TOC running for West Midlands franchise

[Class 170101]

Ah yes, the brave new world of Wilkinson's DfT. That's two franchises now with only two bidders.

Looks like DfT's attempt to shift all risk onto bidders has backfired. The margins just aren't big enough, especially given the cost of bidding.

I got the impression it was also due to the 'large' parental guarantees required to back the franchises up.

 

[Rich McLean]

Also many of the ITTs (especially the SWT franchise) may have DOO/DCO written into them, which may have also put bidders off with no revenue guarantee. This would probably also put off bidders bidding for more than one franchise, winning both and ending up with large revenue loss to begin with as a result with no top cover from the DfT.

 

[the sniper]

I think this franchise will be an interesting one. The prospectus for the franchise talked about formalising Sunday working on the driver's side and encourages the idea of turning the Birmingham suburban stuff to DOO, this obviously being a franchise where there is no precedent for DOO(P) working. As such there'll be no sly but relatively easy DOO expansion as seen on Southern, Scotrail and probably GWR. This will surely have to be done with the co-operation of ASLEF and the drivers. If this is doable, I imagine it will be very expensive, even without taking into account any industrial action or workforce resentment fallout. If Govia win the franchise, surely ASLEF will not be inclined to help them do anything given recent events, let alone introduce DOO. Alternatively if the franchise winner thinks they can hard ball their way to DOO, then this franchise is going to be ugly, very ugly. Will the new 'West Midlands Rail' with their devolved powers have the same stomach for years of disruption and expense that the DfT do?

Even in good times the Birmingham based franchise has always been a difficult/unpopular one to run, throw in possibly having to get DOO in and formalising Sunday working for drivers and it's a recipe for an absolute s*** show. If it's now become clear to the bidders that implementing DOO on the Birmingham suburban network will be required, then I can see why MTR have pulled out, not wanting to deal with that mess. Maybe though with MTR pulling out, Govia and Abellio & Co will be able to put in more conservative/safer bids that avoid having to do DOO? Or maybe the DfT will shoulder more of the pain or offer greater incentives for getting it done?

Interesting times ahead anyway. It probably means nothing, but London Midland are issuing new uniforms to all front line staff this year. To me this seems like an odd thing to do if you think you're going to lose the franchise next year.

 

[northwichcat]

D.O.R. are the fallback

DfT don't want DOR to run any franchises unless there's no other option. They've already opted to give Virgin and FGW lengthy extensions over giving the franchises to DOR and started SWT bidding early after Stagecoach refused to agree a direct award.

 

[HH]

I got the impression it was also due to the 'large' parental guarantees required to back the franchises up.

And you think that isn't a risk????

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

DfT don't want DOR to run any franchises unless there's no other option. They've already opted to give Virgin and FGW lengthy extensions over giving the franchises to DOR and started SWT bidding early after Stagecoach refused to agree a direct award.

Oh I agree, they don't want to go to DOR, but it's always an option.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If it's now become clear to the bidders that implementing DOO on the Birmingham suburban network will be required, then I can see why MTR have pulled out, not wanting to deal with that mess. Maybe though with MTR pulling out, Govia and Abellio & Co will be able to put in more conservative/safer bids that avoid having to do DOO? Or maybe the DfT will shoulder more of the pain or offer greater incentives for getting it done?

MTR introduced DOO on LOROL, but yes, they may sensibly consider it a rather different proposition here.

For the others a key question is whether DfT see Govia's handling of TSGN as a success or not, compared to Abellio in Scotland.

 

[Class 170101]

And you think that isn't a risk????

Its a big deterrent to signing up for (too many) franchises is my point.

Seems to be more shared bids these days
MTR / First at SWT
Abellio with others at West Midlands and previously at Anglia

 

[HH]

Its a big deterrent to signing up for (too many) franchises is my point.

Seems to be more shared bids these days
MTR / First at SWT
Abellio with others at West Midlands and previously at Anglia

Except that Stagecoach pulled out of Anglia; but the Dutch (NS) are particularly nervous about risk.

 

[FordFocus]

HH has raised a good point about the new way of thinking at the DfT. No bidder is really interested with small profit margins and more control from the DfT like Southern and the DOO issues. I think the profit margin for GTR is now 1.5%. So expect conservative bidding and no real investment.

The LM fleet has been renewed recently and there doesn't seem to be a raft of new services and routes like Northern.

 

[northwichcat]

The LM fleet has been renewed recently and there doesn't seem to be a raft of new services and routes like Northern.

Chester-Warrington-Manchester will be the only new route for Northern and if Northern didn't start running a new service on that route ATW would need to enhance their service on that route. The others are transfers from TPE or joining services together, sometimes with a slight re-routeing e.g. going via Victoria instead of Piccadilly or altering which services do and don't go to the Airport.

There was a note in the LM consultation that there could be a number of routes transferred from ATW to LM, with accompanying service revisions but that it yet to be confirmed.

 

[FordFocus]

There are service enhancements such as Greenbank, New Mills Newtown and others for Northern.

 

[causton]

Interesting times ahead anyway. It probably means nothing, but London Midland are issuing new uniforms to all front line staff this year. To me this seems like an odd thing to do if you think you're going to lose the franchise next year.

It does mean nothing. As far as we know at least ... it was in the Direct Award that they have to be replaced so no idea if it came from the DfT or 102 but the order forms have come this week for them!

 

[ChrisHogan]

It does mean nothing. As far as we know at least ... it was in the Direct Award that they have to be replaced so no idea if it came from the DfT or 102 but the order forms have come this week for them!

Clause 27.1 on page 209 of the Direct Award FA.

 

[Harbornite]

I don't mind who runs it, as long as they support reopening the Harborne branch...!

In all seriousness, it will be interesting to see who wins it, Govia's track record with regards to staffing has been quite bad, but the investment in rolling stock has been pretty good (although it goes without saying that they don't own any of it).

 

[northwichcat]

There are service enhancements such as Greenbank, New Mills Newtown and others for Northern.

You did say a raft of new services and new routes, which suggested something more than around 5 lines getting more frequent services and services on other lines transferring to Northern.

 

[Sparks807Evo]

It is a shame MTR have pulled out - I was interested as to what they would've done.

LM have done well on the rolling stock investment - although I feel the northern side of the Snow Hill lines could do with an extra train or two in the peaks to ease the overcrowding. I just hope the next franchise obtains the LO 172s upon their release for that purpose, as well as replace a few 153s.

DOO wise, I hope the franchise steers well clear of it. The whole GTR issue is a great example of why not to go down that route, as it just destroys staff relations. I value having two members of staff on the train, and whilst I feel LM conductors could be more pro-active in ticket checks at times on the Snow Hill line (Northern/XC seem far more consistent in ticket-checking in my experience), there is no need whatsoever for DOO. Anyway, the ticket checks comment is only a minor thing, and it is important to say that the drivers and guards are very helpful if you have any queries/issues and should be praised for that fact.

However, what I'd like to see is a commitment to reinstating the Camp Hill line/chord, and work being done to connect the Stratford to Cotswold line. Obviously the electrification of the Rugeley line will release 170s to resolve the Hereford/Shrewsbury peak capacity issues, and hopefully the TPE 350s can be obtained to further strengthen the WCML services. Also I think ticket barriers should be implemented in the key Birmingham commuter belt stations, and staffed during operating hours in a similar manner to TfL.

 

[ChrisHogan]

In all seriousness, it will be interesting to see who wins it, Govia's track record with regards to staffing has been quite bad, but the investment in rolling stock has been pretty good (although it goes without saying that they don't own any of it).

Procuring 69 new DMU vehicles (the 172s) was part of the 2007 FA; the first 30 350s came in CT/Silverlink days, and the 350/2s and 350/3s were essentially the minimum the DfT could get away with.

I saw the latest 'loading' poster at Euston last week and a significant number of LM departures in the evening peak are now classified 'double red' (=standing for more than twenty minutes). This is a breach of the new DA FA and is something the DfT should have addressed before now.

A lot of Govia's staffing problems were inherited from or caused by remapping with different T&Cs in the two constituent TOCs.

 

[the sniper]

A lot of Govia's staffing problems were inherited from or caused by remapping with different T&Cs in the two constituent TOCs.

The remapping also caused the worst of the driver shortages that were seen a few years ago. Stripping the franchise, particularly New Street LM depot, of most of its decent work led to mass exodus when Cross Country came calling for qualified drivers. Most drivers were leaving the largely rubbish local work to return to the half decent work they'd previously done during Central Trains days. If the Cross Country 170 work had never been removed from the West Midlands franchise than I don't think LM's driver shortage problems would have ever gotten anywhere near as bad as it did.

I'm not really sure what overall benefit the fragmentation of Central Trains between LM and Cross Country actually delivered. No doubt it made the West Midlands franchise a worse proposition...

 

[Harbornite]

LM have done well on the rolling stock investment - although I feel the northern side of the Snow Hill lines could do with an extra train or two in the peaks to ease the overcrowding. I just hope the next franchise obtains the LO 172s upon their release for that purpose, as well as replace a few 153s.

I value having two members of staff on the train, and whilst I feel LM conductors could be more pro-active in ticket checks at times on the Snow Hill line

However, what I'd like to see is a commitment to reinstating the Camp Hill line/chord, and work being done to connect the Stratford to Cotswold line. Obviously the electrification of the Rugeley line will release 170s to resolve the Hereford/Shrewsbury peak capacity issues, and hopefully the TPE 350s can be obtained to further strengthen the WCML services. Also I think ticket barriers should be implemented in the key Birmingham commuter belt stations, and staffed during operating hours in a similar manner to TfL.

Some good points there. I would also like to see all those infra projects and cascades being given the go ahead, although I was under the impression that the LO 172s were going to Chiltern. Regarding tickets, the installation of barriers at New street has been good, but the lack of ticket checks on the cross city is pretty poor and worse than the situation on the Snow hill lines.

Finally, regarding services, London Midland have done well to improve the service frequency on the cross city, seeing a few more snow hill services past Kidderminster would be good, as would increasing the service frequency on the Shrewsbury line to 3tph each way. Obviously you'd need stock, such as the cascaded 170s you mentioned.

 

[HH]

The remapping also caused the worst of the driver shortages that were seen a few years ago. Stripping the franchise, particularly New Street LM depot, of most of its decent work led to mass exodus when Cross Country came calling for qualified drivers. Most drivers were leaving the largely rubbish local work to return to the half decent work they'd previously done during Central Trains days. If the Cross Country 170 work had never been removed from the West Midlands franchise than I don't think LM's driver shortage problems would have ever gotten anywhere near as bad as it did.

I'm not really sure what overall benefit the fragmentation of Central Trains between LM and Cross Country actually delivered. No doubt it made the West Midlands franchise a worse proposition...

Totally agree. This is the problem with civil servants sitting behind a desk, saying it would be more logical if it was divided this way and that way, without having any local knowledge or proper understanding of the railways.

All the bidders on all the franchises realised immediately what a problem Birmingham would be, especially since Central was 'not a happy place' under NX.

 

[Sparks807Evo]

Some good points there. I would also like to see all those infra projects and cascades being given the go ahead, although I was under the impression that the LO 172s were going to Chiltern. Regarding tickets, the installation of barriers at New street has been good, but the lack of ticket checks on the cross city is pretty poor and worse than the situation on the Snow hill lines.

Finally, regarding services, London Midland have done well to improve the service frequency on the cross city, seeing a few more snow hill services past Kidderminster would be good, as would increasing the service frequency on the Shrewsbury line to 3tph each way. Obviously you'd need stock, such as the cascaded 170s you mentioned.

Thank you; the LO 172s haven't been allocated as of yet, however it wouldn't be a surprise if they ended up at Chiltern. They would be very useful though for extra Snow Hill line services, as the 170s aren't totally ideal for commuter work with their layout. Having seen 150001 yesterday all done up, it's a shame some of the 150s can't be retained to supplement the service in the peaks. The 150s will certainly be missed on the Bedford - Bletchley line, considering x2 153s coupled together can't fit into one platform.

The addition of further 323s will further improve the good work already done on the Cross City as you say, although the next operator will need to look at whether they'll want to fit PRM compliant toilets in advance of DDA 2020 guidelines, or will turn TfL/SWT Metro style with no toilets at all.

It's strange with the ticket checks - they're certainly a necessity considering it's very easy for a quick hop between outer suburban stations for free. It was a shame the Nottingham and Leiester services were taken out of the West Midlands remit - as it was a main cause for the driver shortages. It seems relations have settled out recently, although I can see the Sunday working becoming an issue if there aren't enough staff hired to cover them.

Personally I think the Snow Hill services should be under the Chiltern franchise map really, although I suppose the argument for not doing that is because it would leave the West Midlands franchise even smaller.

 

[Harbornite]

Procuring 69 new DMU vehicles (the 172s) was part of the 2007 FA; the first 30 350s came in CT/Silverlink days, and the 350/2s and 350/3s were essentially the minimum the DfT could get away with.

I saw the latest 'loading' poster at Euston last week and a significant number of LM departures in the evening peak are now classified 'double red' (=standing for more than twenty minutes). This is a breach of the new DA FA and is something the DfT should have addressed before now.

A lot of Govia's staffing problems were inherited from or caused by remapping with different T&Cs in the two constituent TOCs.

Fair enough. Let's hope that any serious staffing issues are sorted out, although things seem to be better than they were a few years ago

The remapping also caused the worst of the driver shortages that were seen a few years ago. Stripping the franchise, particularly New Street LM depot, of most of its decent work led to mass exodus when Cross Country came calling for qualified drivers. Most drivers were leaving the largely rubbish local work to return to the half decent work they'd previously done during Central Trains days. If the Cross Country 170 work had never been removed from the West Midlands franchise than I don't think LM's driver shortage problems would have ever gotten anywhere near as bad as it did.

I'm not really sure what overall benefit the fragmentation of Central Trains between LM and Cross Country actually delivered. No doubt it made the West Midlands franchise a worse proposition...

What was the justification for giving Nottingham- Cardiff and Bhm- Stansted to Crosscountry at the time?

 

[Heartland]

There has been a suggestion that the present LM network may change under the new franchise, is this based on speculation or fact?

Also with a proposal for the reopening of stations along the Kings Heath line will this form part of the new Franchise?

 

[northwichcat]

There has been a suggestion that the present LM network may change under the new franchise, is this based on speculation or fact?

It's a fact that it could change as the option of the English ATW services going to LM is being considered: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=124389

 

[Heartland]

Regarding the dubious benefit of splitting up Central Trains, the DfT appear to have made this call, as many other franchise changes over time since 1997. In practice with National Express loosing the franchise, a British Company was replaced in part by German and French owners. If this was influenced by us then being part of the European Union, the present mix of bidders might make a difficult choice for the DfT now the shackles of EU membership are less influential.

Merging the Nottingham- Cardiff and Stansteads with the former Inter City service that became Cross Country was a move that has provided at least a different ownership. But there are the problems of fleet maintenance. The Cross Country Fleet of Voyagers being maintained separately to the former Central units.

Is it fair for one franchise to use outside facilities to maintain their trains? Or is it the best solution for a rolling franchise scenario where control passes on a regular basis.

LM was created out of parts of Central and the bulk of Silverlink and that move perhaps seemed logical to retain yet another London- centric franchise. Never the less the break up of Central removed a core Regional Railway business and broke up its component parts between LM, Cross Country and East Midlands. Central had previously lost the Mid Wales services to Arriva and that is another proof that the DfT control our railways and make the key decisions that affect us all

 

[northwichcat]

Regarding the dubious benefit of splitting up Central Trains, the DfT appear to have made this call, as many other franchise changes over time since 1997. In practice with National Express loosing the franchise, a British Company was replaced in part by German and French owners. If this was influenced by us then being part of the European Union, the present mix of bidders might make a difficult choice for the DfT now the shackles of EU membership are less influential.

I think you're confused with what happened.

There were four franchises:
Silverlink- National Express
Central- National Express
Midland Mainline- National Express
Cross Country- Virgin (51%)/Stagecoach

After the remapping we had
London Overground- MTR Laing
London Midland- Go-Ahead (65%)/Kelios
East Midlands Trains- Stagecoach
CrossCountry- Arriva (A British company at the time of the franchise award)

 

[HH]

Ownership aside, the logic for the split of Silverlink was around LO. It's not clear what the logic for the other changes was.

 

[AlexNL]

Except that Stagecoach pulled out of Anglia; but the Dutch (NS) are particularly nervous about risk.

Parent company NS has come under a lot of scrutiny in the Netherlands. The primary reason for this is of course the Fyra fiasco, but also irregularities at the Limburg tendering* as well as stock shortages have placed the spotlights on NS.

Some politicians have asked for Abellio to be sold off, but this has been blocked by the ministry of Finance (the legal owner of NS). NS / Abellio can't afford another fiasco on the short term though.

* When the province of Limburg put all their trains + bus services out to tender, NS gamed the system by using confidential information given to them by an employee of Veolia, the incumbent operator. NS CEO Huges even forwarded confidential information about station usage fees which Veolia pays to Abellio.

 

[Bungle965]

Totally agree. This is the problem with civil servants sitting behind a desk, saying it would be more logical if it was divided this way and that way, without having any local knowledge or proper understanding of the railways.

All the bidders on all the franchises realised immediately what a problem Birmingham would be, especially since Central was 'not a happy place' under NX.

You never quite know what you are going to get when the win franchises, they can either do a good job, or they can turn a franchise into a bit of a shambles!
Sam

 

[ChrisHogan]

Finally, regarding services, London Midland have done well to improve the service frequency on the cross city, seeing a few more snow hill services past Kidderminster would be good, as would increasing the service frequency on the Shrewsbury line to 3tph each way. Obviously you'd need stock, such as the cascaded 170s you mentioned.

The increase in the CrossCity to 6tph was introduced pre-2007 by CT, not LM. The Shrewsbury line was also 3 tph (one Wales & Borders, one CT to Shrewsbury and the Walsall to Wellington stopper) for several years until the SRA decided to reduce services to 2 tph. The end product is that westbound the two surviving services, LM stopper and W&B semi-fast follow each other into Shrewsbury.

 

[Alfie1014]

Procuring 69 new DMU vehicles (the 172s) was part of the 2007 FA; the first 30 350s came in CT/Silverlink days, and the 350/2s and 350/3s were essentially the minimum the DfT could get away with.

I saw the latest 'loading' poster at Euston last week and a significant number of LM departures in the evening peak are now classified 'double red' (=standing for more than twenty minutes). This is a breach of the new DA FA and is something the DfT should have addressed before now.

A lot of Govia's staffing problems were inherited from or caused by remapping with different T&Cs in the two constituent TOCs.

The procurement of the 350/2s and 172s were part of the Govia bid for the franchise, upon award it was contracturalised into the FA, as would have been any similar rolling stock (or other) commitments from the other two bidders.