Telegraph: Staff Travel 'angers commuters'

[oattam09]

As well as MP's,I dont buy these rags amymore as they all talk Bo55ock5.

What has this got to do with MPs? Ironically the very assessment you make about all MPs comes from the same sources as you are criticising! By all means have a go at the offending article, but don't use it as an excuse to have a go at MPs, not all of whom fit in your description.

 

[gordonthemoron]

surely it is a good idea that railway staff also use the rail network in their leisure time, in order to understand what the great unwashed have to put up with. Without priv travel, many wouldn't bother

 

[bb21]

What has this got to do with MPs? Ironically the very assessment you make about all MPs comes from the same sources as you are criticising! By all means have a go at the offending article, but don't use it as an excuse to have a go at MPs, not all of whom fit in your description.

After the expenses scandal, I wouldn't trust the great majority of them

 

[313103]

For me it is quite simple, if i did not have my free 48hr boxes of which i have 16 and ability to buy tickets at 75% off the standard walk on fare, i guess i wouldnt travel by train.

I would probably use a coach instead, maybe longer journey time but far cheaper.

As a active employee who started before 1996 i have my sort of free travel perks (i pay tax on them so they are not entirely free), as an employee of a Transport for London company i also get a staff oyster card. My wife also gets both. Should i leave the industry or worse be dismissed i lose all travel perks, should TfL stop running the company i work for i automatically lose the TfL oyster card, i will keep my BR pass even on retirement.

This really is a non issue as rail employees who worked for BR reduces every year and currently they are in the minority bracket of current employees.

 

[Stewart]

For me it is quite simple, if i did not have my free 48hr boxes of which i have 16 and ability to buy tickets at 75% off the standard walk on fare, i guess i wouldnt travel by train.

I would probably use a coach instead, maybe longer journey time but far cheaper.

As a active employee who started before 1996 i have my sort of free travel perks (i pay tax on them so they are not entirely free), as an employee of a Transport for London company i also get a staff oyster card. My wife also gets both. Should i leave the industry or worse be dismissed i lose all travel perks, should TfL stop running the company i work for i automatically lose the TfL oyster card, i will keep my BR pass even on retirement.

This really is a non issue as rail employees who worked for BR reduces every year and currently they are in the minority bracket of current employees.

It was only a minority of MPs who were stealing from the taxpayer via their expenses, therefore that was a non issue?

 

[harz99]

It was only a minority of MPs who were stealing from the taxpayer via their expenses, therefore that was a non issue?

Stewart, your a new member so i'll try and be gentle!

This thread has nothing to do with MPs or the expenses scandal; it concerns an article in a newspaper (the Daily Telegraph) and the content of the article which is rail staff free and cheap travel perks.

So your (non issue) issue is irrelevant.

That said, welcome to the forum.

 

[oattam09]

After the expenses scandal, I wouldn't trust the great majority of them

Why were there so few prosecutions then, if they outlandishly flouted the law? My point is what do they have to do with this Telegraph report?

 

[Stewart]

Stewart, your a new member so i'll try and be gentle!

This thread has nothing to do with MPs or the expenses scandal; it concerns an article in a newspaper (the Daily Telegraph) and the content of the article which is rail staff free and cheap travel perks.

So your (non issue) issue is irrelevant.

That said, welcome to the forum.

Thanks.

Even if only one person is claiming cheap fares, it is still wrong on a service that is partially supported by the taxpayer.

Would you say it is fair for some people to be treated preferentially by the police for dint of having worked for them in the past?

 

[oattam09]

Stewart, your a new member so i'll try and be gentle!

This thread has nothing to do with MPs or the expenses scandal; it concerns an article in a newspaper (the Daily Telegraph) and the content of the article which is rail staff free and cheap travel perks.

So your (non issue) issue is irrelevant.

That said, welcome to the forum.

LOL! This post is a wind up, surely? How can someone be so rude without understanding the poster's point? I believe the point being made was that it is relevant even though there are only a few people with the perks. People certainly did not think the expenses scandal was irrelevant even though there are only around 600 MPs and only a tiny number were prosecuted.

 

[bb21]

LOL! This post is a wind up, surely? How can someone be so rude without understanding the poster's point? I believe the point being made was that it is relevant even though there are only a few people with the perks. People certainly did not think the expenses scandal was irrelevant even though there are only around 600 MPs and only a tiny number were prosecuted.

Not prosecuted does not mean there is no wrongdoing. There is a quite clear distinction between the two.

Btw I didn't bring up the issue regarding MPs.

 

[GB]

It was only a minority of MPs who were stealing from the taxpayer via their expenses, therefore that was a non issue?

This has nothing to do with the MP scandal and to liken priv travel to it I find quite offensive.

Thanks.

Even if only one person is claiming cheap fares, it is still wrong on a service that is partially supported by the taxpayer.

Would you say it is fair for some people to be treated preferentially by the police for dint of having worked for them in the past?

Why is it wrong? Priv ticket/pass holders pay tax on it as it is a benefit in kind as well as paying general tax. The train is still going from A - B so no extra cost for the TOC and its not like the trains are rammed full of priv holders. As already mentioned, most buisness have perks or bonuses for their staff in some way or other.

Your comparison with the police is rather wide of the mark too as it also has nothing to do with "free" travel.

 

[bb21]

I also don't see the link with the expenses scandal as that was born out of MPs doing something wrong, ie. claiming for something that they were not entitled to, whereas rail staff travel facilities is something they are legitimately entitled to. A massive difference.

 

[Stewart]

This has nothing to do with the MP scandal and to liken priv travel to it I find quite offensive.



Why is it wrong? Priv ticket/pass holders pay tax on it as it is a benefit in kind as well as paying general tax. The train is still going from A - B so no extra cost for the TOC and its not like the trains are rammed full of priv holders. As already mentioned, most buisness have perks or bonuses for their staff in some way or other.

Your comparison with the police is rather wide of the mark too as it also has nothing to do with "free" travel.

The fact is companies that aren't subsidised by government can pay whatever they want to get the staff they want. That's up to their owners.

For public services, you have to respect the service relies on hard-working taxpayers. Priv cards drain money out of the public purse and increase the needed level of subsidy. We own the services.

 

[Greenback]

The fact is companies that aren't subsidised by government can pay whatever they want to get the staff they want. That's up their owners.

For public services, you have to respect the service relies on hard-working taxpayers. Priv cards drain money out of the public purse and increase the needed level of subsidy. We own the services.

Do you have any evidence that the existence of Privs drains the public purse?
If so, please could you produce this and show how much the Priv scheme costs in total?

Production of such evidence will undoubtedly strengthen your case, and elevate it above the level of simplistic statements.

 

[12CSVT]

I notice the Torygraph article conveniently 'forgets' to mention that staff using PRIV discounts may be required to assist the traincrew where necessary if there is an incident on the train they are travelling on (even if it is leisure travel), and on many TOCs they must give up their seats to other passengers if the train is busy.
In addition PRIV discounts form part of staff wage settlements.

 

[bb21]

The fact is companies that aren't subsidised by government can pay whatever they want to get the staff they want. That's up to their owners.

For public services, you have to respect the service relies on hard-working taxpayers. Priv cards drain money out of the public purse and increase the needed level of subsidy. We own the services.

There is a clear distinction between private companies that are paid a price for providing a service, ie. those in a franchise agreement, and an organisation that has its costs wholly met by the tax payer, ie. the BBC.

In the case of franchisees, such as the TOCs, they receive a set amount of money from the government for providing a service regardless of any extras they might offer staff. The price is already agreed upon and does not change just because they suddenly decide to withdraw staff benefits. I don't see any difference between such companies and those that do not receive a subsidy.

In the case of an organisation such as the BBC then I fully understand your argument.

 

[Stewart]

Do you have any evidence that the existence of Privs drains the public purse?
If so, please could you produce this and show how much the Priv scheme costs in total?

Production of such evidence will undoubtedly strengthen your case, and elevate it above the level of simplistic statements.

If it didn't cost anything, why don't they have all customers paying Priv rates?

 

[Greenback]

Many customers pay a lot less than the Priv rates.

Can you answer the question now?

 

[Stewart]

Many customers pay a lot less than the Priv rates.

Can you answer the question now?

Only where they are extremely limited in when they travel.

Why don't train companies have us all paying Priv rates in order to maiximise income? (!)

 

[AeroSpace]

For public services, you have to respect the service relies on hard-working taxpayers. Priv cards drain money out of the public purse and increase the needed level of subsidy. We own the services.

Staff wages drain money out of the public purse; are you saying that public sector staff should be paid nothing?

 

[Seacook]

The fact is companies that aren't subsidised by government can pay whatever they want to get the staff they want. That's up to their owners.

For public services, you have to respect the service relies on hard-working taxpayers. Priv cards drain money out of the public purse and increase the needed level of subsidy. We own the services.

PRIV cards are are provided in accordance with agreements made with staff as part of their contracts of employment. Why do you think it is acceptable to renege on those agreements? It is possible to negotiate them away but not without some sort of compensation that would certainly not reduce subsidy levels. Are you also in favour of franchises being unable to pay any dividends?

Do you imagine that rail staff - or any public sector workers - are not hard-working taxpayers?

 

[graham43404]

Public sector or private sector the public ends up paying for the perks we are given. Be it a couple of pence on your shopping at Tesco to pay for it's staff to get 10% off shopping, free shares etc.

 

[SS4]

PRIV cards are are provided in accordance with agreements made with staff as part of their contracts of employment. Why do you think it is acceptable to renege on those agreements?

It might not be acceptable but it can happen as the Coalition did to PCS regarding public sector pensions despite the high court ruling in PCS' favour under the last government. More interesting is how does Stewart know that the taxpayer is paying in full for PRIV?

The public sector pay tax just like any other worker (it's amazing how many people forget this) and an overwhelming majority of them are low paid. If you looked at public sector pay and statistician worth his/her salt would discount those at the top as outliers. It's just that those getting paid the most know exactly how to **** the country over in order to save themselves - the expenses scandal showed that

 

[Flamingo]

Don't feed the troll... :roll:

 

[185]

Torygraph = not even good enough to use as bog roll in emergency.

Next week in the Shortofnewsygraph

Asda staff getting staff discounts are pushing up honest taxpayers weekly shops!

McDonalds workers getting free hamburgers are costing us taxpayers more for happy meals!

Bankers getting free money are..... OH NO THEY WON'T RUN THAT STORY! COWARDS!!!!!

 

[313103]

Priv cards drain money out of the public purse and increase the needed level of subsidy. We own the services.

1. Welcome to the forum.

2. Evidence that Priv cards drain money out of the public purse.

3. I would actually say that having privs actually generate income. If i use a box i will often use the buffet car (if one is fitted of course) Creates income, i will very often buy a mag of some sort at WH Smiths on the station (If there is one) creates income, i will buy a snack at say maybe Upper Crust (creates income), I have often upgraded to first class (creates income), i have paid for sleeper services (creates income), if i use my priv for a 75% discount that is often more then a super advance ticket (creates income).

4. If i didnt have a priv card all my travelling would be by road, therefore no money spent at any rail outlet or any revenue for a TOC (Lost Income)

 

[graham43404]

Torygraph = not even good enough to use as bog roll in emergency.

Next week in the Shortofnewsygraph

Asda staff getting staff discounts are pushing up honest taxpayers weekly shops!

McDonalds workers getting free hamburgers are costing us taxpayers more for happy meals!

Bankers getting free money are..... OH NO THEY WON'T RUN THAT STORY! COWARDS!!!!!

The saddest part is that you are so right with that. Those that REALLY cause the problems still lead the champagne lifestyle while those of us lower down the foodchain get blamed for all sorts.

 

[robertbishop]

Don't feed the troll... :roll:

Trolls? I think you mean;



That's better.

 

[sidmouth]

Privs and other other travel benefits are all part of the railway employees remuneration. I can't see the problem with that as all other employers have their own mix of remuneration packages necessary to attract sufficient numbers of staff - it is called supply and demand. I wonder what's included in the Daily Telegraph's remuneration package? If any one has a problem with priv tickets then it's up to them to get a job on the railway or shut up. PS and no I don't work on the railway (though my dad did; he retired 1988 and still retains his Gold Pass and LMS conditions....).

 

[Greenback]

Only where they are extremely limited in when they travel.

Obviously you are not aware of the actual fares that many Priv holders are meant to pay, or the restrictions that Priv or free travel carries with it.

Why don't train companies have us all paying Priv rates in order to maiximise income? (!)

Ther eis evidence from Priv holders that they would not travel at all if they did not have the facilities. There is also evidence that this generates income, much like the rock bottom Advances fares. Perhaps they should be abolished as well?

Anyway, since you either have no evidence to support your opinion, or are unwilling to produce it, I am sure people will be able to make up their own minds as to whether the additional revenue gained from the optional Priv travel fails to outweigh the revenue that might be lost due to Priv holders not paying higher fares.

1. Welcome to the forum.

2. Evidence that Priv cards drain money out of the public purse.[.QUOTE]

None has yet been forthcoming!

3. I would actually say that having privs actually generate income. If i use a box i will often use the buffet car (if one is fitted of course) Creates income, i will very often buy a mag of some sort at WH Smiths on the station (If there is one) creates income, i will buy a snack at say maybe Upper Crust (creates income), I have often upgraded to first class (creates income), i have paid for sleeper services (creates income), if i use my priv for a 75% discount that is often more then a super advance ticket (creates income).

4. If i didnt have a priv card all my travelling would be by road, therefore no money spent at any rail outlet or any revenue for a TOC (Lost Income)

And there is more evidence to support the fact that Privs do not drain the public purse or increase subsidy.