Breaking up network rail
Discussion
Quote - the crash cost tens of millions of pounds in network repairs and marked the "beginning of the end for the wholly commercial management"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1482439/Hatfield-c...
Now we're going full circle, back to commercialization and profit making.
The Spruce goose said:
the railway and network is stuck in the past. there are so many jobs for life brigade it is embarrassing how behind the private sector is it.
network rail should be broken up, there are private companies that can do a better job for less as well as make a profit. the problem is how will it all be paid for, at the end of the day rail prices will go up, there are too many companies involved in the whole process.
it is a mess and probably take 20 years to unravel.
Can you elaborate?network rail should be broken up, there are private companies that can do a better job for less as well as make a profit. the problem is how will it all be paid for, at the end of the day rail prices will go up, there are too many companies involved in the whole process.
it is a mess and probably take 20 years to unravel.
The Spruce goose said:
the railway and network is stuck in the past. there are so many jobs for life brigade it is embarrassing how behind the private sector is it.
network rail should be broken up, there are private companies that can do a better job for less as well as make a profit. the problem is how will it all be paid for, at the end of the day rail prices will go up, there are too many companies involved in the whole process.
it is a mess and probably take 20 years to unravel.
Almost as much of a mess as that post.network rail should be broken up, there are private companies that can do a better job for less as well as make a profit. the problem is how will it all be paid for, at the end of the day rail prices will go up, there are too many companies involved in the whole process.
it is a mess and probably take 20 years to unravel.
Stedman said:
The Spruce goose said:
the railway and network is stuck in the past. there are so many jobs for life brigade it is embarrassing how behind the private sector is it.
network rail should be broken up, there are private companies that can do a better job for less as well as make a profit. the problem is how will it all be paid for, at the end of the day rail prices will go up, there are too many companies involved in the whole process.
it is a mess and probably take 20 years to unravel.
Can you elaborate?network rail should be broken up, there are private companies that can do a better job for less as well as make a profit. the problem is how will it all be paid for, at the end of the day rail prices will go up, there are too many companies involved in the whole process.
it is a mess and probably take 20 years to unravel.
djc206 said:
Surely if the compo is greater than the revenue then when they no longer get compo they'd need to up the game to ensure they disrupt fewer services or they'd end up out of pocket? I'm not saying they would or even could because I don't know anything about the industry I'm just trying to rationalise the thinking behind this whole plan. I'm not supporting the idea btw just intrigued by it.
Or... They would allow less maintenance to take place to maximise the running of trains which was a profit making activity?TOCs have a captive market and just don't care about their customers. They're never going to invest more than a public sector body especially if they have nothing to show for their investment at the end of the franchise. The cost of improvement will always greatly outweigh any marginal gain from providing a better service on the railway.
sparks85 said:
Or... They would allow less maintenance to take place to maximise the running of trains which was a profit making activity?
TOCs have a captive market and just don't care about their customers. They're never going to invest more than a public sector body especially if they have nothing to show for their investment at the end of the franchise. The cost of improvement will always greatly outweigh any marginal gain from providing a better service on the railway.
Good points thanksTOCs have a captive market and just don't care about their customers. They're never going to invest more than a public sector body especially if they have nothing to show for their investment at the end of the franchise. The cost of improvement will always greatly outweigh any marginal gain from providing a better service on the railway.
I don't disagree with some of the comments but the question to ask is, how could a TOC do any better? Are they going to spend any more money? Allow more engineering works? Come up with some radical new way of delivering the work (spoiler, there isn't one). The TOC's aren't full of dynamic leaders and management that will bring about a wholesale step change and any one who thinks that is deluded (much like Chris Grayling I suppose).
Eurostar platforms had nothing to do with Network Rail, bringing them back into service was a DfT decision - once NR were instructed and funded they cracked on with the work and will operate them.
One of the problems is the general public don't understand how the rail industry works or is set up, so you get people making incorrect assumptions just like the Eurostar one. We shouldn't expect the public to understand the intricacies, they just want a train service that is clean, reliable and has capacity - and this is fine. But the point is when people who understand the industry start objecting to proposals, sit up and listen because they're doing it for a good reason.
Eurostar platforms had nothing to do with Network Rail, bringing them back into service was a DfT decision - once NR were instructed and funded they cracked on with the work and will operate them.
One of the problems is the general public don't understand how the rail industry works or is set up, so you get people making incorrect assumptions just like the Eurostar one. We shouldn't expect the public to understand the intricacies, they just want a train service that is clean, reliable and has capacity - and this is fine. But the point is when people who understand the industry start objecting to proposals, sit up and listen because they're doing it for a good reason.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
sparks85 said:
I don't disagree with some of the comments but the question to ask is, how could a TOC do any better? Are they going to spend any more money? Allow more engineering works? Come up with some radical new way of delivering the work (spoiler, there isn't one). The TOC's aren't full of dynamic leaders and management that will bring about a wholesale step change and any one who thinks that is deluded (much like Chris Grayling I suppose).
Eurostar platforms had nothing to do with Network Rail, bringing them back into service was a DfT decision - once NR were instructed and funded they cracked on with the work and will operate them.
One of the problems is the general public don't understand how the rail industry works or is set up, so you get people making incorrect assumptions just like the Eurostar one. We shouldn't expect the public to understand the intricacies, they just want a train service that is clean, reliable and has capacity - and this is fine. But the point is when people who understand the industry start objecting to proposals, sit up and listen because they're doing it for a good reason.
Bold number 1 - Don't I know it Eurostar platforms had nothing to do with Network Rail, bringing them back into service was a DfT decision - once NR were instructed and funded they cracked on with the work and will operate them.
One of the problems is the general public don't understand how the rail industry works or is set up, so you get people making incorrect assumptions just like the Eurostar one. We shouldn't expect the public to understand the intricacies, they just want a train service that is clean, reliable and has capacity - and this is fine. But the point is when people who understand the industry start objecting to proposals, sit up and listen because they're doing it for a good reason.
Bold number 2 - Couldn't agree more, it is its own industry. 'Agreements' between company and union for example - they are mutually beneficial and are needed, yet the GP 'think' it's the unions throwing weight about when they're really not.
I'm only going from what I heard on the radio, but isn't the proposal to set up joint boards between the TOCs and NR to reduce the "us and them" split between them, rather than to "give responsibility for infrastructure to the TOCs" ?
There is something to be said for getting people to work more closely together rather than sitting back and blaming each other.
There is something to be said for getting people to work more closely together rather than sitting back and blaming each other.
I work in a NR Control Centre. I work for NR however my access lanyard clearly displays Virgin Trains and Northern branding as it's a shared building. it's not just the building we share, we are all situated in the same office. Not different area, but right next to each other. I couldn't have a conversation with a NR colleague without a TOC colleague being party to it. We are close enough to touch without leaving our seats. We share conversation, jokes, know each other as friends and many are family. We share food, drinks and have spent many nights putting the world to rights. You could not get a closer working relationship if your tried.
I appreciate this change is 'bigger' that just my office but the reality is those that work on 'The Railway' do just that. the name on the back of the jacket changes regularly, what doesn't change is the that we all want it to work as best as it possibly can, regardless of what colours you are wearing that week.
All changing the management will do is take safety related decisions away from the person whose sole role is safety and put it in the hands of a privatized company with profits in mind.
I appreciate this change is 'bigger' that just my office but the reality is those that work on 'The Railway' do just that. the name on the back of the jacket changes regularly, what doesn't change is the that we all want it to work as best as it possibly can, regardless of what colours you are wearing that week.
All changing the management will do is take safety related decisions away from the person whose sole role is safety and put it in the hands of a privatized company with profits in mind.
Edited by Rick101 on Thursday 8th December 10:13
but it's not (from what I've read) about "putting it in the hands of a private company" is it? It's a proposal for joint management teams with representatives from both sides on.
I'm not taking sides here, but people seem to be jumping to wrong conclusions, again just going from what I've heard and read, about all responsibility going to the TOCs, and that seems to be totally not the case.
I'm not taking sides here, but people seem to be jumping to wrong conclusions, again just going from what I've heard and read, about all responsibility going to the TOCs, and that seems to be totally not the case.
Rick101 said:
I work in a NR Control Centre. I work for NR however my access lanyard clearly displays Virgin Trains and Northern branding as it's a shared building. it's not just the building we share, we are all situated in the same office. Not different area, but right next to each other. I couldn't have a conversation with a NR colleague without a TOC colleague being party to it. We are close enough to touch without leaving our seats. We share conversation, jokes, know each other as friends and many are family. We share food, drinks and have spent many nights putting the world to rights. You could not get a closer working relationship if your tried.
I appreciate this change is 'bigger' that just my office but the reality is those that work on 'The Railway' do just that. the name on the back of the jacket changes regularly, what doesn't change is the that we all want it to work as best as it possibly can, regardless of what colours you are wearing that week.
All changing the management will do is take safety related decisions away from the person whose sole role is safety and put it in the hands of a privatized company with profits in mind.
Well said Rick, most of us on the Railway think the same way, despite some TOC's upper management trying to divide and conquer from within. 'The job' is a massive jigsaw which requires all the right people in the right jobs knowing at least something about everyone else's role, it just falls apart otherwise. As you say, the names on the hi-viz jackets might alter but 'the job' pretty much stays the same in an operational way. It's folk like you on the other end of a constantly ringing telephone and those like me at the sharp end who keep the job moving, not bloody Whitehall (whichever flavour / party is in vogue.I appreciate this change is 'bigger' that just my office but the reality is those that work on 'The Railway' do just that. the name on the back of the jacket changes regularly, what doesn't change is the that we all want it to work as best as it possibly can, regardless of what colours you are wearing that week.
All changing the management will do is take safety related decisions away from the person whose sole role is safety and put it in the hands of a privatized company with profits in mind.
Edited by Rick101 on Thursday 8th December 10:13
Rick101 said:
I work in a NR Control Centre. I work for NR however my access lanyard clearly displays Virgin Trains and Northern branding as it's a shared building. it's not just the building we share, we are all situated in the same office. Not different area, but right next to each other. I couldn't have a conversation with a NR colleague without a TOC colleague being party to it. We are close enough to touch without leaving our seats. We share conversation, jokes, know each other as friends and many are family. We share food, drinks and have spent many nights putting the world to rights. You could not get a closer working relationship if your tried.
I appreciate this change is 'bigger' that just my office but the reality is those that work on 'The Railway' do just that. the name on the back of the jacket changes regularly, what doesn't change is the that we all want it to work as best as it possibly can, regardless of what colours you are wearing that week.
All changing the management will do is take safety related decisions away from the person whose sole role is safety and put it in the hands of a privatized company with profits in mind.
Ah you work in the ROC? Im over the road in Leeman Road depot. I appreciate this change is 'bigger' that just my office but the reality is those that work on 'The Railway' do just that. the name on the back of the jacket changes regularly, what doesn't change is the that we all want it to work as best as it possibly can, regardless of what colours you are wearing that week.
All changing the management will do is take safety related decisions away from the person whose sole role is safety and put it in the hands of a privatized company with profits in mind.
Edited by Rick101 on Thursday 8th December 10:13
t however what is being proposed will be more sCrutyRammers said:
but it's not (from what I've read) about "putting it in the hands of a private company" is it? It's a proposal for joint management teams with representatives from both sides on.
I'm not taking sides here, but people seem to be jumping to wrong conclusions, again just going from what I've heard and read, about all responsibility going to the TOCs, and that seems to be totally not the case.
Exactly this has been tried before (SWT Alliance) and it hasn't exactly been groundbreaking.I'm not taking sides here, but people seem to be jumping to wrong conclusions, again just going from what I've heard and read, about all responsibility going to the TOCs, and that seems to be totally not the case.
I fail to see how inserting a management team between 2 existing teams is going to do anything other than add another layer of bureaucracy.
Bottom line is the TOC's don't like spending money or doing anything which could cost them income. NR are there to primarily operate a safe but efficient railway. If you want to integrate the railway without increasing the safety risk, or adding significant cost or bloating the entire set up then why not let NR control the rolling stock as well?
What I struggle with is, why not run a trial where one route or franchise is renationalised. Measure the performance over 5 years with pre-agreed criteria then see if there has been any benefit or loss.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff