Is the railway about to embark on a massive cost cutting exercise?

[Philip]

I'm not sure how many DMUs can be configured to run on only 1 engine dynamically. I believe the 185s can utilise all the engines when they need to, I'd guess most DMUs either have the engine off or on for the duration of the trip. Not that it would make much difference in terms of cost - the amount of diesel you'd save would be negligible. Staff costs are the highest operating cost. If you need to cut costs they will, inevitably, have to be reduced. It's possible to reduce the bill through means other than compulsory redundancies such as not replacing natural turnover and salary cuts but the diesel bill barely even registers against the staff bill. Not to mention some TOCs (& NR) don't have a substantial diesel fleet (GTR & SE in particular)

I guess on the point of salary cuts, rest day working will be an obvious thing to cut back on, at least away from train crew and dispatcher roles. Sunday as part of the working week is another area they might look at.

 

[bramling]

I guess on the point of salary cuts, rest day working will be an obvious thing to cut back on, at least away from train crew and dispatcher roles. Sunday as part of the working week is another area they might look at.

RDW is a good one, *however* with many places already under-establishment (and Covid having furthered that) this means either timetable reductions or accepting cancellations. Say hello to long lists of cancellations at weekends, like some places already see at times.

 

[quantinghome]

If electric cars really do take off as anticipated, and passenger numbers are slower to recover, the railway could easily find itself in a politically uncomfortable position.

I don't think so. Most rail journeys are competing with motorway and urban car journeys. Electric cars will have lower running costs than internal combustion, but don't do anything to solve road congestion.

 

[Philip]

RDW is a good one, *however* with many places already under-establishment (and Covid having furthered that) this means either timetable reductions or accepting cancellations. Say hello to long lists of cancellations at weekends, like some places already see at times.

Indeed, but this would be made even worse by actually reducing the number of staff.

 

[Bletchleyite]

RDW is a good one, *however* with many places already under-establishment (and Covid having furthered that) this means either timetable reductions or accepting cancellations. Say hello to long lists of cancellations at weekends, like some places already see at times.

Better to change the timetable to be operable using the staffing level you have than to prat about doing that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Feb 2021 ==

I don't think so. Most rail journeys are competing with motorway and urban car journeys. Electric cars will have lower running costs than internal combustion, but don't do anything to solve road congestion.

It's electric buses that pose a real threat. It's hard to argue that a 1980s branch line DMU should be bobbing up and down kicking out filth when it could be turned into a cycle track and a clean electric bus service run on the parallel road. Two set of environmental points in one there, and loads cheaper too.

This I think could well be the biggest threat to the non-electrified part of the railways since Beeching, and is one the railway failed to respond to by ordering a stack of new mechanical DMUs.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Let’s start with delay attribution. Ditch the money go round culture of blame and penalties and instead start analysing what is causing the delay and how to prevent it, rather than who is financially liable.

One of my favoured solutions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One of my favoured solutions.

TBH I'd ditch Delay Repay down to the legal minimum, yes, it's nice to get money back when things go wrong, but it costs a fortune to process. Perhaps now we're out of the EU the law could even be removed so it doesn't apply at all - just have the existing "insurance style" entitlement to alternative transport or a hotel if stranded, and in such severe cases discretionary refunds could be given.

I'm really not convinced that you should get money back for 16 minutes' delay, it's minor in the scheme of things. 2+ hours I'll give you, but that has only happened single-figure numbers of times in my whole life.

It would also mean TOC customer services could actually start responding to concerns raised properly, rather than being busy issuing refunds.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It would also mean TOC customer services could actually start responding to concerns raised properly, rather than being busy issuing refunds.

Exactamundo

 

[bramling]

Better to change the timetable to be operable using the staffing level you have than to prat about doing that.

Yes, however history shows it never quite happens like this. TOCs like to run under-establishment, as it's cheaper to pay RDW than fill a whole roster (or cover things like Sunday working).

So it's a political decision whether lists of cancellations are acceptable, or whether they wish to pay to staff a roster with sufficient cover.

 

[zwk500]

Exactamundo

Assuming TOCs don't decide that the staff previously dealing with delay repay are now an unaffordable expense as they're not needed to fulfill the TOC's obligations...

 

[quantinghome]

It's electric buses that pose a real threat. It's hard to argue that a 1980s branch line DMU should be bobbing up and down kicking out filth when it could be turned into a cycle track and a clean electric bus service run on the parallel road. Two set of environmental points in one there, and loads cheaper too.

This I think could well be the biggest threat to the non-electrified part of the railways since Beeching, and is one the railway failed to respond to by ordering a stack of new mechanical DMUs.

Buses would only be attractive for relatively short journeys, and would be significantly slower given most rural lines tend to terminate in larger towns which generally have congested roads. And they would have much lower capacity - some rural lines are surprisingly busy. Note the fate of the much-heralded bus replacement services in the 1960s.

What routes do you think would be suitable for this treatment?

 

[bramling]

Buses would only be attractive for relatively short journeys, and would be significantly slower given most rural lines tend to terminate in larger towns which generally have congested roads. And they would have much lower capacity - some rural lines are surprisingly busy. Note the fate of the much-heralded bus replacement services in the 1960s.

What routes do you think would be suitable for this treatment?

Plus the age-old issue that there’s people who will happily use a train but would firmly turn their nose up at the thought of using a bus.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What routes do you think would be suitable for this treatment?

Quite a few, even more if you put bus lanes in to stop the bus being impossibly slow. Here's some:

• Ormskirk-Preston
• Kirkby-Wigan
• Conwy Valley
• Bentham Line

Basically take your pick of short rural branches. There's even some you could just bin off in favour of electrifying existing bus routes, e.g. Lancaster-Morecambe.

I really don't want this to happen, but the railway needs to plan for the end of DMUs within 10-15 years if it doesn't want to fall victim to it. Electrification of local bus routes is now going to come thick and fast.

 

[HSTEd]

I don't think so. Most rail journeys are competing with motorway and urban car journeys. Electric cars will have lower running costs than internal combustion, but don't do anything to solve road congestion.

People clearly are willing to tolerate road congestion as it is.
Once you slash the cost of operating a car then people will tolerate even more.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Feb 2021 ==

Quite a few, even more if you put bus lanes in to stop the bus being impossibly slow. Here's some:

• Ormskirk-Preston
• Kirkby-Wigan
• Conwy Valley
• Bentham Line

Basically take your pick of short rural branches. There's even some you could just bin off in favour of electrifying existing bus routes, e.g. Lancaster-Morecambe.

I think the first two would probably be brought full blown into Merseyrail rather than abandoned, but honestly I would prefer the metro or metro-like systems of the major cities to push outwards, largely until they encounter each other.

Merseyrail, Manchester Metrolink, the Sheffield Supertram, Tyne and Wear Metro, NET, OVerground/Underground/Tramlink and whatever they call the Birmingham tram now.

 

[Bletchleyite]

People clearly are willing to tolerate road congestion as it is.
Once you slash the cost of operating a car then people will tolerate even more.

The cost of operating a car won't be slashed; the Government will want that money so a road pricing scheme is basically guaranteed, even if it's a very basic one based on reading the odometer at MoT and issuing an annual mileage-based bill.

Like with diesels a few years ago (!) it's only cheap now to encourage the switch.

 

[Gloster]

The cost of operating a car won't be slashed; the Government will want that money so a road pricing scheme is basically guaranteed, even if it's a very basic one based on reading the odometer at MoT and issuing an annual mileage-based bill.

Like with diesels a few years ago (!) it's only cheap now to encourage the switch.

Never underestimate the government’s (any government’s) willingness to do something stupid and short sighted if they think it will be popular. Particularly if an election is looming.

 

[quantinghome]

Quite a few, even more if you put bus lanes in to stop the bus being impossibly slow. Here's some:

• Ormskirk-Preston
• Kirkby-Wigan
• Conwy Valley
• Bentham Line

Basically take your pick of short rural branches. There's even some you could just bin off in favour of electrifying existing bus routes, e.g. Lancaster-Morecambe.

I really don't want this to happen, but the railway needs to plan for the end of DMUs within 10-15 years if it doesn't want to fall victim to it. Electrification of local bus routes is now going to come thick and fast.

I think the government would conclude that the savings aren't worth the political cost. Even if all short rural branches are shut, it would shave at most a few hundred miles of the 10,000 mile long national rail network. The saving will amount to very little, considering they are the most lightly used parts of the network hence are negligible in terms of train operations and will offer little in terms of savings on asset maintenance/renewal. And for that they have their 'bring back the good old days' political reputation shredded.

 

[Energy]

TBH I'd ditch Delay Repay down to the legal minimum, yes, it's nice to get money back when things go wrong, but it costs a fortune to process. Perhaps now we're out of the EU the law could even be removed so it doesn't apply at all - just have the existing "insurance style" entitlement to alternative transport or a hotel if stranded, and in such severe cases discretionary refunds could be given.

I'm really not convinced that you should get money back for 16 minutes' delay, it's minor in the scheme of things. 2+ hours I'll give you, but that has only happened single-figure numbers of times in my whole life.

It would also mean TOC customer services could actually start responding to concerns raised properly, rather than being busy issuing refunds.

One of my friends regularly travels on WMR and every time he gets delay repay its pence.

 

[Bald Rick]

If electric cars really do take off as anticipated, and passenger numbers are slower to recover, the railway could easily find itself in a politically uncomfortable position.

It already is.

Well those two things are not necessarily contradictory.
For example investment in the railway might take the form of driving ETCS and resignalling faster, leading to substantial reductions in operating costs in the long run - less signalling maintenance work/staff and potentially a headcount reduction for signallers.

There’s been headcount reductions for signallers for about the last century. Trouble is we are now getting to the highest of the high hanging fruit. For example the number of signallers in the Anglia route has reduced by about 30% in the last decade or so, mostly through the resignalling of the Norwich - Ely, Norwich - Yarmouth / Lowestoft, Clacton Line and North London Line. Collectively this has seen nearly 200 signallers go. There’s not much left to do: Ely - Peterborough, Ely - Kings Lynn, Bury St Edmunds - Ely / Cambridge, the west side of the North London Line area, plus a couple of Level Crossing boxes. Probably fewer than 100 signallers between them, net.

The roll out of yet more ‘smart’ motorways like the proposed Warrington - Wigan section on the M6 may well lead to more people travelling by train, I for one won’t drive on a so called, ‘smart’ motorway!

How do you get around elsewhere in the country? Can’t move for them elsewhere- much of the M1, most of the M6 south of Knutsford, stretches of the M25, M3, M4 From Reading to M25 being converted now, etc etc.

This sort of thing should be considered before compulsory redundancies are considered. Pay cuts too; if things get desperate staff across all roles may have to accept a drop in pay, but this would be better than redundancies.

Lack of pay rises have been a reality for many for the last year and the next year or two to come. That’s a real terms reduction I need pay. It won’t stop the job losses either.

How about running DMUs with one less engine working, like the 185s do? Would save a lot in fuel costs? I don't believe it would impact the performance of modern DMUs at least; I've been on 175s with an engine out and the train kept to time.

It would make little difference to overall costs, and it does affect performance.

 

[Philip]

Lack of pay rises have been a reality for many for the last year and the next year or two to come. That’s a real terms reduction I need pay. It won’t stop the job losses either.



It would make little difference to overall costs, and it does affect performance.

Go on then, saying it won't stop the job losses is quite a serious thing to imply on the public forum. What/where/when do you think will happen regarding job losses in the railway?

 

[zwk500]

The roll out of yet more ‘smart’ motorways like the proposed Warrington - Wigan section on the M6 may well lead to more people travelling by train, I for one won’t drive on a so called, ‘smart’ motorway!

Out of interest, do you object to all Smart Motorways or just the All-Lane running ones? I find the traffic flow on variable speed limit sections to be very smooth, and the dynamic hard shoulder running is, to me, an acceptable compromise as it's only ever used once the traffic has slowed down anyway. I don't like ALR at all, and would prefer not to have it. But it's there and I can't be botheres to look up exactly which stretches have what level of Smart Motorway

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Feb 2021 ==

Go on then, saying it won't stop the job losses is quite a serious thing to imply on the public forum. What/where/when do you think will happen regarding job losses in the railway?

It's not that serious a thing, it's pretty obvious staff headcount has to drop at some point. My department has been told all anticipated losses will be covered through natural turnover, but I would be very surprised if every department could manage to lower the bill by enough by turnover alone.

 

[Bald Rick]

Go on then, saying it won't stop the job losses is quite a serious thing to imply on the public forum. What/where/when do you think will happen regarding job losses in the railway?

No idea. Could be anywhere.

But it’s pretty obvious. The Government has been paying something like a £billion a month for the railway for the last year, and its pretty clear that there will be a big revenue gap for the foreseeable future. Money is going to have to be saved, and that means less activity across the board. We’ve already seen a billion quid off the enhancements budget for the next three years - that directly translates into fewer jobs.

Plenty of jobs have gone already - in station retail for example (it’s all part of the railway). Jobs are going in consultancies now (a friend of mine lost hers this week). Recruitment freezes are here in many companies now. Whether there will be redundancies or not I don’t know, but I would be very surprised if there weren’t. The railway isn’t unique in that respect of course, and shouldn’t expect to be.

 

[Philip]

No idea. Could be anywhere.

But it’s pretty obvious. The Government has been paying something like a £billion a month for the railway for the last year, and its pretty clear that there will be a big revenue gap for the foreseeable future. Money is going to have to be saved, and that means less activity across the board. We’ve already seen a billion quid off the enhancements budget for the next three years - that directly translates into fewer jobs.

Plenty of jobs have gone already - in station retail for example (it’s all part of the railway). Jobs are going in consultancies now (a friend of mine lost hers this week). Recruitment freezes are here in many companies now. Whether there will be redundancies or not I don’t know, but I would be very surprised if there weren’t. The railway isn’t unique in that respect of course, and shouldn’t expect to be.

On the last point, I know Northern and TPE have been using agency staff for some station roles for many years, well before the pandemic. I believe the excess window at Manchester Victoria is manned by a Carlisle member of staff. And Northern only last week advertised for a number of booking office, dispatch and customer advisor roles.

 

[zwk500]

On the last point, I know Northern and TPE have been using agency staff for some station roles for many years, well before the pandemic. I believe the excess window at Manchester Victoria is manned by a Carlisle member of staff. And Northern only last week advertised for a number of booking office, dispatch and customer advisor roles.

They still need to run a service, and if critical staff move on or retire, they will need to replace them. Not necessarily 1:1, and not necessarily on the same salary, both of which are good ways to get the wage bill under control.

 

[Kite159]

No idea. Could be anywhere.

But it’s pretty obvious. The Government has been paying something like a £billion a month for the railway for the last year, and its pretty clear that there will be a big revenue gap for the foreseeable future. Money is going to have to be saved, and that means less activity across the board. We’ve already seen a billion quid off the enhancements budget for the next three years - that directly translates into fewer jobs.

Plenty of jobs have gone already - in station retail for example (it’s all part of the railway). Jobs are going in consultancies now (a friend of mine lost hers this week). Recruitment freezes are here in many companies now. Whether there will be redundancies or not I don’t know, but I would be very surprised if there weren’t. The railway isn’t unique in that respect of course, and shouldn’t expect to be.

I can see ticket offices having hours cut back at certain stations to save some money. Maybe even on some of the lesser used stations on merseyrail, getting rid of the promise of staffed from first to last train, especially if the ticket office doesn't have visibility of the platforms.

 

[Bald Rick]

On the last point, I know Northern and TPE have been using agency staff for some station roles for many years, well before the pandemic. I believe the excess window at Manchester Victoria is manned by a Carlisle member of staff. And Northern only last week advertised for a number of booking office, dispatch and customer advisor roles.

By station retail I meant people who work in the coffee shops, food shops, etc etc. There’s thousands of people in such roles on the railway. Or, at least, there were.

 

[Watershed]

By station retail I meant people who work in the coffee shops, food shops, etc etc. There’s thousands of people in such roles on the railway. Or, at least, there were.

They aren't on the DfT's payroll though. Perhaps the Chancellor's (for now), but that's not the DfT's problem!

I suspect that casual and outsourced labour (e.g. zero hours staff) will be the first to be cut, indeed in many places they already have been. Recruitment and pay freezes will help but in some places redundancies will probably be inevitable. For example I can't see a bright future for the first class, or indeed regular, catering staff on the IC operators.

 

[HSTEd]

They aren't on the DfT's payroll though. Perhaps the Chancellor's (for now), but that's not the DfT's problem!

I suspect that casual and outsourced labour (e.g. zero hours staff) will be the first to be cut, indeed in many places they already have been. Recruitment and pay freezes will help but in some places redundancies will probably be inevitable. For example I can't see a bright future for the first class, or indeed regular, catering staff on the IC operators.

Well I would expect most north-south catering staff on IC services to be axed when HS2 opens anyway.
The number of IC journeys long enough to need catering will be substantially reduced when that occurs.

There’s been headcount reductions for signallers for about the last century. Trouble is we are now getting to the highest of the high hanging fruit. For example the number of signallers in the Anglia route has reduced by about 30% in the last decade or so, mostly through the resignalling of the Norwich - Ely, Norwich - Yarmouth / Lowestoft, Clacton Line and North London Line. Collectively this has seen nearly 200 signallers go. There’s not much left to do: Ely - Peterborough, Ely - Kings Lynn, Bury St Edmunds - Ely / Cambridge, the west side of the North London Line area, plus a couple of Level Crossing boxes. Probably fewer than 100 signallers between them, net.

Shouldn't fancy automatic route setting and route management tools allow reduction in signaller workloads sufficient to allow further reductions in headcounts?
Especially once the signallers are all sitting in a small handful of buildings (ROCs or similar?)?

My understanding is that those technologies have come a long way in the last couple of decades.
Indeed wasn't the ROC programme billed by allowing something like a 2/3rds reduction in signaller headcount?

 

[daodao]

While not advocating such closures, the high maintenance costs of certain lightly used lines in wet mountainous regions where expensive engineering work is often needed for repairs, make them vulnerable to permanent closure as a way to reduce long-term expenditure. The examples that I am thinking of are:

• The Settle and Carlisle line
• The Central Wales line
• The Cambrian main line and the Cambrian coast line
• The Conwy valley line
• The Kyle line
• The West Highland routes beyond Helensburgh
• Girvan to Stranraer

Other than the S&C line, they are all outwith England, so the political consequences of closing them will have less effect on the Westminster regime. The number of people affected would be relatively low as these lines serve sparsely populated regions.

 

[Bald Rick]

They aren't on the DfT's payroll though.

Actually, in a way they are. At least the businesses are.

Shouldn't fancy automatic route setting and route management tools allow reduction in signaller workloads sufficient to allow further reductions in headcounts?

That’s generally already happened, but ARS etc on its own doesn’t allow a huge reduction in workload. For example, it’s quite conceivable for 10 ‘traditional’ signalboxes / Level crossings to be replaced by one workstation (as happened with Ely - Norwich), ie a ratio of 10:1. ARS might make that 12:1.

My understanding is that those technologies have come a long way in the last couple of decades.
Indeed wasn't the ROC programme billed by allowing something like a 2/3rds reduction in signaller headcount?

Yes, and a lot of it has happened now (or already planned), that’s my point.