How can the railway cut operational expenditure?

[SussexLad]

Driver Only Operation does NOT mean that there is only one member of staff on the train. It simply means that everything to do with starting, running and stopping the train and letting the passengers on and off by opening and closing the doors is done by the driver.

There is nothing to stop the train operating company employing train staff to assist passengers in the situation you describe.

Nothing except for the fact many on board supervisors or whoever doesn't have to close the doors don't bother to check if anyobe needs assistance on the platform. They'd much rather send a Snapchat or watch YouTube.

I agree with it in principle, it can allow the guard to do more important things and could sometimes help the train leave quicker.

Before anyone asks, that is my personal experience with Souther, Gatwick Express and thameslink (who don't even bother with a obs!)

 

[Starmill]

I think that before you can consider what op ex cost reductions could be made it needs to be understood, if at all possible, what the end game looks like?

That's what should happen.

For it to actually happen that way requires the DfT to come up with convincing proposals and the Treasury to accept that they're value for money. Unless the DfT have some other leverage, or the Treasury are going soft on them, which is unlikely.

 

[Starmill]

DOO would reduce opex costs (runs for cover)

Interestingly DOO itself doesn't lead to much efficiency gain or cost saving, it's de-staffing that really does it. Southern for example kept their former onboard and revenue staff on in a new grade but pay them more now, they don't really achieve passenger results that are any better than before. The workforce became slightly more flexible but it is not clear that there was a large reduction in costs. A drop in headcount just to eliminate spare cover, or efficiency from bigger pools (eliminating route knowledge etc) are not going to be noticeable cost savings compared to de-staffing. DOO also requires expensive reviews or changes to operational procedures, lighting, cameras and communication systems. Pointless if there's no actual opex cut to be had from it.

 

[SussexLad]

Could a speacial computer programme to analyse the different options to recover a train service be useful?

It would reduce costs associated with delay repay and staffing levels could be reduced (either call center staff for delay repay or control room staff because making decisions is easier and quicker). Obviously you'd be looking for an AI rogramme that learns from itself

 

[37424]

Yes, it does.

Does it? video of a test train into Heathrow on You tube doesn't look like level boarding to me. and the gaps at some of the legacy stations are large.

Thinking about it, a long term strategy for reducing costs is to have level boarding. That way passenger assist has less demand so you don't need as many staff.

It would but there are many trains still being built which aren't really level boarding and are are likely to be around for the next 30+ years.

Any extension of DOO would involve a major fight with the Unions which I don't think this government has the stomach or time for.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does it? video of a test train into Heathrow on You tube doesn't look like level boarding to me. and the gaps at some of the legacy stations are large.

HEx and HConn (as was) had level boarding at the Heathrow stations so I'd be amazed if not as the units have the same floor height. I thought the legacy stations were having their platforms raised?

 

[37424]

HEx and HConn (as was) had level boarding at the Heathrow stations so I'd be amazed if not as the units have the same floor height. I thought the legacy stations were having their platforms raised?

That doesn't look like level boarding to me

 

[Dr Hoo]

Interestingly DOO itself doesn't lead to much efficiency gain or cost saving, it's de-staffing that really does it. Southern for example kept their former onboard and revenue staff on in a new grade but pay them more now, they don't really achieve passenger results that are any better than before. The workforce became slightly more flexible but it is not clear that there was a large reduction in costs. A drop in headcount just to eliminate spare cover, or efficiency from bigger pools (eliminating route knowledge etc) are not going to be noticeable cost savings compared to de-staffing. DOO also requires expensive reviews or changes to operational procedures, lighting, cameras and communication systems. Pointless if there's no actual opex cut to be had from it.

In BR's day, certainly in Strathclyde, the point was that the Strathclyde Manning Agreement allowed a significant reduction in station staff roles. On-board ticket inspection had never really been a thing on the non-gangway EMUs (other than in a limited way on Sundays with a single coach open to passengers). Once the 'on train person' had been freed up from the brake van door panel and the units equipped with gangways a whole new era of revenue protection could begin. Ticket barriers went under the Open Stations initiative and many booking offices were closed or had hours/shifts significantly reduced. This went hand-in-hand with new methods of ticketing such as station vending machines (a bit of a disaster back in the 1980s), PORTIS on the trains and multi-modal products like Transcards and Zonecards (which worked quite well in the Glasgow area).

With the switch back to ticket barriers, security concerns, accessibility and assistance requirements at stations it is not entirely obvious that such significant economies could still be obtained in the 2020s.

 

[Starmill]

In RAIL issue 911 Christian Wolmar has written an opinion piece which touches on this. I disagree with his specific conclusions regarding the closure of rural lines (I don't rule out any closures, however, far from it), but I agree with him and his sources regarding the severity of the situation. So far, nearly six months in, there has been little evidence of a return of numbers and less of a return of revenue.

Here are a couple of quotes (p46) that are particularly relevant here:

"It is a second spike in cases that represents the worst possible threat for the railways. If there is a second lockdown, even a partial one, there is simply no money available for the Department to keep paying for trains carrying fresh air. Major cuts will be inevitable

"Among the ideas that have been set out would be severe cuts to regional services, including the scrapping of most branch lines (notably those in Cornwall and East Anglia); a reduction in the frequency of inter-city trains, including the removal of stops in areas with high instances of the disease (Wigan or Leicester for example); and a thinning out of commuter services, which incidentally now have their peak at 0600 as they are used by key workers rather than office staff."

The Prime Minister and Secretary of State are rightly blasted for getting us into this mess - the weight of personal responsibility on the two men is for what is to come is significant.

We probably won't need to wait for too much longer to find out what is coming next.

 

[yorksrob]

Fundamentally, those of us who can travel by train have a responsibility to do so. Realistically it's about the only pro-active thing we can do for the timebeing.

 

[Meerkat]

How many leases/maintenance deals are linked to mileage? They would be the trains getting parked up first (assuming you have somewhere to park them that is cheaper than the saving!).
A Conservative government will surely take on the rail unions as soon as they get some time free to work on a policy? Strikes over pensions, DOO, Sunday’s etc would get limited sympathy from a population facing job losses/tax rises and possible public spending cuts, especially if the public are still reluctant to travel and the Home Counties commuters are used to WFH.
Any investments that don’t involve UK jobs must be at risk, but not sure if there are any?

 

[Starmill]

I find it very bizarre that Wolmar singles out Cornwall and East Anglia. In terms of numbers, Great Yarmouth and St Ives are miles ahead of Barton-on-Humber or Whitby for example. Unless Wolmar's view is that all four of those examples are in scope for closure, in which case

 

[yorksrob]

I find it very bizarre that Wolmar singles out Cornwall and East Anglia. In terms of numbers, Great Yarmouth and St Ives are miles ahead of Barton-on-Humber or Whitby for example. Unless Wolmar's view is that all four of those examples are in scope for closure, in which case

Wasn't he reporting more on what his source has said, in which case I wouldn't rule out treasury agitators not having much of a clue about what's going on on the ground.

Alarmingly, Kent was also mentioned. I can't think what they'd want to chop there.

 

[SussexLad]

With the governments contunued promotion of a leveling up agenda i doudt that borris would completely cut services on some lines. Easier answer that would probably get through more quickly with less angry people would be suspended parts of delay repay for x many years.

Slightly harder but quite likely is the goverment fights the unions. Although that would be controvertial too.

 

[Meerkat]

Slightly harder but quite likely is the goverment fights the unions. Although that would be controvertial too.

A strike would save the Treasury money in wages and running costs! Public opinion wise a time of plentiful WFH and most taxpayers/passengers being concerned about their own jobs would be a time of lower support for any union action.

 

[paul1609]

Wasn't he reporting more on what his source has said, in which case I wouldn't rule out treasury agitators not having much of a clue about what's going on on the ground.

Alarmingly, Kent was also mentioned. I can't think what they'd want to chop there.

The only train I've been on since March was the Romney Hythe and Dymchurch yesterday but going by the numbers of cars parked in Southeastern Car Parks you could comfortably cut 75% of the Outer Commuter services as a starter. The majority of services I see seem to be running next to near empty.
Headcorn station has apparently next to no season ticket holders now down from £4 million pa pre covid and has issued over £800000 refunds.
If there wasn't Massive Government Support Southeastern (financially a larger franchise than Virgin Eastcoast) would be handing the keys in within hours.

 

[yorksrob]

The only train I've been on since March was the Romney Hythe and Dymchurch yesterday but going by the numbers of cars parked in Southeastern Car Parks you could comfortably cut 75% of the Outer Commuter services as a starter. The majority of services I see seem to be running next to near empty.
Headcorn station has apparently next to no season ticket holders now down from £4 million pa pre covid and has issued over £800000 refunds.
If there wasn't Massive Government Support Southeastern (financially a larger franchise than Virgin Eastcoast) would be handing the keys in within hours.

Good old Headcorn.

When I was down there two Sundays ago, there seemed to be a reasonable number of people getting on at Ashford and Maidstone East for London.

There will be a commuter market, but it will be a bit smaller.

 

[Starmill]

The money paid in delay compensation is pretty trivial. It wouldn't make much of a dent in £700 million / month.

 

[matt_world2004]

That doesn't look like level boarding to me

It is level boarding or there are only millimetres difference between the step height and the platform height. Certainly you could get a wheelchair on/off there without difficulty.

 

[paul1609]

Good old Headcorn.

When I was down there two Sundays ago, there seemed to be a reasonable number of people getting on at Ashford and Maidstone East for London.

There will be a commuter market, but it will be a bit smaller.

Of course thats with the SEML via Sevenoaks closed. Im told by Staff that the Morning Peak takings haven't improved very much over lockdown.
Its of course early days but it appears that the commuter market will be a hell of a lot smaller and certainly not support the pre covid service.

 

[yorksrob]

Of course thats with the SEML via Sevenoaks closed. Im told by Staff that the Morning Peak takings haven't improved very much over lockdown.
Its of course early days but it appears that the commuter market will be a hell of a lot smaller and certainly not support the pre covid service.

Well, it's not anything spectacular throughout the day. I suppose they might go from half-hourly to hourly.

That said, I don't think the limited return to offices that will happen, has really got off the ground yet.

 

[Meerkat]

Of course thats with the SEML via Sevenoaks closed. Im told by Staff that the Morning Peak takings haven't improved very much over lockdown.
Its of course early days but it appears that the commuter market will be a hell of a lot smaller and certainly not support the pre covid service.

Far too early to tell. A lot of city companies are planning on WFH for months, but still anticipating an eventual return of some degree. They will need to sort out how you use lifts first.....

 

[markymark2000]

In my opinion, we are far too early to to be looking at line closures or changes to services. I say this because come the first week of September, millions of young people return to school. A good chunk travel by public transport meaning that numbers should jump up.
Add to that that when kids are off school, parents take more holidays and those who can work from home do so. When the kids return to school, many parents return to work and thus commute (every year, there is a noticeable drop in commuters on school holidays)

With these two things in mind, the first week of September might be very busy (compared to current levels)

We then have the Universities towards the end of September. While there will be less students because of the online lectures, there will still be a lot of students which will again boost numbers. I don't think we can have any real idea of the 'normal' use until about mid October and I think that then, and only then, would it be wise to look at where expenditure can be cut service wise.

 

[Bald Rick]

In my opinion, we are far too early to to be looking at line closures or changes to services. I say this because come the first week of September, millions of young people return to school. A good chunk travel by public transport meaning that numbers should jump up.
Add to that that when kids are off school, parents take more holidays and those who can work from home do so. When the kids return to school, many parents return to work and thus commute (every year, there is a noticeable drop in commuters on school holidays)

With these two things in mind, the first week of September might be very busy (compared to current levels)

We then have the Universities towards the end of September. While there will be less students because of the online lectures, there will still be a lot of students which will again boost numbers. I don't think we can have any real idea of the 'normal' use until about mid October and I think that then, and only then, would it be wise to look at where expenditure can be cut service wise.

It’s revenue, not passenger numbers that are important. All education related commuter traffic, including students in further and higher education, and staff employed at educational establishments, represents about 10% of passengers but rather less than that in revenue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Alarmingly, Kent was also mentioned. I can't think what they'd want to chop there.

Would that not be an example of reduced commuter frequencies? There aren't really any branch lines in that sense.

 

[markymark2000]

It’s revenue, not passenger numbers that are important. All education related commuter traffic, including students in further and higher education, and staff employed at educational establishments, represents about 10% of passengers but rather less than that in revenue.

I believe the point remains though in that even if they aren't worth much to the railway, an increase in revenue is an increase in revenue. I don't think any plans can be made now based on current revenue and passenger numbers since over September and early October, it is likely to increase and as I have said, when kids go back to school, 'normal' commuters begin again so that will help to increase revenue.

A further point is that the same kids need to get to school so whether you fund the railways or school buses. It isn't massively different. It's just a different form of transport being funded.

 

[Starmill]

I believe the point remains though in that even if they aren't worth much to the railway, an increase in revenue is an increase in revenue. I don't think any plans can be made now based on current revenue and passenger numbers since over September and early October, it is likely to increase and as I have said, when kids go back to school, 'normal' commuters begin again so that will help to increase revenue.

If revenue were currently running at about 10% of 2019 levels, and three months from now it increased to about 12%, that would likely be seen by Treasury officials as strong evidence of failure, not success...

On some lines, 10% is rather optimistic.

 

[markymark2000]

If revenue were currently running at about 10% of 2019 levels, and three months from now it increased to about 12%, that would likely be seen by Treasury officials as strong evidence of failure, not success...

On some lines, 10% is rather optimistic.

Oh, on some lines which were bad to start with, you aren't going to get some fantastically high figure in September but if the 2% comes from school students, you might get another 5% from parents who go back to work when the kids are in school. You then also have Furlough ending so more employees are going back to work. University students then back at the end of September might bump it up higher. Once you have a proper idea on how many people are travelling in more normal circumstances (IE with schools back and the increase in commuters which that brings), then you can look at what lines can be closed etc to save money.

I am in no way expecting the railways to hit 80% on the 1st September but any increase is an increase and that means less cuts are needed. Workplaces are reopening slowly and with that means more people going back to work. In time, some of the covid restrictions will be eased slightly which again will mean more people in workplaces.
The railway usage seems to be going up a few percentage points each week. Currently around 32% so why are we on 10% revenue but have 32% passengers?

 

[yorksrob]

It’s revenue, not passenger numbers that are important. All education related commuter traffic, including students in further and higher education, and staff employed at educational establishments, represents about 10% of passengers but rather less than that in revenue.

Surely from a political point of view, it's the exact opposite. I suspect that what's riled the treasury more than anything has been paying all of this money to run empty trains around. As anyone who has ventured out on the train in the past week can attest, the era of the empty train has now passed.

Would that not be an example of reduced commuter frequencies? There aren't really any branch lines in that sense.

Possibly. I certainly can't see closures happenning there.

Oh, on some lines which were bad to start with, you aren't going to get some fantastically high figure in September but if the 2% comes from school students, you might get another 5% from parents who go back to work when the kids are in school. You then also have Furlough ending so more employees are going back to work. University students then back at the end of September might bump it up higher. Once you have a proper idea on how many people are travelling in more normal circumstances (IE with schools back and the increase in commuters which that brings), then you can look at what lines can be closed etc to save money.

I am in no way expecting the railways to hit 80% on the 1st September but any increase is an increase and that means less cuts are needed. Workplaces are reopening slowly and with that means more people going back to work. In time, some of the covid restrictions will be eased slightly which again will mean more people in workplaces.
The railway usage seems to be going up a few percentage points each week. Currently around 32% so why are we on 10% revenue but have 32% passengers?

With less buisiness travel, perhaps they could use that famous yield management to make the first class offer more competitive. I can't say as I've noticed much evidence of that happenning yet.

 

[The Ham]

Far too early to tell. A lot of city companies are planning on WFH for months, but still anticipating an eventual return of some degree. They will need to sort out how you use lifts first.....

I'm aware of one finance company (one many would have heard of but not one of the bigger ones) which has allowed a return to the office for those who wish to (especially those who live on their own, have inadequate space at home to work, etc.) however are still talking of WFH being encouraged until at least the end of this year.

However WFH, in the medium term, could actually mean more rail travel. As whilst, say 40% of people could work from home (and no that doesn't result in a 40% drop in passenger numbers as they're likely to still be needed to go in from time to time, with twice a month still being 10% of their working time in an office) many of those would already be driving to work rather than using rail.

If you reduce the number of days in the office you reduce the miles traveled by car and so the cost per mile increases significantly (purchase cost, insurance, VED, residents permits, etc. all have no/limited reductions if you reduce travel). As such the value of owning a car (and certainly a second car) starts to fall significantly.

A small shift in the number of miles traveled by road to rail can, because of the way we travel, have a big impact on the number of miles traveled by rail. As an example a 6.25% shift from road to rail would see Rail's milage increase by 50% of the 2018/19 figures.

Even with a 40% fall that's still going to mean more miles by rail than before.

Now whilst that's likely to result in more longer distance travel and less London and the South East travel (although some of the latter would be offset by the longer distance travel within its boundaries) I'd argue that London and the South East were in need of significant upgrades and so whilst trains will be emptier they will still be fairly busy and fairly busy all day.