DfT in a Hurry on Rail Reform

[LNW-GW Joint]

Evidence that Louise Haigh (now the Rt Hon) is moving "at speed" to progress rail reform.
She met the rail union leaders yesterday, and next week is calling in the management of the failing TOCs (Avanti and TPE mentioned) and their Network Rail equivalents.
The King's speech on Tuesday is expected to include rail reform in the list of Bills for the new session.

Labour summons bosses of worst-performing train operators to meetings

Network Rail route directors will also attend next week as UK government aims to reform railways quickly

www.theguardian.com

Labour has summoned the bosses of some of the worst-performing train operators, including Avanti West Coast and TransPennine, for meetings next week as it seeks to rapidly reform the railways and reset industrial relations.
The transport secretary, Louise Haigh, will bring in Network Rail route directors to attend all talks with the train companies, signalling the move towards an integrated railway.
After Haigh vowed to “move fast and fix things”, legislation to kickstart Great British Railways is expected to be announced in the king’s speech next week, and officials are beginning work to set up the new structure before the summer parliamentary recess.

Haigh has already met rail union leaders at the Department for Transport as the new government looks to facilitate an end to the long-running rail dispute. Haigh said her meetings with Mick Whelan and Mick Lynch, the general secretaries of Aslef and the RMT respectively, were a departure from “the days of antagonism and gimmicks” and the start of “an era of grownup industrial relations”.

Note that TPE is one of the DfT-operated TOCs.

 

[gabrielhj07]

I read the first 4 words of the title and nearly fainted!

 

[DarloRich]

Working "at speed" ( or quickly as it used to be called) is fantastic. The rail reform bill has been stalled in parliament for a long period leading to continuing uncertainty in the industry and lost opportunities to improve things for passengers. Lets not waste anymore time.

adults in charge = action

crayon eaters in charge = nonsense posturing

 

[Dr Hoo]

I would still have thought that a more comprehensive (whilst still as brisk as possible) process might be more sound, including:

Identifying where and how the DOHL 'nationalised' operations are 'better' (reliability, customer focus, industrial relations, capacity, new train introduction, recruitment, costs, etc.);
Then designing a comprehensive new 'GBR' to build on those strengths identified, whilst giving special attention to any areas where the DOHL model might still be falling short;
Also deciding how to 'merge' Network Rail into GBR with as little disruption and cost as possible; and
Creating the new 'passenger champion' organisation as soon as possible so that its views and needs can be factored into the design of GBR rather than it being bolted on afterwards.

This would have far more value than just banging the table or summarily 'stripping' organisations of their contracts in the short term.

 

[scouseyb123]

I wouldn't class TPE as "failing" any more.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I wouldn't class TPE as "failing" any more.

It still has one of the higher cancellations rates compared to other TOCs. It’s just less high than it used to be.

 

[Taunton]

Notably the new Rail Minister within the DfT is Lord Hendy. Should be pretty competent. It's a complete opposite of 1971, when Richard Marsh made the reverse transition, from Minister of Transport to British Rail Chairman.

 

[edwin_m]

I think we have two separate but related things going on here.

Labour policy is to bring TOCs back into public ownership as their existing contracts expire. I'm not sure when the next one does, or whether they need to enact some legislation to achieve that, but if they do then the deadline is clear. They can then just fold them into Operator of Last Resort until they work out what to do next.

This reads more like a short-term initiative to improve performance under existing arrangements, whether the TOCs in question are under OLR (Transpennine) or not (Avanti).

crayon eaters in charge = nonsense posturing

I think I'd be doing quite a bit of posturing if I'd swallowed a load of wax.

 

[WesternLancer]

Seems rather odd (or lacking in journalistic rigour) for the article not to mention that TPE, which the article mentions prominently, is already effectively run by the DfT. So presumably the person they 'call in' sits in the next office somewhere....

All the hallmarks of being seen to be 'doing something / anything'

 

[Harpers Tate]

It still has one of the higher cancellations rates compared to other TOCs. It’s just less high than it used to be.

To say nothing of 3-car 185s rammed to the seams, still happening on Sheffield <> Mancheser with too much frequency.

 

[michael74]

I am 2½ years into my railway career and 30+ years into my working life, I have 2 observations (one may be a bit controversial....) the Unions need get get out of the 1970s and the railway needs to get out of the 1980s. The sooner both get dragged into the 21st century the better.

 

[LittleAH]

Seems rather odd (or lacking in journalistic rigour) for the article not to mention that TPE, which the article mentions prominently, is already effectively run by the DfT. So presumably the person they 'call in' sits in the next office somewhere....

All the hallmarks of being seen to be 'doing something / anything'

suspect it’s lazy journalism. Northern/SWR are performing much worse yet not mentioned

 

[physics34]

Notably the new Rail Minister within the DfT is Lord Hendy. Should be pretty competent. It's a complete opposite of 1971, when Richard Marsh made the reverse transition, from Minister of Transport to British Rail Chairman.

He knows his stuff, but there is a warning that he was the catalyst in closing LUL ticket offices and supported the recent consultation to close ticket offices on GBR. Barring that he seems to be a good egg.

 

[Djgr]

I would still have thought that a more comprehensive (whilst still as brisk as possible) process might be more sound, including:

Identifying where and how the DOHL 'nationalised' operations are 'better' (reliability, customer focus, industrial relations, capacity, new train introduction, recruitment, costs, etc.);
Then designing a comprehensive new 'GBR' to build on those strengths identified, whilst giving special attention to any areas where the DOHL model might still be falling short;
Also deciding how to 'merge' Network Rail into GBR with as little disruption and cost as possible; and
Creating the new 'passenger champion' organisation as soon as possible so that its views and needs can be factored into the design of GBR rather than it being bolted on afterwards.

This would have far more value than just banging the table or summarily 'stripping' organisations of their contracts in the short term.

I think the time for endlessly tinkering and pontificating has long gone

 

[12LDA28C]

I am 2½ years into my railway career and 30+ years into my working life, I have 2 observations (one may be a bit controversial....) the Unions need get get out of the 1970s and the railway needs to get out of the 1980s. The sooner both get dragged into the 21st century the better.

That's a strange observation for a rail employee and, presumably, union member? The Unions have acted with considerably more integrity than the DfT and previous Transport Secretaries during the dispute so far. If asking for a reasonable pay increase for your members during a cost of living crisis and defending against hugely detrimental and potentially dangerous changes to Ts & Cs is considered as 'being in the 1970s' then so be it.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

suspect it’s lazy journalism. Northern/SWR are performing much worse yet not mentioned

Avanti and TPE are just two of "some of the worst-performing train operators" which the article says have been invited to meet the DfT next week.
Avanti and TPE have been prominently in the media eye for many months, hence the specific mention of them, I expect.
But Northern and SWR may be involved, and so might almost any under-performing TOC (are there any actually performing?).
It's difficult to know what the sanction might be for OLR TOCs like TPE and Northern - there is no contract to strip them of, and some of the people involved work across all the OLR TOCs including the "successful" ones like LNER.

 

[michael74]

That's a strange observation for a rail employee and, presumably, union member? The Unions have acted with considerably more integrity than the DfT and previous Transport Secretaries during the dispute so far so if that's your definition of being 'in the 1970s' then that's odd.

I am a union member and have been in various unions and a labour voter all my working life. I am not questioning the integrity (or the aims) of any union and my post should not be interpreted as a support of the previous Government handling of the DfT or RDG more the entrenched attitudes of both unions and employers.

 

[12LDA28C]

I am a union member and have been in various unions and a labour voter all my working life. I am not questioning the integrity (or the aims) of any union, more the entrenched attitudes of both unions and employers.

The 'employer' these days is of course effectively the Government and the current dispute has been prolonged unnecessarily by previous Transport Secretaries refusing to meet with Union leaders. Not much negotiation can take place in that situation.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Working "at speed" ( or quickly as it used to be called) is fantastic. The rail reform bill has been stalled in parliament for a long period leading to continuing uncertainty in the industry and lost opportunities to improve things for passengers. Lets not waste anymore time.

adults in charge = action

crayon eaters in charge = nonsense posturing

10/10 I totally agree. If I may use an American expression please -- time to walk the walk and not talk the talk!

 

[michael74]

The 'employer' these days is of course effectively the Government and the current dispute has been prolonged unnecessarily by previous Transport Secretaries refusing to meet with Union leaders. Not much negotiation can take place in that situation.

Please don't confuse me with someone who has their head in the sand as to be so nieve about who has been pulling the strings with the employers. But the Unions really don't do themselves favours sometimes. The whole industry is constantly pulled between those who don't want reform and those who want to modernise and it's the workers and passengers caught in the middle....

 

[InOban]

I assume that Louise H's plans that were published a few weeks ago were actually written by Lord Hendy... They were certainly written by one or more experts.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I am 2½ years into my railway career and 30+ years into my working life, I have 2 observations (one may be a bit controversial....) the Unions need get get out of the 1970s and the railway needs to get out of the 1980s. The sooner both get dragged into the 21st century the better.

Even if other posters don't agree with this view - politics is perception. I would argue that this is what the general public perceives in my opinion even if people don't like it. Of course unions deserve a pay rise etc. Please can I suggest that there is room for improvement on all sides. there are 3 sides imho:

1. Government -- OK so we have a new one and they WILL change
2. Railway/management etc - we have always done it this way - needs to change
3. Unions - somethings need to change.

In my opinion that is a fair and balanced viewpoint.

 

[michael74]

Even if other posters don't agree with this view - politics is perception. I would argue that this is what the general public perceives in my opinion even if people don't like it. Of course unions deserve a pay rise etc. Please can I suggest that there is room for improvement on all sides. there are 3 sides imho:

1. Government -- OK so we have a new one and they WILL change
2. Railway/management etc - we have always done it this way - needs to change
3. Unions - somethings need to change.

In my opinion that is a fair and balanced viewpoint.

Indeed, I was working for the NHS during COVID and it had a collective 'Road to Damascus' moment, they realised that just because we have done it a certain way for decades, we don't actually need to do it like that anymore. It was unbelievable what got achieved after that point.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I assume that Louise H's plans that were published a few weeks ago were actually written by Lord Hendy... They were certainly written by one or more experts.

Labour has had several transport advisers over the years, from industry, unions and academia.
Hendy (and Haines) had the top jobs in the GBR transition team set up by the Tories, so would have provided significant input to the plans of both parties.
Hendy has also written several special reports for DfT (eg the Union Connectivity review) which are still on the table.
They will also have fronted the NR CP7 negotiations with ORR/DfT over the last two years, and will know the detail behind them (HLOS, SoFA etc).
He's also been in front of the parliamentary Transport Select Committee several times as NR/GBRTT Chair.

However, none of that means Hendy actually penned the Labour proposals in April - his job wouldn't allow him to be that partisan, as a crossbench peer.
It is possible he had input to the Tory Rail Reform draft bill, in his capacity as GBRTT Chair, but we've no means of knowing if that is now dead or not.
His views and expertise must be preferred to have been appointed MoS for DfT and minister for Rail.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

1. Government -- OK so we have a new one and they WILL change
2. Railway/management etc - we have always done it this way - needs to change
3. Unions - somethings need to change.

One way, again maybe controversial - but stop the us/them mentality. Invite all the unions (1 representative from each) to all Transport Select Committee meetings. That way you involve:

1. Government (by definition)
2. Railways / management
3. Unions

 

[En]

I am a union member and have been in various unions and a labour voter all my working life. I am not questioning the integrity (or the aims) of any union and my post should not be interpreted as a support of the previous Government handling of the DfT or RDG more the entrenched attitudes of both unions and employers.

Exactly this

Some of the tradues Unions seem ot have a binary switch on their position when dealing with the management of an organisation in that there is only full cooperation when they are getting 100% of their way , anything else flips the switch into 'combative' mode and seeking any opportyunity to hold a legal ballot to get a mandate for ASoS or Strikes
I see another commentor has implied that OLR staff are 'employed by the government' , this is incorrect as even within services and organisations which have remained in the public sector it is rare that , unless you are sufficiently senior Civil Servant that your employer is actually 'HM Government'

 

[Class83]

I wouldn't class TPE as "failing" any more.

They're not cancelling trains at short notice as they removed half of them from the timetable, so the remaining train has to do a load of intermediate stops and is slower.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Labour has had several transport advisers over the years, from industry, unions and academia.
Hendy (and Haines) had the top jobs in the GBR transition team set up by the Tories, so would have provided significant input to the plans of both parties.
Hendy has also written several special reports for DfT (eg the Union Connectivity review) which are still on the table.
They will also have fronted the NR CP7 negotiations with ORR/DfT over the last two years, and will know the detail behind them (HLOS, SoFA etc).
He's also been in front of the parliamentary Transport Select Committee several times as NR/GBRTT Chair.

However, none of that means Hendy actually penned the Labour proposals in April - his job wouldn't allow him to be that partisan, as a crossbench peer.
It is possible he had input to the Tory Rail Reform draft bill, in his capacity as GBRTT Chair, but we've no means of knowing if that is now dead or not.
His views and expertise must be preferred to have been appointed MoS for DfT and minister for Rail.

I strongly suspect Peter Hendy has been quietly working behind the scenes with Labour.

Don’t forget that the Williams/Shapps proposals caused a furore with the Owning Groups because the DfT could still set the policy agenda for GBR on outsourcing franchises or not. That meant that a change of Government could easily wrap the franchises up into GBR, which is exactly what is going to happen. Hence the attempts to push it into the long grass.

Although the recent Green Paper tried to row back, in part, from those levers, most of the original legal intent remained intact and the new Government just need to take that and put back in the policy decision levers that Williams/Shapps envisaged, telling GBR that they either have to run the services themselves or devolve them to the likes of Metro Mayors.

It is widely regarded at Owning Group level that Shapps had a number done on him by his civil servants, who devised a potential legal framework that could work either for both Conservatives and Labour policy objectives and, as such, was a politically stupid Minister.

 

[dk1]

I wouldn't class TPE as "failing" any more.

But have they not resorted to a pathetically easy timetable just to accommodate their ongoing very poor traincrew recourses?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

We all know a lot of issues here can be sorted by bringing more resources to bear but that will cost money. So the acid test will be whether they are prepared to take a risk and expend more on the premise that a stable good performing service will attract additional passengers to fund the extra costs. Oh and before that the simple matter of pay rises needs to be sorted out. We can already see in Scotland that last years deal didn't by much loyalty and the staff are pushing back again and the service is suffering.