New structure for British railways

[Jeff Smith]

Just read this https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/china-high-speed-rail-cmd/index.html

There has apparently been a lot of investment there.....

[Nearholmer]

28 minutes ago, RichardT said:

All the disadvantages of a monolithic inflexible railway PLUS all the disadvantages of TOC-fragmentation.  Well done Shapps, your paymasters are proud of you.

Do you mean residual fragmentation while things transition to GBR? That I can understand, but if you are talking about longer term, then there won’t be any TOCs in the current sense to be fragmented. There will be train service contractors.

 

Fares are always, and always have been a bngger to get right, nobody ever liked them since Stephenson was a rocket, but it’s hard to imagine a system worse than the present one, and plenty of railways, all over the world, manage to make the fare-offering clear. Of course, clear doesn’t necessarily mean cheap; price depends upon the efficiency of the railway, the degree of subsidy, and pricing decisions (like making the per trip cost by season ticket lower, when the per unit cost of delivering transport at peak times is highest ...... why do that??).

 

My forecast is that an attempt will be made to do three things:

 

- generally improve efficiency in order to reduce costs (an obvious open goal in places); and,

 

- flatten peaks by reducing the discount on season tickets (= increasing prices), at the same time as making them more flexible (which should improve efficiency of itself);

 

- attempt to grow revenue by attempting to get the prices such that nearly every train runs at a high load factor (say 85-100% full) throughout, which will probably involve cutting some fares, while raising others.

 

 

[Gwiwer]

1 hour ago, RichardT said:

The implication is also that the retention of TOCs under “GBR” will still allow this kind of TOC-specific restriction to continue, getting rid of which I thought was one of the major arguments in favour of a unified railway.

As I read the report it was made clear in several places that whilst ticketing options would be changed in some cases the concept of the "walk-up railway" would be universally retained.  Its value should not be under-estimated.  

 

Whilst that might create or allow to continue the situation of some trains regularly becoming overcrowded (often for only a shorter part of an overall journey) the very existence of passenger rail is to permit travel not to prevent it.  Without it there is no reason for the railway as we know it to exist.  

 

Even with "Mandatory reservations" LNER and GWR (who have at times suggested they were operating a reservations-only policy) have allocated one coach per train to unreserved walk-up passengers.  This includes staff whose duty requires them to travel between locations - often on a specific train - and for residential purposes again where there may be no other option for staff to travel to or from their workplace.  Going back many years now BR - WR operated Seat Regulation Tickets for the "West Country Holiday Trains"  which amounted to all trains in Summer Saturdays, plus those overnight ones leaving late on Friday evenings, to and from the Devon and Cornwall resorts.  In theory you had to hold a seat ticket (not a reservation as such but only as many tickets as seats on the train were available) to travel.  Local trains and local journeys within the Plymouth - Penzance area were exempt.  Other than for boarding at Penzance and Paddington, possibly at Paignton and Torquay which I never visited at the time, no checks were ever carried out that I was aware of.  We happily boarded a "Regulated" train at Liskeard for travel to London without seat tickets and found not only was the carriage almost empty but so was most of the train.  Similar arrangements applied at Blackpool.  

 

The British railway network has almost always been a walk-up service and many of the Great British Public expect it to remain so.  What they pay for the privilege is open to debate.  There are valid arguments against a system where it is possible to purchase an Advance ticket for £20 including a specified reserved seat but could in theory be denied travel with an Anytime ticket costing £200 for the same journey but without a reservation.  

 

It is not by any means beyond the bounds of reason to maintain one coach for unreserved travel whilst encouraging pre-booking.  Detailed inspection of the current seat reservation plans will also reveal that even in the "reservable" coaches certain seats cannot be reserved.  

 

As with all things GBR we shall have to wait and see.  If there is a surge in demand for travel in June assuming final restrictions are lifted then LNER will come under increasing pressure to abandon an unpopular system which alienates rather than encourages a significant proportion of their potential customer base.  

[NorthEndCab]

It always amuses me that the same people who cry the loudest for nationalisation are the same people who cry the loudest about the mess the government seems to make of everything else it does.

 

And I include ASLEF in that. 

[John M Upton]

14 minutes ago, NorthEndCab said:

It always amuses me that the same people who cry the loudest for nationalisation are the same people who cry the loudest about the mess the government seems to make of everything else it does.

 

And I include ASLEF in that. 

 

....and the RMT.  

 

If you want a laugh, see what the reaction is when you tell a dyed in wool trade unionist that, actually the Unions are not in charge of running the railways.

 

They just don't get it!

[andyman7]

On 20/05/2021 at 07:50, PaulRhB said:

No I think you’ll see the same variety as the franchises just morph into these set rate operations. The govt already set the names on the main franchises like GWR, LNER and SWR and the new idea was already mooted as bidding to run at a set fee. 

If you read the White Paper it goes beyond that. The DfT do own the franchise names but neither they nor any other part of the industry have had oversight of the industry brand offering. The new organisation will. So it will decide how the contracted operations are branded. Expect a national identity with regional/local flavour. 
In the same way that when BR disappeared it took years for people to stop thinking in terms of BR, I can see now that many people are having trouble conceiving that 'TOCs' will not exist in their current form. They will be supplier contracts to GBR. 

I expect use will be made of identities with history like LNER and GWR. I'm not so sure about c2c.....

[andyman7]

On 21/05/2021 at 08:58, Oldddudders said:

Lots of detail I didn't know there. How privileges have been eroded! When I joined in 1966 senior clerks in Special B got first class travel, under the Grade Restructuring they then became Clerical Officer 4, and newcomers to that grade did not get first class. When I got to MS1 in 1979 I got first class, and MS2 got me a Regional Pass. That was in 1981 and the MS1 DCCs in our Control at Beckenham definitely didn't work Sundays because they couldn't be paid overtime.

 

In 1984 I was MS4 and got an all-stations BR first class pass. When I got to MS5, as i worked in London I got free tube travel. When I got to EG I got a London bus pass too. There was some reciprocity with London Transport officers, obviously. 

 

As for free tickets, after one month's service in 1966, I received a Privilege Ticket Identity Card, entitling me to buy unlimited quarter-price tickets, for my own use only. I think I was also entitled to 4 free tickets per annum, and as has been pointed out, one always chose Dover to Wick or similar. After a year's service, Continental Free Travel became available, with one free ticket par annum, and unlimited purchases of reduced rate travel, typically half-price. London to Vienna became the ticket of choice, routed via Switzerland. The BR Free Ticket thing was rather labour-intensive, with clerks making the things out, so then the Boxes became the way to do it, in about 1981, I think. 

 

Privatisation hamstrung much of this stuff for incoming staff, much like it threw out some babies with bathwater in refusing free duty travel to infrastructure maintenance staff, pushing up industry costs. The extent to which new arrangements will be designed to obtain the buy-in of the staff remains to be seen. We can only hope. 

Yes, the post-1996 offer has been pathetic and the lack of any joined up structure to see through the pointlessness of wooden dollars as different bits of the industry pay other bits to travel and then charge them via the contract costs has been very frustrating. I expect that once the national organisation is established two things will rapidly become obvious:

1) Duty travel through issuing and use of appropriate passes saves a lot of pointless accounting

2) In an era when costs are squeezed and pay rises limited, offering a 'perk' of some free/discounted travel will be a blindingly obvious way to attract and retain staff.

Plus ca change....

[Mike Storey]

21 hours ago, NorthEndCab said:

It always amuses me that the same people who cry the loudest for nationalisation are the same people who cry the loudest about the mess the government seems to make of everything else it does.

 

And I include ASLEF in that. 

 

Don't confuse nationalisation with the government running it.

 

BR coped perfectly well as a stand-alone organisation, particularly by the 80's, with minimal interference. That is despite its, largely incorrect and incoherent music hall image, which had persisted since long before nationalisation.

 

The key issue against nationalisation is the amount of money the Treasury are willing to pay to underwrite the railway system. Once "privatised", with all the regulatory and contractual obligations written into the Major version, there seemed to be no well too dry to fund endless subsidies and investment, Contrast that with BR days. 

 

Unions are blamed for much that went wrong with UK industry, but can also be "blamed" for taking advantage of huge pay rises post privatisation, facilitated by competition between TOCs (and FOCs) for staff. Unions have overseen a cut in staffing from around 400,000 to c.100,000, with no national strikes since the 1980's (bar one possibly, in Railtrack days, but that was over safety). Managements, on the other hand, have seen a ten-fold increase in board room pay in the same timescale, largely for doing very little extra with an awful lot more money. So, when taking the mickey out of Unions, let's remember the other side of that coin. What BR Chairman ever got paid £0.5 million?

[43110andyb]

On 22/05/2021 at 16:08, John M Upton said:

 

....and the RMT.  

 

If you want a laugh, see what the reaction is when you tell a dyed in wool trade unionist that, actually the Unions are not in charge of running the railways.

 

They just don't get it!

I would just like to say you are misguided in your generalised assumption!    

        There are many RMT local industrial & Health & Safety Reps that are ‘Dyed in wool’ -to quote your post that have worked for the past 30 years plus keeping the balance between running a safe railway and pushing back against the private companies that were only interested in total profit!

    Jarvis were a prime example, they would force us as employees to book job numbers to the detriment of Railtrack with the threat of the sack right up to the demise of both Jarvis & Railtrack!

     It was a travesty that cost the industry millions and we were trying our best to save both members & the railway the injustice of what was happening!     Soul destroying at times and seemingly a media led at times anti-union campaign that still seems to sway people’s opinion against the heart & soul members that do genuinely care about the rail industry! -

32 years  ‘not out’ a railwayman and NUR/RMT member for my sins. 

[Nearholmer]

11 hours ago, 43110andyb said:

a media led at times anti-union campaign that still seems to sway people’s opinion

 

Using the media to undermine TUs is as old as TUs, and its a very easy thing to do, because it is only necessary to either report things out of context, or focus on the actions of the generally very small number of members and full-time officials who go OTT, while ignoring the great majority who don't, and any legitimate grievances that they might have.

 

Trouble is, TUs are human institutions, so they are flawed. Employer organisations are also human institutions, so are also flawed, but a very large proportion of the press have a blind-spot to that, for one reason or another.

[Compound2632]

41 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

Employer organisations are also human institutions, so are also flawed, but a very large proportion of the press have a blind-spot to that, for one reason or another.

 

Their humanity, and that of their members, sometimes appears doubtful.

[Allegheny1600]

47 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

 

the media

*snip*

Employer organisations are also human institutions, so are also flawed, but a very large proportion of the press have a blind-spot to that, for one reason or another.

Well, I believe it’s because the press are owned by those self same organisations or individuals.

 

And then, they have the temerity to claim that they are the “free” press - ha!

[Nearholmer]

I was leaving it to others to join the dots.

[Compound2632]

25 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

I was leaving it to others to join the dots.

...

[96701]

Steve Bell's view of Jarvis was about right. A horrible company to work for.

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

On 23/05/2021 at 14:05, Mike Storey said:

.......What BR Chairman ever got paid £0.5 million?

 

That was then and not now.

Remember, BR ended a quarter of a century ago.

Not withstanding general inflation and significant wage inflation across the board, the landscape of senior executive pay is quite different.

Do you think in this day and age, a latter day BR Chairman would be getting much less than that sort of salary?

 

e.g. In 2020

 

CEO of Network Rail (a public body ) on a base salary of £680,000 plus

Chairman of NR is on a base salary of £500,000 plus

Plus loads of directors of NR functions and divisions, on £300,000 and £400,000 plus

CEO of HS2 Ltd (a public body) - £750,0000

HS2 Manager Infrastructure (Phase 1) - £400,000

 

 

.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Ron Ron Ron

[Gwiwer]

37 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

 

 

e.g. In 2020

 

CEO of Network Rail (a public body ) on a base salary of £680,000 plus

Chairman of NR is on a base salary of £500,000 plus

Plus loads of directors of NR functions and divisions, on £300,000 and £400,000 plus

CEO of HS2 Ltd - £750,0000

HS2 Manager Infrastructure (Phase 1) - £400,000

 

 

.

And therein lies scope for some not insignificant savings if things are restructured as the Government document implies.  Strip out some of the duplication.   I know these salaries are often inclusive of a performance-related element but what do some of these folk do which actually requires a salary of that level?  

 

We probably shouldn't go into that argument here.  It is as long as it is broad when it comes to the value of work and the reward of skill.  The best I ever worked for was Hubert Guyot who for a time was Chief Executive Officer of Yarra Trams in Melbourne, Australia.  OK he had all the nice green / cream trams painted a drab shade of grey but his attitude was remarkable.  He personally spoke with every single member of staff; he personally went out on the ground daily and spoke with customers and staff, and when welcoming new recruits he was quite candid about the rates of pay.  His words in my introductory session were "We are all of equal value.  We all work with the same aim.  We all work with everyone.  Some of us are paid more than others, we do different jobs and some of us wear overalls, some wear uniforms and others wear suits.  But I cannot undo historical events in my years here.  I hope you will forgive me for this."  He never lost sight of the value of his workforce from bottom to top and was a rare chief officer who had the unions on-side.  

[Ron Ron Ron]

31 minutes ago, Gwiwer said:

And therein lies scope for some not insignificant savings if things are restructured as the Government document implies.  Strip out some of the duplication.......

 

You would hope so, but cynically, I strongly suspect that any senior civil servants, ported over from DafT Rail to this new GBR, will find their annual salaries being elevated from circa £150,000 to £230,000, up to double that, or even more.

 

NR will still operate as a function, or division within GBR, so I imagine most of the senior roles will remain.

NR's group directors and senior managers on big money.

Apart from the Chairman and CEO noted above (£500k & £680k respectively), there are....

3 on  £430,000+

4 on £300,000 to £350,000

15 on £200,000+

24 on £150,000+ (inc. several on £180,000 plus).

Cut their salaries and many will be offski to private industry or overseas contracts.

 

HS2 is a separate body and they have at least 18 bods on over £200,000 pa. and even more than that on £150,000 to £200,000

 

The boss man for the British Museum (just one of several national museums in London) is on £200,000 pa.

 

 

.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Ron Ron Ron

[corneliuslundie]

According to a calculation website I just looked at £500,000 today is about equivalent to £31,500 in 1970 based on spending power. So what would the bosses of BR at the end have been earning?

Jonathan

[Supaned]

I suspect that some cost cutting will come via DOO/DCO.

 

As more new trains enter service with cameras and driver door controls , to me it's obvious what will happen.

 

TOCs/concessions operating "legacy" rolling stock will continue with existing arrangements until such time as they get replacement trains, but in one swoop they could probably have a decent chunk of the network operated in that way, and of course that will be a condition of the concession contracts as they are let.

[Mike Storey]

On 25/05/2021 at 15:01, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

That was then and not now.

Remember, BR ended a quarter of a century ago.

Not withstanding general inflation and significant wage inflation across the board, the landscape of senior executive pay is quite different.

Do you think in this day and age, a latter day BR Chairman would be getting much less than that sort of salary?

 

e.g. In 2020

 

CEO of Network Rail (a public body ) on a base salary of £680,000 plus

Chairman of NR is on a base salary of £500,000 plus

Plus loads of directors of NR functions and divisions, on £300,000 and £400,000 plus

CEO of HS2 Ltd (a public body) - £750,0000

HS2 Manager Infrastructure (Phase 1) - £400,000

 

 

.

 

Not so. 

 

a) General inflation since 1994 has been about 100% (2.8% per year ave.)

 

b) The job of CEO of BR was the combination of the jobs of the CEO's of NR, all the TOCs and FOCs, most of the Infrastructure companies plus possibly the ROSCO CEO's.

 

c) The last CEO of BR (John Elliott) was on £180k. (base).

 

Many of the people who have been paid these grossly inflated salaries since then, were ex-BR, so less likely to off to another industry (although that has happened of course). There appears to be no rhyme or reason for the massive, inflation busting salaries, other than greed and gross incompetence. There is clear and compelling evidence that Boardroom pay has had nothing to do with company/industry performance for many years now.

 

 

[Oldddudders]

3 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

The last CEO of BR (John Elliott)

Should I remember him?

[uax6]

On 25/05/2021 at 15:19, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

You would hope so, but cynically, I strongly suspect that any senior civil servants, ported over from DafT Rail to this new GBR, will find their annual salaries being elevated from circa £150,000 to £230,000, up to double that, or even more.

 

NR will still operate as a function, or division within GBR, so I imagine most of the senior roles will remain.

NR's group directors and senior managers on big money.

Apart from the Chairman and CEO noted above (£500k & £680k respectively), there are....

 

Cut their salaries and many will be offski to private industry or overseas contracts.

 

The bigger question is how many of the office functions can be done away with...

 

Edited May 26, 2021 by uax6

[Ron Ron Ron]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Not so...... 

.......There appears to be no rhyme or reason for the massive, inflation busting salaries, other than greed and gross incompetence.

There is clear and compelling evidence that Boardroom pay has had nothing to do with company/industry performance for many years now.

 

 

I said nothing about performance Mike.

Senior executive pay levels  (in the world at large)  have certainly outstripped general inflation over the last quarter of a century, since the demise of BR.

 

Hopefully many senior roles in this new GBR, will be abolished due to due to duplication or amalgamation of functions, but who takes charge?

A senior figure from the industry, or the man from the ministry?

 

 

.

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

but who takes charge?

A senior figure from the industry, or the man from the ministry?

 

Perhaps it should be Cummings' penance?