Ticket barriers to be unused at Kings Cross

[Furrball]

Taxpayers’ battle

Despite East Coast Trains (ECT) and NR both being ‘owned’ by taxpayers, there is a bit of a battle going on over reliability as the Government launches the ECT franchising competition. NR has said that it will spend a total of nearly £250million rectifying the problems in the next few years. The franchise has been operated by GNER and National Express, both of whom lost money on the operation. The Department for Transport (DfT) has been instructed by the Government to return ECT to the private sector before the next election in May 2015.

But passengers seem to like the long distance East Coast services, whoever runs them as they give a good rating in the statutory satisfaction ratings so will they be happy with a NR apology? Whatever the answer, they will be more pleased with the decision that has been taken by ECT management to stop using automatic ticket barriers at Kings Cross.

These were specified by the DfT as required for revenue protection but it seems ECT suggest that they do not even cover their costs despite the installation costs being paid for by NR, owners of the station as part of the station upgrade.

Full article

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/201...network-rail-apologises-for-poor-performance/

 

[Flamingo]

While on the other side of the country, ATW realised a few years ago that their attempt to cut costs by removing barriers and staff was costing them millions in lost revenue, and they replaced them, as are FGW...

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Out of interest, which other stations have had barriers inserted then removed? There's Coventry, Canterbury East (I think, could be West) and Cannon St LUL.

 

[stut]

Can't say I'm surprised - there seems to be at least one set of main trainshed barriers left open and unattended at any time of day (which makes a mockery of the ones that are closed, given everything's connected).

What will happen to platforms 9-11, though? Unless they put back the wall between the far end of 8 and 9, it seems rather like window-dressing...

At least this will put paid to the daft one-way system!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The article quoted is a mishmash of several unrelated threads and only a small bit is on gates at King's Cross.
Nowhere does it say they will be "removed" or that there is a change of policy.
They are just being left open by EC because of the manning costs.

If the DfT had made an announcement saying it had reversed its gating policy and no longer required TOCs to gate major stations I would believe it.
But this text appears in the TSGN ITT published last week (p123), covering areas where bids would be scored higher (under Revenue Protection):

- initiatives that require capital investment to improve revenue protection, for example the introduction of new Automatic Ticket Gates (“ATGs”); and
- proposals which would deliver a longer manned operating period for existing ticket gatelines at stations.

I think we are stuck with gates for a long time.

 

[Mojo]

Out of interest, which other stations have had barriers inserted then removed? There's Coventry, Canterbury East (I think, could be West) and Cannon St LUL.

Cannon Street Underground station had the gates removed during the rebuilding of the ticket hall. They were put back some time ago when the new ticket hall opened fully.

And yes, you are right, it is Canterbury East that had its gateline removed.

 

[Class 92]

Would they remove them completely or just keep them open?

 

[jon0844]

It was on this forum that someone from East Coast wrote quite a lengthy post about the company not being that bothered about protecting revenue. I guess that the combination of not having to make a profit, and knowing it won't be running the route for much longer has resulted in the gates not being manned for some time.

This would be particularly bad news for FCC.

 

[philjo]

Probably easier to just keep them open most of the time.
I know last time there was disruption the barriers were effective of keeping people out of he main trainshed as they were all set to exit only until a train was actually announced.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would they remove them completely or just keep them open?

I think they'll remain, and the incoming franchisee will be told to use them by DfT.

The thread title is misleading, no-one has any evidence yet they'd be physically removed.

 

[Deerfold]

Probably easier to just keep them open most of the time.
I know last time there was disruption the barriers were effective of keeping people out of he main trainshed as they were all set to exit only until a train was actually announced.

That seems to be what's happening at the moment.

If they're going to do that they need to make sure they have ticket checks on board - I've had fewer than usual recently (to/from Leeds).

 

[Flamingo]

My personal view of ticket barriers, backed up by several years experience, is that they are the single most effective tool in combating fare evasion and ticketless travel. This is echoed by every one of my colleagues who I have ever discussed it with.

But, the one thing I have learned working for the railway is that the people doing the job are the last to be asked. Management know best!

 

[brompton rail]

Michael Holden said, I believe, that because of better on train ticket checks the barriers at Kings Cross did not generate enough revenue to cover the cost of manning the barriers. He didn't say they were to be removed, or that East a Coast wouldn't ever use them. I imagine they could be quite handy to control admission to trains at busy times like Christmas/ New Year / Easter peak travel days and times. His response was also in reply to a question about arrivals at Kings Cross.

 

[Flamingo]

Funny, but his view about improved on-train checks is the exact opposite to that posted on here by a member of staff a short while ago (as Jon also said). It's way off my patch, but do any users have an opinion on the effectiveness of the on-train checks in that part of the world?

 

[Deerfold]

Funny, but his view about improved on-train checks is the exact opposite to that posted on here by a member of staff a short while ago. It's way off my patch, but do any users have an opinion on the effectiveness of the on-train checks in that part of the world?

I do Leeds - London return every week (so 2 hours to 2 hours 20 mins).

I'm checked, usually once per journey (and it's usually just one trip by a guard through my part of the train) on about 7 out of 10 trains.

To be fair, going south I'm usually on the fast service so noone can board south of Wakefield.

I'm more likely not to be checked going North.

 

[northwichcat]

Regarding the covering costs argument in the original article. How much does ticket barrier operation cost in relation to revenue staff, by the time the ticket barriers need emptying, temporarily being closed off and then fixing if one fails, there's electricity costs and then manual staff may have to fill in for the automated barriers on occasions e.g. the automated barriers not realising it's a bank holiday and peak restrictions are suspended.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Funny, but his view about improved on-train checks is the exact opposite to that posted on here by a member of staff a short while ago (as Jon also said). It's way off my patch, but do any users have an opinion on the effectiveness of the on-train checks in that part of the world?

While not directly related to your question in a recent publication on accessible transport DfT have said the idea of reducing the number of rail staff and replacing them with machines and barriers is not acceptable due to the need to allow disabled people to access rail services properly.

 

[Flamingo]

Well, barriers can't be replacing staff, as every barrier needs at least two people to work them (they are not allowed be on their own). I can't see how the preventing disabled access argument works, to be honest.

 

[edwin_m]

Regarding the covering costs argument in the original article. How much does ticket barrier operation cost in relation to revenue staff, by the time the ticket barriers need emptying, temporarily being closed off and then fixing if one fails, there's electricity costs and then manual staff may have to fill in for the automated barriers on occasions e.g. the automated barriers not realising it's a bank holiday and peak restrictions are suspended.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


While not directly related to your question in a recent publication on accessible transport DfT have said the idea of reducing the number of rail staff and replacing them with machines and barriers is not acceptable due to the need to allow disabled people to access rail services properly.

Interesting - not long ago the DfT-sponsored McNulty report was pushing automation as a way to reduce costs. But having an automatic barrier (cost) which has to be supervised by staff (more cost) is arguably the worst of both worlds.

While useful for suburban routes, barriers are less relevant for long-distance journeys where:
- Many passengers have luggage
- All trains have on-board crews who are able to check tickets on the train
- There is more opportunity for the type of fraud such as doughnutting and misuse of first class that barriers cannot control

Kings Cross may end up like Glasgow Central where suburban platforms are barriered and long-distance ones aren't (wall being reinstated as mentioned), or the barriers are switched off when a long-distance train uses a suburban platform. Obviously this won't work everywhere, especially at through stations where all passengers have to pass through a common barrier line.

 

[sheff1]

It's way off my patch, but do any users have an opinion on the effectiveness of the on-train checks in that part of the world?

I don't use EC anywhere as frequently as I used to but, when I have, the on train checks have seemed less common than I remember in previous years.

Well, barriers can't be replacing staff, as every barrier needs at least two people to work them (they are not allowed be on their own).

Is this supposed to be the case nationwide ?

In the barrier attendant incident I mentioned elsewhere he was working alone, which meant when he went off the make his 'phone call to the police' the barriers were left open.

 

[Drsatan]

In the barrier attendant incident I mentioned elsewhere he was working alone, which meant when he went off the make his 'phone call to the police' the barriers were left open.

Remote monitoring of gatelines (which means a gateline can be monitored by one individual even if the gateline's out of the attendant's line of sight), also poses several problems. If the attendant is busy doing another task (like answering a passenger's question) then it means that he/she can't listen to a video call from a passenger waiting at the other gateline. At smaller stations with only one attendant I can imagine this can be very annoying.

Another problem I have with barriers is that, according to evidence on this forum and elsewhere, a not insignificant number of gateline assistants are very ill-informed on the subject of ticket types, restriction codes and validity.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

. . . . improved on-train checks is the exact opposite to that posted on here by a member of staff a short while ago . . . .

. . . . do any users have an opinion on the effectiveness of the on-train checks in that part of the world?

I do Leeds - London return every week (so 2 hours to 2 hours 20 mins).

I'm checked, usually once per journey (and it's usually just one trip by a guard through my part of the train) on about 7 out of 10 trains.

To be fair, going south I'm usually on the fast service so noone can board south of Wakefield.

I'm more likely not to be checked going North.

My experience on my regular Edinburgh - Newcastle - York - London is much the same.
Its very rare not to see a full inspection northbound out of Kings Cross, but some of the mid-journey checks in either direction can be ineffective (whether through short journeys completed between checks, or dodgers keeping their heads down).

It's not uncommon for a guard to charge for a long-distance first class "upgrade" or wrong-train Advance and overlook a late night group of ticketless party-types between adjacent stations far from London.

 

[Gareth Marston]

My personal view of ticket barriers, backed up by several years experience, is that they are the single most effective tool in combating fare evasion and ticketless travel. This is echoed by every one of my colleagues who I have ever discussed it with.

But, the one thing I have learned working for the railway is that the people doing the job are the last to be asked. Management know best!

It costs to protect revenue fully you get to the point where the cost of extra protection measures outweighs the extra revenue collected which is what EC are saying here.
No attempt by LM to check tickets between Smethwick Galton Bridge and Kidderminster today but they were between SG Bridge and Shrewsbury.

 

[northwichcat]

Well, barriers can't be replacing staff, as every barrier needs at least two people to work them (they are not allowed be on their own). I can't see how the preventing disabled access argument works, to be honest.

Station staff can assist a disabled passenger while ticket barriers can not. If the ticket barrier staff leave their posts to assist then the barriers need to be left open.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In my experience it's unusual for on-train ticket checks not to be made in the morning, but quite common in the afternoon/evening.
I suppose it's about diminishing returns.

 

[stut]

Out of interest, how many barriers can one member of staff supervise? I've found it fairly common, at King's Cross, to have to walk the length of the concourse to the "departures" gateline to find someone to assist you if your ticket isn't accepted by the barriers.

 

[Harlesden]

17:45 Doncaster-London King's Cross last night.
No ticket check and barriers at King's Cross open.
Do EC only check tickets in the early part of the train's journey?
I was checked on my northbound service shortly after departing King's Cross - after a very detailed announcement from the female guard about which tickets were valid (on the 08:30 departure) and which were not

 

[jon0844]

IME since the gates went in, or at least after an initial period where each section (as in blocked from view by pillars) seemed to have one member of staff, the gates are open for most of the day.

I don't know who pays for manning the gates or how it's split (GC and HT wouldn't want to contribute and it seems EC isn't bothered - leaving just FCC to stump up) but it seems like a bit of a mess.

It's even more stupid when you see that FCC has the gates in operation on platforms 9-11, yet the gates are open elsewhere (including upstairs). They might as well have them open too and save on staffing completely - just having some people sat in their information kiosks.

(And, no, I don't actually want that to happen)

 

[bicbasher]

The last time I travelled on EC, I was ticket checked a few minutes after leaving Kings Cross and not at all on the return journey.

I can't remember the last time I was checked on a Southern Metro service, it's more likely they'll do a blitz at a station such as London Bridge along the footbridge to the Southeastern platforms and on London Overground around every couple of months or so on the train.

 

[Greenback]

But, the one thing I have learned working for the railway is that the people doing the job are the last to be asked. Management know best!

Very true, and not just on the railway!

Interesting - not long ago the DfT-sponsored McNulty report was pushing automation as a way to reduce costs. But having an automatic barrier (cost) which has to be supervised by staff (more cost) is arguably the worst of both worlds.

Perhaps there is a belated realisation that the McNulty report was a waste of time?

While useful for suburban routes, barriers are less relevant for long-distance journeys where:
- Many passengers have luggage
- All trains have on-board crews who are able to check tickets on the train
- There is more opportunity for the type of fraud such as doughnutting and misuse of first class that barriers cannot control

Barriers are relevant for long distance travel, as they provide a visible deterrent to people just trying to chance by walking straight on to the platform. They do need to be supported by on train checks, but the latetr are not always going to take place when you are talking about a conductor needing to get through ten carriages between each pair of stations.

Of course, they are much more efficient and valuable in a suburban or metro style operation.

Kings Cross may end up like Glasgow Central where suburban platforms are barriered and long-distance ones aren't (wall being reinstated as mentioned), or the barriers are switched off when a long-distance train uses a suburban platform. Obviously this won't work everywhere, especially at through stations where all passengers have to pass through a common barrier line.

I think it is right that a pragmatic view is taken at each location, depending on the station layout and traffic patterns. It would be as daft to say that all platforms everywhere should be barriered, as would be to say that none ever should.

Station staff can assist a disabled passenger while ticket barriers can not. If the ticket barrier staff leave their posts to assist then the barriers need to be left open.

I have never seen barrier staff leave the barrier line to assist a disabled passenger. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it is usually the platform staff and on train staff that deal with such things when I am around.

The whole subject of ticket barriers is an emotive one. Some are totally against them, some feel they are very useful and also help to keep the platforms free of undesirables. Others, like me see them as necessary, but a minor hindrance at the same time.

 

[northwichcat]

I have never seen barrier staff leave the barrier line to assist a disabled passenger. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it is usually the platform staff and on train staff that deal with such things when I am around.

At the smaller Northern stations it's not uncommon for there to be three 'rail staff' in total - one person in the ticket office and two RPIs on a platform. Now quite often the RPIs are contracted e.g. G4S so can't start performing duties outside their contracts but if there were 3 proper rail staff at the station then the ones on the platform would be better placed to assist a disabled person who has just alighted opposed to the person manning the ticket office.

For instance, at Northwich disabled access to/from the Chester bound platform is only available when the person is assisted by a member of rail staff over a barrow crossing. If there are no rail staff able to do that e.g. during unstaffed hours then the disabled person is required to double back. The ticket office is on the Manchester bound platform and is never manned by more than 1 person so if RPIs were working at the station they should be better placed to assist a disabled person alighting a train going towards Chester at Northwich.

Others, like me see them as necessary, but a minor hindrance at the same time.

To stop them being a hindrance TOCs should be doing more to put all tickets on to standard ticket stock and programming barriers to accept all tickets.