ensure that people are able to travel when they need or choose, including providing extra capacity at times of high demand (for instance by lengthening trains or running extra trains) and only turn passengers away as a last resort. The government should also ensure that not only do train operators fulfil this public service obligation, but that they also have the resources to do so.

[IndustryInsider]

I'm very much in agreement with Railfuture.  Mandatory seat reservations are a bad idea for the many reasons they list.  Even as an operator with a market geared towards longer journeys, there are still plenty of shorter ones undertaken.

[plymothian]

Mandatory seat reservations are always what is called for when people get on a crowded train and complain that the railway has oversold.  They'd only be getting what they wished for.

[grahame]

11) You'll have lots of empty seats where people have open tickets and reserve for the most likely train ... then make another reservation for when it turns out their business isn't finished in time, or they're hours early.   Unless, of course, you add a reservation fee ...

[eXPassenger]

I'm very much in agreement with Railfuture.  Mandatory seat reservations are a bad idea for the many reasons they list.  Even as an operator with a market geared towards longer journeys, there are still plenty of shorter ones undertaken.

There are also longer journeys.  Bristol / London is effectively a long distance commuter route.  When I used it I never knew for certain which return train I would catch as it depended on unplanned activities.  If I have an open return (or season) do I book several trains, or do I book 1 train and make another booking when I miss it?  I cannot use my phone to book when I am en route due to a lack of signal in the underground.

[broadgage]

Agree that the whole idea appears to have been very badly thought out.
Apart from the already suggested issues regarding short journeys, season tickets, and open tickets, what happens at times of disruption and substitute bus services. Or when the booking system fails.

Another way of making "the railway" LESS customer friendly and less attractive.

[grahame]

Apart from the already suggested issues regarding short journeys, season tickets, and open tickets, what happens at times of disruption and substitute bus services.

I can give you a real example which I observed.   For those with cycles, reservations on GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)'s IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train) services are already mandatory.  Cancellation of the 19:07 Chippenham to Westbury lead to a mad dash to the ticket office by a couple of cyclists who had wished to travel on that train, looking to divert via Bath rather than wait for the next direct train at 9 O'Clock.   One managed to get what I think must have been the last space on the next IET, the other half an hour later.   A potential portent of things to come, applied not just to a handful of customers but to all customers.

[Bob_Blakey]

Compulsory seat reservations would, in my opinion, be perfectly acceptable on services which the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) knows are going to be very busy. By now the TOCs surely have enough data to identify these services? I would think this is particularly true of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway). If in doubt then the existing system of optional reservations should apply.

As a matter of policy any passenger with a specific seat (not specific train) reservation should have the added guarantee that anybody occupying their allocated place will be moved by the TM^‡(resolve) / Guard if there are no other seats available for the entirety of their booked journey.

[grahame]

Nothing new about compulsory reservations - looking back to the times when summer holidays were a week at the seaside in Torquay, Ilfracombe, Minehead or Newquay, seat regulation tickets were required to be purchased ahead of time.  And on LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) routes, trains like the Flying Scotsman were "reservation only".  Does the Penzance Sleeper require pre-booking even for seated accommodation these days?

None of these trains really takes much if any local traffic, and seat regulation tickets in the past were only applicable on long distance journeys - people were free to join long distance trains to Minehead at Taunton, to Newquay at Plymouth, without reservation.  And with daytime trains like the 10:00 King's Cross to Edinburgh, with just one intermediate stop, unbooked passengers could catch the 10:30, have a slightly slower (but still fast) long distance journey.

Under the same principles, compulsory reservations under certain limitations might not be unreasonable today. I would suggest not for journeys under 2 hours, not on two successive trains, and not on trains for which no alternative leaves within the following 61 minutes. Also OK for sleeper compartments (and perhaps for first class) so that people can still travel, last minute, should they need to.

If the LNER scheme fits these limited circumstances, fine.  I suspect it doesn't, because their rep, surely, would have said so at the reported meetings.

[CyclingSid]

Looks like I could become an ex-rail passenger?

My cycle trips are largely unpredictable, I never know how long it is going to take, or where I might end up, and I don't have a smartphone.

[Reading General]

Yep. It takes the versatility out of the railway. This is once again a demonstration of the interests of the private railway. Creating an exclusive club for those who are willing to compete for space. A railway which doesn’t want to carry fresh air yet isn’t versatile enough to simply add an extra coach for busier trains. A railway which doesn’t just have companies competing for business with satisfaction surveys, it also wants to pit its customers (passengers) against each other for the space on a train. This is the opposite direction to go for encouraging use.

I have a feeling that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) might go for something like this between London and Reading, citing Crossrail for the reason to justify it.
I understand that something like this could be useful on particular trains, for example the Penzance or Worcester bound trains from London in the afternoon/evening, but that would only be required from London and not the other stops. I am a vestibule dweller at times when it’s busy on long distance trains when I’m only going one or two stops along it’s route, and I don’t mind this. Having done this for many years though I can tell you that the railway was far more versatile to use in the British Rail days of the early 90’s than it has been in the private period, any train was an option then and generally large enough to accommodate everyone on a whim like journey. As the private company’s timetables have changed over the years, the less and less versatile the railway has become. Focussing more on the London business and leisure market and less and less on the service aspect from its public days. Local versatility is what gets cars off roads, people have largely always favoured to get the train to central london for the simple reason that it has an easy way to move around once in the middle. We require a railway that can accommodate short and long on a whim journeys everywhere, and I believe British rail was beginning to provide that before it was broken up.

High speed 2 will definitely be a railway for a private market, there will be no turn up an go on that. A railway for particular customers only.

[TaplowGreen]

In the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) context, anyone who has ever experienced the waking nightmare that is London to Plymouth/Penzance on a Friday evening, anywhere near Easter/Christmas or other Bank Holidays, or the return journey shortly afterwards, or Cornwall/Devon towards London on any given Sunday afternoon may well applaud this policy.

The obvious answer is to increase capacity, however given that the sacred cow (increasingly morphing into a very vain white elephant) of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is sucking up all the investment & resource there is very little left for anything else.

It could equally be said however that this is a bizarre way to encourage leisure travellers who the railway will desperately need to pick up the slackening in revenues and business passenger numbers post COVID.

There's a balance to be struck - this is possibly going too far.

[ellendune]

The obvious answer is to increase capacity, however given that the sacred cow (increasingly morphing into a very vain white elephant) of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) is sucking up all the investment & resource there is very little left for anything else.

Do you have evidence that investment is being curtailed because of HS2?  There is certainly some evidence of curtailment because of lack of confidence that the NR^» (Network Rail - home page) can contain costs within budgets on 'classic' rail projects. 

[Reading General]

Not likely to happen but more flexible rolling stock for specific trains at particular times is what is required. A locomotive and coaches perhaps. Rail tours can accommodate what’s required, why can’t the modern railway? Cross country I note lengthen their trains on the north south route that runs through Reading on Fridays and Saturdays, or at least they used to.

The TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s need to be held to account for flexible capacity. An hourly frequency or even a two hourly train still has the potential to carry more before spending money on increasing the capacity of the network. I don’t think we need to Metroise the national network to make it work better, just work towards accommodating more on intercity type journeys and provide a minimum hourly frequency for all stations to an intercity served station regardless of size. That’s the railway that’s flexible for all to use.

The greater public are interested in a useable rail network not one that is divided. I personally don’t support the building of high speed 2 but when completed feel it should be part of a national network not a closed shop. I’m the same about the east west railway. Branding lines rather than just trains is a very dodgy path to go down. As far as I’m concerned even crossrail shouldn’t have a brand and simply be recognised as part of a national network. The arrows of indecision tells people that they can reach anywhere in the country in theory from that point, with ticketing available to do that. What LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) are planning is moving away from a national network.

[IndustryInsider]

The TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)’s need to be held to account for flexible capacity.

There is not really any such thing as a TOC any more, at least not in the conventional sense, as everything is currently paid for out of the Government's coffers.  Longer term, it looks likely that 'management fee' style contracts will continue to be the way forward, with rewards for good performance, and I would guess some form of national organisation to oversee them.  Perhaps that organisation or the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) will see it as worthwhile to have lots of spare stock sitting around?  But I doubt it.