Remove First Class?

[whole diary]

[Ollie]

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2057632_help_me_ban_first_class_rail

I don't really have an opinion on this, it's just a stupid idea.

[devon_metro]

Communists... 

[Super Guard]

Perhaps we should send the 142s to run Reading-London with 100% standard and we'll have some HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) going Exmouth instead... St James's Park might get interesting though 

[Chris2]

Perhaps we should send the 142s to run Reading-London with 100% standard and we'll have some HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) going Exmouth instead... St James's Park might get interesting though 

Maybe the odd 153 as well.

[moonrakerz]

They've ruined our education system by using this logic:- if you can't improve the worst, then destroy the best !!!!!!

[Tim]

Ollie's post got me thinking again about first class although I started thinking about it when people were posting about the possibility of using trains in reverse formation at Paddington.  before I start I should declare that I am usually a Standard class passenger but that I occassionally go FC^‡(resolve) when a good AP ticket comes up and / or I woudl like the extra space.

There does seem to be an assumption that "first class passengers are the railway's best customers" and that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would be stupid to do anything (such as make them walk further at Paddington) to annoy them.

On purely economic grounds I am not sure that that arguement stacks up. A standard class coach carries about 82 passengers and a FC coach about 42 (very roughly).  FC is more expensive to run for other reasons from leather seats, to free drinks and snacks and the provsion of an extra staff member to serve them.  I suspect that utilisation of the FC seats (even in peak time) is also lower.  Very roughly a FC fare is twice a SC, and the costs of carrying a FC are also about twice.  So I don't think FC passengers are very much more or less valuable to FGW than standard class passengers. 

Contrast this with airlines where the business fares are often many manytimes more extensive than economy and are therefore much more valuable to the airline.

You can make other valid arguements for the provsion of FC (including, that it enables pasengers to work and thereby increases business effciency, that it attracts a group of passngers that might not otherwise travel standard class), but when capacity is constrained the argument for abolishing FC and carrying an extra 100 passengers per train (assuming that the demand to travel is there) is also powerfull (in terms of congestion, environmental impact etc).

How you balance the arguemnts does seem to depend on availability of capacity.  If you have spare capacity (in terms of platform length etc) then having some FC coaches (and other things like bike space and buffets) makes sense as it may attract new users, increase the farebox and at least pays for itself.  However, if and when we reach the point when all trains on a route are say 10 26m coaches and it is prohibitively expensive to lengthen them any more (because of short platforms) and there is still a huge demand to travel (and congestion on the roads, CO2 targets to be met etc) then squeezing more people in by moving to all SC starts to make sense. 

I don't think we are quite at the point yet, and personally I think that Mr Renshaws egalitarian motives are wrong (as devon-metro says "communist"), but it would also be wrong if FGW were forced to raise the standard fares in order to price a large number of SC passengers off trains so as to free up space for a small number of FC passenegrs would it not?

I hope FC survives, but if the main attarction of FC is that it is half empty when SC is more than full then the balance between the classes in terms of fares and number of seats in each class is wrong. 

[bemmy]

Surely the communist thing to do would be for First and Standard Class to become Soft and Hard Class. 

[Andy]

Might there be benefits in reducing the number of first class coaches in some sets to run services for which the take-up of FC^‡(resolve) seats is consistently low? 

[devon_metro]

What about 3 classes of accommodation?

Second Class could be First Class seating without any at seat service or complimentary snacks etc.

[Brusselier]

Surely the communist thing to do would be for First and Standard Class to become Soft and Hard Class. 

Or even "party member" or "non-party member" 

What about 3 classes of accommodation?

Leisure Select anybody?

[Mookiemoo]

If they removed first class - I for one would no longer contribute my annual sum to FGW^▸ (First Great Western)

Now, I dont necessarily want the current level of provision - if they reduce the cost of the ticket!  I could live with no at seat service etc - for a cheaper fare (I moan normally because they keep reducing the provision AND increasing the fare).

However - I need to be able to (1) guarantee a seat and (2) guarantee a table with a power socket.  If I cant get (1) or (2) I'll become one of the B&B commuters and find a B&B to stay in during the week as commuting becomes non feasible.

I know, as has been said, mine is an extreme case but I wonder how many more business people would change model ....

As for the over crowding reading to paddington - I have noticed over the last months a strange sheep like behaviour.  You have a train coming into Reading - next stop paddington - which is heaving in standard.  There is one about 5-10 minutes later (at most) - which is *usually* emptier - yet the sheeple all try to crowd into the overcrowded one without the application of common sense and waiting for the emptier one.  This cycle tends to repeat every other train from what I have unscientifically observed. 

I suspect, although I may be wrong, on the RDG^‡(resolve)-PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) service there are probably only 3-4 trains per day in each direction which leave after each other and which are all rammed.  Hardly a reason to remove first class from most of the sets - which is the only way to guarantee you wont get a first class set on one of these trains. 

If commuters engaged brain (yes I know its early in the morning and they probably havent had their coffee fix) there may be less of an issue.  I bet half of the sheeple could alter their working day by fifteen minutes to half an hour  one way or the other to avoid the worst of the overcrowding and smooth the flow. 

[moonrakerz]

 I have noticed over the last months a strange sheep like behaviour.  You have a train coming into Reading - next stop paddington - which is heaving in standard.  There is one about 5-10 minutes later (at most) - which is *usually* emptier - yet the sheeple all try to crowd into the overcrowded one without the application of common sense and waiting for the emptier one.  This cycle tends to repeat every other train from what I have unscientifically observed. 

My tactics on the tube exactly - if the first one is packed, let it go and observe front/rear coaches - usually one or both is fairly empty, even at the height of the rush hour. Wait for next train at appropriate place on platform - easy !

[old original]

No first class???

where would the of duty staff sit???

[caliwag]

...and the retired servants of course...mind, not a lot different to the company car brigade who clutter our roads...please do yer selling on the internet.

[Trowres]

Congratulations, Tim, for a balanced and well-considered reply. If there is an economist lurking here they may be able to confirm the theory that the market segmentation offered by first class increases revenue and (indirectly) benefits passengers travelling standard class.

On the other hand, there are also reasons to suspect that the existence of first class is detrimental to the lot of the majority of passengers:-
1. Deliberate nobbling of the lower-cost option to preserve the difference of the premium product. It has certainly happened with computer printers, but has it happened with rail? One example might be the exclusion of passengers on standard tickets from dining. I'm sure someone can think of better examples.

2. Compromises in rolling stock design. Ever since the Mk3 coach was designed, pax in standard have had to put up with obstructed views as the bodyshell was designed for proper seat/window alignment in first.

3. As already stated, first has the potential to be detrimental to overall capacity.