Network Rail bets on mindfulness (and err...Greggs) to lure commuters back

[JonathanH]

Getting shut of that daft 1601 - 1829 evening peak restriction across the North would go a long way and would be a start.

I suspect that there will be more evening peak restrictions in the future fares structure if it moves to single leg pricing, not fewer.

 

[43066]

If you worked 100% from home, why would you live in London?

I think you overestimate how many people this applies to. Not every industry is like the IT industry which, dare I say it, perhaps has a higher % than usual of workers who don’t particularly enjoy working closely with others and will naturally favour permanent home working.

I know quite a few people who were office based prior to Covid and were generally positive about working from home initially. All are now champing at the bit to go back in a few days per week, miss interacting and socialising with colleagues, and find remaining in the same four walls each day utterly depressing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think you overestimate how many people this applies to. Not every industry is like the IT industry which, dare I say it, perhaps has a higher % than usual of workers who don’t particularly enjoy working closely with others and will naturally favour permanent home working.

I know quite a few people who were office based prior to Covid and were generally positive about working from home initially. All are now champing at the bit to go back in a few days per week, miss interacting and socialising with colleagues, and find remaining in the same four walls each day utterly depressing.

Possibly so. But again why would you live in London? You could live somewhere both cheaper and nicer, and travel in one or two days a week. The commute isn't the same drag when you don't have to do it daily.

 

[43066]

Possibly so. But again why would you live in London? You could live somewhere both cheaper and nicer, and travel in one or two days a week. The commute isn't the same drag when you don't have to do it daily.

Believe it or not, some of us who live there quite like it . Depends on stage of life, where people hail from originally, where people have studied etc.

If you’re originally from London, you might naturally want to remain close to friends and family (I’m in this category). Equally if you’re a 20 something on a grad scheme, for example, a commuter town isn’t likely to appeal. You’re likely to want to go in to work a fair bit, build your network, socialise with friends. Same if you’re a single thirty something with an active social life (as many are these days, I’m also in this category). Why would you want to rattle around in a house in a dormitory town where you don’t know anyone?

Personally I’d eventually consider moving out, but will probably head south to somewhere in East Sussex or Kent. You have decent countryside, the South Downs etc., characterful towns. It strikes me heading north from London the U.K. is pretty generic and you have to go a *long* way to reach anywhere I’d want to live. Places like Bedford, Kettering, MK and (no offence) Bletchley are a little nondescript!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally I’d eventually consider moving out, but will probably head south to somewhere in East Sussex or Kent. You have decent countryside, the South Downs etc., characterful towns. It strikes me heading north from London the U.K. is pretty generic and you have to go a *long* way to reach anywhere I’d want to live. Places like Bedford, Kettering, MK and (no offence) Bletchley are a little nondescript!

That's not entirely unfair - I would agree the middle bit of the UK (south of Brum, north of London) can be rather nondescript and average! Though it depends on motivations I suppose - MK is certainly a perfect place to bring up kids for those doing that.

I'd agree Sussex can be an absolutely lovely place, if a bit expensive. Don't really know Kent. But there's a good reason this has long been "commuterland", not least because of how nice it gets so close to London. The countryside is absolutely beautiful.

 

[Horizon22]

Because Advance tickets on short journeys are pointless complication and confusion. Advances are for long distance journeys where booking ahead is the norm and where people typically have more flexibility of when to travel.

The old system of them only being available on trains with seat reservations was the right distinction to me.



I would agree that something like "every day is a fares Saturday for 12 months" announced now would be a good plan. But if something favourable is done and is well-publicised, people might switch back.

A lot of commutes are not "short journeys". They could be 60+ minutes. Flexibility could be at "peak" times if that is suitable - how many have been priced out of travelling at that time in the past? Now that there is more capacity in the peak, it makes sense to open it up more - if not generally reducing the ratio of anytime to off-peak fares.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Jan 2022 ==

Possibly so. But again why would you live in London? You could live somewhere both cheaper and nicer, and travel in one or two days a week. The commute isn't the same drag when you don't have to do it daily.

There are many reasons people - especially younger people - choose London over other places and "nicer" is highly subjective. Some people like the lifestyle, culture, facilities and are used to living in a large city, not to mention personal connections to friends and family. Living in commuter towns was generally useful for work and they would really only sleep there & utilising school in extreme examples - hence why often called" dormitory towns". Now that people are spending more time there as they don't have to work, they may evaluate their options and find their town a bit soulless and boring. They might choose other options - including living even further away (1.5-2h) from London.

Everyone is in a different life stage and different parts of the UK appeal to different people at different times of their life for a whole host of reasons. After Covid, some places may have "ranked" up or down as a result.

 

[urbophile]

Possibly so. But again why would you live in London? You could live somewhere both cheaper and nicer, and travel in one or two days a week. The commute isn't the same drag when you don't have to do it daily.

The availability of work is not the only reason for living in a particular city. Family, culture, friendship networks... there are many. But maybe if those people who only live in London because of nearness to a job all move out, house prices will drop to a level that more people who appreciate the city for these reasons can afford.

Anyway all this talk of 'working from home' is a very middle class preoccupation. People in manual and service jobs, by and large, can't do that and have to travel. Often incurring, in the case of London, very long journeys because of the lack of affordable housing in the centre.

 

[tbwbear]

Anyway all this talk of 'working from home' is a very middle class preoccupation. People in manual and service jobs, by and large, can't do that and have to travel. Often incurring, in the case of London, very long journeys because of the lack of affordable housing in the centre.

That is true. You can imagine that along side a general fall in the numbers, the demographic of people commuting in the current "peak" hours will continue to move away from the wealthier middle class commuter towards people in manual and service jobs. House prices in London may fall in time, but probably not to the level required for balance.

So with trains less full in the peak, and used by proportionally more less well off commuters, isn't the current peak pricing model unsustainable - with or without bacon rolls - won't the political pressure for a change to "saturday everyday" fares increase? Also considering, the railways may lose the ability to use the "higher fares to reduce overcrowding" argument.

 

[Horizon22]

Anyway all this talk of 'working from home' is a very middle class preoccupation. People in manual and service jobs, by and large, can't do that and have to travel. Often incurring, in the case of London, very long journeys because of the lack of affordable housing in the centre.

Indeed. And of course it can include the middle-class - many of the staff that these forums are about are relatively well-paid and could be considered "middle-class" yet cannot work from home.

 

[ComUtoR]

Indeed. And of course it can include the middle-class - many of the staff that these forums are about are relatively well-paid and could be considered "middle-class" yet cannot work from home.

Can't be middle class if you wear a HVV to work. What would the neighbours think ! The only thing in the back of my motor is a set of golf clubs and certainly not a pair of steel toecaps..... I'd get dirt on the leather if they were on the back seat !

 

[birchesgreen]

Most office jobs arn't middle class.

 

[JonathanH]

won't the political pressure for a change to "saturday everyday" fares increase

A SWR-style Saturday morning peak is, I think, a racing certainty so maybe there will simply be a peak fare every day for travelling in the morning (although that might enable slightly cheaper weekday peak fares).

 

[43066]

Can't be middle class if you wear a HVV to work. What would the neighbours think !

I reckon you can be either: working class train drivers wear their HVVs while driving *cough* GTR *cough*, middle class ones remove them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Most office jobs arn't middle class.

I was going to say exactly that. There are loads of low paid office jobs, such as call centres. Call centre work is perfect for doing remotely, and to the business's benefit, too - people are more likely to be willing to do split shifts if at home, for example. Some, e.g those with kids, might quite happily do something like 11am-2pm then 5pm-8pm, those being very busy times for call centres but also fitting well around being able to take kids to/from school etc.

 

[urbophile]

Most office jobs arn't middle class.

True too. But most working class people in office jobs can't afford space for a home office either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

True too. But most working class people in office jobs can't afford space for a home office either.

Away from the South East where poorer families often live in Victorian terraces, most likely they actually do. You will often find in such houses, which usually have two reception rooms, only one will be in frequent use. In student houses it is normally converted to a bedroom, but for families it tends to be either spare, or that people will make very limited use of the dining room and easily be able to have a desk in the corner.

Such houses often also have a largeish master bedroom where a desk can be fitted in a corner easily enough.

Pretty much all terraces in Liverpool, Manchester and Preston, to name just three, are of this kind of layout.

And for young people still living with their parents, having a desk in their bedroom left over from their days doing schoolwork on it would be quite common.

 

[tbwbear]

or that people will make very limited use of the dining room and easily be able to have a desk in the corner.

Friend of mine, working as part of a call centre for a major UK airline, has done exactly that for the past year or so. Now has no desire to go back to the office.

Obviously just one example, everyone is different of course - but it is certainly out there as a trend.

 

[birchesgreen]

Friend of mine, working as part of a call centre for a major UK airline, has done exactly that for the past year or so. Now has no desire to go back to the office.

Obviously just one example, everyone is different of course - but it is certainly out there as a trend.

I live in a little terrace house myself, happily WFH with my laptop on the dining table.

 

[ar10642]

I live in a little terrace house myself, happily WFH with my laptop on the dining table.

I'm guessing there are no noisy children in your house or you don't have to do online meetings very much.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm guessing there are no noisy children in your house or you don't have to do online meetings very much.

Children are mostly at school from 9am to 4pm-ish Monday-Friday, which is when most (though not all) office work is taking place. Personally I find online meetings after 4pm quite unusual, people are winding down by that point.

 

[Goldfish62]

I don't think anyone would disagree that there's probably a permanent decline in commuting and that home working to a greater or lesser extent is firmly established.

However, the decisions on the balance of office v home working lies not with the employee, but the employer and I think that balance will evolve and change over time.

 

[tbwbear]

However, the decisions on the balance of office v home working lies not with the employee, but the employer and I think that balance will evolve and change over time.

Isn't there legislation under consideration at the moment that may put the right to work at home into the employee's hands - at least for some - ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think anyone would disagree that there's probably a permanent decline in commuting and that home working to a greater or lesser extent is firmly established.

However, the decisions on the balance of office v home working lies not with the employee, but the employer and I think that balance will evolve and change over time.

In practice it will shift in favour of the employee, as if they don't like an employer's policy they can look elsewhere.

 

[ar10642]

Children are mostly at school from 9am to 4pm-ish Monday-Friday, which is when most (though not all) office work is taking place. Personally I find online meetings after 4pm quite unusual, people are winding down by that point.

School holidays must be a nightmare though?

 

[JamesT]

School holidays must be a nightmare though?

Or kids sent home due to illness. (Or at the moment, being in contact with the plague-ridden)

 

[Bletchleyite]

School holidays must be a nightmare though?

Certainly that would require a bit of thought, but it doesn't seem to pose a great issue in my work. If people are at home with the kids they tend just to sit them in front of the telly while on the call.

Or kids sent home due to illness.

If a kid is ill enough to be sent home from school in normal times they are not going to be running around making a racket, or they need parcelling straight back to school!

This, though, needs to be offset against the benefit that a day's work needn't be lost if a kid needs to be picked up in an emergency. Certainly a bonus for single parents.

(Or at the moment, being in contact with the plague-ridden)

That's only a short-term, once-in-many-years issue and should not be involved in decisions about what we do as a general thing going forward.

 

[ar10642]

Certainly that would require a bit of thought, but it doesn't seem to pose a great issue in my work. If people are at home with the kids they tend just to sit them in front of the telly while on the call.

I WFH 90% of the time and certainly with my kids I need to be in a room with a closing door when they're in the house. They just make too much noise and commotion to be able to do a call or concentrate on anything downstairs. Or they want to wave at the people on the other side of the call. Nightmare.

I also wouldn't recommend staring down at a laptop screen all day long unless you want back and shoulder problems, you need a monitor at the right height and a proper keyboard and mouse.

This effectively means you have either have to have a spare room or have part of a bedroom as a permanent working space which is not always that great. Something a bit miserable about sleeping and working in the same space 100% of the time. I quite like the days I go to a proper office.

 

[Phil56]

Children are mostly at school from 9am to 4pm-ish Monday-Friday, which is when most (though not all) office work is taking place. Personally I find online meetings after 4pm quite unusual, people are winding down by that point.

I had the misfortune of having to make numerous phone calls to a car insurance firm over the Xmas holidays after a neighbour let her car roll into mine and write it off. What with screaming/crying children and barking/howling dogs, the calls weren't particularly efficient or acceptable, especially as each customer service person didn't actually do what they said they would (probably forgot or pressed the wrong button due to being stressed with the noise/disruption etc) meaning yet another phone call to someone else. Just checked my itemised billing and it took 14 phone calls lasting a total of 413 minutes (inc the long waiting times in the queue) to get a settlement figure for a car for which the first person I called said would clearly be a write off due to it's age and therefore low value. I ended up making a formal complaint and got an apology with "lessons will be learned" and a couple of hundred quid compensation!

If employees and their employers are serious about working from home, there needs to be better monitoring and ground rules for their employees they'll start losing business. Personally, I'll never use Churchill insurance after my experience with them over this matter.

 

[birchesgreen]

I'm guessing there are no noisy children in your house or you don't have to do online meetings very much.

No i have a wife who watches Korean dramas all day long , i send her off to watch her ipad in the bedroom if i have any Teams meetings.

Though only tend to have 1 meeting a month anyway...

 

[ar10642]

No i have a wife who watches Korean dramas all day long , i send her off to watch her ipad in the bedroom if i have any Teams meetings.

Though only tend to have 1 meeting a month anyway...

1 meeting a month, wow. Not sure I'd like that. As much as I don't love Teams calls I'd rather see people's faces and hear their voices a bit more than that.