Ticket scanning payments - are these a good idea and how much should they be?

[Bletchleyite]

We've got around 800 guards, so that's only about £15 per guard per period Vs £90-100 that they are down in commission. It's just something to soften the loss of commission.

I'd figure they should perhaps increase it, as the vast majority of Bletchley guards don't bother. Though I suppose a lot of people at that end of things will be on paper tickets anyway, so maybe things will change when TfL finally accept barcoded tickets.

It doesn't sound like the cost of increasing it would be that substantial, and it would cause staff to be more visible.

 

[357]

It's always something that could only be given to existing staff and new staff wouldn't be eligible - this has happened with many things over the years

 

[SCDR_WMR]

It's always something that could only be given to existing staff and new staff wouldn't be eligible - this has happened with many things over the years

I'd prefer it to be a tiered system, similar to how commission works at some places.

0% - 0-1000 scans per period
2% - 1001-2500 scans
3% - 2501-4000 scans
5% - 4001+ scans

Given the links at my depot average 10-11 diagrammed days per period (excluding Sundays) I'd say that's fair. Encourages more scans.

 

[Stan_Butler]

I'd prefer it to be a tiered system, similar to how commission works at some places.

0% - 0-1000 scans per period
2% - 1001-2500 scans
3% - 2501-4000 scans
5% - 4001+ scans

Given the links at my depot average 10-11 diagrammed days per period (excluding Sundays) I'd say that's fair. Encourages more scans.

Is that percentage’s of the value of the tickets scanned you’re proposing? That would be a lot more than the current 2p -3p per ticket even if it’s zero for the first 1000 scans

 

[fishwomp]

If commission has dropped because more people are buying tickets first then this is a good thing.

It says there is less need for the guard to check. If there's less need, then there's no need to pay for it.
If people twig that they won't be scanned or checked, they might start not buying tickets, in which case the commission goes up.,

As most XC stations are gated (Sheffield a notable exception) - they may become ungated in late evenings - so that'd be when to put roving RPIs on, randomly.

Given the guards are losing out due to a shift in dynamics of tickets, it's a great example of why they should try to get things into base (and pensionable) salary instead of random unguaranteed things like 'technology payments'.

I'd prefer it to be a tiered system, similar to how commission works at some places.

0% - 0-1000 scans per period
2%...

Some poor guard on rural lines won't even be able to buy a cup of tea with that!

 

[NCT]

All the more reason to have DOO and non-guard conductors / inspectors.

 

[Topological]

Given the guards are losing out due to a shift in dynamics of tickets, it's a great example of why they should try to get things into base (and pensionable) salary instead of random unguaranteed things like 'technology payments'.


Some poor guard on rural lines won't even be able to buy a cup of tea with that!

This would be my thinking.

Get a sensible number into the base salary and then simply get on with the job of checking ALL tickets. Perhaps the union can suggest a sensible number. I doubt the DfT/CrossCountry are going to suggest anything meaningful.

Otherwise, you have far greater revenue working certain services and a whole world of unnecessary admin.

 

[Fokx]

All the more reason to have DOO and non-guard conductors / inspectors.

Actually it's the opposite.The data received from the ticket scan is FAR more valuable than the few pence paid the scan.

Think of it like a marketing tool, the guard gets around 2p, Trainline gets 6 or so % of the total ticket cost, the Train company gets precise information of your travel habits, information on exact services that passengers use, dates and times they travel, the type of traveller they are such as a commuter or leisure traveller, information to combat travel irregularities, and personal information that can be used as a tailored marketing tool to be customised to that specific traveller to encourage further future travel.

 

[Topological]

Actually it's the opposite.The data received from the ticket scan is FAR more valuable than the few pence paid the scan.

Think of it like a marketing tool, the guard gets around 2p, Trainline gets 6 or so % of the total ticket cost, the Train company gets precise information of your travel habits, information on exact services that passengers use, dates and times they travel, the type of traveller they are such as a commuter or leisure traveller, information to combat travel irregularities, and personal information that can be used as a tailored marketing tool to be customised to that specific traveller to encourage further future travel.

How does that work?

IF the train operating company has an agreement with the train ticket sellers (Trainline being just one) then they can get all of that data (subject to the confidentiality agreements entered into when buying tickets from the sellers). There is no need to scan the tickets.

Alternatively, scanning the tickets brings the data to the train operating company computer. The information on the ticket informs flows.

I suspect (but may be wrong) that the deal with the ticket sellers is the one that brings the greatest informational benefit.

Even more likely is that the train operating companies simply use sales information on destination pairs accompanied by anecdotal loading information on specific services. I am not sure any train operating company is flexing the timetable, or finding extra capacity, based on noisy ticket data.

 

[mathstrains19]

How does that work?

IF the train operating company has an agreement with the train ticket sellers (Trainline being just one) then they can get all of that data (subject to the confidentiality agreements entered into when buying tickets from the sellers). There is no need to scan the tickets.

Alternatively, scanning the tickets brings the data to the train operating company computer. The information on the ticket informs flows.

I suspect (but may be wrong) that the deal with the ticket sellers is the one that brings the greatest informational benefit.

Even more likely is that the train operating companies simply use sales information on destination pairs accompanied by anecdotal loading information on specific services. I am not sure any train operating company is flexing the timetable, or finding extra capacity, based on noisy ticket data.

The scan says exactly which train people are taking - which may not be the train they've selected on trainline etc.

 

[transportphoto]

The greatest value in scanning (“clipping”) a ticket is preventing refund fraud. That’s where the money is saved.

 

[Topological]

The scan says exactly which train people are taking - which may not be the train they've selected on trainline etc.

But does the scan provide the individual identification information?

If so then the Trainline is irrelevant.

 

[Fokx]

How does that work?

IF the train operating company has an agreement with the train ticket sellers (Trainline being just one) then they can get all of that data (subject to the confidentiality agreements entered into when buying tickets from the sellers). There is no need to scan the tickets.

That wouldn't accurately give information on exact service a passenger used in real time it would just provide general information such as when and how they purchased the ticket, and at best what time they entered a station with ticket barriers (If present) if at all.

Even on an advance a passenger can still travel on a different service either accidentally, intentionally or in disruption

Guards can also mark tickets electronically with information (depending on the software the TOC'S use). TTK allows guards to add comments as to why a ticket has been rejected or flag the ticket for further investigation for example.

Alternatively, scanning the tickets brings the data to the train operating company computer. The information on the ticket informs flows.

I suspect (but may be wrong) that the deal with the ticket sellers is the one that brings the greatest informational benefit.

It brings the greatest volume of information, but the information received is generic and not specific to passengers, route or even trains for example.

You might know that 300 people bought an off peak return between two stations in a day for example, but you wouldn't necessarily know exactly what specific services all 300 passengers used. Did they use train company A or train company B? Did they catch the stopping service or the express? Did they buy a first class upgrade or excess to an anytime ticket? Etc...

 

[Topological]

This is all very helpful.

However, to monetise the information the train operating company needs the information about the individual (to market to). Then there needs to be a marginal increase in revenue from that marketing to cover the cost.

I think people are assuming that such minute details help when it is highly unlikely that they do. See the Tesco Clubcard (and they have an amazing amount of data).

I suspect it is more about the potential control on delay repay, refunding of unused tickets (that have been used) and the fact that you can catch people who do not actually have valid tickets.

 

[NCT]

Actually it's the opposite.The data received from the ticket scan is FAR more valuable than the few pence paid the scan.

Think of it like a marketing tool, the guard gets around 2p, Trainline gets 6 or so % of the total ticket cost, the Train company gets precise information of your travel habits, information on exact services that passengers use, dates and times they travel, the type of traveller they are such as a commuter or leisure traveller, information to combat travel irregularities, and personal information that can be used as a tailored marketing tool to be customised to that specific traveller to encourage further future travel.

My point is, if ticket checking is that important, then make that someone's core role, rather than have it as an incentivised optional extra activity of a guard.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Is that percentage’s of the value of the tickets scanned you’re proposing? That would be a lot more than the current 2p -3p per ticket even if it’s zero for the first 1000 scans

Apologies, was meant to be pence, not percentage. Tired new dad typing error

 

[43066]

If commission has dropped because more people are buying tickets first then this is a good thing.

It says there is less need for the guard to check. If there's less need, then there's no need to pay for it.
If people twig that they won't be scanned or checked, they might start not buying tickets, in which case the commission goes up.,

More people are buying tickets online, but it doesn’t follow that fewer people are travelling entirely without tickets - hence the need to check.

If I was a guard I doubt I’d bother to scan many tickets unless I was incentivised to do so.

My point is, if ticket checking is that important, then make that someone's core role, rather than have it as an incentivised optional extra activity of a guard.

Why? Incentivising guards to check tickets seems to be the best of both worlds.

 

[whoosh]

My point is, if ticket checking is that important, then make that someone's core role, rather than have it as an incentivised optional extra activity of a guard.

But if the Guard is already on the train....?

 

[stadler]

My point is, if ticket checking is that important, then make that someone's core role, rather than have it as an incentivised optional extra activity of a guard.

That used to be the case on some trains decades ago in British Rail days. Many trains had both a Guard and a Ticket Inspector onboard. I doubt they would bring that back as it would add extra costs to employ an additional staff member for every train.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Personally, I'd mandate:

Staff who previously received commission get the scan bonus. Over time, this naturally ages out as staff are promoted, retire, resign, sacked etc.

New staff or staff who have never received commission - it's part of the job description you signed up, and agreed, to when taking the role.

For both groups, I would give them an additional incentive payment - £250 or so - if they hit a particularly high number of scans over the 13 rail periods. 13,000 scans should be very achievable (1000 per rail period).

If the staff (other than revenue protection roles) proactively flag a particular customer or ticket that results in a fully paid up settlement or successful prosecution, I would give them £50 for each occasion. No conflict or issues with customers needed - as the flagging is a wholly electronic process for most scanning equipment.

There should also be performance management for staff who are way below the scanning average for that diagram/turn/shift - on a persistent basis. TOCs already know the average scanning records and sales per turn number (shift) for each day of the week, for each month. Performance should be reviewed over the course of a year.

 

[43066]

Personally, I'd mandate:

Staff who previously received commission get the scan bonus.

New staff or staff who have never received commission - it's part of the job description you signed up, and agreed, to when taking the role.

In which case you’d find yourself in dispute with the RMT.

New staff or staff who have never received commission - it's part of the job description you signed up, and agreed, to when taking the role.

In which case the new staff won’t bother doing it. If you’re paying £250 per year you might as well pay a few pence per scan instead, which links the reward to the action much more closely.

Performance related pay is present in many other industries so I’m not sure why it’s so controversial here.

 

[Acfb]

I travelled down on TPE about a week ago (Haymarket to Manchester Piccadilly) and I was surprised the conductor didn't even scan my printed out e-ticket, he just glanced at it. The train was running just over 10 minutes late and I think he came down just before Lockerbie. Maybe they just do that for the ungated stations between Edinburgh and Manchester?

 

[NCT]

Purely your opinion.

My friend who is a guard has in the last year saved someones life by administering CPR, stopped someone from taking pictures of underage girls, and stopped someone racially abusing other people.

I would not define that as “low productivity”.

Those are not guard duties.

The things you mention are a debate about customer facing staffing levels. Personally I'm in favour of having all station calls staffed (with either the train staffed or the station staffed, or both if warranted).

 

[30907]

From a random journey today (and from the Disputes forum) - should railcard checks also be incentivised? Can they be scanned anyway?

 

[Kite159]

From a random journey today (and from the Disputes forum) - should railcard checks also be incentivised?Can they be scanned anyway?

If held on the phone, then yes they can be scanned (which also highlights if anybody has tried to be smart and edit the details such as the expiry date).

 

[dodecahedron67]

I travelled down on TPE about a week ago (Haymarket to Manchester Piccadilly) and I was surprised the conductor didn't even scan my printed out e-ticket, he just glanced at it. The train was running just over 10 minutes late and I think he came down just before Lockerbie. Maybe they just do that for the ungated stations between Edinburgh and Manchester?

Guards are in dispute at TPE, not scanning eTickets. Apparently an offer is being tabled to end this dispute soon though…

 

[amahy]

I’d rather see guards get a bog standard pay rise, remove commissions for scans, and just make ticket selling/checking/scanning compulsory. There are far too many guards that just sit uselessly in the back cab, scrolling through social media on their phone.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

I’d rather see guards get a bog standard pay rise, remove commissions for scans, and just make ticket selling/checking/scanning compulsory. There are far too many guards that just sit uselessly in the back cab, scrolling through social media on their phone.

They will get a pay rise regardless. The point being made is commission has dropped off a cliff since 2019 and that is a loss of income.

Pay per scan would help to rebalance that lost income and it clearly helps with ticket fraud

 

[Trainbike46]

Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with there being one or multiple performance-linked elements in people's pay, and a scan payment is one way of doing that, so why not?

 

[Lewisham2221]

I’d rather see guards get a bog standard pay rise, remove commissions for scans, and just make ticket selling/checking/scanning compulsory. There are far too many guards that just sit uselessly in the back cab, scrolling through social media on their phone.

And then a guard who takes a slow, slothenly stroll from the back cab to the first set of doors satisfies the criteria of "selling/checking/scanning" and gets paid the same as a guard who does their absolute best to get round to every passenger who boarded at every stop which, potentially, would eventually lead to people doing the bare minimum.