Every Tube ticket office to close

[ModernRailways]

Thameslink is a busy commuter line with a 24 hour service 6 days a week and stations largely unstaffed.
It's not that I am advocating a de-staffed system but as those staffing costs become more of a funding issue then TfL are bound to look at how similar systems operate with far fewer staff. If laws and rules need amending and certain amounts needed spent on 'adequate' infrastructure changes then they will be done.
Even on deep level systems (Copenhagen's system is pretty deep) it has proven that unstaffed systems can work.
Whether we like it or not I stand by what I said initially in that station staff will go from at least those 60 to 70 stations where they become deemed unnecessary - or at least a 'roving' single supervisor will end up being in charge of 3 or 4 of the outer stations.

You can't say just because X system works without staff that, that means LU will work fine without staff. You need to look at the bigger picture. The Copenhagen Metro is fully automated, stations are kept in top-tip condition (and there still relatively new and so still look quite modern - for the most part anyway), stations are fully monitored by CCTV, trains are monitored. The system doesn't attract the same kind of people the LU will and that is the difference.

It's simply not a case of looking at other systems and seeing how they do it as London is a unique case, just like every other Metro system that doesn't want as many staff members working during the night (or day) it's all about the areas that the trains will be passing through and that would need to be assessed on a station-by-station, and train-by-train basis.

 

[NSEFAN]

You can't say just because X system works without staff that, that means LU will work fine without staff. You need to look at the bigger picture. The Copenhagen Metro is fully automated, stations are kept in top-tip condition (and there still relatively new and so still look quite modern - for the most part anyway), stations are fully monitored by CCTV, trains are monitored. The system doesn't attract the same kind of people the LU will and that is the difference.

It's simply not a case of looking at other systems and seeing how they do it as London is a unique case, just like every other Metro system that doesn't want as many staff members working during the night (or day) it's all about the areas that the trains will be passing through and that would need to be assessed on a station-by-station, and train-by-train basis.

I think Mutant Lemming's point was that because it works elsewhere, it will be considered for adoption here if it reduces operating costs. Of course, one would hope that all safety aspects are fully considered, as a brand new station should inherently be safer than an early 20th century deep level one. Additional monitoring would almost certainly need to be fitted for stations to be completely de-staffed.

Mind you, we must also be wary of "Not invented here" syndrome. "We know that <insert system> works fine in Europe, but this is BRITAIN!"

 

[Busaholic]

I think Mutant Lemming's point was that because it works elsewhere, it will be considered for adoption here if it reduces operating costs. Of course, one would hope that all safety aspects are fully considered, as a brand new station should inherently be safer than an early 20th century deep level one. Additional monitoring would almost certainly need to be fitted for stations to be completely de-staffed.

Mind you, we must also be wary of "Not invented here" syndrome. "We know that <insert system> works fine in Europe, but this is BRITAIN!"

The day when the trains can operate without those pesky passengers disrupting the smooth running will be the day when stations can be destaffed.

 

[ModernRailways]

I think Mutant Lemming's point was that because it works elsewhere, it will be considered for adoption here if it reduces operating costs. Of course, one would hope that all safety aspects are fully considered, as a brand new station should inherently be safer than an early 20th century deep level one. Additional monitoring would almost certainly need to be fitted for stations to be completely de-staffed.

Mind you, we must also be wary of "Not invented here" syndrome. "We know that <insert system> works fine in Europe, but this is BRITAIN!"

Oh definitely! And I agree, the chances are most deep level stations could be left unmanned - the T&W Metro for example has it's Underground stations unmanned, however they only tend to be left unmanned for around 30 minutes and in that time there is always staff nearby.

If anything it's a case of see how it goes when you have staff, then if staff are required to assist then they need to be there, but if for the most part they're just standing around doing nothing then why not get rid of them? Obviously, the problem arises of what happens in case something goes wrong, but I guess that's just something that would require plenty of prior planning with Police, the ERU(?), LFB, and the LAS.

 

[SF-02]

I've waited at Erith station after 8pm, which is unstaffed and had people mucking about, teenagers crossing live rails etc.

Compare that to Forest Hill which is staffed until the last train thanks to the TfL contract with LOROL, even if it's just the gateline assistant on duty at midnight, it makes a whole lot of difference for the passenger with regards to safety.

Those AGA and TfL Rail/Crossrail stations in London which will soon see staff until the last service will notice a big difference when LOROL/TfL Rail replace the NR TOC.

Definitely. The Erith line is effectively free - no on-board staff and unstaffed stations lose a ton of revenue.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Reduction in staff is different to people loosing their jobs.

As far as I am aware, no-one is being made forcibly redundant.

There will be cuts in staff numbers, either through "wastage" or though people taking voluntary redundancy. I still consider voluntary redundancy to be "losing your job" but I know not everyone agrees.

the T&W Metro for example has it's Underground stations unmanned, however they only tend to be left unmanned for around 30 minutes and in that time there is always staff nearby.

The below-ground stations on the Metro are never left unstaffed. The staff may not be on the gateline or the platform, but there are staff in the station at all times.

You can design to minimise the chance of a fire but you will never completely get rid of the risk. I walk past the memorial at Kings Cross most days. 31 people died there. I dread to think how many would die if the same thing happened again in an unmanned deep-level station.

Above-ground there is no need for staff, but do TfL really want the Underground to regress to the shabby vandalised mess it was in the mid-80s. The state of the stations and trains on the inner West Anglian and out towards Erith, and the state of the North London Line before LOROL, tells us what will happen when the staff are removed.

 

[Busaholic]

There will be cuts in staff numbers, either through "wastage" or though people taking voluntary redundancy. I still consider voluntary redundancy to be "losing your job" but I know not everyone agrees.



The below-ground stations on the Metro are never left unstaffed. The staff may not be on the gateline or the platform, but there are staff in the station at all times.

You can design to minimise the chance of a fire but you will never completely get rid of the risk. I walk past the memorial at Kings Cross most days. 31 people died there. I dread to think how many would die if the same thing happened again in an unmanned deep-level station.

Above-ground there is no need for staff, but do TfL really want the Underground to regress to the shabby vandalised mess it was in the mid-80s. The state of the stations and trains on the inner West Anglian and out towards Erith, and the state of the North London Line before LOROL, tells us what will happen when the staff are removed.

One of the 31 who died at Kings Cross was a fireman and London Fire Brigade would only let some of the things being proposed happen over their dead bodies. Kings Cross was an indictment of the whole culture at London Underground and the complacency therein among some senior and middle
management- read the report sometime and reflect how only good fortune and the commonsense of individuals, in more than one case disobeying orders from above, saved the lives of many others.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Kings Cross was an indictment of the whole culture at London Underground and the complacency therein among some senior and middle management- read the report sometime

I know, the report makes it clear that the culture at London Underground in the 80s of cost-cutting led to corners being cut. There was complacency within management that the cuts and the managed decline were fine because the worst would never happen.

Sound familiar?

 

[ModernRailways]

The below-ground stations on the Metro are never left unstaffed. The staff may not be on the gateline or the platform, but there are staff in the station at all times.

That is not true. The stations are staffed intermittently, and there are times when the station is left without any staff at all. That means no staff in the small office, and no staff anywhere within the station. There is for the most part staff there, but there are times when it is left completely unstaffed.

Granted though, when there is no staff they are fully monitored by CCTV.

 

[Mojo]

Have the Tyne/Wear fire service / ORR given some form of derogation against the Fire Precautions (Sub-surface Railway Stations) (England) Regulations 2009 and Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, or are Metro in breach of these laws?

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Unstaffed deep level may be some way off but 60 or 70 relatively lightly used surface stations (your West Finchleys, Ruislip Gardens, Upneys et al) could easily become unstaffed stations. A minimum of 3 CSA wages times 70 would equate to quite an annual year on year saving. There are many busy mainline stations that have frequent services, electric rails and are unstaffed - how do you justify the spend on one and not another or vice versa ?

 

[Deerfold]

Thameslink is a busy commuter line with a 24 hour service 6 days a week and stations largely unstaffed.
It's not that I am advocating a de-staffed system but as those staffing costs become more of a funding issue then TfL are bound to look at how similar systems operate with far fewer staff. If laws and rules need amending and certain amounts needed spent on 'adequate' infrastructure changes then they will be done.
Even on deep level systems (Copenhagen's system is pretty deep) it has proven that unstaffed systems can work.
Whether we like it or not I stand by what I said initially in that station staff will go from at least those 60 to 70 stations where they become deemed unnecessary - or at least a 'roving' single supervisor will end up being in charge of 3 or 4 of the outer stations.

And Thameslink's going the other way:

First to last station staffing
First to last station staffing will be introduced at Cricklewood, Elstree &
Borehamwood, Flitwick, Harpenden, Leagrave, Mill Hill Broadway, Radlett
and West Hampstead Thameslink – as part of plans to provide first to last
staffing at the 101 busiest stations on the GTR franchise.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...s_mJ6ieV0jRI_SQlRIE5OVw&bvm=bv.81828268,d.bGQ

 

[Tetchytyke]

A minimum of 3 CSA wages times 70 would equate to quite an annual year on year saving. There are many busy mainline stations that have frequent services, electric rails and are unstaffed - how do you justify the spend on one and not another or vice versa ?

The above-ground stations don't need to be staffed, but there is a question about whether they should be staffed. There are plenty of suburban stations in London that don't have staff.

They also tend to be the sorts of dingy, vandalised hellholes that gangs of kids hang around in (see the the inner West Anglia stations for more details).

I just find it odd that, after going for staffing all day on the Overground to stamp out the anti-social behaviour, that Underground want to regress.

 

[bravot]

Aside from all this scaremongering - have TfL or LU stated that stations will be unstaffed?

 

[telstarbox]

TfL have said the opposite - "All Tube stations will be controlled and staffed while services are operating".

 

[Mutant Lemming]

TfL have said the opposite - "All Tube stations will be controlled and staffed while services are operating".

... and in three or five years time ?


costermonger pays more but scaremonger is more fun

 

[Tetchytyke]

TfL have said the opposite - "All Tube stations will be controlled and staffed while services are operating".

TfL also said that they weren't going to close any ticket offices.

 

[bravot]

There's a massive difference between closing ticket officers and removing staff from stations.

Has TfL ever said they won't close ticket offices or was it a Boris promise?

 

[Mutant Lemming]

.

Has TfL ever said they won't close ticket offices or was it a Boris promise?

..and promises from London mayors are always kept aren't they....

 

[jon0844]

It's good that GTR will be staffing many stations from start to finish, but it's disappointing (and even surprising) that this won't mean gatelines being in operation all the time. Indeed, gates will still open relatively early in the evening.

Perhaps the thinking is that at midnight or 2am, letting through the drunk fare dodgers is better than having any conflict, but I am sure a lot of people assumed that keeping stations staffed would have meant revenue protection that could actually keep some people off the railway in the first place.

Now they'll still be allowed easy travel and to cause grief for the member(s) of staff at some of the smaller stations.

 

[radamfi]

How do we know that 'first to last staffing' will actually happen in practice? Southern nominally extended the opening hours of their ticket offices as part of the current franchise and that generally happened in the early part of the franchise but nowadays, due to staff shortages, the ticket offices are often closed earlier than before the current franchise started. It has got to the stage where I don't expect the ticket office to be open after 1800. These 'staff shortages' have gone on for years.

 

[jon0844]

At Hatfield, it just means there's a member of staff somewhere on the station and sometimes that's in one of the offices, not out and visible to the public.

At the moment it is pretty much to be there in case of problems with the lifts, not to be a visual deterrent to anti social behaviour or fare evasion.

Who knows if a few years down the line, GTR and others will be able to argue for getting rid of staff again, claiming some sites could be sufficiently monitored remotely etc.

 

[bravot]

..and promises from London mayors are always kept aren't they....

That was what my comment intended to say. Something stated corporately by TfL holds fair weight compared to the buffoon...

 

[jon0844]

I think in London, it's become quite clear that staffing stations has made a big difference and more people than ever are likely to be using London Overground now than ever did when it was Silverlink.

Newer brighter stations and trains seem to give the perception that things are a lot safer than before (whether true or not) and it also seems that when you have staff visible it helps reduce anti social behaviour, including vandalism. The 379s are in pretty good nick after all this time, compared to the 313s that were a total mess.

Therefore, I'd like to think common sense would keep staff at stations no matter what. TfL must know that more staff equals more revenue, and less costs through crime, so it's a no-brainer from a business point of view.

 

[Aictos]

I think in London, it's become quite clear that staffing stations has made a big difference and more people than ever are likely to be using London Overground now than ever did when it was Silverlink.

Newer brighter stations and trains seem to give the perception that things are a lot safer than before (whether true or not) and it also seems that when you have staff visible it helps reduce anti social behaviour, including vandalism. The 379s are in pretty good nick after all this time, compared to the 313s that were a total mess.

Therefore, I'd like to think common sense would keep staff at stations no matter what. TfL must know that more staff equals more revenue, and less costs through crime, so it's a no-brainer from a business point of view.

I didn't know London Overground operated any Class 379s

 

[jon0844]

Yeah, it's a relatively recent thing...!

Oops.

 

[Busaholic]

It's good that GTR will be staffing many stations from start to finish, but it's disappointing (and even surprising) that this won't mean gatelines being in operation all the time. Indeed, gates will still open relatively early in the evening.

Perhaps the thinking is that at midnight or 2am, letting through the drunk fare dodgers is better than having any conflict, but I am sure a lot of people assumed that keeping stations staffed would have meant revenue protection that could actually keep some people off the railway in the first place.

Now they'll still be allowed easy travel and to cause grief for the member(s) of staff at some of the smaller stations.

Not to mention the grief they'll give to other passengers e.g. females, racial minorities, anybody perceived by them to be 'different' and, in fact, anyone other than large groups of young males.

 

[bravot]

I think in London, it's become quite clear that staffing stations has made a big difference and more people than ever are likely to be using London Overground now than ever did when it was Silverlink.

Newer brighter stations and trains seem to give the perception that things are a lot safer than before (whether true or not) and it also seems that when you have staff visible it helps reduce anti social behaviour, including vandalism. The 379s are in pretty good nick after all this time, compared to the 313s that were a total mess.

Therefore, I'd like to think common sense would keep staff at stations no matter what. TfL must know that more staff equals more revenue, and less costs through crime, so it's a no-brainer from a business point of view.

And that the trains actually turn up now

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Back of a fag packet calculations - 60 to 70 lightly used outer London stations to have one roving SS to cover three or four of them. Nothing may come of it but depends where that fag packet ends up.

 

[LS-Colin]

I don't understand the reasons put forward for the closure of all but 6 LUL ticket offices. During most of the day one can observe queues and clusters of people at almost all of the ticket office windows within the Zone 1 area. No doubt it is a similar scene at larger stations in the outer Zones too. As far as I am aware it is not possible to purchase child, disabled, privilege and certain other reduced ticket types from the self service machines. There is obviously a need for this facility to be retained.