FGW 1st Class - ongoing discussion of the benefits and their apparent reduction

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

BAA funded the building of the Heathrow link.  As a result the then Railtrack guaranteed them paths into London Paddington up until a certain date, 2020 or something like that.  After that, I presume those paths will be up for grabs.

Yup - I understand that BAA has first refusal on renewing them....

[chrisr_75]

I suspect very few use Anytime First, and very few of those will be paying their own fare......one thing which should be stopped immediately if First class accomodation is being reduced is present/former railway staff using their free/almost free travel privileges to sit in First class - that will free up more space for paying customers.

My thoughts exactly about advance fares vs anytime.

Your second point is also something which I agree needs to be removed immediately - I was on a London bound train during February half term this year where a significant part of coach G (around 20, yes, 20 seats) was taken up by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) employees and their famlilies (not taking any notice whatsoever of the quiet carriage rules, of course), including one discussing how one of the children should use their fathers pass to somehow gain access to the Underground network (not sure how this works, but it sounded somewhat dishonest to me), I was fairly fuming when I heard that!

Some of the onboard staff also use first class seats to stash their belongings or just to sit for a chat during a quiet spell - it does not project a particularly good image for customer facing staff to do this - but then if the company challenges any of these behaviours, no doubt the unions will become involved in industrial action over the 'constantly eroding benefits' or some such which...

[thetrout]

I have noticed several anomalies with some of the First Class Coaches. For example 2 Coach G's in the consist. Have fun explaining to someone that Fraud Coach G (which is meant to be Coach H) is infact not the quiet carriage is always great fun!

There was a set running around that had a Coach H the wrong way round for a while, usually able to tell if there is a Toilet behind the power car - usually this is an empty store room.

Another set with 2 Coach H's in it of which one had a broken toilet... Leaving just 1 Toilet in First Class, great fun!

I think the removal of First Advances will become necessary and it's not something I'm too happy about either. Reduction of the First Class is a ridiculous idea too in my opinion. Several trains I've caught into London both on and off peak have been comfortably loaded and I've always needed to share the table by Reading.

The Mayflower and The Cornishman Services down to Plymouth and beyond are also well loaded in First Class - Quite a number using FSR^▸ (First Scot Rail) Tickets (First Off-Peak Return) I certainly use FCR (First Off Peak Day Return) tickets on both of these services. I'd be pretty unnerved if I had to kick someone out of the priority seats...

I too think a trial should've been done. But why can't FGW^▸ (First Great Western) use the approach that Virgin SuperVoyagers use? Have an interchangeable First/Standard Class Carriage. Then classify as appropriate depending on the requirements of the Journey. I can think of a few occasions where I have been asked by a Train Manager to move to Coach F (Full Buffet) so that he can declassify First Class G & H and I think this is an acceptable procedure. Passengers got seats where otherwise they would have to stand. I still got the First Class seating in Coach F. It was a win win situation all round.

Of course we all know that come when these changes are made permanent that FGW will be the villains when it is DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) paying for the removal...

[ChrisB]

I think the removal of First Advances will become necessary and it's not something I'm too happy about either. Reduction of the First Class is a ridiculous idea too in my opinion. Several trains I've caught into London both on and off peak have been comfortably loaded and I've always needed to share the table by Reading.

The intention I've heard mooted being that if it's a table of 4 then that's 4 1st class seats (not 2 or even 1, but 4) and pax are ging to have to get used to this. Just as in Standard actually.

[chrisr_75]

The intention I've heard mooted being that if it's a table of 4 then that's 4 1st class seats (not 2 or even 1, but 4) and pax are ging to have to get used to this. Just as in Standard actually.

All very well and good and will deal with those aisle hoggers who stick their feet on the seat opposite in the hope they'll keep all four seats to themselves, but if first is on average 70% full (FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s own figures) then how does reducing capacity by at least 50% work? If same numbers of people wish to travel in first then some will be denied seats...

[thetrout]

I don't think I was suggesting I deliberately try and discourage people from sharing my table... Quite the opposite in fact. Anyone who is brave enough to sit next to me is more than welcome to You just won't get me in the window seat any time soon, I can't sit still and I will frequently get up from my seat and move around

Contrary to belief and comments I've put on the forum in the past, I'm happy to share a table. But the 'city folks' [generalisation] who seem to think the likes of moi don't belong in First Class are the ones who I find less inclined to share and can be very vocal about it... I guess they'll have to get used to it... Just like how I get used to 1A35 and 1A37 getting gatecrashed on Friday and Saturday nights

[tongue-in-cheek=on]

You might however wish to sit somewhere else if you see thetrout with a cup of coffee on the table and you have an expensive laptop...

[tongue-in-cheek=off]

[John R]

All very well and good and will deal with those aisle hoggers who stick their feet on the seat opposite in the hope they'll keep all four seats to themselves,

I don't think in 5 years of commuting first class, I've ever seen that done.

[chrisr_75]

All very well and good and will deal with those aisle hoggers who stick their feet on the seat opposite in the hope they'll keep all four seats to themselves,

I don't think in 5 years of commuting first class, I've ever seen that done.

I've lost count now of the number of times I've had to ask middle aged men in suits to take their feet (usually very reluctantly) off the seats, more often than not they're occupying an aisle seat at the time - admittedly I'm putting 2 and 2 together, but the general attitude involved would suggest that they're trying to hog 4 seats...

[tom m]

I suspect very few use Anytime First, and very few of those will be paying their own fare......one thing which should be stopped immediately if First class accomodation is being reduced is present/former railway staff using their free/almost free travel privileges to sit in First class - that will free up more space for paying customers.

Part of the terms and conditions for priv pass holders is that they give priority to full fare paying passengers and should give up their seat if there are no spare seats.

There are also a number of busy trains that fgw advise priv pass holders against usin.

[johoare]

There was a ticket check (in first class at least) on the 7.08 between Maidenhead and Paddington this morning.. They are so few and far between so most welcome and in coach H at least (which was the right way around today) everyone appeared to have the correct tickets 

[TaplowGreen]

Part of the terms and conditions for priv pass holders is that they give priority to full fare paying passengers and should give up their seat if there are no spare seats.

There are also a number of busy trains that fgw advise priv pass holders against usin.
[/quote]


There's a clear and unambigious solution to this - Privilege pass holders sit in Standard class only and book ahead in the same way as those on Advance tickets for a particular train, those trains that are highlighted as "busy" are excluded........that levels the playing field to some extent with paying customers whilst allowing those concerned to retain their benefits.

[paul7575]

... but if first is on average 70% full (FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s own figures) then how does reducing capacity by at least 50% work? If same numbers of people wish to travel in first then some will be denied seats...

I don't follow your maths.   AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) some trains are reduced from 2^ to 1^ FC^‡(resolve) carriages and the others from 2 to 1^; so to me that's a reduction of either 40% or a reduction of 25%.

That suggests to me that there'll only be a problem if that '70% average' is all full fare paying passengers at peak times  If a reasonable proportion of the 70% average are Advance fares, then they'll be 'yield managed' out of the equation.   As others have said if they get their calculations right the problem is just that a number of FC passengers won't get a seat for their briefcase...     

Paul

[chrisr_75]

... but if first is on average 70% full (FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s own figures) then how does reducing capacity by at least 50% work? If same numbers of people wish to travel in first then some will be denied seats...

I don't follow your maths.   AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) some trains are reduced from 2^ to 1^ FC^‡(resolve) carriages and the others from 2 to 1^; so to me that's a reduction of either 40% or a reduction of 25%.

That suggests to me that there'll only be a problem if that '70% average' is all full fare paying passengers at peak times  If a reasonable proportion of the 70% average are Advance fares, then they'll be 'yield managed' out of the equation.   As others have said if they get their calculations right the problem is just that a number of FC passengers won't get a seat for their briefcase...     

Paul

Ah, busted! My maths was correct but for some reason unknown I had in my head when I posted that the reduction was to a single first class carriage   

Agree with your figures. I do hope they don't 'yield manage' first to such an extent that they start to justify removing it completely - I fail to see that many people are actually paying full fares, especially given the amount of seat reservations on many services which points towards (but by no means definitively) advance tickets

[John R]

At the time that this is likely to be a problem a good proportion of people will be on season tickets.

[NickB]

That suggests to me that there'll only be a problem if that '70% average' is all full fare paying passengers at peak times  If a reasonable proportion of the 70% average are Advance fares, then they'll be 'yield managed' out of the equation.   As others have said if they get their calculations right the problem is just that a number of FC^‡(resolve) passengers won't get a seat for their briefcase...     

Paul

Q: what is 'yield managed'?