POLL: Are you happy / FGW to continue - Maidenhead Advertiser

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Not our poll, but "theirs" ...

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/News/Areas/Maidenhead/POLL-Are-you-happy-First-Great-Western-looks-set-to-continue-providing-rail-services-until-2019-29102014.htm?

POLL: Are you happy First Great Western looks set to continue providing rail services until 2019?

This week, the Weekly Poll looks at the news that First Great Western (FGW^▸ (First Great Western)) looks set to continue providing train services along the Great Western Main Line until at least March 2019.

...

We want to know what you think of the deal. Are you happy FGW will be continuing to provide services? Is there anything you would like to see improved over the next few years?

Are you happy First Great Western looks set to continue providing rail services along the Great Western Main Line until 2019?

Closing Date: 05/05/2015

[broadgage]

I am fairly happy for First group to continue, despite the recent substantial worsening of reliability and steadily worsening crowding.
Most of the worst recent problems have been failures of Network rail infrastructure, in particular the near weekly major signalling failures. I feel that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) could have responded better, in particular by running full length trains when only limited paths are available. However the cause of the trouble was undoubtedly Network rail and not the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company).

Looking further back we have had two successive seasons of major disruption due to flooding and weather related infrastructure damage. IMHO^▸ ('in my humble opinion'), FGW coped well under these circumstances, no doubt some things could have been done better, but in general they did well in the extreme weather.

The cleaning and maintenance of trains is done by FGW (or by a subcontractor whom they appoint) and compares well IME^▸ ('in my experience') with other TOCs.

I recall a handful of major breakdowns with passengers trapped on trains for many hours, one incident was especially noteworthy, the response of FGW was in my view very poor, but these events are rare. And they MIGHT have learnt lessons.

Overcrowding is subjectively getting worse, but rolling stock provision is largely dictated by government policies and by what is actually available, not certain that a different TOC would do better in this regard ?
FGW have shown willing by the purchase of a few HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) in addition to the majority of the fleet that is leased in the usual way.

FGW are to be commended for the excellent Pullman restaurants, they are now AFAIK^▸ ('as far as I know') the only TOC to offer a full restaurant service.

IME a lot of the so called "anti FGW" views among the general public are in fact anti Thameslink views. The Thameslink or FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect) franchise was run by First group until very recently and offered an appalling service. So bad indeed that I suspect that a lot of victims tarred anything run by First group with the same brush !

[eightf48544]

My view is that it is poisioned challis for any TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) with all the infrastructure work going on in the next 4/5 years. They will be totally at the mercy of Network Rail getting all the engineering work done on time, however, there will also be continuity of mangement between FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and Netwrok Rail which hopefully will work smoothly. By and large the Reading work has gone pretty smoothly. FGW also have new maintenance facilities at Reading which will hopefully improve the reliiability of the Turbos  Also FGW does know the line and have begun to develop contingency plans but it will be  almost impossible to cater for every adverse event. 

Any other TOC would have to learn all that from scratch. There is bascially no chance of any extra trains until the wires are up and we have electric trains in TV^▸ (Thames Valley). So apart from tinkering with the timetable to hopefully balance out demand between trains there is little scope for any large increase in capacity.

I do wonder about March 2019 presumably DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have chosen a date by which they expect the wires to up to Bristol/Cardiff, the new signalling installed and working, the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project. This will offer more capacity on routes, save money, give a consistent and safe service and meet customer requirements. Intended to replace HSTs.) in service and EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) in the TV but before Crossrail pops its head out of the tunnel and wrecks the local service to Reading in December 2019.  Giving the new franchise holder just 9 months to learn the ropes before Crossrail disrupts the service.

So what happens if everything is not up and running by March 2019 I doubt if any other TOC would want to pick up the mess so maybe FGW will be in charge until 2020 or later.

So FGW are probably the least worse TOC to run the line.

[mfpa]

Would it really make much difference? Or would most staff simply TUPE^▸ (The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. In a railway context, the legislation that protects rail staff when a franchise changes hands.) over to the new operator, bringing all their experience with them?

[broadgage]

Most front line operational staff would indeed transfer via TUPE^▸ (The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. In a railway context, the legislation that protects rail staff when a franchise changes hands.) to a new train operating company.
However senior management tend to be appointed by the old or new TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) and not transferred en-mass from the old to the new company.
Whilst a new firm MIGHT have new better management and better rules, policies or procedures, there is also a risk that they might be worse ! especially initially when confronted with problems unique to the area.

[grahame]

Whilst a new firm MIGHT have new better management and better rules, policies or procedures, there is also a risk that they might be worse ! especially initially when confronted with problems unique to the area.

It's my understanding that perhaps a couple of dozen people at the top are replaced, and of course it takes time for change to come through from those people to the operational team, apart from the "day 1" type instructions to wear new uniforms, and rebranding by the incoming company to strip off the replaced company's branding and put theirs on, even if in the old colours.

When Wessex Trains (National Express) were replaced by First Great Western almost 10 years ago, many of us got the impression that the incoming folks from First weren't anything like as acquainted with the operations of the West fleet as might have been wished, and indeed were relying on their main line experience scaling down to regional and local services to too high a degree.   This impression may have been wrong, for in those days I was far less informed, and contacts within First were minimal.

In contrast, in the lead up to the 2012 bids all of the shortlisted bidders - including First - were impressive in the background work and community contacts that they made, and indeed members of some teams were our there on the ground learning how it worked.  So the bids would have been, in my view, very well formed indeed even if some of that information had been used to allow them to run the franchise in a way that didn't suit some of the people using and potentially using the trains.

A couple of years on from 2012, much of that shortlisted experience will have been lost, with all bid teams unsuccessful and moving on.  And Direct Operated Rail services haven't, to my knowledge, been out and learning in case they have to take over - let alone to the excellent extent that all bidders did a couple of years ago.   It follows, then, that it's First who are in a best informed position to be running the services in less than a year from now.