How many checks?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

THe way to do this is to work with the company,. identifying the problems & suggesting ways to overcome them!

Indeed it is, Chris ...

Or at least that can be a part of the answer.   I'm not going to "hijack" this thread into a TransWilts campaigning one, but you need to bear in mind that at times a lot of activity in the form of constructive suggestions can lead to the company seeing something for which there is a public demand - which is good - but them perhaps they also see the opportunity to use that public pressure to use strong arm tactics to go for a substantially increased subsidy if they're to do xxxxx.    Rather that look at a specific rail case which could get very emotive, I'll point you towards some of the goings on on bus services around the UK^▸ (United Kingdom), and radio 4 programs like "face the facts" which have highlighted most of the major bus operators and how they have managed to do so well out of things like this.

A suggestion made by Jacobs in 2004 as something that should be done was costed / quoted in December 2005 at 30k per annum; the price has now risen to over 300k per annum.  I'm fully aware of inflation, I'm fully aware that the scope for return in the final winddown of the current franchise is limited, but I've also got a suspision that part of it's about maximising what the public purse may pay.  We happen to live in a nice looking house, and there's a certain class of builder / handyman who'll take a look at the place and inflate his quote to reflect what he thinks he can get us to pay, above what the job really costs.   And that has happened on the buses.  Do you think, Chris, it may happen on the trains too?   What are your thoughts on how we should get the best transport deal for the public, or would you think that the best answer is going to be the best answer for the operator too?

[ChrisB]

Depends on your (probably political) point of view. Your own best chance is to get a service requirement written into the next Great Western franchise bid document, I reckon.

There's the current lack of rolling stock too, so you can't expect any kind of peak service. What's a realistic passenger loading on say a two-hourly off-peak service, plus what you get currently in the peak?

[grahame]

Depends on your (probably political) point of view. Your own best chance is to get a service requirement written into the next Great Western franchise bid document, I reckon.

There's the current lack of rolling stock too, so you can't expect any kind of peak service. What's a realistic passenger loading on say a two-hourly off-peak service, plus what you get currently in the peak?

We're looking to (re)gain and retain an appropriate service - the retain being every part as important as the regain - so getting something appropriate written in to the mainstream franchise is very much part of the strategy; (thinking about that already!). But can I correct you on one point, Chris, for the record.  You write:

plus what you get currently in the peak?

It's arguable what we get in the morning peak (technically the 06:30 from Chippenham is a "peak" train) but the train is back on the main London - Bristol line by 07:27.   In the evening, there is no peak service at all ... offpeak starts at 18:30, I believe, and there's nothing off the main line until 19:01.

Now ... if there was a train that got into Chippenham between 08:00 and 08:30, and one that left again between 17:30 and 18:30, they would be peak services.  There's nothing within half an hour, though.  The SLC2 in the franchise DOES allow FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to move one of the trains to those time slots -  they're within the allowed range and indeed, I understand, the intent of the SLC2 was to provide just such a peak service so one helpful suggestion to overcome some of the problems, even without providing extra services, is that they should do just that.

[ChrisB]

But as I pointed out, without the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) finding additional stock, they don't have any available to run at those times currently....

[grahame]

But as I pointed out, without the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) finding additional stock, they don't have any available to run at those times currently....

Yes, I read you making that point Chris    ... and chat with a few people too ...

[ChrisB]

You didn't answer my question re your likely off-peak loadings / demand?

Can you realistically make a case for the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) to start an off-peak service when they *do* have stock availability? Maybe that's a starting point currently?

[grahame]

You didn't answer my question re your likely off-peak loadings / demand?

Can you realistically make a case for the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) to start an off-peak service when they *do* have stock availability? Maybe that's a starting point currently?

Yes ... lots of work done on that front ... although one of the most difficult things to evaluate with the scenario you're painting is the effect of running an offpeak service still with an 'orrid 'ole in the peak.   And one of the most interesting things is to consider how it would do if another operator were running a true peak service.  Done nicely, it should be a "win, win" if the various folks can work it together!

[SDS]

Ahh.... a TM^‡(resolve) that is like the the LTV^▸ (London [and] Thames Valley) drivers, BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) Officers, signallers, Swindon control and management that you have dealings with SDS Pad.

Is it really necessary to continually criticise those around you, even if it may sometimes be in jest?

Then there's the passengers. Heaven forfend if they are in their autumn years or a bicycle owner....

Fine, don't EVER ask me again what the real reason for problems, delays, etc is or are. Have you ever considered that I might have http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoid_personality_disorder hmm. Dont judge people on what they post till you have the full picture.

[ChrisB]

Should you be in a customer-facing role if you suffer from that disorder?

[grahame]

I'm somewhat concerned at where we may be headed with this thread, so I'm locking it to think it through / give the moderator team an opportunity to consider.

[grahame]

This thread has generated a lot of interest on ... and away from ... the thread itself.  And I'm left looking at inputs from moderators discussing it, and messages by email and p.m. too. On one hand, I wring my hands and say "I wish we could all agree" and on the other hand I celebrate the discussions, the fact that we share diverse views and sometimes ask those awkward (and sometimes uncomfortable questions).  And - as seems almost inevitable on the rare occasions that a thread goes pear-shaped, I find myself looking at one, or a handful of posts, and wondering how it was meant to be taken ... and regretting that someone has taken it in a way that wasn't intended; that has certainly happened on this thread, as my mailbox confirms.  So - Folks - posters on this thread - you're a darned good bunch; I don't think anyone's deliberatley upsetting anyone else, though obviously there are different views.  So, please, let's draw a line and move on.  I probably will tell on my blog, sometime, how I took my first job out of college to be customer facing precisely because I hated dealing with people I didn't know and it was a challenge - an issue for me that needed resolving.  Today, I still have a far thinner skin that most though I wouldn't describe it as a something that holds me back - more something to be nurtured and turned round if I can for the good of caring.

OK ... Here comes that line


As I recall we were talking "how many ticket checks" - or had we completed the subject?

[Commuting Bookworm]

Getting back on track, what are the rules regarding what a guard should do on a train regarding checking tickets? I have not been checked once this week?

[inspector_blakey]

The fundamental rule is that operational and safety-critical duties always take precedence over examining tickets. Common sense will tell you that this rule is of course entirely correct, and it couldn't be any other way. However it does have the unfortunate side-effect of giving the sub-set of staff who would rather avoid contact with their passengers at all costs, and therefore don't check tickets or indeed leave the back cab or office, a get-out clause; they can claim that they weren't checking tickets on a given service because they were dealing with some kind of operational issue.

Presumably guard's managers will notice patterns of behaviour, so I would assume that if a particular guard is noted never to be checking tickets then some action would be taken. What I'm not sure of is how vigorously FGW^▸ (First Great Western) go after the guards who are too lazy to do revenue, and what the potential implications for industrial relations would be - I can see the press release from the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) now, shreiking about 'greedy fat cat privateer' train operators putting their profits before the safety of passengers were a guard to be dismissed for habitually ignoring revenue duties.

A further complication, although one that applies in an ever-smaller number of cases, is that I think there may still be a few long-serving staff on the system who are working under the conditions of their original BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) contracts. Some of these staff may have been employed before the duties of guards and ticket examiners were merged together into the "conductor" role. In fact, if you go back far enough, there was a time many years ago when ticket eamination by guards was strictly forbidden.

[Glovidge]

Is it the train manager's duty to check the tickets (ie part of his/her job descripion) Also I would have thought it compulsory that a train manager should walk up and down the coaches at least once an hour.

I only say this as the other day a bloke plonked himself next to me (on the other side of the aisle) and then informed me that he had a heart condition and could I keep an eye on him? In fairness the train manager checked on him twice during the journey but if he hadn't have done the ticket checks he wouldn't have been aware of this. (This was after after informing the passenger with the dickie heart that he had tickets for the next train and was on the wrong service so he had to pay an extra ^35!?! )

[inspector_blakey]

The blunt answer to that is that is is certainly not rail staff's responsibility to act as minders or nannies to passengers. It's good that the train manager did check on the passenger a couple of times. However, if you're seriously suggesting that the train manager would have been culpable had he not walked through the train then something happened to the passenger that's complete nonsense! He went above and beyond, it's certainly not his job to provide some sort of medical support to a passenger who really shouldn't be travelling if they're that unwell.