Do you think Thameslink has failed? And what can be done to fix it

[Mutant Lemming]

I didn't refer to earnings potential, booking leave or future prospects etc etc.
I referred to the earlier post about people losing their jobs. Of course there will always be some (probably an employer happy to find an excuse) but it would have to be a poor employer to sack staff who had made every reasonable effort - which is all I said.

And I did mention those (who now make up a considerable part of the workforce) who are on short term contracts who will not have their contracts renewed if they cannot attend on time. Is that not losing their job or do contract staff not count ? .. there are also no end of 'poor employers' out there (try asking freight drivers) who couldn't give a monkey's fig how much effort someone makes to turn up. You really do need to get out more and meet people who work in the real world.

 

[Robertj21a]

And I did mention those (who now make up a considerable part of the workforce) who are on short term contracts who will not have their contracts renewed if they cannot attend on time. Is that not losing their job or do contract staff not count ? .. there are also no end of 'poor employers' out there (try asking freight drivers) who couldn't give a monkey's fig how much effort someone makes to turn up. You really do need to get out more and meet people who work in the real world.

Thanks for the personal abuse. If you knew what I did I think even you would realise how silly your comments are !

I have every sympathy with all those affected by the Thameslink problems, the delays, cancellations, lack of information and general frustration. All I have said is that it is a poor employer who sacks staff who have made every effort. Not sure why even you can't understand that.

 

[WelshBluebird]

All I have said is that it is a poor employer who sacks staff who have made every effort

That may be the case - but poor employer or not, a job that pays the bills is better than no job, and if someone specifically loses their job because they can no longer get to work for a specific time reliably because the railways have messed up, who do you think they will blame?

 

[GodAtum]

If your frame of reference is a 9-5 office job on a perm contract then you're probably right.

But if you're a contractor, you'll have something like a week's notice and a renewal every 6 months or so. The employer is getting you in because they have an acute gap to fill and you're paid by the day. They can't really afford anything like the same degree of flexibility. And when renewal time comes round, reliability will be a key factor.

And that's at the upper end. What do you think those on zero hours contracts will experience?

Let's say you work in retail. Maybe healthcare. You absolutely can't be late, can you? And remember, it's not just London, there are hundreds of thousands of local journeys where the alternative isn't there because train has always been the obvious way of getting there.

From my part, my job is secure (and I can get there by bus or hire a car). But I am currently looking for a new job. But 90% of jobs in my field are in London. And I couldn't even guarantee making it to an interview at the moment.

But the most emotional part? When I have to visit the London office, or go to a conference, at the moment, that means I don't get to see my son that day. Now, I'm lucky in that I can usually avoid going. But if I were prevented from seeing my son every weekday for the foreseeable future? That would send me over the edge.

Due to Southern trains being only 8 coaches instead of 12, and the times not being suitable for my, I've had to hand in my notice.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Thanks for the personal abuse. If you knew what I did I think even you would realise how silly your comments are !

I have every sympathy with all those affected by the Thameslink problems, the delays, cancellations, lack of information and general frustration. All I have said is that it is a poor employer who sacks staff who have made every effort. Not sure why even you can't understand that.

Not how your post comes across to most - half of the employers are poor these days but most employees have no choice but to work for them. if you feel you are facing abuse from me or anyone else then please report the matter it isn't my intention to harm anyone's feelings. I'm quite happy to see the post deleted if it offends you.

 

[Robertj21a]

Not how your post comes across to most - half of the employers are poor these days but most employees have no choice but to work for them. if you feel you are facing abuse from me or anyone else then please report the matter it isn't my intention to harm anyone's feelings. I'm quite happy to see the post deleted if it offends you.

Don't worry, I've coped with far worse !

I dispute that 'half of the employers are poor these days' - but it's a subjective issue anyway and you won't have any facts to support that, so I'll ignore it as simply untrue.

I'm also not sure why you feel that my post comes across differently to what I posted. What I do know is that quite a few people seem to have totally ignored what I actually wrote - and are then more than happy to add in issues that I never raised - it may be that you recognise yourself in that pastime.

 

[Hadders]

Small things can count against you, even with an understanding employer.

Say there's a restructure, or you're going for a promotion. All other things are equal, is the person making the decision going to go for the employee who's always late (even if it isn't their fault), or someone who's always on time?

 

[bramling]

Small things can count against you, even with an understanding employer.

Say there's a restructure, or you're going for a promotion. All other things are equal, is the person making the decision going to go for the employee who's always late (even if it isn't their fault), or someone who's always on time?

Even the most supportive employers are not going to be able to sustain someone who is routinely late. Sooner or later they’re going to get an attendance warning, which will then escalate. There’s already people losing pay thanks to this RailSham, and others who have had to do things like purchase additional cars.

 

[Hadders]

Even the most supportive employers are not going to be able to sustain someone who is routinely late. Sooner or later they’re going to get an attendance warning, which will then escalate. There’s already people losing pay thanks to this RailSham, and others who have had to do things like purchase additional cars.

I'm fortunate. I work for an understanding company and I only have to travel into London a couple of times a week. I also travel from Stevenage which thankfully has been far better served during this shambles than places like Arlesey and Sandy.

I used to get the 0736 departure arriving at Kings Cross at 0800 and take a 20 minute walk to the office, arriving before 0830. If there was a problem with the 0736 there was always the 0738 or the 0758, 0802 or 0807 which would still get me to the office before 0830 if I took the Underground instead of the 20 minute walk.

The only way I can be certain of arriving at the office before 0830 at the moment is to get to the station for 0700 and hope something's running. It's the same on the way home - I always used to arrive back at Stevenage around 1810 but you can add half an hour to that at the moment.

This shambles just takes the certainty away and effectively extends my working day by an hour.

 

[jagardner1984]

Put it all in a idiotically long tunnel, 100% separate from other services. Including four track tunnels to allow for passing. Simple. Hilariously expensive. Absolutely impractical. Weatherproof.

But actually .....

Isn't the real problem here that you have lots of incredibly old infrastructure, joined together in various unusual and not ideal ways, running at virtual capacity from the off ?

It's easy to forget this project was originally called Thameslink 2000, it is utterly incredulous that 18 years after the project was supposed to be delivered initially, GTR/Network Rail/DFT (and for DFT to stand back and point the finger at either party is absolutely crazy) did not produce and staff to a draft timetable a year / 18 months ago. This was always going to be such a momentous change that some staffing slack / wasted staff time was inevitable, and DFT should have absorbed some of the costs of delivering a change they initiated efficiently.

But broader than that, rather than trying to find bits of old railway to stitch together to form major parts of the capital's transport infrastructure, wouldn't we be best to think in Crossrail type terms, and be honest about the costs ? These bits of infrastructure (ECML, MML, WCML) are running at capacity. Build an entirely new route from A to B, with links to existing infrastructure at either end. With inbuilt recovery routes (4 track). Phenomenally costly, yes, but surely all we've managed to do here in the 25 odd years of this project, is to create a pressure point so densely operated that a single point of failure will produce carnage for thousands of people.

Aside from anything else, there is the target to build tens of thousands of new homes across the south east in the coming years. In X years time, Thameslink is full and standing, where does the next capacity come from ?

Until we have realism in transport planning, what hope is there to avoid further debacles ?

 

[Mutant Lemming]

What I don't understand is why different trains are late and cancelled each day, those that are advertised as running often become 'delayed' then disappear, when trains do run you have three or four serving the same stops in a row followed by a big gap (e.g. 15:03,15:13, 15:18, 15:33, all stations out of St.Pancras then nothing till 17;43). Why can't they just do the usual and run an emergency standard timetable. Two trains an hour fast of 12 cars and two trains an hour stopping even if they just ran Bedford/Luton - Kentish Town would be better than the current mess. The service is so hit & miss as to become worthless to it's regular users.