Comment piece in Passenger Transport - "The railway risks becoming irrelevant"

[AlterEgo]

I'm pretty sure the pay toilet / standing / single pilot stories were publicity stunts, eagerly lapped up by moronic tabloid journalists, which was the intent.

That’s exactly what they were.

 

[reddragon]

I think that depends where you are. Most aren't rude, I'd agree, but there does seem to be a significant contingent of rude, disinterested staff to the south and south east of London for some reason (including Victoria), including, in my experience, almost all gateline staff I've encountered. And no, before anyone asks, I don't fare-dodge, so have never encountered gateline staff in a context where they might have some justification in being a little short.

Elsewhere in the country I've experienced plenty of laziness (most notably in booking offices, but also the classic LNR guard who never does tickets) but very little rudeness.

GWR gate line staff at Paddington have the same reputation, I find them unhelpful but tbh they must be incredibly busy and probably not the people anyone should ask questions of other than for operation of their tickets in the gates.

 

[LowLevel]

People obviously have little knowledge of the role of a train conductor, they do Check tickets.
Assistance in emergency situations.
Passeger evacuation in an emergency situation.
Assist passengers on trains with accessibility on & off trains.
Arrange assistance at station stops & ongoing connections.
Customer information for ticketing etc

This perception that they sit on the back cab, maybe they are in there arranging assistance/ taking to control / checking connections etc etc
Conductors that just hide on the back cab soon get found out, there sales figures are low & they get monitored plus a taking to.
There's unobtrusive monitoring/ assessments on board etc

It's a role that on non metro type services needs to be retained

Do they? I think that depends where you are. Some TOCs manage this element very differently to others.

In my experience if the guard is sat in the back cab for the entire journey they're rarely doing anything productive. I wouldn't necessarily say never doing anything productive, but certainly the majority of the time.

I've been doing the job for years and I'm yet to find out what important tasks a guard can be doing in the back that will take up an entire hour long plus journey, with the exception of an occasional competency assessment.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

They wanted to make you pay to pay for using a toilet on the plane ! They even looked at standing seats to get more on a plane, the main reason they are the biggest is that they drive away the competition due to there shear sheer size.

lol both of those are urban myths - but their "charge for anything" reputation meant that most of us believed them when the stories were first published.

That’s exactly what they were.

Were these proposals called out at the time? Not every bonkers proposal is always announced on the morning of 1st April.

 

[pc3087L]

Mr O’Leary (CEO of Ryanair) is a past master at producing click bait for tabloid journalists on the basis that any publicity is good publicity - especially if it’s free

 

[Bantamzen]

Mr O’Leary (CEO of Ryanair) is a past master at producing click bait for tabloid journalists on the basis that any publicity is good publicity - especially if it’s free

Indeed, I seem to remember him saying planes could be fitted out like underground trains. Methinks he knew very well it would never be a thing and was winding the gutter press up.

 

[Vespa]

My take on the railways is convenience, I drive to most places because there is either no lines or its too awkward to travel to, I tend to use it more to travel to city centres so I don't have to drive into a city and find a parking space, when it's just me not a problem, when it's a family of four it can be more cost effective to drive in and park up for cost effective price per head vs 4 x train fares.

Retail park are popular for that reason.

 

[Bald Rick]

Retail park are popular for that reason.

Retail parks are popular because people like to shop there.

how people get there is dependent on the relevant transport links.

 

[Vespa]

Retail parks are popular because people like to shop there.

how people get there is dependent on the relevant transport links.

Unlimited unrestricted parking helps.

For trains to work it has to go where people wants to go with minimal inconvenience.

 

[Ken H]

Unlimited unrestricted parking helps.

For trains to work it has to go where people wants to go with minimal inconvenience.

Same with buses. but where buses go to out of town shopping, even they struggle. If you have a weeks shopping from the supermarket or a new kitchen sink from B&Q you dont want to go home on the bus or train.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Unlimited unrestricted parking helps.

Usually that's the case, but not always. Some "out of town" trading estates / retail parks will have, maybe, a "maximum three hours" free parking restriction, and if the site is anywhere near to a sports stadium or similar, this time period may sometimes be further reduced or restricted on a match day or event day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Usually that's the case, but not always. Some "out of town" trading estates / retail parks will have, maybe, a "maximum three hours" free parking restriction, and if the site is anywhere near to a sports stadium or similar, this time period may sometimes be further reduced or restricted on a match day or event day.

Probably more that it's (effectively) unlimited in quantity and free. Few people want to spend a whole day at such places (other than potentially very large ones like the Trafford Centre with significant leisure facilities), three hours is probably a sweet spot for some shopping and a coffee.

 

[miklcct]

Unlimited unrestricted parking helps.

For trains to work it has to go where people wants to go with minimal inconvenience.

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

 

[Ken H]

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

Are there any out of town shopping centres with an adjoining train station? Meadowhall? How many come by train or tram, compared to those coming by car?

 

[ar10642]

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

It's not a small subset, the vast majority of households have access to car outside London. In fact, life is incredibly difficult without one in a lot of cases.

Personally I can't stand the places, but they are popular for a reason.

 

[Dr Hoo]

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

Could you clarify what you mean here. A substantial majority of the population have 'access to a car' even if they don't personally own one. E.g. parents' car or children's car, car share scheme, taxi or minicab. Plenty of people who shop locally (i.e. walking distance) for everyday items or rely on supermarket deliveries will happily make an occasional special arrangement to visit a retail outlet like B&Q to get something like DIY materials or visit a garden centre.

Even if a retail outlet is next to a railway (or tram, metro or bus) station this isn't very helpful when you want to carry a flat-pack wardrobe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not a small subset, the vast majority of households have access to car outside London. In fact, life is incredibly difficult without one in a lot of cases.

Personally I can't stand the places, but they are popular for a reason.

It is an interesting dilemma that:
1. Town centres have suffered from the lack of, and price of, parking
2. Public transport works well if things are centred on the town centre
but
3. You'll only get things moving back to town centres (outside large cities) if driving and parking there is easier
4. That ease of driving damages the viability of public transport

I think the only way you'd sort that is to put the free/cheap parking back in, get stuff moving back then create excellent quality public transport networks, and once they exist start creeping the prices back up.

 

[ar10642]

It is an interesting dilemma that:
1. Town centres have suffered from the lack of, and price of, parking
2. Public transport works well if things are centred on the town centre
but
3. You'll only get things moving back to town centres (outside large cities) if driving and parking there is easier
4. That ease of driving damages the viability of public transport

I think the only way you'd sort that is to put the free/cheap parking back in, get stuff moving back then create excellent quality public transport networks, and once they exist start creeping the prices back up.

Not sure how you'd solve that without making public transport even cheaper than driving (it's currently miles off for me) or free. Free coffee if you take the bus or something?

 

[HSTEd]

Not sure how you'd solve that without making public transport even cheaper than driving

Ultimately, given the relatively high population density in the UK, and especially in England (and even more so if you knock out the tops of Scafell Pike et al), you probably could afford [in a fraction of industrial output sense] massive subsidies for a saturation public transport system.

But without such a system, public transport can't achieve the economies of scale to be economically reasonable.

 

[stuu]

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

78% of households have a car. The enormous majority of people with disposable income have a car, except in the biggest cities

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ultimately, given the relatively high population density in the UK, and especially in England (and even more so if you knock out the tops of Scafell Pike et al), you probably could afford [in a fraction of industrial output sense] massive subsidies for a saturation public transport system.

But without such a system, public transport can't achieve the economies of scale to be economically reasonable.

One of the biggest problems is that it's not just subsidy of public transport, it's also loss of income (profit, basically) from fuel taxation and parking charging.

The country really needs to wean itself off that and instead regulate car use in places where it causes harm. EVs would be an ideal opportunity.

 

[Ken H]

Ultimately, given the relatively high population density in the UK, and especially in England (and even more so if you knock out the tops of Scafell Pike et al), you probably could afford [in a fraction of industrial output sense] massive subsidies for a saturation public transport system.

But without such a system, public transport can't achieve the economies of scale to be economically reasonable.

maybe in built up areas. but there are huge areas of England that are sparse. get the bus from Keighley to Todmorden and tell me you could fill a bus every 10 minutes. And thats in a metropolitan county.

 

[matacaster]

But they make money, which is something rail operators could perhaps try to do

The railways would do well to look at how supermarkets took on and largely wiped out expensive

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

That is true. However, in general, car owners tend to have higher incomes than people without cars and are more likely to spend more too.

It is an interesting dilemma that:
1. Town centres have suffered from the lack of, and price of, parking
2. Public transport works well if things are centred on the town centre
but
3. You'll only get things moving back to town centres (outside large cities) if driving and parking there is easier
4. That ease of driving damages the viability of public transport

I think the only way you'd sort that is to put the free/cheap parking back in, get stuff moving back then create excellent quality public transport networks, and once they exist start creeping the prices back up.

+ the punitive business rates and often ramshackle nature of town centres. Small to medium sized town centre shops are better suited to niche situations, but they can't hold the variety of stock and cheap prices offered by amazon, eBay etc. Discouraging non-car owners by locating out of town was probably part of business planning.

 

[yorksrob]

78% of households have a car. The enormous majority of people with disposable income have a car, except in the biggest cities

Do all members of those households have equal access to the car ? Some members might really on public transport.

 

[InOban]

78% of households have a car. The enormous majority of people with disposable income have a car, except in the biggest cities

But when one member of the household is using the car, the others have no access.

 

[ar10642]

Do all members of those households have equal access to the car ? Some members might really on public transport.

In my experience these people will get taken there in a car by someone when they need to go. There is usually some sort of bus service to these places anyway.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I'm pretty sure the pay toilet / standing / single pilot stories were publicity stunts, eagerly lapped up by moronic tabloid journalists, which was the intent.

That was exactly my understanding too. FAKE NEWS

I'm interested in this. Could you please give me a source? Thank you.

This Boy Band Singer Fainted After Wearing All His Clothes On A Plane To Avoid Excess Baggage Fees

We’ve all considered doing this, tbh.

www.buzzfeednews.com

Singer has fit on plane after wearing 12 layers to avoid luggage fee

James McElvar (pictured), a singer with Glasgow five-piece Rewind, thought he was having a heart attack when he passed out at 37,000 feet after choosing to put on all of his clothes - in total, 12 layers.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Peter Sarf]

I'm on a delayed TPE at the moment. The guard has been great regular announcements and has been through the train in person to check in with everyone and discuss onward travel for missed connections.

Then the PA chimed in to tell us that "you maybe able to claim delay repay if you've been delayed 30 minutes or more" which is just flatly incorrect.

On the same train. An example of good customer service and then an example of bad.

It isn't just awkward enthusiasts, nor is it a majority of staff, it's a just a low level of constantly missing the small things that slowly add up to what seems like a pervasive issue of poor customer service.

I'm not sure it's sensible to pretend that if only the enthusiasts stopped whinging everything would be fine and there's no problem with customer service.

Thing to watch is bad performance is always going to outweigh several cases of good performance. It is important to identify and recognise the positive.

You do have to wonder why so many people who “dislike” the railways, spend half their time on a railway forum, dreaming up reasons for its impending demise.

I think it is highly likely that the vast majority of people who hate the railways never consider going on a forum.

Passenger stats https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisatio...ml?initialWidth=648&childId=pym_5a6d0281ee262

Freight stats
"In 2017, 5% of all freight lifted in Great Britain was on rail (76.4 million tonnes). The proportion of freight lifted on the rail network was the same as it was in 2016. Freight lifted by road (HGV) was 89% and 6% was taken by water."

Crickey - water carries more freight that rail. Presumably that is some bulk commodity like aggregates. I note it is dwarfed by road.

The railway does deliver poor service on occasions, no doubt, which industry doesn’t? However, would you say the service is worse than air, bus, ferry services? Because I’m not sure it is.

For me it is the poor and incorrect information tat ruins tings. Getting told your train is cancelled just after an alternative has left is infuriating.

Can you provide a link to the stats regarding pumping money into roads or electrifying road freight? Compared to how much investment in rail for what? It’s a fairly spurious argument.

I don’t know about the motivation for every poster but I don’t work in rail. I do not want to railway to be rundown, quite the opposite, I would love it to grow and to become the silver bullet of transport.

I do however want them to be run efficiently with an eye to cost effectiveness so the ticket cost and subsidy are money well spent or invested.

Why is it improper for members of the public to have an opinion on the costs of operating a public service and the treatment of public workers?

It seems from all that is being posted on these forums that the industry needs massive upheaval and improvements/modernisation of working practices. That isn’t the same as wanting massive closures, people not to get a reasonable pay-rise or mass compulsory redundancies.

Like it or not passengers and tax payers are stakeholders in the railways and are entitled to an opinion.

In my opinion….

True.

I'm not sure that "we're no worse than other services well known for often being poor" is a strong defence of railway customer service. All of them should be doing better not just shrugging and going "well they're as bad as us".

Yes. No good hiding behind excuses like that.

Wasn’t it precisely those attitudes from numerous trade unions that made Mrs Thatcher’s reforms so popular?

I am afraid so. To me it appears the unions gave them selves a bad reputation fighting the inevitable.

Indeed - Ryanair is hardly the bar to aim for!

Which is why it is so disappointing that rather than improving customer service, all passengers have received over the last 2 years is vicious timetable cuts, stock sent off-lease leading to overcrowding, unreliability due to insufficient traincrew, fare rises, and worsening terms and conditions. And now the prospect of a summer full of strikes.

And that is on top of all the other issues the railway had pre-Covid.

You have to wonder how much higher passenger numbers would be if even just a few of these issues were addressed.

I do not hate Ryanair but I know what I am getting. Ryanair are more tempting than a lot of the railways offering which are frankly unbelievably expensive.

I spent 25 years as a Union rep, supporting members through multiple disputes with breaks, coming back one last time when bad management returned.

What I learnt is that 50% of the problem is management and 50% is the staff and that sensible balanced negotiations are essential. You have to understand the position management were in and work with them for the best possible outcome. Learn what the staff really wanted and what mattered to them, then create a route of balance that had the best outcome for both members and the business, but not what the management always wanted.

My last stint was with some appalling management and it was a battle both sides lost. You cannot win them all.

In my IT life I was lucky as most managers were enlightened and respectful. But in the various factories I worked in I encountered managers and staff who would have been sacked for their behaviour if it was and office. I think the railways are nearer to the factory style perhaps.

Yes I'd broadly agree with that. Taken in the round (see a point I'll make in a moment).

I would tend to agree my interaction with staff on the ground tends to be neutral at worst but usually very positive. That's probably because most staff don't exactly go to work with the thought of "how can a ruin someone's day today?" in mind, quite probably the opposite in fact!

Though I suspect I probably also benefit often, when things have gone wrong, from being the person who approaches saying "I don't suppose you can help me out with x because I know this isn't your fault but it'd really help me if you did" rather than huffing and puffing at them and moaning and blaming them for what's gone wrong. I contacted LNER on twitter not so long ago about an issue and the twitter bod apologised for the delay and when I joked back that unless they'd personally gone out there and sabotaged the railway they had no need to apologise they responded back saying "thank you so much it's felt like everyone is blaming me for everything today". I rather suspect I could have asked for a lot then and gotten. You catch more fly with honey etc etc.

Anyway! Staff in the ground. Usually fine, often excellent. Bad apples the exception.

But that's not all there is to customer service is there? I find the industry usually falls completely flat on face in the pre and post travel area.

Contacting a TOCs customer services is often nightmarish. It can take an eon to get a response. The responses are often wrong or incomplete. They'll dig in and fight over peanuts. They entire experience from start to finish is just woeful. I deal with the Department for Work and Pensions for a living and regularly the railway matches them for incompetence, intransigence and general awfulness.

Delay Repay is often terrible with valid claims rejected and buggy claim forms making anything but the most simple claims (i.e. one ticket, for one train, on one TOC) being tricky. Claims are rejected often very little or indeed no information is provided for you to work out why.

That whole side is woeful. And gives, in my view, a terrible impression.

That's quite apart from the stuff where it shoots itself in the foot. Like TOC Only tickets which cannot be excessed so a whole new ticket must be bought. Yes the customer should make sure they get the right train. But it's a lot easier to sell "I'm sorry sir but this ticket is only valid on X Trains not Z Trains, I'll have to excess you to the right fare. That'll be £1 please" than "This ticket it worthless, you'll have to buy a new one costing £20 and yes you can ask for a refund of the other but there'll be a £10 admin fee".

Woeful.

To me those are less customer service and more the hard product itself. And I think the generation of trains we have our poorly equipped to compete on quality which I think is what we're going to need to do in this brave new world.

Absolutely. It was quite clear for quite a while before Covid that the DfT/Treasury and the industry were operating on the basis that they didn't need to have a quality service and product because people would travel and buy seasons costing £x,000pa anyway. Or they'd travel and pay exorbitant walk-up or advance fares. I think thats a much tougher sell now. Not impossible, numbers are thankfully rebounding despite everything, but harder.

Seems we agree!

I agree, I have found dealing with staff (well any people) kindly can get me further. Being confrontational means, in my book, one has already lost and just wants to upset the person one is dealing with.

I think attempts to imitate Ryanair's staff policy would result in a full-blown nationwide strike - not just on specific days like the upcoming one.

Well then an alternative carrier to the railways will come along - if you get my jist.

But the majority of the criticism is not constructive though, it's bashing the staff and not understanding how the industry actually works.
There's many problems in the industry that there's easy solutions too, but nobody consults the staff or even listens to them.

A problem for the railways is that many decision makers (I am looking at you DfT) know nothing about railway operation. BUT that does not mean those on the coal face can get self righteous. There is a need to cultivate an atmosphere of understanding and that works both ways. A 150 year old industry has to be prepared to adapt or die.

The right way to counter anything in a forum you disagree with is to use facts and argue rationally. Suggesting people should not post in a forum is not the right way.

Here here. Freedom of speech.

Most criticism I read on this thread is about the system, operating practises and design. It's outdated.

Most comments about staff are positive. I have met very few rude railway people

I agree - and rude people are not just rail staff (see below).

GWR gate line staff at Paddington have the same reputation, I find them unhelpful but tbh they must be incredibly busy and probably not the people anyone should ask questions of other than for operation of their tickets in the gates.

That reminds me. I was at Paddington watching the 345s from the barrier line and noticed a member of gateline staff running after passengers heading for an obviously out of service train. Generally being helpful. After about 90 minutes I saw a passenger going berserk at him - I do not know why. Assuming the staff member was in the wrong I put that at 1% of the time. But not really likely they were in the wrong - quite likely the passenger did not have a valid ticket or had barrier trouble.

I can remember in the bad old days of my commuting the guy who ran the station (one staff member) was sometimes in a bad mood. Once I asked him why - he looked at me and poured out the ****e he had got earlier. From then on I made a point of reminding him if he looked like he needed a reset. He appreciated it and would go to the trouble of telling us to get on a preceding train if he felt ours was cancelled (usually a correct guess). This was usually made official AFTER our alternative had just left - something the railway really needs to avoid is bad/missing information.

Treat people like dirt and they will eventually behave like dirt.

My take on the railways is convenience, I drive to most places because there is either no lines or its too awkward to travel to, I tend to use it more to travel to city centres so I don't have to drive into a city and find a parking space, when it's just me not a problem, when it's a family of four it can be more cost effective to drive in and park up for cost effective price per head vs 4 x train fares.

Retail park are popular for that reason.

Similarly central London is basically inaccessible to car owners to herd to drive and not enough parking.

Same with buses. but where buses go to out of town shopping, even they struggle. If you have a weeks shopping from the supermarket or a new kitchen sink from B&Q you dont want to go home on the bus or train.

The weeks shopping is because we no longer buy fresh what we need for a few days. An example of market change and other market changes are what the railways need to adapt to.

Usually that's the case, but not always. Some "out of town" trading estates / retail parks will have, maybe, a "maximum three hours" free parking restriction, and if the site is anywhere near to a sports stadium or similar, this time period may sometimes be further reduced or restricted on a match day or event day.

My nearest Tescos superstore has a limit like that. There it is to discourage the out of London commuters driving to Zone 6 (Purley Station).

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

No this is incorrect - it is not a small subset in the UK that own cars. I recall that in Hong Kong, from what I recall seeing in Kowloon, there is very low car ownership. I seem to recall you have lived in Hong Kong ?.

It is an interesting dilemma that:
1. Town centres have suffered from the lack of, and price of, parking
2. Public transport works well if things are centred on the town centre
but
3. You'll only get things moving back to town centres (outside large cities) if driving and parking there is easier
4. That ease of driving damages the viability of public transport

I think the only way you'd sort that is to put the free/cheap parking back in, get stuff moving back then create excellent quality public transport networks, and once they exist start creeping the prices back up.

Largely true. Town centres have taxed shops and charged parking to death.

OK The two London Westfields at Shepherds Bush and Strratford could actually be benefiting the railways and I ave seen quite a lot of passengers alighting and boarding at Shepherds Bush.

78% of households have a car. The enormous majority of people with disposable income have a car, except in the biggest cities

That is my belief.

Do all members of those households have equal access to the car ? Some members might really on public transport.

They rely on dad to give them a lift !. The Missus says I am selfish because I decline to give the "service" but I am avoiding making two return trips for what I would walk as one return trip.

 

[miklcct]

Similarly central London is basically inaccessible to car owners to herd to drive and not enough parking.

The weeks shopping is because we no longer buy fresh what we need for a few days. An example of market change and other market changes are what the railways need to adapt to.

My nearest Tescos superstore has a limit like that. There it is to discourage the out of London commuters driving to Zone 6 (Purley Station).

No this is incorrect - it is not a small subset in the UK that own cars. I recall that in Hong Kong, from what I recall seeing in Kowloon, there is very low car ownership. I seem to recall you ave lived in Hong Kong ?.

Largely true. Town centres have taxed shops and charged parking to death.

Yes I lived in Hong Kong. Car ownership is low because parking is unaffordable in general except in rural villages. Also the fuel cost plus tunnel cost is generally more expensive than bus fare as well.

Town centre is by definition where the market is. Therefore it's where everyone wants to go so buses operate there. Also as town centre parking is at a premium people won't want to use a car to go there.

 

[AlterEgo]

And these out-of-town retail parks are deliberating limiting themselves to a small subset of potential customers if they are designed only for car access.

You are once again reminded that there are 33 million cars in the UK and the vast majority of people have access to one.