Caledonian Sleeper

[MrEd]

Right, OK. Sounds like some change management is needed to get the staff to let go of the good old days!

That is true, and has been a cause of unhappiness among staff for a couple of years now, and it’s obvious that staff have been unhappy since the Mk5s began to be rolled out. There are some exceptional staff, mostly at the Fort William and Inverness bases, but a great many who don’t seem to care, and I suspect that this is because of low morale. That said, the current dispute is entirely about a pay freeze. I personally think that the slightly draconian decision to go on strike for two weeks during the peak summer season (coinciding with Euro 2020) over the pay freeze was very much the final straw in a long list of grievances between employees and management.

The problem is that a good business needs to value and support its staff, and ensure their loyalty. I don’t get much of a feeling that CS succeed in this. Loyal, hardworking staff are an asset to a good business. It may be a vicious cycle, but I wonder if Serco’s current business model has contributed to staff dissatisfaction and low morale? The changes have made staff feel withdrawn and have meant that their enthusiasm for the work has worn down.

As you say, the fact that the staff (some of whom are long-standing and have had considerable experience working sleepers with BR as well as Scotrail under NatEx/First Group) had to handle more changes in 18 months between 2018 and 2019 than they had handled in the past 30 years probably had a lot to do with this. Staff also have to be in the unenviable position of communicating unpopular changes in company policy to passengers (and dealing with passengers’ complaints as the fallout from this).

 

[andbrads]

That is true, and has been a cause of unhappiness among staff for a couple of years now, and it’s obvious that staff have been unhappy since the Mk5s began to be rolled out. There are some exceptional staff, mostly at the Fort William and Inverness bases, but a great many who don’t seem to care, and I suspect that this is because of low morale. That said, the current dispute is entirely about a pay freeze. I personally think that the slightly draconian decision to go on strike for two weeks during the peak summer season (coinciding with Euro 2020) over the pay freeze was very much the final straw in a long list of grievances between employees and management.

The problem is that a good business needs to value and support its staff, and ensure their loyalty. I don’t get much of a feeling that CS succeed in this. Loyal, hardworking staff are an asset to a good business. It may be a vicious cycle, but I wonder if Serco’s current business model has contributed to staff dissatisfaction and low morale? The changes have made staff feel withdrawn and have meant that their enthusiasm for the work has worn down.

As you say, the fact that the staff (some of whom are long-standing and have had considerable experience working sleepers with BR as well as Scotrail under NatEx/First Group) had to handle more changes in 18 months between 2018 and 2019 than they had handled in the past 30 years probably had a lot to do with this. Staff also have to be in the unenviable position of communicating unpopular changes in company policy to passengers (and dealing with passengers’ complaints as the fallout from this).

What kind of unpopular changes have the staff had to communicate? Some examples would be good. For instance, turning customers away if they are 5 mins late for the breakfast cut off, is that a company policy or is that something that is down the the staff member?

And even if it is company policy, what would happen to the staff if they turned a blind eye for minor infractions?

Very few, if any, front of house staff have influence on the procedures they are operating to. So having to enact something that isn’t their idea is pretty universal up and down the country and far from unique to CS.

 

[35B]

What kind of unpopular changes have the staff had to communicate? Some examples would be good. For instance, turning customers away if they are 5 mins late for the breakfast cut off, is that a company policy or is that something that is down the the staff member?

And even if it is company policy, what would happen to the staff if they turned a blind eye for minor infractions?

Very few, if any, front of house staff have influence on the procedures they are operating to. So having to enact something that isn’t their idea is pretty universal up and down the country and far from unique to CS.

Examples of boarding protocols and food service have been given. And, yes, staff have to follow instructions but can be forgiven for feeling sore if the result is that they are on the receiving end of grief from customers.

It’s not necessarily about control by the staff, but the natural reaction when something that works is changed for the worse.

 

[andbrads]

Examples of boarding protocols and food service have been given. And, yes, staff have to follow instructions but can be forgiven for feeling sore if the result is that they are on the receiving end of grief from customers.

It’s not necessarily about control by the staff, but the natural reaction when something that works is changed for the worse.

Sorry if I have missed it but how is the food service any different from with the old coaches? If the staff take an ear bashing over the hot water issues, then that I can sympathise with to a certain degree although handling the bad, as well as the good, is an essential part of any customer-facing role and I still think CS staff are no different to anyone else. For example, I work in new build home sales; the sales people based on site regularly take a coating from customers because their plot is late, which they have zero control over. I have only slightly more influence over this as a manager, ultimately we are relying on another team to do their job which is in turn dependent on many variables.

Unless the sales team on site can detach from what they can’t control, keep the buyers on-side and ultimately process and handle the situation without unduly affecting the customer or other colleagues, then they will fail in the role. I do offer myself up as a point of escalation with unhappy customers but only once the staff have given it a fair go themselves, I do also cut the staff some slack with whingeing and b!tching about things behind closed doors, but I will never tolerate this seeping into the customer-facing side and them becoming aware of any malaise within the company.

Most of the team have served for several years which is on the longer side for new homes sales. So it proves that you can still have long serving staff with such an approach.

Also, when you say things that have ‘changed for the worse’, worse for whom? The customer, or the staff?

 

[35B]

Sorry if I have missed it but how is the food service any different from with the old coaches? If the staff take an ear bashing over the hot water issues, then that I can sympathise with to a certain degree although handling the bad, as well as the good, is an essential part of any customer-facing role and I still think CS staff are no different to anyone else. For example, I work in new build home sales; the sales people based on site regularly take a coating from customers because their plot is late, which they have zero control over. I have only slightly more influence over this as a manager, ultimately we are relying on another team to do their job which is in turn dependent on many variables.

Unless the sales team on site can detach from what they can’t control, keep the buyers on-side and ultimately process and handle the situation without unduly affecting the customer or other colleagues, then they will fail in the role. I do offer myself up as a point of escalation with unhappy customers but only once the staff have given it a fair go themselves, I do also cut the staff some slack with whingeing and b!tching about things behind closed doors, but I will never tolerate this seeping into the customer-facing side and them becoming aware of any malaise within the company.

Most of the team have served for several years which is on the longer side for new homes sales. So it proves that you can still have long serving staff with such an approach.

Also, when you say things that have ‘changed for the worse’, worse for whom? The customer, or the staff?

The feedback on here is customer side, and about moves from what worked to what didn’t work. I take your point about the roles of different teams, but these were decisions taken away from the front line that they had both to implement and be criticised for, without even the cushion you have of knowing you’re being paid to take one for the company as a whole.

 

[andbrads]

The feedback on here is customer side, and about moves from what worked to what didn’t work. I take your point about the roles of different teams, but these were decisions taken away from the front line that they had both to implement and be criticised for, without even the cushion you have of knowing you’re being paid to take one for the company as a whole.

Maybe it is hidden in 321 pages here but could you clarify what has not worked about the food service?

 

[miami]

The pantries were design features from a bygone era, dating back to a very different sleeper product, i.e. the traditional BR one.

Perhaps the problem is that the company needs different staff to operate a hotel on wheels, and the best way to have done that via change management would have been to get rid of staff hired for the old way (whatever that was), and hire new staff that treat customer service as their primary purpose, on standard catering/hotel terms.

 

[MrEd]

What kind of unpopular changes have the staff had to communicate? Some examples would be good. For instance, turning customers away if they are 5 mins late for the breakfast cut off, is that a company policy or is that something that is down the the staff member?

And even if it is company policy, what would happen to the staff if they turned a blind eye for minor infractions?

Very few, if any, front of house staff have influence on the procedures they are operating to. So having to enact something that isn’t their idea is pretty universal up and down the country and far from unique to CS.

OK, here goes:
1) the bizarre end-of-platform boarding system of 2018-19, which staff and passengers alike hated.
2) the short-lived but ridiculous ’no sharing tables with strangers’ rule in the lounge car (another piece of 2018-19 madness), which made some passengers irate.
3) stopping first class passengers from reserving tables in the lounge car/stopping staff reserving tables for regulars, which had been a perfectly accepted practice for some years previously.
4) increases in the cost of berth supplements
5) pre-Covid, the breakfast card ordering system
6) underestimation by CS of how busy the lounge car would be, resulting in the lounge car running out of food completely/having half the menu unavailable mid-journey.

In First Group days, things were very laid back and management probably turned a blind eye to a lot of ingenious ways of working among individual crews. Serco management is quite top-down and staff seem much more reluctant to stray from company policy. The reason for the breakfast cut-off that you mention is that first class breakfasts are served on trays using crockery (standard class use disposable takeaway containers) and this must all be collected and stored on a trolley before the train arrives at its destination. This means that the staff are under quite a lot of pressure to ensure that all cutlery etc is collected before arrival. It’s not so much of an issue on the Fort William route because of the late arrival time, but it can mean quite a pressured breakfast service southbound into Euston or northbound into Aberdeen/Edinburgh/Glasgow.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jun 2021 ==

Maybe it is hidden in 321 pages here but could you clarify what has not worked about the food service?

In addition to what I’ve said above:

1) The sleeper hosts are not trained chefs/kitchen assistants, but find themselves having to plate and present fiddly dishes (whereas in First Group days, the hot meals were deliberately chosen so as to be cooked and presented in one pot). This is very time-consuming.
2) Some crews are reluctant to serve hot meals to those sitting on the bar stools on the ground that the tables are too narrow. This seems to me to be bizarre. I don’t know if this is company H&S policy or staff being difficult, but it does make the service harder.
3) The breakfast card ordering system pre-Covid was a disaster, as half the passengers forgot to fill out the card. So staff were spending the early part of the journey (while the lounge car was full to bursting) trying to find passengers to ask them what they wanted for breakfast. The old ordering system from First Group days allowed passengers simply to tell the host on boarding what they wanted for breakfast, meaning that the host had a full list of breakfast orders by the time the train departed. This old system was easier for both passengers and staff (and has in fact been reintroduced for breakfast orders during the Covid restrictions). The old system works well- so why on earth did CS introduce those silly cards?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jun 2021 ==

Perhaps the problem is that the company needs different staff to operate a hotel on wheels, and the best way to have done that via change management would have been to get rid of staff hired for the old way (whatever that was), and hire new staff that treat customer service as their primary purpose, on standard catering/hotel terms.

I don’t think that this would be possible, first because of TUPE, and second because the union is unlikely to allow railway staff to be hired on those terms.

 

[Butts]

Perhaps they should have left First in charge of an albeit lesser ambience with lower expectations but better service and Bargain Berths.

Would punters prefer or more importantly be willing to accept a ramshackle experience at a significantly lower price ?

 

[CBlue]

Perhaps they should have left First in charge of an albeit lesser ambience with lower expectations but better service and Bargain Berths.

Would punters prefer or more importantly be willing to accept a ramshackle experience at a significantly lower price ?

Lower prices and increase the already ridiculous subsidy further? You're having a laugh, right...?

 

[Butts]

Lower prices and increase the already ridiculous subsidy further? You're having a laugh, right...?

True, you might as well make it free

Seriously what is the difference between the cost of providing the service and the revenue raised ?

 

[greyman42]

2) the short-lived but ridiculous ’no sharing tables with strangers’ rule in the lounge car (another piece of 2018-19 madness), which made some passengers irate.

What was the thinking behind that one?

 

[Blindtraveler]

Perhaps they should have left First in charge of an albeit lesser ambience with lower expectations but better service and Bargain Berths.

Would punters prefer or more importantly be willing to accept a ramshackle experience at a significantly lower price ?

In the case of this one, yes although I do not miss the old seats. There were just too many inconveniences with those and they were just unfit for purpose.

 

[Butts]

In the case of this one, yes although I do not miss the old seats. There were just too many inconveniences with those and they were just unfit for purpose.

Why don't they offer to swap the CS stock for The Riviera stock operating down to the West Country ?

 

[CBlue]

True, you might as well make it free

Seriously what is the difference between the cost of providing the service and the revenue raised ?

Average passngers about 300k passengers a year

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/1869/caledonian-sleeper-key-stats-2019-20.pdf

Assuming they all go to/from London, that would be 5,800 a week, or 961 per day, or 480 in each direction - 240 people for each train.

At £10m a year it's a mere £33/journey subsidy, or 7.8p per mile subsidy.

That's a best case scenario and before passenger levels dropped, of course. The subsidy now is likely far higher.

 

[JonathanH]

Why don't they offer to swap the CS stock for The Riviera stock operating down to the West Country ?

For what purpose? The seats aren't better in the Night Riviera stock and there isn't enough to run in both directions to and from Scotland.

 

[Butts]

That's a best case scenario and before passenger levels dropped, of course. The subsidy now is likely far higher.

Does The Riviera make money or is that subsidised as well ?

 

[JonathanH]

Does The Riviera make money or is that subsidised as well ?

Clearly the Night Riviera doesn't make money but the costs are wrapped up in the rest of the GWR service rather than being separately identified to outside observers.

 

[Butts]

Clearly the Night Riviera doesn't make money but the costs are wrapped up in the rest of the GWR service rather than being separately identified to outside observers.

So when First ran Scotrail and the Sleepers was that the same case ?

Only separating it as an entity has highlighted the massive subsidies.

 

[CBlue]

Does The Riviera make money or is that subsidised as well ?

I think it best to assume that sleepers don't make money regardless of what fiddling around is done with stock and staff.

 

[35B]

So when First ran Scotrail and the Sleepers was that the same case ?

Only separating it as an entity has highlighted the massive subsidies.

No - they were visible already; the Night Riviera was nearly killed 15-odd years ago as DfT recognised the cost savings from not running it.

 

[Butts]

I think it best to assume that sleepers don't make money regardless of what fiddling around is done with stock and staff.

As the seated sections seem to be a common source of complaint did they ever consider hitching a GWR style HST 1st Class Coach as part of the service for the non-berth customers ?

 

[Bald Rick]

Why don't they offer to swap the CS stock for The Riviera stock operating down to the West Country ?

Because then CS could operate to/from one Scotland location rather than 5.

 

[Butts]

Because then CS could operate to/from one Scotland location rather than 5.

Could CS or the Night Riviera operate a sleeper from Inverness to Penzance - is this technically possible ?

 

[popeter45]

Could CS or the Night Riviera operate a sleeper from Inverness to Penzance - is this technically possible ?

technically yes it used to happen
economically no way

 

[Bald Rick]

OK, here goes:
1) the bizarre end-of-platform boarding system of 2018-19, which staff and passengers alike hated.
2) the short-lived but ridiculous ’no sharing tables with strangers’ rule in the lounge car (another piece of 2018-19 madness), which made some passengers irate.
3) stopping first class passengers from reserving tables in the lounge car/stopping staff reserving tables for regulars, which had been a perfectly accepted practice for some years previously.
4) increases in the cost of berth supplements
5) pre-Covid, the breakfast card ordering system
6) underestimation by CS of how busy the lounge car would be, resulting in the lounge car running out of food completely/having half the menu unavailable mid-journey.

Thanks for this @MrEd ; is this from your personal observation or is it what you have learned from the CS team?

My view of the above:

1) did seem a little odd, more staff intensive, but I can see why it was done (to help new / infrequent travellers know where their coach was).

2) agreed not a good thing to try

3) again I can see why that was done, to get maximum use out of the club car. But I can see both sides.

4) not really an issue for the onboard staff, surely?

5) I preferred the card system. I imagine that some passengers didn’t like needing to decide on the point of boarding, and some passengers (me!) didn’t like it when waiting to board when the couple in front are taking an age to decide! Also I guess the card system worked better on the southbound for the Scotland stops.

6) I wonder if that was because the sleeper became a lot more popular with the new stock, and CS had based their orders on historical data? Nevertheless, inexcusable.

Re the more complex ‘fiddly’ dishes, I agree that it is more work for the on board team, and one hopes that suitable training was given. And I also hope that some consideration was given to the time taken to prep different dishes. But if there’s demand for it, then it comes down to delivering what the customer wants.

 

[mmh]

Card ordering for breakfast seems a bit of a niggly thing to have a complaint over - many people will have used such a thing before at a hotel, on a plane, a hospital...

People don't like being handed a menu and asked to choose instantly in a restaurant or pub, I can't see it being popular on a station platform either!

 

[Bald Rick]

Could CS or the Night Riviera operate a sleeper from Inverness to Penzance - is this technically possible ?

Technically - yes. But who would use it? I’d be surprised if there is more than one person a week travelling Penzance to Inverness (other than by bike, lots do that). It would be a minimum of 15 hours.

technically yes it used to happen
economically no way

It didn’t used to happen. There were sleepers from Plymouth? / Bristol to Glasgow / Edinburgh about 25 years ago, but I’m pretty sure there was never a regular Penzance - Inverness.

 

[GordonT]

Clearly the Night Riviera doesn't make money but the costs are wrapped up in the rest of the GWR service rather than being separately identified to outside observers.

So does this imply that the rest of the GWR passenger market most of whom have probably never heard of the Night Riviera are to an extent being fleeced in order to enable perhaps 0.1% of the overall GWR demand to travel in the style to which it has been accustomed?

 

[MrEd]

Thanks for this @MrEd ; is this from your personal observation or is it what you have learned from the CS team?

My view of the above:

1) did seem a little odd, more staff intensive, but I can see why it was done (to help new / infrequent travellers know where their coach was).

2) agreed not a good thing to try

3) again I can see why that was done, to get maximum use out of the club car. But I can see both sides.

4) not really an issue for the onboard staff, surely?

5) I preferred the card system. I imagine that some passengers didn’t like needing to decide on the point of boarding, and some passengers (me!) didn’t like it when waiting to board when the couple in front are taking an age to decide! Also I guess the card system worked better on the southbound for the Scotland stops.

6) I wonder if that was because the sleeper became a lot more popular with the new stock, and CS had based their orders on historical data? Nevertheless, inexcusable.

Re the more complex ‘fiddly’ dishes, I agree that it is more work for the on board team, and one hopes that suitable training was given. And I also hope that some consideration was given to the time taken to prep different dishes. But if there’s demand for it, then it comes down to delivering what the customer wants.

I would say that it’s a mixture of personal observation and speaking to staff. Of course, the staff aren’t themselves bothered about fare increases but seemed to be the favoured punchbag of irate passengers bemoaning them, particularly if other aspects of the service were below par. This contributed to a lot of staff stress.

I think you’re right about running out of food: I don’t think CS ever correctly estimated how popular the club/lounge car was on the Highlander.