Is £5000 a year for a season ticket too much?

[Titan]

Why not tax long distance commuting to encourage less congested city's. 

 

Surely that would make it more economical to live in the city, and thus make it even more congested? Especially if not only it brings in the money earner but their family as well...

[hayfield]

Surely that would make it more economical to live in the city, and thus make it even more congested? Especially if not only it brings in the money earner but their family as well...

 

 

Or move jobs which are not city dependant out of the city making life better for those living there. As for the cost of property, thats for another thread

[pete_mcfarlane]

Surely that would make it more economical to live in the city, and thus make it even more congested? Especially if not only it brings in the money earner but their family as well...

 

Not if you can walk or cycle to work (along dedicated cycle paths). That will reduce traffic. 

 

The problem is that decent quality city centre housing that appeals to professional people with families is fairly limited. There are plenty of high quality flats in city centre locations, but these tend to appeal to single people or younger couples. As soon as they have kids, they move out to the suburbs.

 

We'd have to do a spot of social engineering, and push the poorer people out of the cities to make room for professionals. And that would involve the political party that tends to run most inner city councils agreeing to most of their core voters being moved out and replaced with people who tend to vote for the other two main parties...... 

[Titan]

Not if you can walk or cycle to work (along dedicated cycle paths). That will reduce traffic. 

 

If you base your policy on an 'if' then it stands a very high chance of not going well. Don't forget the shopping, trips to the doctor etc. unless the family is not allowed out other than traveling to work...

[pete_mcfarlane]

If you base your policy on an 'if' then it stands a very high chance of not going well. Don't forget the shopping, trips to the doctor etc. unless the family is not allowed out other than traveling to work...

 

But people tend not to do those things en masse at the same time every weekday morning and evening, so they won't cause congestion in the same way as commuting does. Plus things like doctors, dentists and schools all tend to be within walking distance in cities so there's less need to drive to them.   

[Southernman46]

It does sounds like it but my annual season from Grateley to London is £4836 and works out at about £11 a single journey if used every day (ok this won't happen - I need to work out what exactly VMF use I am putting it to) but technically that's what could be achieved, I reckon that's pretty good value BEARING in mind it costs £5.50 a day just to park my car at the station / or £7.70 at Andover and an EYE-WATERING £11 at Guildford (which I use for early shifts occasionally) ...............

 

Interesting the "void days" rebate on last years' ticket has covered the cost of this years' fare increase so technically I've seen no price increase - if SWT (SWR) cock-up the same number of times in the next 12 months then the same will happen

[Poggy1165]

Part of the problem is that the London economy is over-heated, leading to silly property prices. My solution would be to move the politicians and civil servants out to somewhere where land is really cheap - say Scunthorpe - and let the private companies stay in London if they so wished. That way you aren't intervening directly in commercial decisions.

 

This will never happen, because it would divorce too many highly influential persons from their clubs and opera/ballet/theatres, etc.

[Fat Controller]

Not if you can walk or cycle to work (along dedicated cycle paths). That will reduce traffic. 

 

The problem is that decent quality city centre housing that appeals to professional people with families is fairly limited. There are plenty of high quality flats in city centre locations, but these tend to appeal to single people or younger couples. As soon as they have kids, they move out to the suburbs.

 

We'd have to do a spot of social engineering, and push the poorer people out of the cities to make room for professionals. And that would involve the political party that tends to run most inner city councils agreeing to most of their core voters being moved out and replaced with people who tend to vote for the other two main parties...... 

And also find a way of housing all the people who provide services for the city dwellers, from bin men to police, fire and health service personnel.

[njee20]

Yeah, I don't think most people would want a 30 mile cycle each way before and after work TBH

I agree, it's lunacy, but up to 10 miles I'd wager it's the quickest way to travel, and very viable for a lot of people.

 

Those folk aren't the ones paying £5k for a season ticket mind!

[jjb1970]

Something to keep in mind is that a lot of people want to work in London. I think many would also like to live in London is property was affordable. Often in these threads there seems to be an assumption that people are desperate to go elsewhere, I've no doubt some are but plenty of people working in London want to work in London and don't want to move elsewhere.

One of my former employers relocated from London to Southampton and the attrition rate was terrible as so many people left rather than relocate to work in Southampton.

[njee20]

Would be interesting to know how many people paying £5k a year to commute do want to work in London. I suspect it's very few! I certainly don't. If I could get the same job elsewhere then I would, in a heartbeat.

[APOLLO]

Part of the problem is that the London economy is over-heated, leading to silly property prices. My solution would be to move the politicians and civil servants out to somewhere where land is really cheap - say Scunthorpe - and let the private companies stay in London if they so wished. That way you aren't intervening directly in commercial decisions.

 

This will never happen, because it would divorce too many highly influential persons from their clubs and opera/ballet/theatres, etc.

 

And what has poor old Scunthorpe done to deserve such an unsavory influx of talentless miscreants !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Send them to Widnes instead, then they can savor the delights of a pie "warmed" by throwing it in the chip fat at the local chippy !!!!!!!

 

Edited to add - I agree London is getting to be a bit of a nightmare for many. I pity the low paid but absolutely essential workers - cleaners, nurses, shop assistants etc etc who are 100% needed to keep the City functioning - how do they survive ??

 

Brit15

Edited August 17, 2017 by APOLLO

[royaloak]

No difference in hassle booking the two, in fact experience tells me Trainline is the easier of the two websites to use

 

Why would anyone knowingly use the Trainline to buy tickets (with their 'booking' fee) when the same tickets are available from all TOC websites plus some other independents without the booking fee?

[royaloak]

Would be interesting to know how many people paying £5k a year to commute do want to work in London. I suspect it's very few! I certainly don't. If I could get the same job elsewhere then I would, in a heartbeat.

The same job or the same pay?

One does not equal the other!

 

Sometimes (obviously not always) the same or similar job is available closer but people prefer the higher paying one in London even with the increased cost (monetary and time)  of commuting.

[Zomboid]

Something to keep in mind is that a lot of people want to work in London. I think many would also like to live in London is property was affordable. Often in these threads there seems to be an assumption that people are desperate to go elsewhere, I've no doubt some are but plenty of people working in London want to work in London and don't want to move elsewhere.

One of my former employers relocated from London to Southampton and the attrition rate was terrible as so many people left rather than relocate to work in Southampton.

The thing with London is that it's the centre of the transport system. You can recruit for a job in London from everyone within a 60 mile radius in most directions. To realistically commute to Southampton you'd need to be on the SWML/M3 corridor, or some distance along the coast either direction.

Anyone not in that area already will either have to relocate or leave. Most won't want to uproot their families if they don't have to, so they find another job.

It also become harder to recruit quality people outside London simply because you're fishing in a smaller pond.

[Titan]

One of the influential reasons I started my job with my current employer was that it was almost literally on my doorstep. 10 minute bicycle ride to work if that. About 8 months after joining they announced that the office was closing and everyone would be relocating to Birmingham. Now it is a 20 minute cycle to the station, a train journey of between 35-50 mins depending on train, and a ten minute walk after that. As commutes go it is quite reasonable, and cheaper than any other transport option. However almost half the team resigned despite the relocation package, and I really notice the extra hours it is taking out of my day.

[D854_Tiger]

The thing with London is that it's the centre of the transport system. You can recruit for a job in London from everyone within a 60 mile radius in most directions. To realistically commute to Southampton you'd need to be on the SWML/M3 corridor, or some distance along the coast either direction.

Anyone not in that area already will either have to relocate or leave. Most won't want to uproot their families if they don't have to, so they find another job.

It also become harder to recruit quality people outside London simply because you're fishing in a smaller pond.

 

Nowadays an awful lot of people work in London on short term contracts through a limited service company.

 

Basically, something of a tax dodge if you don't like paying NI and because your service company address is home, all your travel expenses are tax deductible.

 

Successive governments have, push come to shove, been forced to put up with these arrangements knowing full well people would not be able to afford to take the jobs on a full-time employment basis and the companies who employ their services claim they also need the flexibility of using those same contracts.

 

I know of a software engineer who has been employed this way for twenty-five years now (a well known airline near Heathrow).

[D854_Tiger]

Part of the problem is that the London economy is over-heated, leading to silly property prices. My solution would be to move the politicians and civil servants out to somewhere where land is really cheap - say Scunthorpe - and let the private companies stay in London if they so wished. That way you aren't intervening directly in commercial decisions.

 

This will never happen, because it would divorce too many highly influential persons from their clubs and opera/ballet/theatres, etc.

 

 

One **** in Scunthorpe is enough surely.

[Dunsignalling]

Nowadays an awful lot of people work in London on short term contracts through a limited service company.

 

Basically, something of a tax dodge if you don't like paying NI and because your service company address is home, all your travel expenses are tax deductible.

 

Successive governments have, push come to shove, been forced to put up with these arrangements knowing full well people would not be able to afford to take the jobs on a full-time employment basis and the companies who employ their services claim they also need the flexibility of using those same contracts.

 

I know of a software engineer who has been employed this way for twenty-five years now (a well known airline near Heathrow).

Hope he's building up a good pension pot, because if he's not employed by the company he'll not be in their pension scheme and if he avoids paying NI for most of his working life, he'll get squat off the state........

Edited August 18, 2017 by Dunsignalling

[D854_Tiger]

Hope he's building up a good pension pot, because if he's not employed by the company he'll not be in their pension scheme and if he avoids paying NI for most of his working life, he'll get squat off the state........

 

Indeed, the downside is the amount you are allowed to set aside into a pension (tax free) is calculated according to how much salary you are paid (by your own service company). Many only pay themselves a nominal sum (say minimum wage) and the rest they take as a share dividend, which attracts zero NI, but that approach does scuppers your pension contributions.

 

So not much of a tax dodge really, though employing your wife as a secretary is and claiming for two tins of dog food a day for the guard dog, when you live in a semi, might be stretching it a bit.

 

The main advantage of working this way are the tax deductible travel expenses, there is supposed to a two year rule to that but it's virtually unenforceable, then everyone you speak to seems to be on one of these service company contracts and nearly all will tell you without them they would have to give up working in London.

 

The real surprise (though maybe not) is the extent to which these things seem to be condoned within institutions like the BBC, the NHS and the civil service.

[The Stationmaster]

Something to keep in mind is that a lot of people want to work in London. I think many would also like to live in London is property was affordable. Often in these threads there seems to be an assumption that people are desperate to go elsewhere, I've no doubt some are but plenty of people working in London want to work in London and don't want to move elsewhere.

One of my former employers relocated from London to Southampton and the attrition rate was terrible as so many people left rather than relocate to work in Southampton.

 

The same sort of thing happened on BR when they relocated various parts of the organisation out of London.  Even with free travel (which was not taxable as a Benefit In Kind) some people simply did not want to work at a place other than London and either tried for jobs elsewhere in London within BR or left completely.  But they were only a small percentage as generally it had long been the norm on the railway that you moved for promotion so a goodly percentage were used to moving in any case.

[njee20]

The same job or the same pay?

One does not equal the other!

 

Sometimes (obviously not always) the same or similar job is available closer but people prefer the higher paying one in London even with the increased cost (monetary and time)  of commuting.

Bit of both, I'd take a proportional reduction in salary to work closer to home, not a 40% drop. Jobs do exist, but are far fewer in the sticks, and if you're commuting most places in the South East are quite London-centric.

 

That also highlights a significant factor of being based in London - you have a far greater catchment. Imagine people will travel 30 miles as the crow flies. Based in London that's a huge catchment. Move your company out (to say, Watford) and it's an awful lot smaller. Yes, you may retain your north of London people, they may be really happy at the reduced commute, but anyone from the south/west/east who was happy to travel into London won't be pleased.

Edited August 18, 2017 by njee20

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Why would anyone knowingly use the Trainline to buy tickets (with their 'booking' fee) when the same tickets are available from all TOC websites plus some other independents without the booking fee?

Fine. But if Trainline add a fee and others don't, then the train fare works out even cheaper than EasyJet; who also hit you with various fees.

[Claude_Dreyfus]

Nowadays an awful lot of people work in London on short term contracts through a limited service company.

 

Basically, something of a tax dodge if you don't like paying NI and because your service company address is home, all your travel expenses are tax deductible.

 

Successive governments have, push come to shove, been forced to put up with these arrangements knowing full well people would not be able to afford to take the jobs on a full-time employment basis and the companies who employ their services claim they also need the flexibility of using those same contracts.

 

I know of a software engineer who has been employed this way for twenty-five years now (a well known airline near Heathrow).

A couple of rather sweeping statements there, not all of which are entirely accurate. At the risk of going off-topic, contractors using limited companies do pay NI (both personal and company), as well as income tax, corporation tax and, for the majority, VAT.

 

Also, whilst there are short-term benefits for travel, this is not open-ended. Anything more than two years can start to attract the attention of HMRC and run the risk in getting caught up in IR35. Something your associate, and no doubt you, will no doubt be aware of.

 

There will always be those who 'play the system' (as with anything), but the majority do not; contrary to what members of parliament (both sides), Unions and other vested interests may say.

 

Apologies; rant over...

[jjb1970]

The same sort of thing happened on BR when they relocated various parts of the organisation out of London.  Even with free travel (which was not taxable as a Benefit In Kind) some people simply did not want to work at a place other than London and either tried for jobs elsewhere in London within BR or left completely.  But they were only a small percentage as generally it had long been the norm on the railway that you moved for promotion so a goodly percentage were used to moving in any case.

 

The electricity generation sector expected you to move around too if you wanted promotion, at least once you wanted to go higher than shift charge engineer. That used to upset some but the system was what it was and it was one of those things you needed to just accept and live with if you had any ambition to advance. If you weren't willing to move around then that was fine but you were highly unlikely to move upwards. That's why I ended up living down here.

 

In the case of my employer that moved, I think a lot was down to where they moved to. They wanted to move next to a university with a strong maritime reputation and establish a joint technology campus. The three choices were Southampton, Newcastle and Glasgow. I actually thought (and still think) that both Strathclyde and Newcastle universities are stronger on marine engineering and naval architecture than Southampton. If they'd gone to Glasgow or Newcastle I think the attrition rate would have been massively lower as both of those cities have far more appeal than Southampton (well, I think they do), many of the people already had links with one of the two areas and house prices are attractive to anybody used to London or London commuter belt prices. I'd certainly have gone to Newcastle or Glasgow as I loved the job and liked the company, and I love both Newcastle and Glasgow. However c'est la vie, no use crying over things.