Interpretation of "impartial retailing"

[MarkyMarkD]

Thanks, RJ, that you do what I think all ticket staff should do!

It isn't very hard to work out if the railcard saving is more than the cost of a railcard.

But I wonder how many people - particularly, say, foreign tourists - don't buy a railcard and are never encouraged to do so.

 

[AlterEgo]

An employer has grounds to fire/dismiss a person if they are not doing what they are employed to be doing. It's common sense, really. I would never dare give out such information if I was working for Virgin.

The world of work is not like that at all.

You may be "spoken to" if you started offering split tickets, as they are bad practice and not necessarily the best customer service (for the reasons RJ gave earlier). You would not be fired over it.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

A ticket office employee is employed to the sell the tickets that customers ask for, not to give lectures about split-ticketing.

A Maths teacher is employed to teach Maths, not Science!

Similar thing...

No it really isn't... A booking clerk giving out info on onboard service or timetabling would be comparable to the maths-science thing, but split-ticketing wouldn't!

 

[All Line Rover]

The world of work is not like that at all.

You may be "spoken to" if you started offering split tickets, as they are bad practice and not necessarily the best customer service (for the reasons RJ gave earlier). You would not be fired over it.

Shocking! I am most surprised. So the world of work is not as bad as I thought, then!

What if someone offered split tickets continually? Would they not be fired eventually?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Shocking! I am most surprised. So the world of work is not as bad as I thought, then!

What if someone offered split tickets continually? Would they not be fired eventually?

No, because what they are doing is hardly illegal or extremely serious, is it?!

 

[All Line Rover]

No, because what they are doing is hardly illegal or extremely serious, is it?!

I would have thought the TOC would take it seriously - they're losing precious revenue for goodness sake!

 

[AlterEgo]

I would have thought the TOC would take it seriously - they're losing precious revenue for goodness sake!

It might not be the employee's TOC concerned!

It would also not be impartial for, say, a SWT clerk to suggest that someone travelling between London and Birmingham buy a Route:High Wycombe ticket and then ask for an excess on board, or at Euston, if demanded. This would deprive Virgin of revenue, for example.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

An employer has grounds to fire/dismiss a person if they are not doing what they are employed to be doing. It's common sense, really. I would never dare give out such information if I was working for Virgin.

For example, imagine if a Maths teacher taught his classes Science instead!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think that there are very few staff employed by TOC's who tell customers about split-ticketing opportunities.

Thank you.
I'd still be very interested if you could please answer the question that I raised in respect of a legally binding dismissal to which you have apparently responded, but not (as far as my poor brain can deduce) answered.

 

[All Line Rover]

Thank you.
I'd still be very interested if you could please answer the question that I raised in respect of a legally binding dismissal to which you have apparently responded, but not (as far as my poor brain can deduce) answered.

I cannot answer, as I was wrong. Sorry about that!

I am still extremely shocked, as I have known employees from other sectors to be dismissed on far more trivial grounds.

Just imagine if an employee in the MAN ticket office told every customer asking for a return ticket to London that they could save £50 by splitting the ticket at x, or save £80 by buying the ticket from y! If they continued doing it after being told not to, I would be shocked if they weren't fired! Unions, I suppose...

I still stand by my comment about ATOC's view on the matter, though.

 

[AlterEgo]

I have known employees from other sectors to be dismissed on far more trivial grounds.

Thankfully there are Unions on the railway, who can advise employees (well, their members anyway!) on their rights. One of the good things unions do.

 

[talltim]

I don't see how depriving your TOC of revenue could be a disciplinary offence if your TOC is not the cheapest and you are legally bound to give impartial advice

Presumably unless you are sure your ticket/s are the best for you then you are best off with as vague a ticket request as possible, otherwise you may miss out on saving/suitability suggestions from the clerk.

If someone asks for the cheapest possible method, do you (as a ticket clerk) then have to look at split tickets? If you don't you are being biased against TOCs that don't offer direct tickets but combined may be cheaper and thus not impartial

 

[Greenback]

If someone asks for the cheapest possible method, do you (as a ticket clerk) then have to look at split tickets? If you don't you are being biased against TOCs that don't offer direct tickets but combined may be cheaper and thus not impartial

No, you do not have to look at split tickets. You are only required to find the cheapest valid ticket from origin to destination. Could you please clarify the second part, I'm afraid I don't see what you are getting at?

 

[telstarbox]

You can tell ALR is on his summer holidays! (only joking)

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....If someone asks for the cheapest possible method, do you (as a ticket clerk) then have to look at split tickets? If you don't you are being biased against TOCs that don't offer direct tickets but combined may be cheaper and thus not impartial

Clerks must offer the cheapest valid through fare from the origin to the destination, nothing more.

Impartial Retailling is based on the premise that most people want a ticket from A-B via the cheapest, shortest, most direct route. At the end of the day, that is what joe public wants, not the longest, most convoluted route know to man, just to save a few quid.

 

[Greenback]

Clerks must offer the cheapest valid through fare from the origin to the destination, nothing more.

Impartial Retailling is based on the premise that most people want a ticket from A-B via the cheapest, shortest, most direct route. At the end of the day, that is what joe public wants, not the longest, most convoluted route know to man, just to save a few quid.

Yes, that is what the majority of the public want, and for those that do want to save money, they can always do their own research, or as I have done before I had internet access, ask the clerk the prices of possible splits!

 

[MarkyMarkD]

It doesn't help when the pricing system (and particularly the yield management systems) mean that splits are so much more affordable than direct tickets.

I can buy tickets from Chatham - Rugby, and Rugby - Warrington, using 2 x Advance tickets, when the direct Chatham - Warrington journey is not available on an advance at all at the same time, and where the split involves a continuous non-stop journey from Euston to Warrington. That is just silly.

On a Sunday doing the return journey, it costs around £20 doing the split, whereas there are no Advance tickets for the full journey.

I expect that the correct ticket office advice for this return journey would be to buy an Off Peak Return (which is cheaper than 2 x Advances in most cases, without the split).

 

[talltim]

Clerks must offer the cheapest valid through fare from the origin to the destination, nothing more.

Impartial Retailling is based on the premise that most people want a ticket from A-B via the cheapest, shortest, most direct route. At the end of the day, that is what joe public wants, not the longest, most convoluted route know to man, just to save a few quid.

But that is based on the premise that someone has asked for the cheapest ticket, not the cheapest method. If split tickets using TOCs A+B is cheaper than a single ticket using TOC C* then it is biased towards TOC C to only suggest the single ticket.
Many splits don't involve any extra changes or changes of route, and some can save quite large amounts of money, although what a large amount is will vary from passenger to passenger.

*single TOC tickets or tickets where a TOC gets the majority of of the ORCATS revenue

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Lets be honest, if the origin was Penzance and the destination was Thurso, how long would you be prepared to wait for the ticket? How long would the person behind you be prepared to wait? And the person behind them?

If a passenger asks for a ticket from A to B, that's what we offer. If they ask for A to B to C to D, that is what we offer.

To take it to the logical extreme of 'cheapest method' we would have to include finishing short and starting short aswell. On a local area basis that may be fine, but long distance? or by a route at the other end of the country? That's ludicrous IMO.

 

[talltim]

I think you are missing my point. I'm not saying that ticket staff should have to offer splits, I'm saying that the fare structure shouldn't be so convoluted that splits can so often
be the cheapest way. The TOCs know that impartial ticket selling is required, yet they have created a position where they can't do so ( within a reasonable selling time)
Another thing is, what is a reasonable selling time? With the price of tickets nowadays a family outing of a reasonable distance could easily reach £300. If you were to go to PC world to spend that on a computer you would expect and receive quite a length of the staff's time (ignore the quality of the advice for now!). So if you are spending £300 with the railway surely you could expect at least 10 minutes of the clerk's time?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

The fare structure is based on supply and demand, in that enviroment it is quite difficult to base fares on mileage to reduce the effectiveness of splits. That issue is made harder by the fares being set by different companies on the same route. For example, Manchester to Newton-le-Willows is set by Northern and Newton-le-Willows to Birkenhead North is set by Merseyrail, but Manchester to Birkenhead North is set by TPE, yet they are all valid on the same train(s).

The time you should expect to wait to be served at a ticket office varies by station and TOC (according to demand and the number of clerks available on a normal day) but generally it is three minutes off peak and five minutes peak time at medium sized stations.

Someone spending £100 on split tickets could take up ten minutes of a clerks time, while someone spending £300 on a through ticket could take just 30 seconds.

Impartial retailling isn't completely impartial for the reason you have highlighted, but it is the best way to have the system based on the vast majority of users (and generalisations).

We have ended up in a middle-man culture in this country, the majority rely on someone else to give us the best deal. Look at comparison sites, they are telling you the best deal and because people think they are not paying for it, they are happy to use them. For the most part, that is not true, but because of this belief, we have now even got comparison sites for things like online bingo!

People can do research and get the best deals, but people expect things to be done for them. In an ideal world, splits would always be offered, but this is not an ideal world.

 

[Greenback]

The fare structure is based on supply and demand, in that enviroment it is quite difficult to base fares on mileage to reduce the effectiveness of splits. That issue is made harder by the fares being set by different companies on the same route. For example, Manchester to Newton-le-Willows is set by Northern and Newton-le-Willows to Birkenhead North is set by Merseyrail, but Manchester to Birkenhead North is set by TPE, yet they are all valid on the same train(s).

The time you should expect to wait to be served at a ticket office varies by station and TOC (according to demand and the number of clerks available on a normal day) but generally it is three minutes off peak and five minutes peak time at medium sized stations.

Someone spending £100 on split tickets could take up ten minutes of a clerks time, while someone spending £300 on a through ticket could take just 30 seconds.

Impartial retailling isn't completely impartial for the reason you have highlighted, but it is the best way to have the system based on the vast majority of users (and generalisations).

We have ended up in a middle-man culture in this country, the majority rely on someone else to give us the best deal. Look at comparison sites, they are telling you the best deal and because people think they are not paying for it, they are happy to use them. For the most part, that is not true, but because of this belief, we have now even got comparison sites for things like online bingo!

People can do research and get the best deals, but people expect things to be done for them. In an ideal world, splits would always be offered, but this is not an ideal world.

I agree. We expect to be handed things on a plate all the time these days. Yes, the fares system is complex, which is one of the reasons why it is unfeasible to offer splits. Imagine the scenario, a clerk investigates split tickets for 20 minutes, causing a build up of frustrated passengers and discovers that A to B splitting at C and D saves £20 on the thorugh fare. The customer is pleased, until their cousin, partner or random man in the pub tells them that splitting at D, E and F might have saved them £25. Cue complaint from angry customer who has been 'ripped off', even though they had been initially happy to pay the through fare.

The fares system, including impartial retailing, is not perfect by any means, but it is the best we can hope for within the convoluted shambles of the post privatisation industry. I have yet to see any proposal that will address and rectify the problems we are well aware of within the current industry structure.

 

[exile]

I agree. We expect to be handed things on a plate all the time these days. Yes, the fares system is complex, which is one of the reasons why it is unfeasible to offer splits. Imagine the scenario, a clerk investigates split tickets for 20 minutes, causing a build up of frustrated passengers and discovers that A to B splitting at C and D saves £20 on the thorugh fare. The customer is pleased, until their cousin, partner or random man in the pub tells them that splitting at D, E and F might have saved them £25. Cue complaint from angry customer who has been 'ripped off', even though they had been initially happy to pay the through fare.

The fares system, including impartial retailing, is not perfect by any means, but it is the best we can hope for within the convoluted shambles of the post privatisation industry. I have yet to see any proposal that will address and rectify the problems we are well aware of within the current industry structure.

A computer can find all possible splits very easily. I understand online retailers are not allowed to offer them but it's technically feasible. And if online retailers aren't allowed then booking staff will have to put up with passengers asking for different journey options. As it happens I know the split points for my regular journeys so can do it online but the average passenger may not even be aware split ticketing can save money.

 

[OwlMan]

A computer can find all possible splits very easily. .

Why do you think that?

If it was easy why do you think that there is not a pubically available website to provide this information

Peter

 

[SickyNicky]

A computer can find all possible splits very easily

As someone who has looked at this in depth let me assure you that it cannot. It is immensely complex and requires huge computing power.

edit: it is "technically feasible" though, as you say.

 

[Greenback]

A computer can find all possible splits very easily. I understand online retailers are not allowed to offer them but it's technically feasible. And if online retailers aren't allowed then booking staff will have to put up with passengers asking for different journey options. As it happens I know the split points for my regular journeys so can do it online but the average passenger may not even be aware split ticketing can save money.

As others have said, it has been tried and creating a programme to find splits is far from easy. The biggest problem of all is that it is reliant on the data given to it and the parameters set in the program.

A lot more people are now aware of split ticketing. There has been a lot of publicity on TV and newspapers/magazines over the past couple of years, not to mention the internet itself.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

A computer can find all possible splits very easily. I understand online retailers are not allowed to offer them but it's technically feasible. And if online retailers aren't allowed then booking staff will have to put up with passengers asking for different journey options....

Rubbish, even if online and telesales are bound by impartial retailing, that could not stop them also offering split tickets, they'd have extra sales to make up for the loss of more expensive tickets if they managed to do it and no-one else did. The fact is that no-one has found or designed a suitable bit of software to allow split ticketing to be retailed successfully.

....As it happens I know the split points for my regular journeys so can do it online but the average passenger may not even be aware split ticketing can save money.

The fact the joe public doesn't do their homework is no concern of the railway though, we're back to middle-man culture.

 

[radamfi]

As someone who has looked at this in depth let me assure you that it cannot. It is immensely complex and requires huge computing power.

edit: it is "technically feasible" though, as you say.

If the data was supplied in a 'nice' format (unlike, say, as in the Avantix software), presumably it would be a lot easier. Modern computers could probably compare millions of fare combinations in a matter of seconds. Obviously differences in restrictions etc. would have to be taken into account.

Obviously if fares could be calculated by looking up a table of distance like this:

http://www.ns.nl/binaries/content/a...internet/tweedeklastariefeenheden1jan2011.pdf

then there would not be a need for split tickets.

Does any other country have numerous competing websites for buying train tickets?

 

[hairyhandedfool]

It's not just the fare that needs comparing though, it's routes, time restrictions, stopping short, starting short, break of journey maybe, then the added complication of condition 19, advance fare availability and probably more besides.

 

[Greenback]

Yes, don't forget rangers and rovers!!!

 

[radamfi]

It's not just the fare that needs comparing though, it's routes, time restrictions, stopping short, starting short, break of journey maybe, then the added complication of condition 19, advance fare availability and probably more besides.

However, even taking a simplistic approach and just comparing splits between station pairs, it would be a major step forward if a list of splits could be produced for each station pair for each ticket type. Then a manual check could be made to see if restrictions etc. are OK.