Isn't rather stupid that BPN drivers are working local services from Wigan to Liverpool when they have their own crew depots?
Blackpool crews will obviously have turns on the Blackpool-Liverpool services; by also working Wigan-Liverpool stoppers it keeps them up to date with station specific details at all intermediate stations should they ever be required to stop at them. Which they do on Sundays anyway though not everyone
works their Sundays. I'm not saying this is the right way to do things...
Presumably that's to guard against anti-competitive practices? i.e. stopping an outgoing franchise holder deliberately swelling the crew resource base towards the end of franchise thereby imposing a cost burden onto the next franchise holder?
Equally it helps to ensure that an outgoing franchise holder doesn't run down staffing levels and pocket the savings leaving the incoming franchisee with a huge headache on day one.
On the other hand you could argue that British Rail was better able to engage in long-term planning (e.g. major electrification and its implications) than TOCs on short-term franchises. A unified system would also be better able to switch resources - using Crewe TC to cover Preston work was a lot easier under BR than using VTWC men to cover NR work!
This is all fair comment though BR rarely received the levels of investment currently being seen.
I'd say it was an argument FOR full nationalisation. Politicians and civil servants make poor decision makers because of their short-termism, true, but a nationalised industry takes the micro-management away from the politicians and civil servants. A big part of the problem at the moment is the short-termism, with both franchises and in Government. That, and the fact that Government can blame the TOCs for all the failures and insulate themselves from criticism.
However, the (somewhat ironic) situation we have now under private sector operation is that the DfT (i.e. politicians and civil servants) has far more influence on the day-to-day running than it ever did under British Rail. (Decisions that today are taken by the DfT, were in the past taken by BR without the need to refer to civil servants or politicians.)
If renationalisation was likely to reproduce a semi-independent BR Board then it would make long-term planning easier though the issue might still resurface of the Treasury seeking to restrict investment funds. However I have no expectation that any future renationalisation would be along such lines. Rather I would expect the current excessive levels of micro-management, which sometimes border on ignorant interference, to simply get worse. Some politicians are already keen to stick their oar in, a new BR would surely see this exacerbated.
But getting back to the issue. Short-forms due to lack of stock are not Northern's fault, but perhaps they'd have been better off with a gradual transfer to electric traction rather than the big bang. But cancellations due to lack of staff IS Northern's fault. If the electrification had been completed the lack of staff would have been more, not less, pronounced: more drivers and guards would need to be off route and traction learning, causing a bigger shortfall in staff.
One issue that has only been touched on briefly is the fact that we are now into the summer period of leave meaning that leave is taken in two week blocks rather than just one. During single weeks of leave many staff will happily work either the weekend before or after but during two week blocks they are completely unavailable during the middle weekend. This will make any staff shortage that may exist even worse though I very much doubt that it is anywhere near explaining the size of the current mess. Suffice to say that if Preston-Blackpool had re-opened as originally scheduled things would have been at least a little less chaotic.
I'll repeat that a better IR climate would help immeasurably.