Future of Ticket Office Consultations launched

[Railwaycat]

This whole smartphone thing is rapidly getting out of hand. Why should people be forced to have one to go about their daily lives? They cost money up front, they cost money to use. A lot of people find them a pain in the neck to use - me for one. My wife and brother and sister in law don't have one and don't want one. People have fought to keep cash, and yet this is creeping up on us.
And most of all, in today's dangerous world (criminally as well as internationally) who's to know how secure your networks and phones will be tomorrow.

 

[Bantamzen]

This whole smartphone thing is rapidly getting out of hand. Why should people be forced to have one to go about their daily lives? They cost money up front, they cost money to use. A lot of people find them a pain in the neck to use - me for one. My wife and brother and sister in law don't have one and don't want one. People have fought to keep cash, and yet this is creeping up on us.
And most of all, in today's dangerous world (criminally as well as internationally) who's to know how secure your networks and phones will be tomorrow.

In the context of this thread, there is no-one being forced to using smartphones, other options exist such as buying online & printing e-tickets, using TVMs, or seeking staff assistance where ticket offices have closed (albeit I accept that this may vary from station to station if implemented). However the reality is more and more people are using smartphones, and is rapidly becoming the most popular method for buying tickets, hence the emphasis put on making these the primary method.

As for security, well who here pays their bills, buys big ticket items, cars or even homes by cash? For the most part all of these transactions are done electronically, and the risks for these are practically no different to using other electronic means such as mobile apps. There are many simple, and secure ways to protect users of mobile payment methods, and most banks have back-up methods to check that online transactions are properly authorised. And flipping it around, what's to stop a criminal brushing past and swiping a wallet from someone queuing to pay cash at a ticket office? Swings and roundabouts.

 

[Hadders]

This whole smartphone thing is rapidly getting out of hand. Why should people be forced to have one to go about their daily lives? They cost money up front, they cost money to use. A lot of people find them a pain in the neck to use - me for one. My wife and brother and sister in law don't have one and don't want one. People have fought to keep cash, and yet this is creeping up on us.
And most of all, in today's dangerous world (criminally as well as internationally) who's to know how secure your networks and phones will be tomorrow.

You are not required to possess a smartphone to travel by train. Tickets will still be available to purchase at stations although in the future you will need to use a ticket machine rather than a ticket office in most situations. Staff should be on hand to help anyone needing assistance to use the machine.

Many people do find smartphones a quick and convenient way for everyday transactions, which is why they have become hugely popular.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This whole smartphone thing is rapidly getting out of hand. Why should people be forced to have one to go about their daily lives? They cost money up front, they cost money to use. A lot of people find them a pain in the neck to use - me for one. My wife and brother and sister in law don't have one and don't want one. People have fought to keep cash, and yet this is creeping up on us.

The vast, vast majority of people choose to use smartphones and like using them. This figure will only increase. You are in a very small minority now and it's getting smaller all the time. I have recently made train journeys in which every single passenger in my coach presented a smartphone when the ticket inspection took place. 100% of them.

If people have already chosen to have smartphones, making use of those to let them buy their tickets etc is a simple and obvious step, and a "win win" - the TOC needs to pay for fewer booking offices, TVMs and rolls of tickets, and the customer doesn't have to queue to make their purchase.

When the number of people wanting the alternatives gets very small, it becomes very, very expensive to provide them in proportion to their use, and so they tend to go away or reduce in number, or different alternatives come in like the idea of convenience stores selling e-tickets. Or in this case you lose the ability to use the booking office, but can still use a TVM.

 

[Horizon22]

This whole smartphone thing is rapidly getting out of hand. Why should people be forced to have one to go about their daily lives? They cost money up front, they cost money to use. A lot of people find them a pain in the neck to use - me for one. My wife and brother and sister in law don't have one and don't want one. People have fought to keep cash, and yet this is creeping up on us.
And most of all, in today's dangerous world (criminally as well as internationally) who's to know how secure your networks and phones will be tomorrow.

Who has said that? There's multiple other ways to get tickets if you wish.

There are some very simple "smart" phones out there but to be honest almost anything with an internet connection with some apps on it made in the last 10 years will be a "smartphone". The vast, vast majority of people have one (~95% and practically everyone under 50). You are in the very small minority, and you would have to accept that. This doesn't apply just to ticketing but a whole host of stuff you can do, most of which isn't done in cash these days.

 

[Railwaycat]

Who has said that? There's multiple other ways to get tickets if you wish.

There are some very simple "smart" phones out there but to be honest almost anything with an internet connection with some apps on it made in the last 10 years will be a "smartphone". The vast, vast majority of people have one (~95% and practically everyone under 50). You are in the very small minority, and you would have to accept that. This doesn't apply just to ticketing but a whole host of stuff you can do, most of which isn't done in cash these days.

There's multiple other ways at the moment. Which is what this whole issue is about - keeping choice and accessibility for all. We are rapidly losing that in society.

 

[Bread & cheese]

This whole smartphone thing is rapidly getting out of hand. Why should people be forced to have one to go about their daily lives? They cost money up front, they cost money to use. A lot of people find them a pain in the neck to use - me for one. My wife and brother and sister in law don't have one and don't want one. People have fought to keep cash, and yet this is creeping up on us.
And most of all, in today's dangerous world (criminally as well as internationally) who's to know how secure your networks and phones will be tomorrow.

This is not necessarily helpful, but I wanted to point out that there is an alternative to a smartphone.
I don't have a smartphone, but I do have an iPad mini (Wi-Fi only model). Admittedly this did cost money up front, but (to answer some of your objections to smartphones) it costs nothing to run, and is easy to use. It is portable, and will let you use as many journey planning and ticketing apps as you like.
It's also very handy for all manner of other uses.

 

[HSTEd]

My smartphone costs very little to run beyond battery power, given that I am still on pay as you go.

I got my Blackview smartphone for about £80 new, although its probably full of Chinese Intelligence backdoors! It is very nice though.

 

[12LDA28C]

The vast, vast majority of people choose to use smartphones and like using them. This figure will only increase. You are in a very small minority now and it's getting smaller all the time. I have recently made train journeys in which every single passenger in my coach presented a smartphone when the ticket inspection took place. 100% of them.

If people have already chosen to have smartphones, making use of those to let them buy their tickets etc is a simple and obvious step, and a "win win" - the TOC needs to pay for fewer booking offices, TVMs and rolls of tickets, and the customer doesn't have to queue to make their purchase.

When the number of people wanting the alternatives gets very small, it becomes very, very expensive to provide them in proportion to their use, and so they tend to go away or reduce in number, or different alternatives come in like the idea of convenience stores selling e-tickets. Or in this case you lose the ability to use the booking office, but can still use a TVM.

Where has it been proposed that TVMs are also being withdrawn? And how much exactly is 'very, very expensive' when the same staff are (allegedly) merely being brought out from the ticket office onto concourses and platforms, or do you predict a reduction in staff numbers?

Anyone in favour of this proposal is clearly just in support of de-staffing stations, pure and simple and I'd be interested to understand why anyone would consider this a good thing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where has it been proposed that TVMs are also being withdrawn? And how much exactly is 'very, very expensive' when the same staff are (allegedly) merely being brought out from the ticket office onto concourses and platforms, or do you predict a reduction in staff numbers?

It has been confirmed in documentation posted upthread that there will be a considerable reduction in staffing numbers.

The numbers of TVMs are being reduced as fewer people use them, yes, that's just happening quietly. Stations aren't being left without them though. But people are overridingly switching to e-tickets, as they are the most convenient solution for most users.

Anyone in favour of this proposal is clearly just in support of de-staffing stations, pure and simple and I'd be interested to understand why anyone would consider this a good thing.

I am in favour of reductions in station staffing, because there are better things the money can be spent on, and money is finite (and as both a farepayer and a taxpayer I don't want that money being spent unnecessarily). So yes. Minor stations don't need to be staffed, they aren't in Germany, Switzerland or the Netherlands, for example.

Rather than redundancies my inclination would be to do it as a slow process involving a complete recruitment freeze into those roles and staff being withdrawn/redeployed as they leave or retire, though. And where stations being destaffed would have an accessibility implication, e.g. on DOO routes, thought needs to be given to other options, e.g. adding a second member of on board crew like a Southern OBS to deal with putting the ramp down. (As there are more stations than diagrams this will likely be cheaper than staffing the stations), and long overdue lift installations at places like Ulverston where staff need to supervise barrow crossing use.

 

[12LDA28C]

I am in favour of reductions in station staffing, because there are better things the money can be spent on, and money is finite (and as both a farepayer and a taxpayer I don't want that money being spent unnecessarily). So yes. Minor stations don't need to be staffed, they aren't in Germany, Switzerland or the Netherlands, for example.

Rather than redundancies my inclination would be to do it as a slow process involving a complete recruitment freeze into those roles and staff being withdrawn/redeployed as they leave or retire, though. And where stations being destaffed would have an accessibility implication, e.g. on DOO routes, thought needs to be given to other options, e.g. adding a second member of on board crew like a Southern OBS to deal with putting the ramp down. (As there are more stations than diagrams this will likely be cheaper than staffing the stations), and long overdue lift installations at places like Ulverston where staff need to supervise barrow crossing use.

Reduction in staff can only mean a worse service provided for passengers, increase in antisocial behaviour and if not worse passenger safety then at least perceived passenger safety. Wonderful.

 

[Railwaycat]

Reduction is staff can only mean a worse service provided for passengers, increase in antisocial behaviour and if not passenger safety then at least perceived passenger safety. Wonderful.

Well said.

It sickens me how all to many on here can't or don't want to see that. We will lose our comfortable heated waiting room and toilet facilities at Alfreton when the booking office closes - how can that be good for anyone?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It sickens me how all to many on here can't or don't want to see that. We will lose our comfortable heated waiting room and toilet facilities at Alfreton when the booking office closes - how can that be good for anyone?

Bletchley's heated entrance/waiting area is open 24/7 regardless of staff presence (though the toilets aren't, they are left open during the day again regardless of staff presence in the booking office). Plenty of public toilets outside of the railway are open and unstaffed. Thus there is no reason why either of these things need to be the case other than rampant conservatism (or specific antisocial behaviour issues at specific stations, perhaps best dealt with by cheaper security guards).

 

[lrailadventure]

I am in favour of reductions in station staffing, because there are better things the money can be spent on, and money is finite (and as both a farepayer and a taxpayer I don't want that money being spent unnecessarily). So yes. Minor stations don't need to be staffed, they aren't in Germany, Switzerland or the Netherlands, for example.

It's not just minor stations that are losing their staff in this proposal though.. Stations like Bristol Temple Meads, Slough , Blackpool North, Burnley Manchester Road, Leeds, Manchester Oxford Road and even the like of Paddington are facing reductions in the hours of staffing (in some cases minor reductions, in other cases major reductions).

Imagine you were blind (or visually impaired), or you had learning disabilities or another disability that prevented you from travelling on the railway like a "regular" passenger. How do you purchase a ticket on a very inaccessible TVM, and then find your way to the platform safely, and then get on the correct train (remembering that audible announcements at stations are not always audible, or working, or correct) outside of the staffed hours? How would you find a member of staff after they've been pulled out of the fixed location of a ticket office and been told to wander around the station?

For a lot of people, and not just those with disabilities, a fixed location to find a member of staff is significantly more useful than a member of staff that could be anywhere..

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not just minor stations that are losing their staff in this proposal though.. Stations like Bristol Temple Meads, Slough , Blackpool North, Burnley Manchester Road, Leeds, Manchester Oxford Road and even the like of Paddington are facing reductions in the hours of staffing (in some cases minor reductions, in other cases major reductions).

Yes, and I've said before that I think the way this is being done is appalling, with stations that really should have a Customer Care Centre, or a Tourist Welcome Centre (geared to those things, not just a booking office with people behind glass) not having one, yet stations that really don't justify anything are keeping their booking offices. This should be a national strategic plan with national criteria, bound up with improved TVMs (e.g. a project for a new single TVM UI nationally with evidence based UI design work done to ensure it's truly intuitive, and fares simplification), not the mess it is.

Imagine you were blind (or visually impaired), or you had learning disabilities or another disability that prevented you from travelling on the railway like a "regular" passenger. How do you purchase a ticket on a very inaccessible TVM, and then find your way to the platform safely, and then get on the correct train (remembering that audible announcements at stations are not always audible, or working, or correct) outside of the staffed hours? How would you find a member of staff after they've been pulled out of the fixed location of a ticket office and been told to wander around the station?

For a lot of people, and not just those with disabilities, a fixed location to find a member of staff is significantly more useful than a member of staff that could be anywhere..

If I was visually impaired I'd buy an e-ticket on my phone or computer using a screen reader. Assuming of course screen readers work on the sites/apps - if they don't, then that's something to add to the above list - it's perfectly doable. Or you have a Braille button in a standard place to call for assistance on the TVM. Or you simply offer all visually impaired people who have a diagnosis of a visual impairment such that they couldn't use a TVM completely free travel. Or you provide them a telesales line of some kind for no extra charge. All of these options would be significantly cheaper than keeping a load of booking offices open just because one blind person might use them once every few months.

It's certainly true that some people would prefer there to be staff, but it's not about what people prefer, it's about what's economic and what else can be done with the money being spent on increasingly-irrelevant booking offices at smaller stations like Bletchley.

 

[WAB]

It's not just minor stations that are losing their staff in this proposal though.. Stations like Bristol Temple Meads, Slough , Blackpool North, Burnley Manchester Road, Leeds, Manchester Oxford Road and even the like of Paddington are facing reductions in the hours of staffing (in some cases minor reductions, in other cases major reductions).

Imagine you were blind (or visually impaired), or you had learning disabilities or another disability that prevented you from travelling on the railway like a "regular" passenger. How do you purchase a ticket on a very inaccessible TVM, and then find your way to the platform safely, and then get on the correct train (remembering that audible announcements at stations are not always audible, or working, or correct) outside of the staffed hours? How would you find a member of staff after they've been pulled out of the fixed location of a ticket office and been told to wander around the station?

For a lot of people, and not just those with disabilities, a fixed location to find a member of staff is significantly more useful than a member of staff that could be anywhere..

Whilst you may have a valid point, your argument that Bristol Temple Meads, Paddington and Leeds City are going to be abandoned wastelands with no staff in the evenings is quite extraordinary!

 

[Sand_elf]

I went to pick up tickets from a machine last year but it spat out blanks. A quick visit to the ticket office sorted it all out.
If the ticket office was closed i assume i'd risk a fine by getting on a train with a blank ticket?

I remember once buying a return ticket from the machine, it printed the outbound ticket, but ran out of roll to print the return. Luckily the ticket office was open so I got it endorsed for the return journey. I would have had all sorts of problems otherwise.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I remember once buying a return ticket from the machine, it printed the outbound ticket, but ran out of roll to print the return. Luckily the ticket office was open so I got it endorsed for the return journey. I would have had all sorts of problems otherwise.

This is something that needs fixing. It is not exactly rocket science to work out whether there are enough tickets remaining in the machine to print a given set of tickets or not. There are a number of ways this could be achieved, the railway is just too bone-idle to fix it.

On the simplest level, every TVM containing two printers but printing only from one at a time, and a work ticket being raised automatically for the roll to be replenished when the first roll runs out, is an obvious way.

Plus if printing fails, give the passenger the benefit of the doubt - record that it failed, but let them have any tickets that were printed for free (i.e. refund the payment or mark the booking as uncollected automatically). The railway wouldn't lose very much as it doesn't happen that often and most people wouldn't be dishonest. A lot of the time that'd mean the first outbound ticket was printed, so they'd get to the interchange station where it could be resolved.

 

[Mabs]

Well said.

It sickens me how all to many on here can't or don't want to see that. We will lose our comfortable heated waiting room and toilet facilities at Alfreton when the booking office closes - how can that be good for anyone?

Someone asked me today when the ticket office shuts, will the toilets close too?

I said most likely go, I can't see them keeping it open and then send someone at the end of the day to close it.

 

[lrailadventure]

This should be a national strategic plan with national criteria, bound up with improved TVMs (e.g. a project for a new single TVM UI nationally with evidence based UI design work done to ensure it's truly intuitive, and fares simplification), not the mess it is.

And whilst I agree that will be useful, it will take time to develop something like that and there's still no guarantee that it will be accessible to everyone.. You will still need staff to assist with ticket purchasing, passenger assistance etc.

If I was visually impaired I'd buy an e-ticket on my phone or computer using a screen reader. Assuming of course screen readers work on the sites/apps - if they don't, then that's something to add to the above list - it's perfectly doable. Or you have a Braille button in a standard place to call for assistance on the TVM. Or you simply offer all visually impaired people who have a diagnosis of a visual impairment such that they couldn't use a TVM completely free travel. Or you provide them a telesales line of some kind for no extra charge.

Or.. just have a fixed member of staff that can sell tickets and provide assistance, as is the proven way that already works pretty well?

All of these options would be significantly cheaper than keeping a load of booking offices open just because one blind person might use them once every few months.

So visually impaired people and other people who can't use TVMs or require assistance should be excluded from travel? Are you also trying to imply that those with disabilities can't be regular commuters (because that's very ableist of you if you are..)? People are essential on the railway. A machine cannot answer every question, nor can it guide a passenger to a platform safely, avoiding other passengers and hazards such as luggage, bollards, benches, plants etc and then ensure the passenger safely gets on board the train and finds a seat, before passing on a message to the destination station that that passenger will require assistance disembarking the train, and exactly where they can be found on board.

It's certainly true that some people would prefer there to be staff, but it's not about what people prefer, it's about what's economic and what else can be done with the money being spent on increasingly-irrelevant booking offices at smaller stations like Bletchley.

Removing the staff from ticket offices will make the railway less safe, end of.

If passengers don't feel safe, they will stop travelling on the railway altogether and the industry will go further into decline. Why are you so keen for hundreds of people to lose their jobs, and the industry to become less safe? How will it benefit you, because any money saved from this ridiculous proposal won't benefit the trains or the services provided, it will go straight into the shareholder's pockets.

Whilst you may have a valid point, your argument that Bristol Temple Meads, Paddington and Leeds City are going to be abandoned wastelands with no staff in the evenings is quite extraordinary!

Did I say abandoned wastelands or did I say they will be facing a reduction in hours (in some case minor, in some cases major)?

 

[WelshBluebird]

Whilst you may have a valid point, your argument that Bristol Temple Meads, Paddington and Leeds City are going to be abandoned wastelands with no staff in the evenings is quite extraordinary!

Except that isn't what was claimed.
What the person you replied to was saying is that:

1. Those stations are having their staffing hours reduced.
2. A reduction in the times those stations are staffed is going to cause issues for people who rely on the staff at stations.
3. Even where staff do remain, by removing the ticket offices you remove the one place you know staff will be. The suggestion is for staff to instead be placed on the concourse, but depending on the station that positioning may well be less obvious for people who need to find the staff than when you could just walk up to the ticket office to find someone.

Which bit don't you think is correct?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or.. just have a fixed member of staff that can sell tickets and provide assistance, as is the proven way that already works pretty well?

At too high a cost.

The railway receives far too much subsidy for what it delivers. What would you prefer, destaffing or closures?

So visually impaired people and other people who can't use TVMs or require assistance should be excluded from travel?

No. Assistance can be provided in ways other than booking office staff for a far lower cost.

Are you also trying to imply that those with disabilities can't be regular commuters (because that's very ableist of you if you are..)?

Season tickets can be purchased online. Let's not wheel out the RUK Standard Minority, before you start coming up with someone with all 8 protected characteristics and no Internet access.

People are essential on the railway. A machine cannot answer every question, nor can it guide a passenger to a platform safely, avoiding other passengers and hazards such as luggage, bollards, benches, plants etc and then ensure the passenger safely gets on board the train and finds a seat, before passing on a message to the destination station that that passenger will require assistance disembarking the train, and exactly where they can be found on board.

If someone requires that level of assistance to get to a train, how did they reach the station and how will they get from the station to their destination at the other end, pray?

If passengers don't feel safe, they will stop travelling on the railway altogether and the industry will go further into decline. Why are you so keen for hundreds of people to lose their jobs, and the industry to become less safe? How will it benefit you, because any money saved from this ridiculous proposal won't benefit the trains or the services provided, it will go straight into the shareholder's pockets.

People won't stop travelling because they have to walk past a blank wall instead of a ticket office they mostly don't use, because most tickets are not sold that way any more.

 

[tomuk]

Bletchley's heated entrance/waiting area is open 24/7 regardless of staff presence (though the toilets aren't, they are left open during the day again regardless of staff presence in the booking office). Plenty of public toilets outside of the railway are open and unstaffed. Thus there is no reason why either of these things need to be the case other than rampant conservatism (or specific antisocial behaviour issues at specific stations, perhaps best dealt with by cheaper security guards).

And in the case of GWR the majority of their waiting and toilet facilities will remain open desppite the removal of the ticket office.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==

Except that isn't what was claimed.
What the person you replied to was saying is that:

1. Those stations are having their staffing hours reduced.
2. A reduction in the times those stations are staffed is going to cause issues for people who rely on the staff at stations.
3. Even where staff do remain, by removing the ticket offices you remove the one place you know staff will be. The suggestion is for staff to instead be placed on the concourse, but depending on the station that positioning may well be less obvious for people who need to find the staff than when you could just walk up to the ticket office to find someone.

Which bit don't you think is correct?

It may well vary from station to station and operator to operator but in most cases if the station already has dispatch or station supervisory staff as well as ticket staff it is the ticket staff who are being removed not the other staff. The stations will remain staffed. Of course this is different to the one man band smaller stations.

 

[NeilCr]

If someone requires that level of assistance to get to a train, how did they reach the station and how will they get from the station to their destination at the other end, pray?

For my partner it’s straightforward

Bus to the station. Is met the other end

Being partially sighted familiarity is a massive help

I understand the rationale of the underlying idea but the sweeping implementation with such a short consultation period is the issue

As I say it might be minor to many but it will definitely curtail her independent train travel.

When I went through Ramsgate yesterday there was a protest outside. Not sure when it started but there were maybe 20-30 people there - quite a view with visible disabilities

 

[lrailadventure]

No. Assistance can be provided in ways other than booking office staff for a far lower cost.

Like what? A robot that can identify a passenger's exact requirements and provide the correct assistance? Dream on...

Season tickets can be purchased online. Let's not wheel out the RUK Standard Minority, before you start coming up with someone with all 8 protected characteristics and no Internet access.

And what if they don't want to purchase a ticket online?? Sorry that the reality is that passengers with various disabilities and additional requirements travel and require assistance. What you're trying to create is a hostile railway where no one is able to get any assistance.

If someone requires that level of assistance to get to a train, how did they reach the station and how will they get from the station to their destination at the other end, pray?

Taxis, family & friends, buses etc.

People won't stop travelling because they have to walk past a blank wall instead of a ticket office they mostly don't use, because most tickets are not sold that way any more.

Yes, they will. Ticket offices don't just sell tickets, you're very out of touch with the real world if you think that. They answer enquiries, provide passenger assistance, provide safety, look out for vulnerable travellers, look out for those who appear to be distressed (or have intentions to end their lives), deter anti-social behaviour and so on. Without a member of staff at the station, incidents will increase, the railway will be less safe, and when the railway is less safe, passengers (particularly female, solo, elderly, disabled etc) will be put off from travelling on trains. There is no debate about it.


I noticed you chose not to answer the part where I asked you why you're so keen for hundreds of people to lose their jobs and how exactly it will benefit you.. because you know it won't. You know that any money that is saved from this, won't benefit the railway, it will benefit the shareholder's pockets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I understand the rationale of the underlying idea but the sweeping implementation with such a short consultation period is the issue

Yes, I agree with this, it's a raging bin inferno.

I agree with the principle and think that done right we could save money while making it acceptable to pretty much everyone bar the Luddites* who can simply be ignored, I don't agree with the implementation.

* By which I mean people who could use a more modern method of ticket purchase but simply choose not to. And as I say a lot, we should go out of our way to help "can'ts" but "won'ts" can and should simply be ignored entirely.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jul 2023 ==

I noticed you chose not to answer the part where I asked you why you're so keen for hundreds of people to lose their jobs and how exactly it will benefit you.. because you know it won't. You know that any money that is saved from this, won't benefit the railway, it will benefit the shareholder's pockets.

The express object of this, which is why the Government is pushing it, is to reduce operating subsidy without the political unpleasantness of severe service cuts or even outright route closures.

As a taxpayer, I would like to see the railway become more efficient and either use less of my tax or spend it to get more service or cheaper fares. Any of those is good with me.

 

[jon0844]

Look at the price cuts that came when supermarkets reduced manned tills and installed self checkout terminals...

And as for people clinging on to buying paper tickets from a ticket office instead of embracing technology, how about we just focus again on the fact that ticket offices don't just sell tickets - and never have?

Rename them as customer information points and, bam, job done. How you can keep them open for all of the other things they exist for. No job cuts. No retooling staff to be outside wandering the platforms. Just some new signs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Look at the price cuts that came when supermarkets reduced manned tills and installed self checkout terminals...

Most of the railway is not a for-profit business now, and increasingly it is moving away from that model. It's nothing like supermarkets.

What self-checkouts HAVE done, though, which is why I like them, is allowed one member of staff to be responsible for maybe 5-10 tills, which means more are open at once, which means shorter queues. They've been good for me, certainly, I actively choose to use them whenever possible.

And supermarkets are a highly competitive industry which is forever cutting margins to the bone, so I suspect they do indeed mean lower prices or at least fewer price increases. It's fairly hard to demonstrate one way or the other without figures you won't be getting.

 

[tomuk]

Look at the price cuts that came when supermarkets reduced manned tills and installed self checkout terminals...

Supermarkets have kept prices artificially low for years ask some farmers and producers who are regularly hand bagged by their friendly supermarket buyer.

 

[Silenos]

Assistance can be provided in ways other than booking office staff for a far lower cost.

I think though, that if people with various disabilities tell us that removal of ticket offices, and destaffing of stations for some or all of the day, will make it harder for them to travel - which as I understand it is what they are telling us - then it behoves us to believe them. Even if mitigations can be put in place, which I think is your position, it is understandable if people doubt that these will be forthcoming. Or adequate.