Get Britain Moving - Labour's plans to fix Britain's Railways

[whole diary]

[Bob_Blakey]

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

It depends; if he means reducing the number of people who have 'back-office' jobs which do not add to the cost-effectiveness and service quality of the industry (same approach as should be taken with the NHS) then he is correct but if he is suggesting across the board staff reductions when we know the industry has a serious shortage of on-train staff, and other 'operational' people, then I would regard him, at best, as seriously misguided.

[TonyK]

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

I have neither the expertise nor access to the same data to be able to comment. That said, I am sure the railway, in common with many other massive organisations, has scope for trimming staff without losing performance. The clever bit is in identifying the right bits, and making sure any new process works before cutting. His Lordship will no doubt be given every assistance by the unions.

[ChrisB]

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

If I were a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) back-office staffer - say in delay attribution - I think I'd be keeping a beady eye open on the job market.

[Electric train]

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

If I were a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) back-office staffer - say in delay attribution - I think I'd be keeping a beady eye open on the job market.

Route control is another where there is both TOC and NR^» (Network Rail - home page) staff duplicating what was done by one in BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and big 4 days, time table planning, access planning also duplicated

[TaplowGreen]

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

If I were a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) back-office staffer - say in delay attribution - I think I'd be keeping a beady eye open on the job market.

Route control is another where there is both TOC and NR^» (Network Rail - home page) staff duplicating what was done by one in BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and big 4 days, time table planning, access planning also duplicated

Hendy also cited in the same context working practices dating back to the age of steam, which may well bear scrutiny, and logically it wouldn't be too surprising if the ticket office closure programme was resurrected, perhaps on a smaller scale?

[GBM]

Hendy also cited in the same context working practices dating back to the age of steam, which may well bear scrutiny, and logically it wouldn't be too surprising if the ticket office closure programme was resurrected, perhaps on a smaller scale?

Perhaps not until ticketing is simplified?
There are some of us here who use a ticket office!

[grahame]

Hendy also cited in the same context working practices dating back to the age of steam, which may well bear scrutiny, and logically it wouldn't be too surprising if the ticket office closure programme was resurrected, perhaps on a smaller scale?

Perhaps not until ticketing is simplified?
There are some of us here who use a ticket office!

If you simplify the ticket system, you reduce the complexity and transaction time, thus increasing the throughput per agent.   By making the system simpler, you also make more people much more confident to buy  and book online, again reducing the agent time needed.  But - you still need a "ticket office' facility with a real human - actually at more stations rather than less.   How many manned desks do you need at Temple Meads - at Reading - at Paddington.  And redeploy the resource to smaller currently-unstaffed stations. For sure, there's not a need for constant ticket sales, but the booking office team are also typically superb in customer query and support handling, and could probably even manage to serve a cup of coffee and be widened to help with things like the local bus service for onward travel, and passenger assistance.    I'm not suggesting a closure program except of what becomes excess duplicated windows - I'm suggesting a modernisation, but the horse must come before the cart this time, not the other way around!

[ellendune]

Looking at back office  systems, surely if you can reduce the complexity of contracts (e.g. delay attribution) you would need less staff.

[ChrisB]

If they can get to a position of single-leg pricing, with just one fare peak/off-peak, and an Advance fare, then just maybe a tVM and online would work. But that's a long way off unless someone's done major work in the background

[eightonedee]

Moderators - this thread seems to have drifted somewhat - perhaps the last page or so should be shifted to the "Get Britain Moving" thread about the new government's policies?

(After the match, of course......!)

[Chris from Nailsea]

Agreed, and done already. 

I have no interest whatever in the football: I didn't even know who England are playing until I stumbled across it on the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) this afternoon.  Sorry! 

[stuving]

There was yet another railway piece in the last Sunday Times - or rather two. One was a largely fact-free bit of nostalgia really, based on Royal Mail's intention to decommission its mail EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit). But that news story is itself less than meets the eye (and not in a press release).

The front-page banner article on the business bit was headlined "Labour mulls plan to hire 100,000 railworkers as staffing crisis looms". Its source was  given as"draft summary findings .... seen by the Sunday Times", referring to a Rail and Urban Transport Review for the Labour team, conducted by Jürgen Maier (ex Siemens UK^▸ (United Kingdom) boss). However, the snippets quoted don't really add up - is that 100,000 really an increase in headcount, or just to replace the 50,000  who will retire by 2030 plus other leavers (both are said)?

One other quote picks up that new recruits these days are rarely under 25, without explaining why employing older workers is a bad thing. I do hope that Even Newer Labour have grown out of the idea that creating jobs is a good thing in itself - rather than first finding things that need doing, and then making sure we have people who can do them.

[Electric train]

There was yet another railway piece in the last Sunday Times - or rather two. One was a largely fact-free bit of nostalgia really, based on Royal Mail's intention to decommission its mail EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit). But that news story is itself less than meets the eye (and not in a press release).

The front-page banner article on the business bit was headlined "Labour mulls plan to hire 100,000 railworkers as staffing crisis looms". Its source was  given as"draft summary findings .... seen by the Sunday Times", referring to a Rail and Urban Transport Review for the Labour team, conducted by Jürgen Maier (ex Siemens UK^▸ (United Kingdom) boss). However, the snippets quoted don't really add up - is that 100,000 really an increase in headcount, or just to replace the 50,000  who will retire by 2030 plus other leavers (both are said)?

One other quote picks up that new recruits these days are rarely under 25, without explaining why employing older workers is a bad thing. I do hope that Even Newer Labour have grown out of the idea that creating jobs is a good thing in itself - rather than first finding things that need doing, and then making sure we have people who can do them.

The loss of skilled and knowledgeable people in certain key areas is becoming very acute as experience people retire, even the contractors are suffering the same as their experienced people age out. 

[ChrisB]

Fewer HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) seats could force passengers not to travel

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page)

The government may need to deliberately put people off travelling between Birmingham and Manchester by rail because scrapping HS2’s northern leg is likely to mean trains can take fewer passengers.

New HS2 trains will travel to Manchester on existing tracks but they will have less space than current services, according to a report by the public spending watchdog.

The National Audit Office (NAO) said the government could need to manage demand by “incentivising people to travel at different times or to not travel by rail”.

The NAO's report also stated that the previous Conservative government had spent £592m buying up land and property along now-cancelled parts of the route.

Last October, then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced that sections of the high-speed railway linking Birmingham with Manchester and with the East Midlands would no longer be built.

It means that only the stretch between London and the West Midlands will go ahead. New trains built for HS2, however, will run over the entire line.

But the NAO said these trains “may have fewer seats than existing services”, and HS2’s delivery company estimates that capacity between Manchester and Birmingham could be reduced by 17%.

The Department for Transport (DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)) is looking at how longer HS2 trains could be used, but existing stations such as Crewe would have to be adapted.

As a result, the NAO said that the DfT “will need to assess options for addressing capacity issues on the west coast”, such as dissuading passengers from travelling by train at certain times - if at all.

But the report warned that this may constrain economic growth and increase environmental costs.

Another option would be “improving or adding infrastructure”, but this could be expensive and disruptive.

"It’s long been clear that the Conservatives recklessly mismanaged HS2 and allowed the costs to spiral entirely out of control – but this report lays bare the scale of their mistakes," Labour's new Transport Secretary Louise Haigh said.

The NAO report also said that disposing of the land and property bought along the northern leg of the route could take several years, although some may be needed for other transport projects such as Northern Powerhouse Rail.

The recent King's Speech included a High Speed Rail Bill, which had previously been tabled to build HS2's northern leg.

The new government said it would not revive HS2's cancelled sections but repurpose the bill to bring in powers to build new rail infrastructure in northern England.

"We are reviewing this report’s findings, alongside the position we have inherited on HS2 and wider transport infrastructure and will set out next steps in due course," Ms Haigh said.

“Transport is an essential part of our mission to rebuild Britain – and we're committed to delivering infrastructure that works for the whole country."

Last October, when the northern leg was scrapped, the then government said that a terminus at Euston would go ahead but only with private funding.

If HS2 did not reach Euston, passengers would have to change at Old Oak Common in west London to reach the capital’s centre.

The authors of the NAO report said there would be more costs to come on top of the cancellation, which is expected to take three years and cost £100m.

Some work will be done even though it is no longer required.

For example, only three platforms will now be needed at Birmingham Curzon Street, but the full seven will be built because it would cost more to cancel.

Since 2020, construction costs have increased by £6.1bn.

The NAO report says the DfT and HS2 Ltd are finalising a "lowest cost action plan" to try to reduce costs, particularly through trying to renegotiate contracts.

A spokesperson for HS2 Ltd said: “This is a project of unprecedented scale and complexity and the cancellation of Phase 2 has increased our cost challenges."

Reasons include the budget and schedule being set too early, delays to planning consent and the impact of external events such as the Covid-19 pandemic.

[TonyK]

At the risk of sounding political, this does rather show what can happen when a decision is taken by a Prime Minister to try to get people to vote for him. It does rather sound as though HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) was all about capacity after all, and that we could end up with less than we started with. Another point that has been made is the inflationary effect of setting a budget for a huge infrastructure project at such an early stage, as every contractor will aim to spend it. You obviously need a ballpark figure to start with, but if that had been kept to the construction costs with stations and rolling stock separate throughout, it may have been more manageable. Water under the bridge now, and all told a pig's ear of a job that will still need doing one day.