Jump to content

Northern rail could be nationalised


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Barry O said:

. on their mobiles (not acceptable on any construction site) most of the time and no supervision.

Baz

Quite common in the UK from what I have noticed on various building sites.

Do a bit of work, stop, on phone, do a bit of work, stop, on phone and so on.

Is it the same in other countries?

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Quite common in the UK from what I have noticed on various building sites.

Do a bit of work, stop, on phone, do a bit of work, stop, on phone and so on.

Is it the same in other countries?

Bit unfair to pick on builders, that sounds like most people these days with smartphones.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Barry O said:

Remember why we denationalised the railways???

 

Considering how often I've heard on here from people in the industry saying government has more direct interference now than it did under BR, not really!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

Bit unfair to pick on builders, that sounds like most people these days with smartphones.

We were talking about construction, so I saw no need to mention shopkeepers, or typists, or bakers or........

 

I would agree about smartphone usage, it is just plain stupid.

Why does anybody need to constantly check what's happening?

 

I have a smartphone and it spends most of it's time off, I only have it on if I need to call or am expecting a call direct to it, or the landline is on divert, (most people call the landline when contacting me) or if i'm using one of the "smart" features.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, melmerby said:

I have a smartphone and it spends most of it's time off, I only have it on if I need to call or am expecting a call direct to it, or the landline is on divert, (most people call the landline when contacting me) or if i'm using one of the "smart" features.

 

Are you my father in law?  :D

  • Like 1
  • Funny 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a smart phone, don't intend getting one and am quite happy with my Nokia C2. I have  life to be getting on with, why would I waste hours on a smartphone!

 

Davey

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Davey said:

I don't have a smart phone, don't intend getting one and am quite happy with my Nokia C2. I have  life to be getting on with, why would I waste hours on a smartphone!

 

Davey

Because they are actually useful - camera, maps, phone, internet & music all in one place, very useful for getting from A to B.

 

Example: couple of years ago Virgin cancelled all services out of Euston in the evening rush hour, had to find a hotel for the night.  My phone allowed me to seek out reasonable accommodation and book it whilst sat in a bar thinking of my options.  Had I not taken the hotel option I could also have used the same phone to find a alternative train home either via Kings Cross, St Pancras or Marylebone.

 

My phone lets me hold electronic travel tickets, check on Ebay selling and see emails whilst out and about.

 

My iPhone SE wasn't stupid money and I don't regret buying it, I don't spend all my time on it and don't have to use social media or play games.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

It used to be if any operative in the Building Services Company I worked in was caught using a phone it was instant dismissal due to Health and Safety regs. If it was on a BAA airport well...security issues abound.

 

My biggest problem was lack of speed, poor supervision and shoddy workmanship right beside a live railway line...

 

Baz

Edited by Barry O
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with G2 non-smart phones is that the network of masts is gradually being dismantled. We shall all be forced to G3 or G4 (G5 anyone?) - except those near here who have no mobile signal at all.

Jonathan

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Because they are actually useful - camera, maps, phone, internet & music all in one place, very useful for getting from A to B.

 

Example: couple of years ago Virgin cancelled all services out of Euston in the evening rush hour, had to find a hotel for the night.  My phone allowed me to seek out reasonable accommodation and book it whilst sat in a bar thinking of my options.  Had I not taken the hotel option I could also have used the same phone to find a alternative train home either via Kings Cross, St Pancras or Marylebone.

 

My phone lets me hold electronic travel tickets, check on Ebay selling and see emails whilst out and about.

 

My iPhone SE wasn't stupid money and I don't regret buying it, I don't spend all my time on it and don't have to use social media or play games.

 

All of which I seem to either manage perfectly well without a phone, or have no desire to have access to when out and about. For some jobs I can see them being a useful tool, but as part of day to day life I'm afraid I find them rather silly.

Edited by Reorte
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Northern franchise has been a disaster from its inception and the people of the north have been let down by the actions of the DFT yet they escape any form of disapproval . The franchisees have carried out what they were directed  by DFT and constrained as to any improvements by the guidelines contained in the agreements to run trains.The rail companies also seem to have not fully understood the problems involved perhaps it is to big a franchise and should have been split down the middle ?   NR have struggled to complete works and the delays in electrification have not helped  anybody . Comments by politically motivated people have not helped passengers and have only confused matters they are only in their jobs for a short time whereas passengers are there for the long term.Perhaps an authority covering the north with the DFT out of the way will work but all we hear is talk ,it is happening sometime but no dates ,this is not good for the people.I hope that things improve soon as the passenger needs a good reliable service .

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

DFT OLR3 Ltd - a shell company owned by the Department for Transport has today changed its name to NORTHERN TRAINS LIMITED.

 

Company number 03076444

 

Expect a DfT statement shortly.

  • Informative/Useful 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I think the travelling public will think that there will a almost immediate improvement but what they forget is that the same management will remain for now, same problems with stock and introduction of newer stock, congestion as well the same issues of term of conditions will rumble on.

 

 I wait with baited breath to see if there is any improvement.

  • Agree 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

This is what's in the public domain so far from the Department for Transport.

 

Northern Holdings

 

Meet the 'new boss; same as the old boss'.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been listening to Mr Schapps on R4 - lots of waffle about new trains (next year), depot refurbishments, more drivers and clean trains - got in getting rid of the 'nasty' Pacers as well.

 

Interesting story of a bird bringing down the wires and then who's fault it is when it comes to fixing it and apparently it depends how big the bird is - what consultant told him that story to describe a problem I really do not know, clearly it resonated with him enough to repeat such piffle on a radio interview.

 

A couple of commuters interviewed as well and both remarked how the service improved 2 weeks ago when re-nationalisation was first mentioned - or is it simply that perhaps more trains serviceable and driver training almost completed had begun to take effect.   So government steps in just in time for the training programmes to take effect and can them claim the improvements as their own - and what are these new trains or do he mean another cascade of 150s is coming?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Just been listening to Mr Schapps on R4 - lots of waffle about new trains (next year), depot refurbishments, more drivers and clean trains - got in getting rid of the 'nasty' Pacers as well.

 

Interesting story of a bird bringing down the wires and then who's fault it is when it comes to fixing it and apparently it depends how big the bird is - what consultant told him that story to describe a problem I really do not know, clearly it resonated with him enough to repeat such piffle on a radio interview.

 

 

Not necessarily involved in bringing down the OLE but the size of a bird struck by a train is, believe it or not, a factor in delay attribution; Below a certain size it is a TOC responsibilty, on the basis that trains should not be damaged by a small bird; If larger the delay is Network Rail's, as it is an animal incursion on the railway (although how NR is expected to stop birds accessing the line I have no idea !) 

 

I have always believed that instead of delays being split simply into TOC or NR, there should be a third category for incidents not reasonably within the control of the rail industry; Bird strikes (of whatever size), passengers ill on trains and bridge strikes being three examples. Given that by far the majority of external delays are Network Rail's this would also give a clearer picture of responsibility for poor performance.

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 5
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

I have always believed that main reason that the railway was privatised/franchised was so that Ministers could take a back seat and not be blamed every time there was a major c**k-up or, worse still, an accident. And Labour Govt was not keen to renationalise for the same reason.

So I am a bit surprised to see Grant Shapps so happy to take on Northern.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

I have always believed that main reason that the railway was privatised/franchised was so that Ministers could take a back seat and not be blamed every time there was a major c**k-up or, worse still, an accident. And Labour Govt was not keen to renationalise for the same reason.

So I am a bit surprised to see Grant Shapps so happy to take on Northern.

There was also the issue of getting BR off the National Debt.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

I have always believed that main reason that the railway was privatised/franchised was so that Ministers could take a back seat and not be blamed every time there was a major c**k-up or, worse still, an accident. And Labour Govt was not keen to renationalise for the same reason.

So I am a bit surprised to see Grant Shapps so happy to take on Northern.

I remember how on winning power, T Blair's government's policy gradually went from a railway that was

"Publicly owned" to

"Publicly controlled" to

"Publicly accountable". I.E. in effect the status quo.

They renewed franchises when if they really wanted they could have let them slip into government control, but didn't.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.