As the new government begins bringing the railway back under public ownership, it would be wise to look at the history books
Coming soon: Great British Railways
I was in a boozer in Lancashire on election day, chewing the fat with a couple of old lags from the so-called bygone days of British Rail. I made some comment along the lines of, “Well, let’s be honest, it wasn’t really any better under British Rail and was a bit of a national joke at times,” only to be told politely I was talking a bit of nonsense really. They contested that “sectorisation” was the glory era for the rail industry and I thought “here we go again…”.
I’m not planning another article comparing whether it was better or not back then, I’ve been down that road before a few times with you lot and in fairness to these old-timers, my recollection as a teenager is admittedly of a railway landscape that had more character, a greater brand personality and presence and a sense of strong leadership – big leaders, recognisable to the public and well respected by their staff. Safety didn’t seem as strong, but this was an epoch in transport and beyond that was transitioning from underinvested, outdated infrastructure to an industry which was more technological and where shoddier working practices and culture were becoming more professional. This period, that was neither here nor there, in my view, imported risk. Anyway, I digress, as we look forward with a new government, it’s worth ruminating on whether we are genuinely likely to see signs of this so-called halcyon era of BR.
My biggest fear right now is around leadership and capability. I’m not decrying the efforts of those in management roles. There really is talent out there, but when the railway was last under national ownership, formal development programmes were more predominant. They had longevity and created pathways that took folk through the formative stages of their careers. Today’s development schemes are short-lived, falling by the wayside if their architect moves on.
When I look round the sector, I see huge enthusiasm among fledgling managers and a far more culturally savvy and diverse perspective, but I also see them, in some respects abandoned by their seniors, those galvanising, strong leaders at the top who should not only provide assuredness in times of adversity but also informal mentoring. I also see less career planning for leaders – folk aren’t moving into roles internally due to some kind of structured long term plan for them, more so because they’ve flitted from one job application to another and in some cases, got lucky.
The uncertainty and constant sense of ‘waiting for direction’ in terms of the future industry set-up has created malaise, alongside a blunting of scope and accountability for leaders
The uncertainty and constant sense of ‘waiting for direction’ in terms of the future industry set-up has created malaise, alongside a blunting of scope and accountability for leaders. The post Covid-environment in which TOCs don’t take revenue risk, alongside a more prescriptive, scrutinising role for the Department for Transport, has stymied the span of roles for folk and prevented new skills and experiences being developed alongside a desire and ability to make decisions. The industry, in my view, has far fewer rounded and experienced leaders than in the dying days of nationalisation – and don’t forget back then, there was no separation between operations and infrastructure, so operations managers were more multi-functional. For this reason, during the privatisation years, London Underground managers, reared in an integrated railway, were always highly regarded, better remunerated and sought after in the ‘National Rail’ environment.
Sadly, I don’t sense a mass of railway managers waiting excitedly to be unleashed and emancipated within a new structure and buoyed by greater certainty for the future of GB rail, now the election result has been confirmed. It’s not helped by only old-timers remembering, as my lags down the pub did, how much freedom and fun it was last time round. Instead, I see a cadre of managers showing a mix of world-weariness, neutered of their creative flair to the extent they can’t even contemplate what it might look like to be able to develop and genuinely execute and follow through new ideas. They appear hesitant, waiting for direction from leaders who themselves are fatigued and confused, lacking the energy to go through all this change once more, this time reversing the privatisation years they’ve invested the bulk of their career in. Meanwhile, the modern generation is, in my view, more conservative and not as instinctively entrepreneurial or risk taking as their predecessors (not necessarily a bad thing) and this cultural shift will need to be taken into account before anyone thinks we can just pick up where we left off in sectorisation.
Importantly too, I fear that the railway, in its desire to achieve value for the shareholders of the various privatised companies, alongside an anxiousness to quickly exploit the benefits of technological enhancements, has cut its cloth too savagely. I understand the Treasury’s post-Covid demands to reduce costs, but I don’t believe that there has been an appreciation of the complexity of the railway and the risks of reducing staffing to the bone. I see the pitfalls when disruption occurs, particularly during evenings and weekends, when managers have gone home and staff are depleted; large stations descend into chaos, bordering on anarchy with customers having to take control, in the absence of sufficient staffing and leadership. In the new world when the industry finally has a proper structure and strategy, it will take longer to rebuild and achieve success because we’ve reduced staffing numbers and the number of experienced managers.
The landscape has indeed changed since last time round, though this is where the history books are so important for Labour and all those involved in the sector. Where sectorisation appeared to be a success was because it consisted of local, market-led business units, with very clear accountabilities and in a set-up and culture that encouraged commercial innovation. There were fairly fluid processes to sign off initiatives and ‘get things done’. There was also an emphasis on the railway and its assets, such as stations, to be treated as ‘profit centres’ and a retailing philosophy was fashionable within the sector, which naturally spawned a more customer-focused approach. Bear in mind back then, across society as a whole, customer service was very much in its infancy, seen as some radical and slightly odd principle created by the Americans and one which rested a little uncomfortably with the transport sector.
When I started my career in 1993, I’d suggest that at least a third of my fellow employees were either unnerved by the concept of being subservient to passengers or considered it nonsense
When I started my career in 1993, I’d suggest that at least a third of my fellow employees were either unnerved by the concept of being subservient to passengers or considered it nonsense. The benefit we have this time round is that customer service is absolute bread and butter to every business, not just in transport – even if it’s not always delivered with aplomb. We’re working in an environment where there is more technological and human innovation around making the life of customers better.
There are other things in our favour, that were less the case during the last knockings of nationalisation. Although there had been a major investment in London commuter rolling stock with the advent of the fleet of Networkers, for instance, the fleet profile across the industry was tired and deteriorating. Privatisation brought with it a flurry of new trains. It may have been less interesting for us trainspotters, but in the main the fleet across Britain has become more streamlined, yet still flexible in terms of its ability to serve different routes and scenarios.
Whilst the downturn in customer numbers in recent years has made it harder to balance the books, this is also a railway that should be easier to operate. Spreading customer numbers more evenly across the day, due to more flexible and less intense working arrangements, should create a less pressurised environment and alleviate all the pinch-points that used to be the bane of our lives. It should also make it easier to reduce delays related to mass commuting that pushed the railway on some corridors to breaking point every morning and evening peak. Even challenges that were intrinsic to a frontline manager’s peak-time portfolio, such as the retailing experience, have, to a huge extent, been taken away. Queues out of the door at ticket offices, as well as broken or slow machines, were as big an issue for your average duty manager as a track circuit failure when I joined the railway.
Modern day advances that make this an easier playing field than back then, also include the ability to glean, track and act on customer and non-user sentiment, through social media and other research tools. Remember, the internet wasn’t really in play during the nationalised era. Today’s marketing manager in the railway can generate campaigns digitally, with an eye-catching graphic, compelling message and a few quid thrown at Meta and friends. Back then it was posters, leaflets and hugely expensive TV and radio ads.
Technology has also enhanced safety management, particularly in terms of remote infrastructure and asset monitoring and although anti-social behaviour is still very much active, the design and layout of stations and trains, as well as the use of CCTV mean that it should be easier to create a more controllable railway for staff and customers.
Whilst I fear that today’s managers are less equipped than before, through no fault of their own, I do believe that culturally the railway is in a better place
Whilst I fear that today’s managers are less equipped than before, through no fault of their own, I do believe that culturally the railway is in a better place. Firstly, it is in a more collegiate and collaborative space. From my observations, the railway towards the back end of BR was more ‘command and control’, which did, at least, create a sense of clearer direction, but perhaps made it less a place to provide feedback freely or where the less experienced could flourish. Then, in the early years of privatisation, a macho, adversarial culture emerged where former colleagues at British Rail were now in separate businesses. Lacking any maturity gleaned from ever working outside of their organisation before, they enjoyed flexing their muscles, thinking that was how to operate in the ‘real commercial world’, taking legal recourse and acting parochially. At least we all seem to get along just fine these days in the industry! Integration.
Looking forward, there could indeed be a playing field more conducive to success than in many years if everything works in our favour. Imagine, a few short years (or sooner) a railway that isn’t distracted by a sleep walk towards nationalisation or privatisation and where its lasting structure is in place and all the unsettling re-organisations to get to this ‘end state’ have been completed. Consider a scenario where track and train are united in a truly integrated set-up and where all modes are also marvellously entwined and where the network is genuinely moving towards net zero, buoyed by technology, expertise and changing working and customer behaviours. Imagine a happy workforce, less militant because the trade unions have, in their eyes, got their own way and the railway isn’t dominated by rapacious, profit-hungry fat-cats.
All of the above sounds too good to be true and is a scenario that the railway of my lifetime has never been able to achieve. The closest was perhaps the early years of sectorisation before the distracting transition towards privatisation took hold, but even in its heyday, the railway managers of old could only fantasise about the kind of technological and cultural advances we now have at hand. In many respects this perfect landscape is actually achievable if the industry can come together, be perhaps patient a little longer and importantly gen up on its history, learning from past failures, even if it’s not fashionable in the modern era to be seen to recycle the stuff of three or four decades ago.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Alex Warner has over 30 years’ experience in the transport sector, having held senior roles on a multi-modal basis across the sector. He is co-founder of recruitment business Lost Group and transport consultancy AJW Experience Group (which includes Great Scenic Journeys). He is also chair of West Midlands Grand Rail Collaboration and chair of Surrey FA.
This story appears inside the latest issue of Passenger Transport.
A railway ready for renationalisation?
by Passenger Transport on Jul 11, 2024 • 12:20 pm No CommentsAs the new government begins bringing the railway back under public ownership, it would be wise to look at the history books
I was in a boozer in Lancashire on election day, chewing the fat with a couple of old lags from the so-called bygone days of British Rail. I made some comment along the lines of, “Well, let’s be honest, it wasn’t really any better under British Rail and was a bit of a national joke at times,” only to be told politely I was talking a bit of nonsense really. They contested that “sectorisation” was the glory era for the rail industry and I thought “here we go again…”.
I’m not planning another article comparing whether it was better or not back then, I’ve been down that road before a few times with you lot and in fairness to these old-timers, my recollection as a teenager is admittedly of a railway landscape that had more character, a greater brand personality and presence and a sense of strong leadership – big leaders, recognisable to the public and well respected by their staff. Safety didn’t seem as strong, but this was an epoch in transport and beyond that was transitioning from underinvested, outdated infrastructure to an industry which was more technological and where shoddier working practices and culture were becoming more professional. This period, that was neither here nor there, in my view, imported risk. Anyway, I digress, as we look forward with a new government, it’s worth ruminating on whether we are genuinely likely to see signs of this so-called halcyon era of BR.
My biggest fear right now is around leadership and capability. I’m not decrying the efforts of those in management roles. There really is talent out there, but when the railway was last under national ownership, formal development programmes were more predominant. They had longevity and created pathways that took folk through the formative stages of their careers. Today’s development schemes are short-lived, falling by the wayside if their architect moves on.
When I look round the sector, I see huge enthusiasm among fledgling managers and a far more culturally savvy and diverse perspective, but I also see them, in some respects abandoned by their seniors, those galvanising, strong leaders at the top who should not only provide assuredness in times of adversity but also informal mentoring. I also see less career planning for leaders – folk aren’t moving into roles internally due to some kind of structured long term plan for them, more so because they’ve flitted from one job application to another and in some cases, got lucky.
The uncertainty and constant sense of ‘waiting for direction’ in terms of the future industry set-up has created malaise, alongside a blunting of scope and accountability for leaders. The post Covid-environment in which TOCs don’t take revenue risk, alongside a more prescriptive, scrutinising role for the Department for Transport, has stymied the span of roles for folk and prevented new skills and experiences being developed alongside a desire and ability to make decisions. The industry, in my view, has far fewer rounded and experienced leaders than in the dying days of nationalisation – and don’t forget back then, there was no separation between operations and infrastructure, so operations managers were more multi-functional. For this reason, during the privatisation years, London Underground managers, reared in an integrated railway, were always highly regarded, better remunerated and sought after in the ‘National Rail’ environment.
Sadly, I don’t sense a mass of railway managers waiting excitedly to be unleashed and emancipated within a new structure and buoyed by greater certainty for the future of GB rail, now the election result has been confirmed. It’s not helped by only old-timers remembering, as my lags down the pub did, how much freedom and fun it was last time round. Instead, I see a cadre of managers showing a mix of world-weariness, neutered of their creative flair to the extent they can’t even contemplate what it might look like to be able to develop and genuinely execute and follow through new ideas. They appear hesitant, waiting for direction from leaders who themselves are fatigued and confused, lacking the energy to go through all this change once more, this time reversing the privatisation years they’ve invested the bulk of their career in. Meanwhile, the modern generation is, in my view, more conservative and not as instinctively entrepreneurial or risk taking as their predecessors (not necessarily a bad thing) and this cultural shift will need to be taken into account before anyone thinks we can just pick up where we left off in sectorisation.
Importantly too, I fear that the railway, in its desire to achieve value for the shareholders of the various privatised companies, alongside an anxiousness to quickly exploit the benefits of technological enhancements, has cut its cloth too savagely. I understand the Treasury’s post-Covid demands to reduce costs, but I don’t believe that there has been an appreciation of the complexity of the railway and the risks of reducing staffing to the bone. I see the pitfalls when disruption occurs, particularly during evenings and weekends, when managers have gone home and staff are depleted; large stations descend into chaos, bordering on anarchy with customers having to take control, in the absence of sufficient staffing and leadership. In the new world when the industry finally has a proper structure and strategy, it will take longer to rebuild and achieve success because we’ve reduced staffing numbers and the number of experienced managers.
The landscape has indeed changed since last time round, though this is where the history books are so important for Labour and all those involved in the sector. Where sectorisation appeared to be a success was because it consisted of local, market-led business units, with very clear accountabilities and in a set-up and culture that encouraged commercial innovation. There were fairly fluid processes to sign off initiatives and ‘get things done’. There was also an emphasis on the railway and its assets, such as stations, to be treated as ‘profit centres’ and a retailing philosophy was fashionable within the sector, which naturally spawned a more customer-focused approach. Bear in mind back then, across society as a whole, customer service was very much in its infancy, seen as some radical and slightly odd principle created by the Americans and one which rested a little uncomfortably with the transport sector.
When I started my career in 1993, I’d suggest that at least a third of my fellow employees were either unnerved by the concept of being subservient to passengers or considered it nonsense. The benefit we have this time round is that customer service is absolute bread and butter to every business, not just in transport – even if it’s not always delivered with aplomb. We’re working in an environment where there is more technological and human innovation around making the life of customers better.
There are other things in our favour, that were less the case during the last knockings of nationalisation. Although there had been a major investment in London commuter rolling stock with the advent of the fleet of Networkers, for instance, the fleet profile across the industry was tired and deteriorating. Privatisation brought with it a flurry of new trains. It may have been less interesting for us trainspotters, but in the main the fleet across Britain has become more streamlined, yet still flexible in terms of its ability to serve different routes and scenarios.
Whilst the downturn in customer numbers in recent years has made it harder to balance the books, this is also a railway that should be easier to operate. Spreading customer numbers more evenly across the day, due to more flexible and less intense working arrangements, should create a less pressurised environment and alleviate all the pinch-points that used to be the bane of our lives. It should also make it easier to reduce delays related to mass commuting that pushed the railway on some corridors to breaking point every morning and evening peak. Even challenges that were intrinsic to a frontline manager’s peak-time portfolio, such as the retailing experience, have, to a huge extent, been taken away. Queues out of the door at ticket offices, as well as broken or slow machines, were as big an issue for your average duty manager as a track circuit failure when I joined the railway.
Modern day advances that make this an easier playing field than back then, also include the ability to glean, track and act on customer and non-user sentiment, through social media and other research tools. Remember, the internet wasn’t really in play during the nationalised era. Today’s marketing manager in the railway can generate campaigns digitally, with an eye-catching graphic, compelling message and a few quid thrown at Meta and friends. Back then it was posters, leaflets and hugely expensive TV and radio ads.
Technology has also enhanced safety management, particularly in terms of remote infrastructure and asset monitoring and although anti-social behaviour is still very much active, the design and layout of stations and trains, as well as the use of CCTV mean that it should be easier to create a more controllable railway for staff and customers.
Whilst I fear that today’s managers are less equipped than before, through no fault of their own, I do believe that culturally the railway is in a better place. Firstly, it is in a more collegiate and collaborative space. From my observations, the railway towards the back end of BR was more ‘command and control’, which did, at least, create a sense of clearer direction, but perhaps made it less a place to provide feedback freely or where the less experienced could flourish. Then, in the early years of privatisation, a macho, adversarial culture emerged where former colleagues at British Rail were now in separate businesses. Lacking any maturity gleaned from ever working outside of their organisation before, they enjoyed flexing their muscles, thinking that was how to operate in the ‘real commercial world’, taking legal recourse and acting parochially. At least we all seem to get along just fine these days in the industry! Integration.
Looking forward, there could indeed be a playing field more conducive to success than in many years if everything works in our favour. Imagine, a few short years (or sooner) a railway that isn’t distracted by a sleep walk towards nationalisation or privatisation and where its lasting structure is in place and all the unsettling re-organisations to get to this ‘end state’ have been completed. Consider a scenario where track and train are united in a truly integrated set-up and where all modes are also marvellously entwined and where the network is genuinely moving towards net zero, buoyed by technology, expertise and changing working and customer behaviours. Imagine a happy workforce, less militant because the trade unions have, in their eyes, got their own way and the railway isn’t dominated by rapacious, profit-hungry fat-cats.
All of the above sounds too good to be true and is a scenario that the railway of my lifetime has never been able to achieve. The closest was perhaps the early years of sectorisation before the distracting transition towards privatisation took hold, but even in its heyday, the railway managers of old could only fantasise about the kind of technological and cultural advances we now have at hand. In many respects this perfect landscape is actually achievable if the industry can come together, be perhaps patient a little longer and importantly gen up on its history, learning from past failures, even if it’s not fashionable in the modern era to be seen to recycle the stuff of three or four decades ago.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Alex Warner has over 30 years’ experience in the transport sector, having held senior roles on a multi-modal basis across the sector. He is co-founder of recruitment business Lost Group and transport consultancy AJW Experience Group (which includes Great Scenic Journeys). He is also chair of West Midlands Grand Rail Collaboration and chair of Surrey FA.
This story appears inside the latest issue of Passenger Transport.
DON’T MISS OUT – GET YOUR COPY! – click here to subscribe!