ECML franchise to be broucht back under Public Ownership

[bike2steam]

Did anyone hear the clatter of a massive penny dropping, after decades of 'privatisation' it seems as though they've grasped the idea of 'one owner' for track and trains, like many have been saying all the time.

[Coryton]

I have often wondered when there is a change of franchisee how many people actually lose their jobs?

 

...R

 

So far as i know the rank and file carry on as before, with a new tie or perhaps whole uniform if they're lucky, with just the management at the top changing.

 

Always willing to be corrected...

[Coryton]

Did anyone hear the clatter of a massive penny dropping, after decades of 'privatisation' it seems as though they've grasped the idea of 'one owner' for track and trains, like many have been saying all the time.

 

Right, but there is a very big difference between having one owner for track and trains, and one 'owner' for track and some of the trains, but not the others.

 

OK well in the pre-nationalisation days we had trains from one company running over other company's lines. But I believe that in most cases the track owner operated the majority of passenger and freight trains over their track - letting the "LNER" control the track along the ECML would be a rather different story.

[009 micro modeller]

No indeed, but I was hinting at the fact that something like this sort of vertical integration was tried under sectorisation. where so far as I know every bit of track was allocated to one sector or another.

 

A reduction in safety shouldn't be an inevitability of privatising infrastructure though. We don't see many calls to nationalise airlines to reduce the number of accidents.

I thought they eventually ended up having an engineering sector who maintained it in the way that the regions previously did but it's interesting to hear this was tried as well. The point about privatisation of infrastructure is also valid as there's no particular reason why a private company should do it less safely, as long as they are subject to sensible safety regulations.

[Steamport Southport]

So far as i know the rank and file carry on as before, with a new tie or perhaps whole uniform if they're lucky, with just the management at the top changing.

 

Always willing to be corrected...

 

Yep. And people going round putting stickers over the previous owners name on signs, etc.   

 

 

 

Jason

[rodent279]

Well, I don't see how HM Gov. will get it right. To start off with, its website is almost impossible to find with a google search of LNER. Not even on the second page of Google's results. Even small cottage industries selling loco lamps are higher up the list. And LNER is basically VTEC with Virgin replaced by LNER. None of that lovely Apple Green and Garter Blue...

 

Before we get too dewy eyed, let's not forget that "LNER" will not be "the" LNER-it will just be that part that runs long distance express trains between London, Leeds, York, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Glasgow & Aberdeen. No suburban or country services, no cross-country or inter-regional/inter-company trains, no East Anglia, no GC, no trans-Pennine or Manchester services, and no freight.

 

It's not "the" LNER of apple green locos, Mallard, Flying Scotsman etc, being re-incarnated, any more than todays "GWR" is "the" GWR of green engines with copper capped chimneys, and tickets that must be shewn.

Edited May 17, 2018 by rodent279

[Coryton]

I thought they eventually ended up having an engineering sector who maintained it in the way that the regions previously did but it's interesting to hear this was tried as well. The point about privatisation of infrastructure is also valid as there's no particular reason why a private company should do it less safely, as long as they are subject to sensible safety regulations.

 

I don't know in detail things were arranged but so far as I know there was vertical integration in the sense that all track was 'owned' by one sector or another (I've seen maps showing which bit belonged to which, including a wonderful one of Birmingham New Street with different platform lines allocated to intercity, regional and parcels).

 

I don't suppose each sector had its own set of on-track plant, though I do seem to recall intercity funding track machines that would let them resume full speed running immediately after maintenance rather than having several days of reduced speeds.

[Coryton]

Yep. And people going round putting stickers over the previous owners name on signs, etc. 

 

Ah yes - mustn't forget that!

 

Though it's interesting where the old names sometimes linger - then again I know of one place which still has a sign mentioning the "real" Southern Railway and I'm sure it's not the only one like that.

[AMJ]

I wonder if it will be like American railroads, different operating companies over the same track as another operator owns. Had it in Albuquerque that the local New Mexico Rail Runner trains took priority over the Amtrak service which got held. Amtrak are often held by the freight lines owners in preference for their own trains.

[Coryton]

I wonder if it will be like American railroads, different operating companies over the same track as another operator owns. Had it in Albuquerque that the local New Mexico Rail Runner trains took priority over the Amtrak service which got held. Amtrak are often held by the freight lines owners in preference for their own trains.

 

While I've heard that too about Amtrak (though I haven't experienced it personally so far as I know), I've also read that 'foreign' freight trains sometimes/often(?) get priority over a railroad's own trains because they have to pay compensation if they delay someone else's train.

 

(Heard a similar thing about when the BBC and ITV shared transmitters, some owned by the BBC and some by ITV - you fixed the other company's first when there was a problem because you had to pay penalties to them but not to yourself).

[mdvle]

A reduction in safety shouldn't be an inevitability of privatising infrastructure though. We don't see many calls to nationalise airlines to reduce the number of accidents.

 

Airlines are a very bad example given the extreme regulations that both they and aircraft manufacturers operate under.

 

Otherwise you are correct, in theory the infrastructure could be privatized although it would just mean a different method would have to be found for the government to subsidize the losses.

 

The problem is a question of how well it would work in the real world given the pressure to meet quarterly stock market expectations.

[LBRJ]

So far as i know the rank and file carry on as before, with a new tie or perhaps whole uniform if they're lucky, with just the management at the top changing.

 

Always willing to be corrected...

 

It is truly a case of meet the new boss. same as the old boss.

They have to keep the people in place who actually run the thing!

 

I appeared to work for about 5 companies without ever moving an inch

[Mike Storey]

Depends on what is said in the franchise wording, they may have the option but don't take it up... 

 

They don't. It is not allowed under ORR rules.

 

A TOC (or FOC) can pay a premium for obtaining paths in the timetable planning process, and a negotiation ensues on the resulting performance penalty/premium payable, but can only obtain those paths if they are available and do not inflict damage to the existing paths "owned" by other companies, if those companies do not agree. There have been occasions where other companies have suddenly agreed to a voluntary worsenment of their entitlement, to let East Coast have a better slice of the cake - GNER were expert at achieving this but nobody officially knew what had gone on behind closed doors with other TOCs, I do but I cannot tell.

 

But in real time operations, if NR are found to have given undue preference to any one operator's trains when making decisions about late running services, they are in trouble. They were accused of this (when it was Railtrack) some years ago on the East Coast, but it was not found to be systemic, just poor judgement by some signallers at one or two locations, who were "suitably advised" as a result.

[Mike Storey]

I thought they eventually ended up having an engineering sector who maintained it in the way that the regions previously did but it's interesting to hear this was tried as well. The point about privatisation of infrastructure is also valid as there's no particular reason why a private company should do it less safely, as long as they are subject to sensible safety regulations.

 

I think you may recall that Railtrack plc was subject to "sensible safety regulations". I am not sure there are many people who would advocate a return to private ownership and operation of the infrastructure, given their record.

[Mike Storey]

Nope. Fact.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Great_Britain#/media/File:GBR_rail_passengers_by_year_1830-2015.png

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Great_Britain#Annual_passenger_numbers

 

 

 

Jason

 

The fastest growing route (in terms of passenger numbers) in 1995 was the West Coast Main Line, still owned and run by BRB. The graph means nothing in terms of causation.

[Mike Storey]

I have often wondered when there is a change of franchisee how many people actually lose their jobs?

 

...R

 

Job security is somewhat protected by TUPE for a short period, but the main changes are usually in the management board, and then in on-train catering (if this already existed). The rest of any changes will come from technical innovations such as increased automated ticketing, or DOO/DOC. But in total, there are around 30,000 more direct jobs in railway operations, customer service, repairs/maintenance and admin, than there were at the end of BR (about 120,000-ish compared to 90,000-ish from figures i have seen reported by DfT and in certain publications).Add to that the infrastructure and train maintenance and repair and new build jobs that are now privately held, for which I do not know the numbers, but a large proportion of those were already done privately before BR finished.

[caradoc]

Right, but there is a very big difference between having one owner for track and trains, and one 'owner' for track and some of the trains, but not the others.

 

OK well in the pre-nationalisation days we had trains from one company running over other company's lines. But I believe that in most cases the track owner operated the majority of passenger and freight trains over their track - letting the "LNER" control the track along the ECML would be a rather different story.

 

Absolutely, and imagine the complications if 'LNER' Train Operating Company (TOC) was given control of and responsibility for their routes;

 

What routes would this actually be: Presumably Kings X-Edinburgh and Doncaster-Leeds, being their prime services, but what about the other routes they operate over, such as Leeds-Bradford, Edinburgh-Aberdeen, Inverness and Glasgow Central, on all of which they are not the major operator. So, if the LNER TOC 'owned' their main lines, there would have to be track access agreements between LNER and every single other operator using their tracks. Those other operators would of course still have to have agreements with Network Rail for all the other routes they operate over, as indeed would LNER for their non-owned routes.

 

An already complex system would become even more complicated, and as I have said before I am not convinced that any TOC really does want to take on all the duties and responsibilities of Network Rail.

[AMJ]

The increase in jobs and the associated costs since privatisation are mainly due to each franchise needed to have staff department that under BR were centralised. However I have bought tickets online from a few operators and they look to be all done by a contracted company in the south west.

 

Looking at the graph I wonder if the increase in the 1960's under BR was the imminent demise of steam locomotives. By then car ownership was getting quite large.

[Coryton]

The increase in jobs and the associated costs since privatisation are mainly due to each franchise needed to have staff department that under BR were centralised. However I have bought tickets online from a few operators and they look to be all done by a contracted company in the south west.

 

 

I imagine the need to crew all the extra services we're running now compared with BR days increases the number of jobs required somewhat.

An already complex system would become even more complicated, and as I have said before I am not convinced that any TOC really does want to take on all the duties and responsibilities of Network Rail.

 

But the shiny new LNER presumably will if it's told to.....

[009 micro modeller]

I wonder if it will be like American railroads, different operating companies over the same track as another operator owns. Had it in Albuquerque that the local New Mexico Rail Runner trains took priority over the Amtrak service which got held. Amtrak are often held by the freight lines owners in preference for their own trains.

I heard that they are technically legally required to give priority to Amtrak over their own (usually freight) services but often don't, so that Amtrak trains are often held for a long time.

[Peter Crawford]

On the other hand the web site has only just gone up and I'm not sure you'd expect Google to rank it highly from the beginning. Google methodically works its way through the web and even if you were to seed the web with links to your new web page (which is how Google traditionally worked out how highly to rank a page, though no doubt now it's more sophisticated), it would take a while to work through.

 

Quite likely by the time LNER takes over it will be somewhat higher up, besides which by then the Virgin East Coast web site will presumably redirect to it so it doesn't really matter.

 

It's possible, but surely that's a sign? A mere re-lettering exercise won't help. Also, they'll have quite a challenge with bringing in ironing-board Class 800s (named in some quarters as the 'Train with The Leaking Pipes'. If they want iconic, then they should go the whole hog and turn them into: Apple Green, Garter Blue and Silver Link Silver. 

[Peter Crawford]

Railway reform would be helpful. Going back to Big Four style operation, with reasonably big regions owned and operated by private companies that also are responsible for track and train.

[Robin2]

Job security is somewhat protected by TUPE for a short period, but the main changes are usually in the management board,

My question is about how many people are actually changed - I know most employees just transfer over to the new business.

 

Let's put some numbers on it. Are there 5 people at the top who are replaced by 5 people (or 3 or 7) from the new franchisee?

 

...R

[Coryton]

It's possible, but surely that's a sign? A mere re-lettering exercise won't help. Also, they'll have quite a challenge with bringing in ironing-board Class 800s (named in some quarters as the 'Train with The Leaking Pipes'. 

 

A sign of what?

 

As for the 800's, there do seem to be teething problems on GWR but I haven't heard of any recurrence of the leaky air conditioning event on the first day.

[Mallard60022]

So far as i know the rank and file carry on as before, with a new tie or perhaps whole uniform if they're lucky, with just the management at the top changing.

 

Always willing to be corrected...

My Station Staff friends at 36E have a large collection of Uniforms in their Bothy. I think they will be able to donate them to the NRM in due time. 

P