UK Rail Passenger Numbers Discussion

[Ken H]

I'm not sure anything has been confirmed here. In my post I mentioned drivers and maintenance staff. It is absolutely certain that at least one TOC has been prevented from employing sufficient maintenance staff which resulted in severe curtailment of services during the recent RMT overtime ban. It is not only drivers required to run a railway.

The railway has traditionally been run on RDW and overtime and goodwill on the part of the staff. During an industrial dispute goodwill is in short supply and we have all seen the result an overtime ban has had on the railway during the last month.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2023 ==



Indeed. It's cheaper to do that than to employ a full complement of staff.

But we are seeing a shift where people are more interested in doing non work stuff than the overtime money. Especially if overtime kicks you over the threshold of a higher tax rate.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Do explore the side roads which run in parallel to the main roads, you may be surprised, you will find pleasant routes, pocket parks, quiet travel away from noisy vehicles, interesting old buildings to admire as you ride along, A facet of London you may learn to enjoy

I'm not a cyclist but I certainly agree with this. It's always surprised me that so many cyclists in London prefer to place themselves in harm's way and cycle along the busiest roads when, with a little trial-and-error research, they could find far more pleasant alternative routes.

 

[12LDA28C]

But we are seeing a shift where people are more interested in doing non work stuff than the overtime money. Especially if overtime kicks you over the threshold of a higher tax rate.

Indeed, you're just reinforcing my point that companies need to be allowed to employ sufficient staff so that they don't have to rely on overtime and RDW.

 

[Jimini]

I'm not a cyclist but I certainly agree with this. It's always surprised me that so many cyclists in London prefer to place themselves in harm's way and cycle along the busiest roads when, with a little trail-and-error research, they could find far more pleasant alternative routes.

I’m the other way to be honest. Road traffic tends to be a lot more predictable than backstreets with pedestrians randomly wandering out between parked cars etc. 99% of the time when I cycle to work I’ll use the A11 from Stratford into town, rather than plodding around the not so bright lights of Shadwell / Mile End etc., even before they turned it into a Cycle Superhighway a few years back. Same when I lived in Tooting for many a year before that. A3 / A24 all the way!

 

[jayah]

But we are seeing a shift where people are more interested in doing non work stuff than the overtime money. Especially if overtime kicks you over the threshold of a higher tax rate.

So high marginal taxes are a disincentive to economic activity after all!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2023 ==

Indeed, you're just reinforcing my point that companies need to be allowed to employ sufficient staff so that they don't have to rely on overtime and RDW.

The coin has two sides. The timetable can and will be reduced until that condition is met. Nobody is going to be funding thousands of new, well paid jobs providing the same service and the government aren't keen on paying the overtime either.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2023 ==

Of course not. Employing say 80-90% of a full complement of drivers and relying on RDW and overtime to cover the shortfall may be enough to run the timetable but it leaves a TOC exposed if there is any kind of overtime ban or drivers just decide that they don't need/want to work overtime any more, whether officially as part of industrial action or unofficially. Better to employ a full establishment of drivers at every depot surely?

Just the same as NR relying on overtime / RDW to man signalboxes, as we have seen over the last few weeks.

There seems to be violent agreement between government and unions on overtime and not wanting it.

Unfortunately some people are harbouring the somewhat unrealistic view this will result in a huge increase in FTEs funded by the magic money tree.

 

[Goldfish62]

But we are seeing a shift where people are more interested in doing non work stuff than the overtime money. Especially if overtime kicks you over the threshold of a higher tax rate.

You do realise the higher tax rate only applies to any amount over that threshold?

 

[Horizon22]

There seems to be violent agreement between government and unions on overtime and not wanting it.

Unfortunately some people are harbouring the somewhat unrealistic view this will result in a huge increase in FTEs funded by the magic money tree.

Yes this is the problem; the DfT don't want it but also appear to be turning a blind eye to the fact that reducing it significantly will have an associated cost.

 

[Ken H]

You do realise the higher tax rate only applies to any amount over that threshold?

Yes. But it is catching more and more people as the threshold does not rise with inflation.
Because of the way PAYE works the
Marginaal rate of tax on extra income can be quite high if you include NI.

 

[43066]

Indeed, you're just reinforcing my point that companies need to be allowed to employ sufficient staff so that they don't have to rely on overtime and RDW.

There’s zero chance of this happening as nobody will want to pay for the increase in head count. The railway has always run on overtime and will continue to do so - hence the initial proposal to ASLEF which includes a move to committed Sundays (ie enforced overtime) rather than bringing them inside the working week, where that hasn’t already happened.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2023 ==

You do realise the higher tax rate only applies to any amount over that threshold?

A lot of people do seem to misunderstand this!

If your salary is just below the 40% threshold then I can see how overtime is less attractive, however if you’re a few k below or above it will makes little difference to your marginal tax rate.

However there is a need to incentivise overtime eg by paying time and a half, or people will simply conclude the additional take home isn’t worth the leisure time foregone.

 

[Goldfish62]

If your salary is just below the 40% threshold then I can see how overtime is less attractive, however if you’re a few k below or above it will makes little difference to your marginal tax rate.

But....national insurance reduces by 10% so you're only actually paying 10% more in tax for earnings above the threshold.

 

[jayah]

There’s zero chance of this happening as nobody will want to pay for the increase in head count. The railway has always run on overtime and will continue to do so - hence the initial proposal to ASLEF which includes a move to committed Sundays (ie enforced overtime) rather than bringing them inside the working week, where that hasn’t already happened.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2023 ==



A lot of people do seem to misunderstand this!

If your salary is just below the 40% threshold then I can see how overtime is less attractive, however if you’re a few k below or above it will makes little difference to your marginal tax rate.

However there is a need to incentivise overtime eg by paying time and a half, or people will simply conclude the additional take home isn’t worth the leisure time foregone.

The marginal tax rate is the marginal tax rate. A few k below the threshold it is rate 1 and £1 above it is rate 2. The marginal rate doesn't float around between the two.

As seen in very highly remunerated jobs, at £100k it hits a rate 62/71/77% depending on whether there are no/undergrad/undergrad&postgrad student loan repayments. At those sort of levels it really does shut down activity, just as it did in the 1970s, which is why very high marginal rates went out of fashion for some time. If you can't shelter the 'excess' using pensions, the incentive is to stop working just before it bites. In the case of new grads or contractors, many simply prefer to work abroad.

A lot of people seem to misunderstand that the mini-budget debacle was a lesson in unfunded spending, not in the merits of removing punitively high marginal rates of tax.

 

[Watershed]

A lot of people seem to misunderstand that the mini-budget debacle was a lesson in unfunded spending, not in the merits of removing punitively high marginal rates of tax.

I don't think abolishing the additional (45%) rate of tax would have materially changed that. However, the loss of the personal tax allowance above £100k (which, as you say, creates a ludicrous marginal tax rate of at least 62%) is something that would be justifiable.

 

[miklcct]

I've been in London on Tube strike days. It's a nightmare. It took 90 minutes to go five miles by bus. I'd have walked if it wasn't raining. The delay was caused by a combination of traffic gridlock and massively extended stops because people tried to get on an already rammed full bus. The poor driver looked like she was going to give up in despair. After a while she stopped between stops to drop people off which sped things up very slightly.

Five miles (8 km)!!! That's a long way to walk! For me I don't want to walk anything further than 1 km and I will take my cycle out if the destination is further than that. Isn't there a National Rail service which can take you somewhere closer where you can walk / take a bus to the destination?

This is why I will always use a bicycle in preference to a bus where practical. Rain can be dealt with by suitable clothing. Both my commutes to Farringdon this week have coincided with the worst weather of the week across SE England and the 2.4 mile cycle to my local station was fine with jacket and waterproof overtrousers. Admittedly it is less good in the warmer seasons where the choice can be to get wet from the rain or get wet from perspiration.

I once cycled from my home in Cricklewood to Oakleigh Park (10.9 km) in order to catch a train under heavy train, and it was totally miserable which I don't want to do it again.

I'm not a cyclist but I certainly agree with this. It's always surprised me that so many cyclists in London prefer to place themselves in harm's way and cycle along the busiest roads when, with a little trial-and-error research, they could find far more pleasant alternative routes.

My usual commute is now between my home in Cricklewood and the closest Overground station, Brondesbury, where I park my bike and take the train. There route I take is the route A5 where the crow flies. It is very busy but it is the fastest (4 and a half minutes between Cricklewood Broadway and Brondesbury Station) and there isn't a viable alternative.

If I want to go to the mainline stations, e.g. Paddington or Euston, the fastest, shortest and most direct way is, again, on the busy A5. The route I cycle to Euston is A5 then A501, i.e. the busiest roads in Central London, because if I take the quieter roads north of A501 I will need to climb a hill.

 

[Bikeman78]

Five miles (8 km)!!! That's a long way to walk! For me I don't want to walk anything further than 1 km and I will take my cycle out if the destination is further than that. Isn't there a National Rail service which can take you somewhere closer where you can walk / take a bus to the destination?

To be honest, I wouldn't think twice about walking five miles in fine weather. I couldn't think of a better option from Liverpool Street to Paddington than the 205 bus, given that the tube was not running.

 

[al78]

I'm not a cyclist but I certainly agree with this. It's always surprised me that so many cyclists in London prefer to place themselves in harm's way and cycle along the busiest roads when, with a little trial-and-error research, they could find far more pleasant alternative routes.

Cycling from Victoria to Euston stations or Victoria to UCL is very difficult without using some busy roads.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2023 ==

I once cycled from my home in Cricklewood to Oakleigh Park (10.9 km) in order to catch a train under heavy train, and it was totally miserable which I don't want to do it again.

I would be miserable if I was under a heavy train as well.

I agree cycling in the rain isn't a barrel of laughs but it is fine for modest distances with waterproofs. I cycled a 19 mile round trip to work every working day 10 years ago including through the wettest winter on record. I got used to it, back then I wore lycra trousers which absorb very little rainwater so are comfortable to wear when cycling in the rain. I find it worse to cycle in winter conditions than in rain, that is why I have winter tyres on my mountain bike for when there is the risk of ice on the roads.

 

[absolutelymilk]

My usual commute is now between my home in Cricklewood and the closest Overground station, Brondesbury, where I park my bike and take the train. There route I take is the route A5 where the crow flies. It is very busy but it is the fastest (4 and a half minutes between Cricklewood Broadway and Brondesbury Station) and there isn't a viable alternative.

You could go down Fordwych Road for a large chunk of that route and skip the traffic and lights!

 

[miklcct]

I couldn't think of a better option from Liverpool Street to Paddington than the 205 bus, given that the tube was not running.

The better option is Elizabeth line, doesn't it work?

 

[12LDA28C]

The coin has two sides. The timetable can and will be reduced until that condition is met. Nobody is going to be funding thousands of new, well paid jobs providing the same service and the government aren't keen on paying the overtime either.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2023 ==

Again, you're putting words in my mouth.

Chiltern Railways were unable to run ANY service north of Banbury during the RMT overtime ban due to insufficient maintenance staff being at work. You're not seriously suggesting that kind of service reduction becomes a permanent feature of the railways because it's cheaper not to employ sufficient staff to run even the most basic of services? I'm sure a few MPs who have constituencies along the northern section on the Chiltern Mainline might have something to say about that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2023 ==

There’s zero chance of this happening as nobody will want to pay for the increase in head count. The railway has always run on overtime and will continue to do so - hence the initial proposal to ASLEF which includes a move to committed Sundays (ie enforced overtime) rather than bringing them inside the working week, where that hasn’t already happened.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2023 ==

See above. I'm not just talking about drivers.

 

[jayah]

I don't think abolishing the additional (45%) rate of tax would have materially changed that. However, the loss of the personal tax allowance above £100k (which, as you say, creates a ludicrous marginal tax rate of at least 62%) is something that would be justifiable.

When it was reduced from 50% to 45% there was no change in the tax taken, meaning there was a lot more economic activity happening as a result.

45% is not competitive with high growth economies, once you look outside the other low growth parts of Europe. Nor is Corporation Tax rising to double that in Ireland.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2023 ==

Again, you're putting words in my mouth.

Chiltern Railways were unable to run ANY service north of Banbury during the RMT overtime ban due to insufficient maintenance staff being at work. You're not seriously suggesting that kind of service reduction becomes a permanent feature of the railways because it's cheaper not to employ sufficient staff to run even the most basic of services? I'm sure a few MPs who have constituencies along the northern section on the Chiltern Mainline might have something to say about that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2023 ==



See above. I'm not just talking about drivers.

The service will be shrunk rather than the headcount increased. In the public sector, customers are a very long way down the priorities.

That is not to say it will happen in exactly the same way as the chaotic and unplanned changes during the overtime ban.

It is pretty inevitable there are serious reductions coming. The railway is not financially sustainable, there are big savings to be made. Following the mini budget, the magic money has been roped off.

Efficiencies like ticket retailing, DOO and getting more of the current voluntary overtime, which often starts at 35hrs, into the contract are essential to lessen the pain.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2023 ==

Yes this is the problem; the DfT don't want it but also appear to be turning a blind eye to the fact that reducing it significantly will have an associated cost.

You may be in danger of assuming that cutting overtime means increasing headcount?

It won't - services will be cut instead until the timetable fits into the smaller envelope.

 

[43066]

It is pretty inevitable there are serious reductions coming. The railway is not financially sustainable, there are big savings to be made. Following the mini budget, the magic money has been roped off.

Efficiencies like ticket retailing, DOO and getting more of the current voluntary overtime, which often starts at 35hrs, into the contract are essential to lessen the pain.

It won't - services will be cut instead until the timetable fits into the smaller envelope.

Can I ask, is any of this based on actual knowledge, or are you just telling us what you want to happen?

 

[ar10642]

Can I ask, is any of this based on actual knowledge, or are you just telling us what you want to happen?

I don't think many on here *want* it to happen, but it feels like the way it's going doesn't it?

Hopefully we'll be proved wrong and we get a useable railway again.

 

[Trainbike46]

I don't think many on here *want* it to happen, but it feels like the way it's going doesn't it?

Hopefully we'll be proved wrong and we get a useable railway again.

Based on previous comments, the person being reacted to by @43066 does seem to want something along those lines to happen

Though I am fully with you regarding hoping that it doesn't

 

[The Ham]

Following the landslip in Hampshire (Hook), clearly the "best" thing to do would be not to reinstate it as it would save the cost of the repair as well as reducing (quite significantly) the number of trains running.

As clearly cutting costs is the only thing that we should consider.

(Clearly this isn't my view, but is an extension of the cuts without looking at the impact view that some have).

 

[Bald Rick]

Following the landslip in Hampshire (Hook), clearly the "best" thing to do would be not to reinstate it as it would save the cost of the repair as well as reducing (quite significantly) the number of trains running.

As clearly cutting costs is the only thing that we should consider.

(Clearly this isn't my view, but is an extension of the cuts without looking at the impact view that some have).

well Basingstoke to London is one if the few parts of the network that pays its way (even now), so that would be a bit silly. If it happened at How Wood rather than Hook, it would be a different conversation!

 

[Horizon22]

You may be in danger of assuming that cutting overtime means increasing headcount?

It won't - services will be cut instead until the timetable fits into the smaller envelope.

The service continues to run on overtime even with reduced timetables. However, I was more referring to Sunday which if you wanted to stop being run on overtime - something the unions are on board with too - there would be an immediate cost in terms of adding that Sunday pay into the base salary to some extent but you would also need more diagrams to cover the work.

The timetable isn’t even so you can’t just cut to fit everything in as you would like.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The service will be shrunk rather than the headcount increased. In the public sector, customers are a very long way down the priorities.

That is not to say it will happen in exactly the same way as the chaotic and unplanned changes during the overtime ban.

It is pretty inevitable there are serious reductions coming. The railway is not financially sustainable, there are big savings to be made. Following the mini budget, the magic money has been roped off.

The magic money tree is very much alive and kicking with the govt currently needing to borrow 305B next year its what they chose to spend it on is whats driving these challenges to operators at the moment to reduce costs. Removing duplication of services across operators makes a lot of sense but until the DfT puts the operators back on a commercial footing. My take is Harper/Merriman will attempt to return some operators back into this space as this will provide a better outcome for the taxpayer and passenger rather than DfT micro managing.

 

[43066]

The magic money tree is very much alive and kicking with the govt currently needing to borrow 305B next year its what they chose to spend it on is whats driving these challenges to operators at the moment to reduce costs. Removing duplication of services across operators makes a lot of sense but until the DfT puts the operators back on a commercial footing.

Funny isn’t it. I see Mr. Sunak was able to use a private jet, at taxpayers’ expense, to travel between London and Leeds the other day. But “there’s no money”.

My take is Harper/Merriman will attempt to return some operators back into this space as this will provide a better outcome for the taxpayer and passenger rather than DfT micro managing.

I agree. The government’s approach to the railway over the last couple of years has been a little like China’s zero Covid strategy: incompetently conceived, doomed to failure from the start, and an ongoing disaster which now needs to be reversed in the way that shifts blame away from/causes least embarrassment to those who implemented it…

 

[Facing Back]

Funny isn’t it. I see Mr. Sunak was able to use a private jet, at taxpayers’ expense, to travel between London and Leeds the other day. But “there’s no money”.

He was probably concerned the service he needed would be cancelled

 

[Bantamzen]

Funny isn’t it. I see Mr. Sunak was able to use a private jet, at taxpayers’ expense, to travel between London and Leeds the other day. But “there’s no money”.



I agree. The government’s approach to the railway over the last couple of years has been a little like China’s zero Covid strategy: incompetently conceived, doomed to failure from the start, and an ongoing disaster which now needs to be reversed in the way that shifts blame away from/causes least embarrassment to those who implemented it…

He was probably concerned the service he needed would be cancelled

Not forgetting the cost of some LNER flexible fares....

 

[Snow1964]

Yes. But it is catching more and more people as the threshold does not rise with inflation.
Because of the way PAYE works the
Marginaal rate of tax on extra income can be quite high if you include NI.

Marginal PAYE rate is especially high between £50,000 and £60,000 if you have children, due to the child benefit taper. including NI is something like 53% for first child and extra 9% per subsequent child (from memory). So only take home less than half you earn.

However most people can avoid these high marginal rates by paying additional pension contributions to bring taxable income below 50%. If going to lose big chunk in tax, then all that is effectively a free pension contribution and better to be in your pension pot than 'donated' to the Treasury.