First Group: General Discussion

[noddingdonkey]

Is something afoot at Huddersfield/Halifax depots? I saw a Halifax route 503 branded double decker on Huddersfield's 328 route earlier, then one of Halifax's "red arrow" single deckers on the 183.

 

[Blackpudding]

Is something afoot at Huddersfield/Halifax depots? I saw a Halifax route 503 branded double decker on Huddersfield's 328 route earlier, then one of Halifax's "red arrow" single deckers on the 183.

The access road to Huddersfield depot is being resurfaced and so Halifax based vehicles are being used for today.

 

[noddingdonkey]

Interesting, thanks for that.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Well, First Essex drivers are adding to their benefits, apparently!

Which surely is the point about First. They are so much at sixes and sevens that they couldn't be consistent even if they tried.

Care to explain?

 

[DragonEast]

Care to explain?

I gather extra/higher allowances have been offered for traveling between Colchester and Chelmsford depots to achieve a settlement without it going to the Union, allegedly. Of course I acknowledge it's "normal" behaviour and perhaps even reasonable, but it shows the nonsense of the idea of some "blanket" rule to "attack" benefits across the board. It seems to be related to the (already) shared 70 service. Doesn't make it any better or more reliable for the poor passengers who pay for it all though!

 

[InspectorBloke]

I gather extra/higher allowances have been offered for traveling between Colchester and Chelmsford depots to achieve a settlement without it going to the Union, allegedly. Of course I acknowledge it's "normal" behaviour and perhaps even reasonable, but it shows the nonsense of the idea of some "blanket" rule to "attack" benefits across the board. It seems to be related to the (already) shared 70 service. Doesn't make it any better or more reliable for the poor passengers who pay for it all though!

It's slightly different to what you suggest. Currently drivers at Colchester and Chelmsford sign on and off at the bus depots and are then paid travel time between the depot and the bus station if required.

What will happen instead is that drivers will sign on at the bus depot but will sign off at the bus station if required or vice versa, thereby cutting the travel time that drivers currently receive between depots and bus stations and increasing driving hours potentially.

So it is a benefit loss to drivers. First seem to have offered a one off payment in order that the union and drivers accept the offer without resorting to industrial action or protracted negotiations.

As for service 70, the majority of journeys will be operated by Chelmsford, with some operated by Colchester. Braintree outstation currently operates the majority of journeys, with some operated by Colchester and Chelmsford. Drivers won't be paid extra for operating services.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It's slightly different to what you suggest. Currently drivers at Colchester and Chelmsford sign on and off at the bus depots and are then paid travel time between the depot and the bus station if required.

What will happen instead is that drivers will sign on at the bus depot but will sign off at the bus station if required or vice versa, thereby cutting the travel time that drivers currently receive between depots and bus stations and increasing driving hours potentially.

So it is a benefit loss to drivers. First seem to have offered a one off payment in order that the union and drivers accept the offer without resorting to industrial action or protracted negotiations.

As for service 70, the majority of journeys will be operated by Chelmsford, with some operated by Colchester. Braintree outstation currently operates the majority of journeys, with some operated by Colchester and Chelmsford. Drivers won't be paid extra for operating services.

So it's a one off ex gratia payment in order to secure a longer term cost saving by removing some restrictive practice? So pretty sensible?

 

[DragonEast]

So it's a one off ex gratia payment in order to secure a longer term cost saving by removing some restrictive practice? So pretty sensible?

That's fine. All sorted. They can just carry on fire-fighting trying to run too many buses with too few resources. And their passengers can carry on complaining into thin air, or in the Essex vernacular "get lost".

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

That's fine. All sorted. They can just carry on fire-fighting trying to run too many buses with too few resources. And their passengers can carry on complaining into thin air, or in the Essex vernacular "get lost".

No, but you get the point that the particular criticism that you made is actually something sensible.

 

[Cesarcollie]

That's fine. All sorted. They can just carry on fire-fighting trying to run too many buses with too few resources. And their passengers can carry on complaining into thin air, or in the Essex vernacular "get lost".

In fairness there is a relatively new MD in post. He will have multiple challenges, the first and foremost being profitability. You can't change everything overnight, and whilst revenue growth will no doubt be on his list, the 'instant wins' are things like changing T & C and sorting out loss-makers like Clacton. The latter also releases buses which starts to ease the vehicle age profile (albeit it's a drop in the ocean....).

 

[Volvodart]

At long last they are doing something with Greyhound Canada

http://www.firstgroupplc.com/news-and-media/latest-news/2018/09-07-18a.aspx

Statement by Greyhound Canada

[*]Greyhound Canada to downsize its Canadian business based on a 41% decline in ridership since 2010
[*]Effective October 31, 2018, operations will discontinue in all provinces except Ontario and Quebec; Canada-US routes will continue
[/LIST]


TORONTO, Ontario (July 9, 2018) -- Greyhound Canada has taken the difficult decision to downsize its operations. The company has notified all proper authorities of its intention to discontinue service – both passenger and freight -- effective October 31, 2018 in the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. In British Columbia, all routes will cease except for Vancouver to Seattle, which is operated by Greyhound Lines, Inc. (USA) and BoltBus.



All routes in Ontario and Quebec will continue unchanged, aside from the Trans-Canada service west of Sudbury in northern Ontario, which we will exit.



Greyhound Canada will continue to serve the following corridors:

• Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal-New York
• Toronto-Niagara Falls-Buffalo-New York
• Toronto-London-Windsor-Detroit
• Toronto-Barrie, Toronto-Guelph/Kitchener/Cambridge, and all other southern Ontario services.

Customers can find additional information by visiting www.greyhound.ca or calling 1-800-661-8747.



Decision rationale



This decision is regrettable and is due to a challenging transportation environment that is characterized by declining ridership in rural communities; increased competition from subsidized national and inter-regional passenger transportation services; the new entry of ultra-low-cost airline carriers; regulatory constraints, and increased car travel. Greyhound envisions that these changes will result in a viable, sustainable business on the remaining routes.



Greyhound Canada had taken a range of cost reduction steps over the last few years, including frequency adjustments to route schedules and other efficiency measures. Unfortunately, these actions were insufficient, and the downward trajectory continued.



Stuart Kendrick, Senior Vice President, Greyhound Canada, said: “It is with a heavy heart that we announce these service impacts for the end of October. We understand that these route changes are difficult for our customers. Despite best efforts over several years, ridership has dropped nearly 41% across the country since 2010 within a changing and increasingly challenging transportation environment. Simply put, we can no longer operate unsustainable routes.



“We are committed to keeping customers informed and will continue to provide fair and open communications to ensure that adequate notice is given.”



Business as usual until October 31, 2018



Important to note: it is business as usual until October 31, 2018 — Greyhound Canada’s operations will continue during the summer period and beyond Thanksgiving.



Route changes and route retention



Effective October 31, 2018 the route information is as follows:

• British Columbia – discontinue all routes. Note: Service between Vancouver and Seattle, which is operated by Greyhound Lines, Inc. (USA) and BoltBus, is unaffected.
• Alberta – discontinue all routes
• Saskatchewan – discontinue all routes
• Manitoba – discontinue all routes
• Ontario - In Ontario, we will operate substantially as we do today in the southern and eastern regions of the province with no changes in the Toronto and Ottawa areas. There will be changes in the northern part of the province. Service will be discontinued on the Trans-Canada Highway, west of Sudbury. Greyhound Canada will continue to operate in southern Ontario.
• Quebec - In Quebec there are no changes, with service between Ottawa and Montreal unaffected. Service between Montreal and New York that is operated by Greyhound Lines, Inc. (USA) is also unaffected.

Greyhound Canada is continuing its discussions with provincial and federal governments about the importance of government investments in rural connectivity.



In addition to these changes, FirstGroup announced at our annual results in May a wider review of our entire Greyhound business, which is ongoing.



Press contacts:



Ontario and Quebec:

Veronica Green | Tel: (613) 867-9128 | veronica@blueprintpr.ca

Wendy Cumming | Tel: (613) 619-4555 | wendy@blueprintpr.ca



British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan:

Veronica Rivas | Tel: (778) 996-2845| vrivas@blueprintpr.ca



Customer information:



1-800-661-8747

www.greyhound.ca

www.twitter.com/GreyhoundBus

www.facebook.com/GreyhoundBus

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

At long last they are doing something with Greyhound Canada

http://www.firstgroupplc.com/news-and-media/latest-news/2018/09-07-18a.aspx

Surprised that they are keeping any of it and given the recent results, it needed major surgery as a minimum. Would TOT have sanctioned this sort of thing?

Glad I travelled on the Vancouver to Whistler route into the Rockies - rather more scenic than Transdev’s Whitby route!

 

[Volvodart]

Tim said that this is what they had to do, but indicated it took time for some unexplained reason.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Tim said that this is what they had to do, but indicated it took time for some unexplained reason.

When did he say that?

 

[Volvodart]

One of the analysts presentations some time ago. It was mentioned in the September 2017 results presentation in more detail.

 

[overthewater]

This should have all been done by April of this year.

 

[Robertj21a]

I don't claim to know the Greyhound Canada ops very well but, given the size of First's problems, it seems rather odd that they didn't strip out the whole operation. This appears to be a bit half-hearted and will, presumably, still need quite a bit of costly management structure and overheads to maintain.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

One of the analysts presentations some time ago. It was mentioned in the September 2017 results presentation in more detail.

That was "In a related development, we have ended our old pooling arrangements in the northeast corridor that had been conducted under traditional coach commercial arrangements, because the market has moved to our mobile offerings and we needed to shed past practices. And finally, we are continuing our cost reduction programme in Canada by, most recently, filing to eliminate numerous routes in British Columbia, where we still face regulation."

That they have been able to announce the results and then make these changes so quickly shows that these issues were not that intractable, especially as they only affected one of the provinces. One of the criticisms of Tim O'Toole was his reticence to make big changes. Remember what Wolfhart Hauser said when the results came out - “The board is examining all appropriate means to mobilise the considerable value inherent in the Group.

"Initial actions from its evaluation are underway, including conducting a full external review of Greyhound's business model and prospects, which will conclude in the coming months"

That things have been so swift indicates that perhaps TOT was a bit of a blocker.

 

[overthewater]

I don't claim to know the Greyhound Canada ops very well but, given the size of First's problems, it seems rather odd that they didn't strip out the whole operation. This appears to be a bit half-hearted and will, presumably, still need quite a bit of costly management structure and overheads to maintain.

Maybe its been rejigged so it can be sold off?

 

[overthewater]

That things have been so swift indicates that perhaps TOT was a bit of a blocker.

Why did the broad keep him, did he try to leave once before? I would say the broad more to blame than anyone eles...

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I don't claim to know the Greyhound Canada ops very well but, given the size of First's problems, it seems rather odd that they didn't strip out the whole operation. This appears to be a bit half-hearted and will, presumably, still need quite a bit of costly management structure and overheads to maintain.

I don't claim to either but Canada is a federal system so what goes for Ontario doesn't hold for Alberta. Also, two thirds of the population live in and around Quebec and Ontario - the only real population density.

I guess it's akin to having First Cymru and announcing you're getting rid of Haverfordwest, Carmarthen and Tycroes depots - sounds like a lot, covers a large area, has a number of fleet, isn't worth that much, when you'd much sooner have the decent bit round Swansea!!!

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Why did the broad keep him, did he try to leave once before? I would say the broad more to blame than anyone eles...

Why did the broad keep him - sorry, I don't know his wife

 

[padbus]

When I was in Ontario and Quebec last month, the Greyhound coaches that I saw all looked rather rundown and shabby.

 

[DragonEast]

In fairness there is a relatively new MD in post. He will have multiple challenges, the first and foremost being profitability. You can't change everything overnight, and whilst revenue growth will no doubt be on his list, the 'instant wins' are things like changing T & C and sorting out loss-makers like Clacton. The latter also releases buses which starts to ease the vehicle age profile (albeit it's a drop in the ocean....).

All agreed. Though the "new" Essex MD isn't unfamiliar to the operation having held senior management roles in the region for a considerable number of years. Time will tell, but I'm not convinced that it is anything other than a continuation of his battle with Go-Ahead. That's fine . . . I'm just not so sure that letting the rest of the operation go to rack and ruin in the meantime is so clever? Mind you I suspect none of it is particularly profitable, so we can I suppose argue it doesn't matter anyway. And, of course, in view of First's much bigger problems elsewhere, as evidenced on this thread, it doesn't!!

I just find it a bit frustrating that First (though perhaps others do the same, but not I suspect to the same extent) cling on to an operation which is going no-where for the sake of it, and with no greater ambition than to keep the others out. Everyone is playing the waiting game to see where the plug will be pulled next. The story of First, I suppose.

 

[Cesarcollie]

All agreed. Though the "new" Essex MD isn't unfamiliar to the operation having held senior management roles in the region for a considerable number of years. Time will tell, but I'm not convinced that it is anything other than a continuation of his battle with Go-Ahead. That's fine . . . I'm just not so sure that letting the rest of the operation go to rack and ruin in the meantime is so clever? Mind you I suspect none of it is particularly profitable, so we can I suppose argue it doesn't matter anyway. And, of course, in view of First's much bigger problems elsewhere, as evidenced on this thread, it doesn't!!

I just find it a bit frustrating that First (though perhaps others do the same, but not I suspect to the same extent) cling on to an operation which is going no-where for the sake of it, and with no greater ambition than to keep the others out. Everyone is playing the waiting game to see where the plug will be pulled next. The story of First, I suppose.

But the problem is large chunks of Essex are fundamentally good bus territory, with large urban areas (in many cases growing) and strong inter-urban flows. It also has a relatively supportive local authority. The downsides are congestion (which with a few exceptions is politically 'too difficult' to tackle), commercial competition in parts (Southend, Colchester), and high employment costs (too close to London). The Trade Union has also developed too much power over the years, particularly at some depots. I think if First walked away from Essex they would almost be admitting they're incapable of running buses successfully even in relatively favourable conditions!!

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

But the problem is large chunks of Essex are fundamentally good bus territory, with large urban areas (in many cases growing) and strong inter-urban flows. It also has a relatively supportive local authority. The downsides are congestion (which with a few exceptions is politically 'too difficult' to tackle), commercial competition in parts (Southend, Colchester), and high employment costs (too close to London). The Trade Union has also developed too much power over the years, particularly at some depots. I think if First walked away from Essex they would almost be admitting they're incapable of running buses successfully even in relatively favourable conditions!!

Clearly, it has its issues despite being fundamentally good bus territory - Go Ahead are losing a small fortune, First a small profit (on a sizeable turnover), whilst Arriva have bailed out of Colchester once.

The First Essex reality is that there have been mistakes in various route/network shake ups, congestion is a major problem, recruitment issues mean the TU has been able to gain too much influence (?) and investment has not been good enough.

That said, they are removing the gangrenous limb (who wants to be running buses to Jaywick - most deprived area of southern England IIRC) of Clacton, and also saving a chunk on the Braintree premises, and are focusing on ousting Hedingham from the places they don't want them and happy to vacate the duff areas.

Those who know such things can confirm if any vehicle savings will allow the oldest fleet to go (assuming it isn't sent elsewhere) and with a decent MD who has done a decent job in FEC, there may yet be hope.

 

[Cesarcollie]

Clearly, it has its issues despite being fundamentally good bus territory - Go Ahead are losing a small fortune, First a small profit (on a sizeable turnover), whilst Arriva have bailed out of Colchester once.

The First Essex reality is that there have been mistakes in various route/network shake ups, congestion is a major problem, recruitment issues mean the TU has been able to gain too much influence (?) and investment has not been good enough.

That said, they are removing the gangrenous limb (who wants to be running buses to Jaywick - most deprived area of southern England IIRC) of Clacton, and also saving a chunk on the Braintree premises, and are focusing on ousting Hedingham from the places they don't want them and happy to vacate the duff areas.

Those who know such things can confirm if any vehicle savings will allow the oldest fleet to go (assuming it isn't sent elsewhere) and with a decent MD who has done a decent job in FEC, there may yet be hope.

Indeed, agreed.

 

[johnw]

So are First Eastern Counties and Essex still managed as one company or have they been separated? I can never keep up with First management structure!

 

[Cesarcollie]

So are First Eastern Counties and Essex still managed as one company or have they been separated? I can never keep up with First management structure!

They remain separate companies though now share an MD. I think other management roles currently remain largely separate (though finance is of course centralised anyway).

 

[Bungle965]

Something I might as well ask while we are on the subject of Essex, is there any reason why they have or did have (I think) ERG ticket machines, instead of the usual Almex's that were seen as far as I am aware almost everywhere else?
Sam