Southern's Timetable Reduction

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks, I hadn't seen that one before.  Looks like someone, somewhere might usefully have paid a bit more attention to the second recommendation in the "Key Messages" section:

 

b. Continued effective engagement with the Trade Unions to consider solutions for improved productivity. The experience of the last 15 years has been that trade unions have been effective at negotiating outcomes for their members from the somewhat short-term interest of franchisees.

 

AFAICT from reading the McNulty report, it's not clear that the Trades Unions were involved in any of the Stakeholder Workshops that were carried out for that exercise.

 

And the comment is in any case rather misleading I think.  Many of the deals with ASLEF secured productivity improvements  which reflected in the increased pay while in other instances the industry has simply had to compete in the wider world in order to simply obtain staff.

 

It is becoming increasingly noticeable that many station level staff in larger towns in the southeast/London area on GWR are EYU immigrants suggesting that there has been difficulty in recruiting 'local' people (this is a common trait in the hospitality industry as well if our part of the world is any guide.  So comparison with other jobs (e.g 'bus drivers??) is not the correct one when looking at railway jobs.  The comments about Driver training struck me as having been written from a position of considerable ignorance and failure to understand what the job involves (or how it should be properly managed).

 

I find it worrying taht decisions seem to have been made on the nbasis of such badly considered research without looking at many of the real cost drivers in the railway industry structure.

[Coryton]

But it does need to be read with care as in one instance the same working appears as two separate trains - thus two trains are cancelled as a consequence of one faulty set etc.  On an intensive, relatively short distance, service the real figure is the number of diagrams lost or part lost because of a particular failings.  That is of course not what the public would need to know as they relate to particular trains but the management should be relating to the real shortages/problems which kick off the succession of diagrams lost.

 

And of course if you run fewer but longer trains you could need the same number of units even with a large number of services cancelled.

[roundhouse]

And of course if you run fewer but longer trains you could need the same number of units even with a large number of services cancelled.

None of our trains are any longer as already mainly 12 cars. However quite often these dyas they aren ow shorter. This evning my train home (12 car) was cancelled due to 'an operating incident'

[Foulounoux]

A work collegue is moving ot Jersey. Apparently the peak hour traffic is that great that it can take half hour to travel across the island. I might see if they have any more jobs going

y

 

That reminds me of a trip to Barbados. We took a taxi and the driver advised us he was taking a detour to avoid rush hour

 

We hired a car the following week rush hour turned out to be 10 cars st the traffic lights

 

 

On topic so 5 day strike is announced From Havant I prefer to fly out of gatwick as I can do the whole trip by public transport

Next weeks German trip is now car and Heathrow.

 

Colin

[phil-b259]

Not really true in my experience.  Politicians generally are frightened of confrontation with (strong) trade unions and often go a long way to avoid it.  In this case I think what has probably gone on in the background is fairly clear - firstly there is an idiotic report from 'academics' about the level of earnings in the rail industry which in many respects looked through the wrong end of the telescope and was not brilliant in identifying why overall industry costs - in total - were rising.  This was then taken in the wrong (or quite likely from their viewpoint the right) way and they swung 'opinion' onto frontline costs - Wilkinson appears to have been a prime candidate in this - grossly overpaid himself he was hardly likely to have a go at costs in the upper levels of the industry.

 

So DaftT, no doubt 'inspired' by this idiot, then began to 'prove' to the politicos how costs could be reduced and got things going by writing things into franchise renewals.  The trouble is they probably in reality have no more understanding of how things work than the politicos do and the franchise is let to a company which very clearly has even less understanding than DafT have of how to go about things than.

 

Net result - the present mess.  Simplest answer - get rid of the idiot Wilkinson, clearly some sort of motormouth who hasn't got a clue about anything to do with railways; get shot of Govia for sheer incompetence and either re-let or put the franchise under direct management pending re-let.  Do not give it to TFL - they also have limited understanding of how real railways work and lack the experience to run something like this whatever they might be muttering in the background.  At the same time there should be a competent rail industry review (although I'm not at all sure who in the industry would be 'competent' in this instance) to review the DOO (P) conditions and requirements - and when that review is complete to leave it to franchsees and other operators to implement them where it is possible to do so.  In some cases in my view there would have to be independent risk assessments however overall the reality is that properly applied DOO(P) works successfully, has done so in Britain for over a quarter of a century, and imports little or no additional risk potential and in many instances actually reduces risk potential.

 

It doesn't sound like the DfT agree

 

From the BBC website (my bold):-

 

Rail minister Paul Maynard said the strike would do nothing other than cause yet more disruption and daily misery for passengers.

He said: "It is deeply disappointing that the union bosses continue to overlook the impact they are having on the travelling public, and I strongly condemn this proposed action.

"The changes GTR are proposing will modernise services and provide better journeys for passengers.

"Clearly, the RMT has decided that it is not on the side of the passenger."

 

GTR said it was unacceptable passengers were being made to suffer.

Chief operating officer Dyan Crowther said all onboard staff had a job with no reduction in salary.

She said: "The sooner we can introduce the essential modernisation that our railways desperately need, the sooner we can stop the RMT from holding passengers to ransom.

"Contrary to the RMT's accusation, we have always been open to talks and remain so."

She claimed RMT General Secretary Mick Cash had been unwilling to enter into discussion.

 

Subtext is as I said earlier, namely this is all the fault of the trade unions.

[jjb1970]

I have to admit I'm a bit of a sceptic when it comes to reports in general. They're a bit like opinion polls in that the frames of reference fed to researches employed to produce them can be used to determine the final recommendations and get the desired result. I've played the game from both ends in having both written reports for clients including government departments and also ripped reports apart for other clients and to me it is exactly that - a game. However many people accept impressive credentialed authors and the moniker of an ostensibly independent institution on the cover at face value and just accept conclusions. I did a particularly brutal hatchet job on one report and when I had the embarrassment to run into the lead author at a university function she was the one who was quite apologetic and was decent enough to admit that whilst brutal there was nothing in my appraisal that was unfair or unsupported, she seemed to just accept (as I generally did) that she did her job in delivering a report and I did mine for the people paying my bills. Business is business and all that.

[John M Upton]

(apart from that the new Thameslink trains do not have a position for the guards ot operate the doors) to save on costs.

 

For the record the new Class 700's do have Guards Operation Panels (GOP) fitted, look for the GOP label on a panel adjacent to some of the doors.  I was taking a look at one just this very afternoon.

[roundhouse]

For the record the new Class 700's do have Guards Operation Panels (GOP) fitted, look for the GOP label on a panel adjacent to some of the doors.  I was taking a look at one just this very afternoon.

 

 

Thanks John.

I stand corrected. I have yet to travel on one.

[cheesysmith]

I'd love for someone to do a comparison of train crew costs of the last days of BR vs now. Take the costs of train crew for a area (say what is the present GTR) and divide it by the number of trains run. It would provide a good yardstick of how wage rises and productivity have gone together. It would also give evidence to either prove the report or not.

[jonathan452]

RE: Class 700

Thanks John.

I stand corrected. I have yet to travel on one.

Nor have I.

 

But it might be worth taking a comfy cushion to put on the seat.........!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Stationmaster]

I have to admit I'm a bit of a sceptic when it comes to reports in general. They're a bit like opinion polls in that the frames of reference fed to researches employed to produce them can be used to determine the final recommendations and get the desired result. I've played the game from both ends in having both written reports for clients including government departments and also ripped reports apart for other clients and to me it is exactly that - a game. However many people accept impressive credentialed authors and the moniker of an ostensibly independent institution on the cover at face value and just accept conclusions. I did a particularly brutal hatchet job on one report and when I had the embarrassment to run into the lead author at a university function she was the one who was quite apologetic and was decent enough to admit that whilst brutal there was nothing in my appraisal that was unfair or unsupported, she seemed to just accept (as I generally did) that she did her job in delivering a report and I did mine for the people paying my bills. Business is business and all that.

 

Over the years with some of my bosses or Directors I used to (perhaps a little tongue in cheek sometimes) ask them what they would like me to prove.  I suspect this approach is far from uncommon in various parts of, say the Civil Service or indeed among some people managing some franchises and certainly applies in cases where consultants are brought in.

 

I reality it is not something to be cynical about as it is natural that people would wish to prove their point of view, or what they are proposing, to be correct and of course they don't really need to say what result they want as their past words and action will already have made that perfectly clear.

 

The two examples quoted above by Phil would seem to prove the same point.  Govia has made an absolute mess of managing (mismanaging is probably more apt) their IR situation and their approach to major change but it is plainly obvious that they are hardly likely to admit it and they are equally obviously going to seek to direct potential blame onto someone else (and let's face the RMT has been equally daft in setting itself up as the ideal target for that.  However to describe what they are proposing as 'modernisation' strikes me as playing with the truth - they are not seeking to 'modernise' anything; they are simply trying to introduce a changed method of operation which should, if correctly carried out, improve reliability and has a longer term potential to reduce operating costs.  In my view introducing a method of operation which is over a quarter of a century old is hardly 'modernisation'.

 

Regrettably Paul Maynard's words do little more than show his lack of understanding of what is involved although he is probably right in talking about 'better journeys for passengers' when what is a hopeful outcome is that trains will actually run as planned - which must be better than a reduced timetable and frequent cancellations even in that.  He was probably briefed by that Wilkinson bloke?

 

I must say that I would absolutely love to go into Southern to carry out an operational standards audit - it would be interesting to see what happens to be hiding under various stones in view of their inability to run 100% of their reduced service.

[The Stationmaster]

I'd love for someone to do a comparison of train crew costs of the last days of BR vs now. Take the costs of train crew for a area (say what is the present GTR) and divide it by the number of trains run. It would provide a good yardstick of how wage rises and productivity have gone together. It would also give evidence to either prove the report or not.

Not necessarily a very good comparison as it is really far too crude a measure to assess the impact of any changes when the train service has also changed.  The old thorny question remains - how do you measure traincrew productivity and indeed what does it actually mean when you do measure it.  Fora  given set of, say, Driver Conditions of employment I could knock out a timetable which gives maximum utilisation with a high percentage of turns spent actually driving but the timetable I deliver could well be commercially useless.  From the other end of the equation I could no doubt knock out a timetable  to exactly meet a commercial specification and in traincrew utilisation terms it could be total rubbish with a high manning cost (the SNCF approach to life as it happens).

 

Generally a good trainplan will be a combination, in varying measures, of the two extremes of maximum utilisation and maximum meeting of the commercial spec and occasionally the two might even coincide.  But if you are running a commuter railway with distinct peaks at certain parts of the day you will inevitably face certain cost implications for resourcing it and it doesn't really matter what you do - you will never completely resolve the resource consequences (and resultant costs) of a service with peaks

[pH]

That reminds me of a trip to Barbados. We took a taxi and the driver advised us he was taking a detour to avoid rush hour

We hired a car the following week rush hour turned out to be 10 cars st the traffic lights.

 

Video of the situation - https://youtu.be/ca-HZ7qiR0I

 

(Apologies for going completely OT, but that advert immediately came to mind when I read Colin's post)

[HillsideDepot]

Not necessarily a very good comparison as it is really far too crude a measure to assess the impact of any changes when the train service has also changed.  The old thorny question remains - how do you measure traincrew productivity and indeed what does it actually mean when you do measure it.  Fora  given set of, say, Driver Conditions of employment I could knock out a timetable which gives maximum utilisation with a high percentage of turns spent actually driving but the timetable I deliver could well be commercially useless.  From the other end of the equation I could no doubt knock out a timetable  to exactly meet a commercial specification and in traincrew utilisation terms it could be total rubbish with a high manning cost (the SNCF approach to life as it happens).

 

Generally a good trainplan will be a combination, in varying measures, of the two extremes of maximum utilisation and maximum meeting of the commercial spec and occasionally the two might even coincide.  But if you are running a commuter railway with distinct peaks at certain parts of the day you will inevitably face certain cost implications for resourcing it and it doesn't really matter what you do - you will never completely resolve the resource consequences (and resultant costs) of a service with peaks

 

When I was a bus scheduler I had a quote from Gerard Fiennes prominent on my office notice board:

A timetable should be a promise not a hope. A punctual service is a cheap service on the basis that unpunctuality upsets the working to such a degree that expensive improvisation may be necessary.

My managing director was of the opposite opinion and instructed me to remove the sign, but I still strongly believe what it says. He and I could never agree the correct way to calculate "duty efficiencies" either, although the method was largely irrelevant, what mattered was consistent methodology to compare one set of duties with another, and an acceptance that the most "efficient" on paper may have been completely unworkable on the road.

 

[The Stationmaster]

When I was a bus scheduler I had a quote from Gerard Fiennes prominent on my office notice board:

A timetable should be a promise not a hope. A punctual service is a cheap service on the basis that unpunctuality upsets the working to such a degree that expensive improvisation may be necessary.

My managing director was of the opposite opinion and instructed me to remove the sign, but I still strongly believe what it says. He and I could never agree the correct way to calculate "duty efficiencies" either, although the method was largely irrelevant, what mattered was consistent methodology to compare one set of duties with another, and an acceptance that the most "efficient" on paper may have been completely unworkable on the road.

 

 

Exactly so Adrian - the only reason I didn't tick 'Agree' was because I never planned 'bus working (apart from a bit on emergency services).  I simply told our Deputy MD - who was charged with responsibility for services hence my directly reporting to him for some things - that when my team and I produced trainplan and timetable they would work and meet the commercial spec at minimum operating cost (assuming they had actually bothered to produce one that I didn't argue with because it was unworkable/too expensive).  I also had the advantage that in the company I effectively controlled the traincrew conditions of service and hence all the diagramming and rostering 'rules'.  

 

I didn't have a  Jerry Fiennes quote on my office wall but I did have a  Russian language timing sheet for a Moscow - Berlin service which served to get some folk in a tangle when trying to translatre (the Deputy MD spoke Russian so he loved it, my immediate Director just walked away looking puzzled).

[stewartingram]

There are Lies, Damn Lies, & Statistics.

 

You can prove anything with figures.

 

 

Stewart

[jjb1970]

The timetable thing is not dissimilar to the argument in engineering that it is more cost effective to get things right first time than to waste money correcting errors and flaws down the line. Or the old adage that if people think safety is expensive then try having an accident.

[ejstubbs]

Another engineering adage: the trouble with doing things right first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was.

 

(This one always comes to mind when someone starts banging on about how the Y2K bug was just a "scare story".)

[jonathan452]

 

Don't you mean Forest Hole, it's been renamed

 

 

Spoke too soon!

 

Fresh mayhem as second sinkhole opens up in Forest Hill - http://www.standard....l-a3311521.html

[roundhouse]

Forest Hole - The sequel!!

[Joseph_Pestell]

y

 

That reminds me of a trip to Barbados. We took a taxi and the driver advised us he was taking a detour to avoid rush hour

 

We hired a car the following week rush hour turned out to be 10 cars st the traffic lights

 

 

On topic so 5 day strike is announced From Havant I prefer to fly out of gatwick as I can do the whole trip by public transport

Next weeks German trip is now car and Heathrow.

 

Colin

Havant to Heathrow easy enough. Train to Woking + RailAir Coach. Gatwick-Havant was grim when we did it last with a change at Three Bridges.

[Chris116]

Havant to Heathrow easy enough. Train to Woking + RailAir Coach. Gatwick-Havant was grim when we did it last with a change at Three Bridges.

"

 

Be careful with the RailAir coach service from Woking. It used to be every half hour but has recently been reduced to once an hour.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Forest Hole?

 

Or Forrest Gump; just keep on running.....

[roundhouse]

No agreement at the ACAS meeting. Sounds like the govt wouldn't let Govia move at all to come up with a resolution.

 

So the 5 day guards strike is on. Wasn't really expecting it to be called off really.

 

A fun week next week....not.

[phil-b259]

No agreement at the ACAS meeting. Sounds like the govt wouldn't let Govia move at all to come up with a resolution.

 

So the 5 day guards strike is on. Wasn't really expecting it to be called off really.

 

A fun week next week....not.

To be fair we are now getting towards the end game here.

 

A five day strike is not a trivial mater when it comes to conductors pay packets* and as such smacks of desperation by the Union bosses particularly with Govia adamant the new regime will come into play from 21st August.

 

Thing is, this was totally predictable - in a confrontation between the RMT and a Conservative administration the RMT were always going to come off worse.

 

* As Peter Wilkinson rather crudely put it union, members, like the rest of us have bills to pay and most cannot afforded to continue extensive strike action for months on end and the union will eventually have to sue for peace. All the Governmrnt has to do is weather the public relations storm - which is easily done thanks to the provotisation process which sets TOCs up to be the fall guys.