Why is Merseyrail so heavily staffed?

[Tetchytyke]

What the point of staffing nearly every station on Merseyrail network, when the vast majority of ticket office are running at a loss

Because the value of having a staff member on every station far exceeds the cost of having that staff member on every station.

There is a reason why the first thing TfL did when they took over Silverlink Metro was put a staff member on every single station. And they have kept every station staffed. Even Emerson Park is staffed.

Compare Merseyrail to, say, the Tyne and Wear Metro. The Metro is pretty much feral in parts of the system whereas Merseyrail isn’t, even in the roughest bits of Liverpool.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Why do stations on Manchester's equivalent commuter rail system have so many serious crimes against the person including mu*s and s* offences when Liverpool doesn't?

Having staff permanently there acts as a deterrent to crime & ASB. Add into the contract wheelchair assists and other helpful things they do, and it's money well spent.

I'd rather be on a Merseyrail station at 10pm on a dark night, than one of 'don't worry we've got lots of cameras instead' Metrolink's wild west stations.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Aug 2024 ==


It seems the operator is cashing in by taking it's time in backfilling GPR (ie spare) vacancies and perhaps that should be reason enough to ditch contractor Serco/Transport UK.

Part of that is (or perhaps was) down to the RMT. Northern traincrew historically refused to allow revenue protection or security / Byelaw enforcement staff to patrol their trains which meant resources ended up being concentrated elsewhere and cultured the view that it was unlikely you'd ever be challenged if you did something wrong. I'm still not sure whether they do now, most revenue protection activity occurs at stations. Penalty Fares etc are also a relatively new concept to this area, Merseyside had them decades earlier.

Whereas on Merseyrail, it's been long engrained into the travelling public that there is a high probability of encountering some sort of authority figure during your journey.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And there is a different attitude between the classic Merseyside scally and the southern chav. The former does tend to desist when meeting with authority, the latter is as likely to punch them.

Merseyside is often derided for living in the past, and in some ways it does, but this is a positive aspect of that.

 

[Gareth]

Merseyside is often derided for living in the past...

Depends what you mean by "often". I hardly ever hear that.

 

[yorkie]

Depends what you mean by "often". I hardly ever hear that.

I think @Bletchleyite means in a fares & ticketing sense, such as their ~20year delay installing TOD collection, and their refusal to embrace e-tickets, in which case that's absolutely spot-on, and I don't see how that could be controversial!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think @Bletchleyite means in a fares & ticketing sense, such as their ~20year delay installing TOD collection, and their refusal to embrace e-tickets, in which case that's absolutely spot-on, and I don't see how that could be controversial!

Probably more widely too - that isn't necessarily a bad thing. But probably outwith this thread to go into that in detail.

 

[Oggworth]

And there is a different attitude between the classic Merseyside scally and the southern chav. The former does tend to desist when meeting with authority, the latter is as likely to punch them.

Merseyside is often derided for living in the past, and in some ways it does, but this is a positive aspect of that.

Classist language not necessary, especially whilst accusing others of living in the past.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Classist language not necessary, especially whilst accusing others of living in the past.

I don't consider the description "chav" or "scally" classist. It's a description of an attitude, not a social class; being born poor and living on a council estate does not predispose one to be a petty criminal.

Indeed, to imply that it does is itself classist.

 

[YoungJohnson]

It's also worth noting the culture of Liverpool itself and the issues within the city over many years. I have relatives up there, and a couple of them did spend fairly long periods on the dole (6 months to 2 years - both are now in work). They have both said that although it wasn't explicitly stated, there was not really much attempt to force them into work by the job centre, because there wasn't a huge amount of work around, and generally a lot of the gaps in the labour market up there were for people with specific qualifications (e.g. radiographers at the hospital or engineering jobs at the port).

There is a complete contempt amongst many in Liverpool (which will include everyone from business owners to train guards, to the job centre staff) towards a lot of what comes out of Westminster / SW1, so the likes of Grayling (already a man considered a public joke) demanding DOO (irrespective of the issues around McGee / Zee) is going to be met with utter hostility, from far more people than just railway workers. Again this is historical, whether it's from the days of the Toxteth riots, to Hillsborough and so on.

Getting rid of railway staff (a stable and relatively well paid job for the area) will not go down well with anyone, even if the bean counters (who let's face it often have no idea about poverty) shout and scream.

Finally there is a common view in many parts of the country that "people should work for benefits" which could be translated into both a left wing and a right wing way. The logical conclusion to that is that "well it's better we pay people to staff things, even if we could get away with out doing so - because it's better to have people earning a wage and being productive and spending their money in the economy, rather than doing nothing". And of course this can be argued to reduce the effects on external services, whether it's mental or physical health, the police, housing departments or whatnot. If staffed stations reduce crime and anti-social behaviour then it's a win for everyone. If it also means that someone is doing a days work rather than sat on the dole or sat in the pub then it's also a win - both for them and society. And of course what's to stop people once they have valuable work experience on the station from applying for guard, driver, management and so on. There have been many people who started out on the platforms and ticket offices who have ended up with very senior positions in the railway, and used their front line experience to improve things once in senior management grades.

I have no idea if any studies of this ilk have been performed, but it would be interesting to know how much public money is saved more widely and more long term, even if there is fuss about "paying people for front line jobs we could technically do without". I'm certainly not going to bring up the private vs public arguments for railways, but fragmentation of the industry appears to have created far more jobs which if the railway was more unified, shouldn't need to exist - and many of them are far less useful to the farepayer than someone on a station.

 

[Djgr]

It's also worth noting the culture of Liverpool itself and the issues within the city over many years. I have relatives up there, and a couple of them did spend fairly long periods on the dole (6 months to 2 years - both are now in work). They have both said that although it wasn't explicitly stated, there was not really much attempt to force them into work by the job centre, because there wasn't a huge amount of work around, and generally a lot of the gaps in the labour market up there were for people with specific qualifications (e.g. radiographers at the hospital or engineering jobs at the port).

There is a complete contempt amongst many in Liverpool (which will include everyone from business owners to train guards, to the job centre staff) towards a lot of what comes out of Westminster / SW1, so the likes of Grayling (already a man considered a public joke) demanding DOO (irrespective of the issues around McGee / Zee) is going to be met with utter hostility, from far more people than just railway workers. Again this is historical, whether it's from the days of the Toxteth riots, to Hillsborough and so on.

Getting rid of railway staff (a stable and relatively well paid job for the area) will not go down well with anyone, even if the bean counters (who let's face it often have no idea about poverty) shout and scream.

Finally there is a common view in many parts of the country that "people should work for benefits" which could be translated into both a left wing and a right wing way. The logical conclusion to that is that "well it's better we pay people to staff things, even if we could get away with out doing so - because it's better to have people earning a wage and being productive and spending their money in the economy, rather than doing nothing". And of course this can be argued to reduce the effects on external services, whether it's mental or physical health, the police, housing departments or whatnot. If staffed stations reduce crime and anti-social behaviour then it's a win for everyone. If it also means that someone is doing a days work rather than sat on the dole or sat in the pub then it's also a win - both for them and society. And of course what's to stop people once they have valuable work experience on the station from applying for guard, driver, management and so on. There have been many people who started out on the platforms and ticket offices who have ended up with very senior positions in the railway, and used their front line experience to improve things once in senior management grades.

I have no idea if any studies of this ilk have been performed, but it would be interesting to know how much public money is saved more widely and more long term, even if there is fuss about "paying people for front line jobs we could technically do without". I'm certainly not going to bring up the private vs public arguments for railways, but fragmentation of the industry appears to have created far more jobs which if the railway was more unified, shouldn't need to exist - and many of them are far less useful to the farepayer than someone on a station.

I would say that if staffing a station makes people far more comfortable to travel, especially at night, then this is IN ITSELF useful.

Perhaps best practice on Merseyrail could be usefully employed elsewhere? For example, Greater Manchester I'm looking at you.

I don't consider the description "chav" or "scally" classist. It's a description of an attitude, not a social class; being born poor and living on a council estate does not predispose one to be a petty criminal.

Indeed, to imply that it does is itself classist.

"Chav" is generally considered to have a class dimension, as googling a definition will quickly reveal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps best practice on Merseyrail could be usefully employed elsewhere? For example, Greater Manchester I'm looking at you.

Certainly Metrolink is a hive of ASB, but I can't help but think that groups of burly security guards would be more use in stemming it than a single member of booking office staff who may not feel safe to step out of the office.

It would also make a major difference if the Police could be bothered to get a handle on ASB at Piccadilly Gardens, which just leaks into the wider system, and a gateline at Piccadilly and Victoria (even if not possible at other locations) would help.

But in my view Merseyrail overdoes it to the extent that they are often stood in the way chatting. And Central's narrow island doesn't lend itself to dispatchers at all - again they just get in the way. And I'm not convinced the likes of Aughton Park would ever end up a hive of ASB, nor does the ticket office do much if it did as it's very remote from the platforms.

 

[Djgr]

There is a complete contempt amongst many in Liverpool (which will include everyone from business owners to train guards, to the job centre staff) towards a lot of what comes out of Westminster / SW1

This is so true. And yes it's not a class or income thing.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 31 Aug 2024 ==

Certainly Metrolink is a hive of ASB, but I can't help but think that groups of burly security guards would be more use in stemming it than a single member of booking office staff who may not feel safe to step out of the office.

It would also make a major difference if the Police could be bothered to get a handle on ASB at Piccadilly Gardens, which just leaks into the wider system, and a gateline at Piccadilly and Victoria (even if not possible at other locations) would help.

But in my view Merseyrail overdoes it to the extent that they are often stood in the way chatting. And Central's narrow island doesn't lend itself to dispatchers at all - again they just get in the way. And I'm not convinced the likes of Aughton Park would ever end up a hive of ASB, nor does the ticket office do much if it did as it's very remote from the platforms.

It's perception that counts.

I would rather be waiting at, say, Bank Hall at 11pm in the evening than, say, Hattersley.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Merseyrail did (possibly still does) also have a policy whereby all revenue taken from penalty fares and enforcement activity was ringfenced and reinvested back into those activities. It used to be explicitly referenced on their website, but seems to have been revamped and is no longer there.


Makes no difference really to Merseyrail, as their revenue goes to the local PTE, Merseytravel, and they're paid a management/concession fee. They do get rewarded for hitting revenue/income targets, however. They also have KPIs relating to safety and security.

 

[prod_pep]

I would rather be waiting at, say, Bank Hall at 11pm in the evening than, say, Hattersley.

Perhaps a fairer comparison would be something like Kirkby or Bromborough Rake with Hattersley, or Bank Hall with say Ashburys, but absolutely the Merseyside stations feel safer every time (having used both Hattersley and Ashburys more than once). I've never, ever felt unsafe on Merseyrail trains or stations in over 20 years of very regular use. Merseyrail's high levels of staffing do play a role, as well as the fact Liverpool is a safer city than Manchester. Mind you, I remember Silverlink Metro and that truly did have an 'edge' to it, particularly by night.

In short, the staffing levels are a positive thing.

 

[Pacef8]

Bromborough rake has recently had a space of anti social behaviour due to the local yout claiming their is nothing to do. I grew up there and we had acre lane school, plenty of pot smokers and shroom munchers but people didn't go round breaking into cars and smashing shop windows .

 

[alistairlees]

This thread title should be “why is almost everywhere except merseyrail so understaffed”.

 

[childwallblues]

As a local reident who lives within Liverpool City Region and a former employee of First North Western and its successors I can say that nearly all stations within the current LCR Region are staffed. That includes the City Line from Lime Street as far as Garswood on the Wigan Line. Newton-le-Willows on the Chat Moss and Hough Green on the CLC. The only stations within LCR that I am aware of that are not staffed are Rainford, Meols Cop, Upton and Heswall.
I have always considered that the staffing policy is the correct. Merseytravel/LCR Region has invested a lot of money over the past 25-30 years (maybe earlier) on disabled facilities and many stations now have lifts with more being installed.

 

[DMckduck]

This thread title should be “why is almost everywhere except merseyrail so understaffed”.

I'm quite surprised just how many people believe ticket prices will fall if there was less or no staff.

Yeah you could say the subsidy would be reduced, but that money will be diverted elsewhere in reality.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Why do stations on Manchester's equivalent commuter rail system have so many serious crimes against the person including mu*s and s* offences when Liverpool doesn't?

Having staff permanently there acts as a deterrent to crime & ASB. Add into the contract wheelchair assists and other helpful things they do, and it's money well spent.

I'd rather be on a Merseyrail station at 10pm on a dark night, than one of 'don't worry we've got lots of cameras instead' Metrolink's wild west stations.

Exactly. I was coming back from Bootle towards central Lancs in the evening after a day in Merseyside, so I used Merseyrail from Bootle Oriel Road into Sandhills and then out to Ormskirk for a connecting train home. The station can be quite exposed at quiet times despite the location, and I knew if there were any issues, that there was a staff member in the ticket office a minute's walk away.

Contrast this experience with Northern's services out of Manchester. I commuted across Manchester for 3 years on the weekends, and the amount of drunk and disorderly, fights and ne'er-do-wellers on the quieter trains made me feel very unsafe.

I'm a 5"11 stocky man, so it was a lot worse for people who are more vulnerable, and definitely dissuaded some of them from using it at certain times.

Even the guards generally hid away from view after a certain time, to try and protect themselves (I don't blame them, there were several assaults when the more proactive sorts of guards tried to check tickets or deal with other customer queries and no-one should have to put themselves in harm's way at work).

Now a staff member at the ticket office on quieter stations would be welcome to help people report persons likely to cause a disturbance (or already causing a disturbance), and ensure the BTP deal with them, before they cause havoc with a load of people trapped in the vicinity between station stops.

 

[Zamracene749]

Unmanned metro station at around 9pm (North Shields). Kids kick out the rear window of a metrocar. I inform the driver. Driver radios in, control tells him to run out of service. Myself, plus the other handful of passengers are then kicked off the train. With the aggresive teens. Metrocar disappears into the distance. Voice of god comes over the tannoy, telling the perpetrators to leave because the police are on their way. 10 mins later, no police. Tannoy tells em again. 15 mins later, no police, kids are back on the platform fronting up to passengers and hurling abuse at the ones on the opposite platform. This is the reality of unmanned suburban stations in the UK nowadays. Those that bleat about the cost of manning them? Well, why not get rid of the police too? For the use they are? Because, like the station staff, they are a deterrent. The little sh**s that cause bother avoid manned places. Fortunately, the only grown ups were myself and a lad that had just come home after 4 weeks on the trawlers who was in no mood for a delay so we politely told them to go home.

 

[Bikeman78]

Because the value of having a staff member on every station far exceeds the cost of having that staff member on every station.

There is a reason why the first thing TfL did when they took over Silverlink Metro was put a staff member on every single station. And they have kept every station staffed. Even Emerson Park is staffed.

Compare Merseyrail to, say, the Tyne and Wear Metro. The Metro is pretty much feral in parts of the system whereas Merseyrail isn’t, even in the roughest bits of Liverpool.

Agreed. I have never had any bother on Merseyrail. It seems likely that having someone on duty at every station from first to last train is a positive thing.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Sep 2024 ==

Unmanned metro station at around 9pm (North Shields). Kids kick out the rear window of a metrocar. I inform the driver. Driver radios in, control tells him to run out of service. Myself, plus the other handful of passengers are then kicked off the train. With the aggresive teens.

Kicking people of at an unmanned station, in the company of hooligans that have just smashed a window, doesn't sound like the wisest of moves. Those trains normally run in pairs don't they? They could have moved everyone into the unit without the smashed window. Safe to say I have never seen anything like this on Merseyrail.

 

[youngiecj]

This thread title should be “why is almost everywhere except merseyrail so understaffed”.

I was about to say the same, well said.

 

[dk1]

I was about to say the same, well said.

So true. They know the cost of everything but the value of nothing

 

[Meole]

A fair few don't pay on unstaffed routes, not just Tyneside but commuter lines around outer London where a short journey between unstaffed stations carries little risk.

 

[Chester1]

Staffed stations are positive but the problem comes when people expect fares at that they would have without having hundreds of non essential staff or they expect the subsidy required to avoid this to not reduce funding for other public services in their area. It's the mindset that every station must be staffed long hours 7 days a week that I object to. It's a metro system with a second person onboard each train. Staffed stations are an optional extra and that's OK if people are prepared to accept a trade off somewhere.

 

[Tetchytyke]

the problem comes when people expect fares at that they would have without having hundreds of non essential staff or they expect the subsidy required to avoid this to not reduce funding for other public services in their area

Is funny isn’t it, we can afford a profit margin on the IET that even the National Audit Office criticised as poor value for money.

But staffing stations is an unaffordable luxury.

Hmm.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Sep 2024 ==

Unmanned metro station at around 9pm (North Shields). Kids kick out the rear window of a metrocar. I inform the driver. Driver radios in, control tells him to run out of service. Myself, plus the other handful of passengers are then kicked off the train. With the aggresive teens. Metrocar disappears into the distance.

North Shields used to be staffed late into the evening, with the gate line manned. I used to work in North Shields and it needed the staff.

I don’t visit very often now, given I’ve moved, but I rarely see the gate line manned even during the day now.

It’s also why I never reported damage to the driver when I was travelling late at night. Metro control were always happy to dump passengers anywhere with no regard to their safety. I’d rather be on a damaged train than no train. And if it’s dangerous, well, maybe they should have more staff to notice these things.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Staffed stations are positive but the problem comes when people expect fares at that they would have without having hundreds of non essential staff or they expect the subsidy required to avoid this to not reduce funding for other public services in their area. It's the mindset that every station must be staffed long hours 7 days a week that I object to. It's a metro system with a second person onboard each train. Staffed stations are an optional extra and that's OK if people are prepared to accept a trade off somewhere.

Well, Merseyrail fares are generally very reasonable, and the local region is prepared to subsidise it, so it's worth it. The buses are a sluggish joke in comparison (and there is a lot of ASB which can't be combatted cheaply), so a safe and secure rail system is important to make sure people don't just jump straight in the car.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well, Merseyrail fares are generally very reasonable, and the local region is prepared to subsidise it, so it's worth it. The buses are a sluggish joke in comparison (and there is a lot of ASB which can't be combatted cheaply), so a safe and secure rail system is important to make sure people don't just jump straight in the car.

It also receives considerable national subsidy, I believe.

 

[AlastairFraser]

It also receives considerable national subsidy, I believe.

Is there a comparison to the subsidy given to other networks though?

 

[Voo]

DOO was never going to come in on Merseyrail. Aside from it being Liverpool (which has it's own culture around work, unions and employment), the drivers knew both Chris McGhee and Martin Zee personally and what happened to both of them - one in prison and the other dragged through the courts on an utterly nonsense charge, essentially runing his life and it appears ending his railway career even after being cleared.

No driver who knew either of them is going to want to be responsible and as the court in the McGee case stated, legally liable for safeguarding drunks and crowd control on platforms, nor the myriad of dangers in the dispatch corridor. I'm not going to defend the actions of McGee, but aside from the dispatch incident, the summing up of his case included the judge castigating him for failing to deal with the welfare and safeguarding of the girl irrespective of the accident. Without a guard, a DOO driver is legally liable for this.

Coupled with the Stephen Murdoch dispatch case and West Wickham where a trainee driver dragged a woman under a train, and with the onus on lone drivers being responsible for managing crowds and behaviour on stranded trains these days, it's a non starter.

We've moved on from the 80s mentality of "you're on your own on a DOO train", with a driver simply relying on gaining interlock, and simply ignoring crowding issues on platforms or people getting assaulted, vulnerable minors, the disabled on trains - and rightly so. Unfortunately the powers that be can't simply then turn round and demand that this same lone driver is made legally liable for everything on top of it / or the scapegoat for everything, when the public rightly demand higher standards.

Ending his railway career? Hmm, not sure about that. Probably best stick to facts.