Caledonian Sleeper

[JonathanH]

Two 73s to Inverness this morning (73967+73969) but both the Aberdeen and Fort William portions have 66s - 66709 with 73971 to Aberdeen and 66738 with 73970 to Fort William

 

[Blindtraveler]

I can't help wondering if some of the money that should be being paid in staff wages isn't being spent on propping up the the 73 which to me never seemed a very good idea but hey what do I know? With regards to the lack of service to the seats on particularly the Highlander service with the call button I took this up with CS quite early in the process of transitioning to the new stock and they initially came up with a whole pile of excuses about short staffing at cetera but what later admitted that sometimes the the system they've installed goes unnoticed by crew who when questioned about it were most apologetic. I suggest it's probably a case of being persistent.

 

[JonathanH]

I can't help wondering if some of the money that should be being paid in staff wages isn't being spent on propping up the the 73 which to me never seemed a very good idea but hey what do I know?

The 73 is GBRf's problem, not Caledonian Sleeper. All Caledonian Sleeper have to do is pay GBRf to supply a train. If GBRf have to use a 66 so be it, it shouldn't be costing Caledonian Sleeper any more money.

 

[6Z09]

The 73 is GBRf's problem, not Caledonian Sleeper. All Caledonian Sleeper have to do is pay GBRf to supply a train. If GBRf have to use a 66 so be it, it shouldn't be costing Caledonian Sleeper any more money.

Maybe costs no money to Caledonian Sleeper ,but it certainly can cost time.
The logistics of day coaches to Fort William ,Dellner couplings and shunting are not the best option.
Add in the additional shunts at each destination to get the 73 on the coaches.

 

[norbitonflyer]

If your flying to Glasgow depending on the timings it may be better getting the citylink bus direct from there rather than faffing around with the train, the scenery is as good and the journey times a lot quicker.

I've already bought the train tickets, but thanks for the pointer. I don't think the coach schedule aligns with our flight, and as we have railcards the coach is lot more expensive (although I do need to factor in the bus from the airport to Queen Street)

 

[mpthomson]

I suggest the actual facts of this dispute are somewhat different to the perceived view of many uninformed commentators on this forum.

If you (or the RMT) can't make the case for this action clearly to the general public (or even on this forum, where the understanding is a little better) then there will be little to no public support for it, especially in the current circumstances.

This is going to be another self-inflicted wound for the RMT I suspect, especially if pay is brought into it.

 

[paul1609]

I've already bought the train tickets, but thanks for the pointer. I don't think the coach schedule aligns with our flight, and as we have railcards the coach is lot more expensive (although I do need to factor in the bus from the airport to Queen Street)

You can also get the 757 bus from stance 7 at the airport to Dumbarton Rd Dalmuir (app Caledonian St). This stop is known as Dalmuir Post Office although there is no Post office there now. The bus is every 30 minutes, its the same bus that provides the link to Paisley for the rail link tickets but in the opposite (Clydebank) direction. Its an every stop kind of bus that takes 50 minutes to Dalmuir but does go over the Erskine bridge so does have some interest. Dalmuir station (Fort William bound platform) is about 200yards from the bus stop. Its cheaper than the express bus in to the city centre but its obviously difficult to connect to a 3 trains a day and there's not much (anything!) of interest at Dalmuir.

 

[route101]

I've already bought the train tickets, but thanks for the pointer. I don't think the coach schedule aligns with our flight, and as we have railcards the coach is lot more expensive (although I do need to factor in the bus from the airport to Queen Street)

Only a few of the Citylink coaches call at Glasgow Airport. The Glasgow Airport bus is pretty expensive £12 return I think.

 

[mpthomson]

Pretty good. Rail enthusiasts have a dim view of anything which stops rail services, but the general public support key workers who kept services running during lockdown and are horrified that they are facing pay freezes which are real terms pay cuts. I suspect they are more likely to be unhappy with CS's mismanagement of it by cancelling and refunding instead of offering help.

With respect I don't think that's the likely outcome with respect to the public's take on this dispute.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With respect I don't think that's the likely outcome with respect to the public's take on this dispute.

I also don't think people will consider employees of what is now basically a premium tourist train as "key workers", any more than they would consider employees of (say) the Ffestiniog Railway as that.

If we were talking about the staff of their local commuter railway, maybe, but only maybe even then.

 

[ashkeba]

I also don't think people will consider employees of what is now basically a premium tourist train as "key workers", any more than they would consider employees of (say) the Ffestiniog Railway as that.

That seems probably a bigger problem than a load of railfans disagreeing with the logic of strikes that stop rail services.

Of course, the staff striking did not decide the change from essential sleeper service to "tourist hotel on wheels".

 

[Bletchleyite]

That seems probably a bigger problem than a load of railfans disagreeing with the logic of strikes that stop rail services.

Of course, the staff striking did not decide the change from essential sleeper service to "tourist hotel on wheels".

It's never been essential, or at least not since aeroplanes were invented.

 

[Journeyman]

It's never been essential, or at least not since aeroplanes were invented.

Exactly. If it were to be axed, in all honesty the hardship would be minimal.

 

[BRX]

It would be easy to argue that no mode of transport has ever been essential, as long as there was some other alternative.

But each option that's removed is a degradation in the service that's available to people. There are people for whom you could say that the removal of the sleeper service would be a similar level of 'hardship' as it would for other people if, say, all flights to Inverness ceased.

 

[Journeyman]

It would be easy to argue that no mode of transport has ever been essential, as long as there was some other alternative.

In this case, though, there are lots of alternatives. Possibly slightly fewer in terms of the Fort William service, and they're all arguably less convenient, but ultimately the sleeper provides a limited-capacity service for premium-paying passengers, for whom plenty of other modes of transport exist. I'd say the sleeper is somewhat less essential than possibly any other train service in the country.

But each option that's removed is a degradation in the service that's available to people. There are people for whom you could say that the removal of the sleeper service would be a similar level of 'hardship' as it would for other people if, say, all flights to Inverness ceased.

But if the sleeper to Inverness were to be axed, you'd see an upswing in demand for flights, so it's highly unlikely you'd run into problems there.

"Hardship" here is a relative term. If you're using the Sleeper often enough to be adversely affected by its removal, I'd suggest you're probably using it as a lifestyle choice to support something like second home ownership, or spending a few days a week working in London and the rest of your time in the Highlands, and if you can afford to do that, I'd argue you don't really know what "hardship" is.

 

[zwk500]

It would be easy to argue that no mode of transport has ever been essential, as long as there was some other alternative.

But each option that's removed is a degradation in the service that's available to people. There are people for whom you could say that the removal of the sleeper service would be a similar level of 'hardship' as it would for other people if, say, all flights to Inverness ceased.

It's a reduction of choice. If not enough people are choosing that option, what is the value in maintaining it? You have flights, day trains, cars and coaches as alternatives. Especially as the Sleeper's now marketed as 'an experience' rather than a mode of travel.

 

[Journeyman]

It's a reduction of choice. If not enough people are choosing that option, what is the value in maintaining it? You have flights, day trains, cars and coaches as alternatives. Especially as the Sleeper's now marketed as 'an experience' rather than a mode of travel.

Absolutely. It's a choice that requires an absolutely colossal subsidy, and if the service is persistently unreliable, be that through strike action, rolling stock failures, infrastructure problems, weather, whatever, then people will be put off using it. While you can possibly justify subsidising a train that's near full, if usage drops sufficiently to the point where half the trains are empty, then serious questions will be asked about future viability. As if COVID wasn't enough, just as tourism has started to reopen, the staff decide to shoot themselves in the foot by crippling the service for two weeks, which will no doubt result in a long-term drop in business, and massive reputational damage at a time when it totally can't be afforded. It's extremely naive to expect the public to support this action - they won't. They'll vote with their feet, and be far less willing to trust the Sleepers again in the future.

 

[miami]

but the general public support key workers who kept services running during lockdown and are horrified that they are facing pay freezes which are real terms pay cuts

Given that real key workers that were essential for everyone (NHS, supermarkets) received -- at most -- claps, and were supposed to be grateful for that, I suspect that "horror" will be limited to a very small subset of the country.

Have a referendum saying "We have £100m to spend, should we give it to nurses or give it to people operating an overnight train for people to get to/from London" and see what people say. People don't like unions - especialy RMT - at the best of times.

People carting empty trains from Scotland to London around during lockdown are not key workers in the public eyes. Yes technically they are, technically I am, technically pretty much everyone I know fits in to one of the categorys, but in the publics eyes key workers are those stacking shelves and running IVs into people, not those serving businessmen scotch and haggis on a luxury train.

With the UK government taking control of the railway, coupled with the reduced ability of an industry to hold London to hostage now that people have shown they can work from home, we could well see an end to above inflation pay rises every year. It will be interesting to see how things progress.

 

[andbrads]

Can someone shed some light on the social distancing reason that CS are using to keep the club car shut.

MK5 coaches are over 60m2, halve that for fixtures, vestibules etc. = at least 20 people with over 1m2 each (restaurants can have 1m distancing) and still allowing for staff? This is not taking into account that there are booths that will help further.

Seems very do-able with a risk assessment? Or is there some other reason (ie industrial relations) that's really at play?

 

[Journeyman]

Can someone shed some light on the social distancing reason that CS are using to keep the club car shut.

MK5 coaches are over 60m2, halve that for fixtures, vestibules etc. = at least 20 people with over 1m2 each (restaurants can have 1m distancing) and still allowing for staff? This is not taking into account that there are booths that will help further.

Seems very do-able with a risk assessment? Or is there some other reason (ie industrial relations) that's really at play?

I'd imagine that with very limited capacity, you'd have to constantly turn people away, and it would increase the risk of conflict and aggro with the staff. It's not ideal, but I can see why it's being done.

 

[CW2]

The CS on train staff rather enjoy having the area for their own enjoyment, as there is only minimal staff accommodation otherwise.

 

[andbrads]

I'd imagine that with very limited capacity, you'd have to constantly turn people away, and it would increase the risk of conflict and aggro with the staff. It's not ideal, but I can see why it's being done.

Is this not where a booking system would come in? You know, how restaurants and pretty much everywhere else has managed for the last year or so?

The CS on train staff rather enjoy having the area for their own enjoyment, as there is only minimal staff accommodation otherwise.

Hmmmm! And I take it they are also maintaining the 1 metre distancing which is so impossible to achieve with customers...

 

[miami]

The CS on train staff rather enjoy having the area for their own enjoyment, as there is only minimal staff accommodation otherwise.

Ahh, the "Coach K" situation.

Is this not where a booking system would come in? You know, how restaurants and pretty much everywhere else has managed for the last year or so?

If a restaurant doesn't get any money in, they go bust.

If the railway doesn't get any money in, they get bailed out some more.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ahh, the "Coach K" situation.

The answer to that is the same as Coach K but slightly easier - convert a berth to a staff lounge with a bay of seats and a table.

 

[paul1609]

In this case, though, there are lots of alternatives. Possibly slightly fewer in terms of the Fort William service, and they're all arguably less convenient, but ultimately the sleeper provides a limited-capacity service for premium-paying passengers, for whom plenty of other modes of transport exist. I'd say the sleeper is somewhat less essential than possibly any other train service in the country.

But if the sleeper to Inverness were to be axed, you'd see an upswing in demand for flights, so it's highly unlikely you'd run into problems there.

"Hardship" here is a relative term. If you're using the Sleeper often enough to be adversely affected by its removal, I'd suggest you're probably using it as a lifestyle choice to support something like second home ownership, or spending a few days a week working in London and the rest of your time in the Highlands, and if you can afford to do that, I'd argue you don't really know what "hardship" is.

Its a fallacy that the West Highlands are poorly connected. Fort William is only just over 2 hours drive from Glasgow Airport, its 3 hours on the citylink bus. The reality is that the whole railway is largely run for tourists and day trippers not just the sleepers. Locals will largely drive or get the citylink, its an hour quicker than the train. Its been like that for the 35 years Ive been regularly travelling to the area.

 

[JonathanH]

The answer to that is the same as Coach K but slightly easier - convert a berth to a staff lounge with a bay of seats and a table.

One berth really isn't enough though, more like two or three - certainly if more than one member of staff needs to use it. It is a bit difficult to identify what should be sacrificed for the staff area - there are already fewer berths than the stock they replaced.

 

[andbrads]

One berth really isn't enough though, more like two or three - certainly if more than one member of staff needs to use it. It is a bit difficult to identify what should be sacrificed for the staff area - there are already fewer berths than the stock they replaced.

Presumably this is because of the en-suites. Surely the higher fares charged for these would mean it washes its face?

 

[JonathanH]

Presumably this is because of the en-suites. Surely the higher fares charged for these would mean it washes its face?

Clearly it doesn't 'wash its face'. The question is whether the losses are more with less but more expensive accommodation than with the previous arrangements. It is a bit difficult to separate that from the overall higher costs of having to meet the costs of the new rolling stock.

 

[BRX]

In this case, though, there are lots of alternatives. Possibly slightly fewer in terms of the Fort William service, and they're all arguably less convenient, but ultimately the sleeper provides a limited-capacity service for premium-paying passengers, for whom plenty of other modes of transport exist. I'd say the sleeper is somewhat less essential than possibly any other train service in the country.

But if the sleeper to Inverness were to be axed, you'd see an upswing in demand for flights, so it's highly unlikely you'd run into problems there.

"Hardship" here is a relative term. If you're using the Sleeper often enough to be adversely affected by its removal, I'd suggest you're probably using it as a lifestyle choice to support something like second home ownership, or spending a few days a week working in London and the rest of your time in the Highlands, and if you can afford to do that, I'd argue you don't really know what "hardship" is.

I put hardship in scare quotes for a reason. All the things you say about regular sleeper users you could say about regular air users. I'm just saying that the sleeper is no more or less essential than other modes. Having choices allows more people to use the mode that works best for them. Reducing choices is a degradation of service.

 

[CBlue]

Just about every alternative doesn't require a ridiculous level of subsidy!

The sleeper would never pay for itself or even come close - as far as cost benefit goes you'd be far better off spending the money on something else instead of what feels a bit like a vanity project by politicians.