National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers (RMT)

Save The Railway Path: 30/03/2008

Given the news that Bristol City Council has halted plans to run Bus Rapid Transit down the Bristol-Bath Railway Path, a cheerful crowd of families and friends came out Sunday March 30 to Celebrate the Path - but they insist that it's too early to declare victory!

Although the press are saying that the plans to run BRT down the path have been "shelved," we need to find out exactly what this means. If it comes off that shelf and into the funding tray in two years time, we are in trouble. "Off the shelf and in the bin" should be the rallying cry for the BRT plan.

We also need to make sure that nothing like this ever happens again. No traffic consultant should pick up their Sustrans route map and discovers a "disused" railway to turn into a bus lane, nobody should try to take a bit of the railway path away for some reason, such as bit more bypass, or some house-building project. And that is a risk.

The dangerous Z-bend at Clay-Bottom, the destruction the A4174 Northern Ring Road made of the path, these are things we don't want to see repeated, any more than some more plans for buses down the route ten or fifteen years from now.

There is still going to be a vote on Tuesday, April 1, about leaving the path free of buses. It's been amended, and we have more support promised. We still want this vote to win! If it goes through, it becomes much harder for that plan on the shelf to be picked up and used. Meet on Tuesday evening, 5:30 pm, outside the Council House.

The forecast for Sunday was "sunny spells and scattered showers, some of them heavy." Bristolians came out to have fun, and celebrate the fact that the campaign is winning.

We haven't won yet, but the fact that the council have had to issue a last-minute video announcement, is a sign that things are going well.

We just need to show everyone how much we love the path as it is, at this, the FIRST Railway Path Celebration.

Posted on 12:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

BBC News: 29 March 2008

A plan to build bus lanes alongside the Bristol to Bath cycle path has been scrapped.

Sustrans described the proposal as "right idea, wrong route"

A protest meeting about the controversial scheme had been due to take place on Sunday.

Councillors now want to press ahead with plans for a Rapid Bus Transport Scheme to run from the city centre to Long Ashton.

Mark Bradshaw from Bristol City Council said it would now be focusing on other priorities.

More than 9,500 people signed a petition against the proposal.

Under the plans, a three-mile stretch between Lawrence Hill and Emerson's Green would have been altered to house a "rapid transit" bus lane.

At the time, sustainable transport charity Sustrans said the route, which is used for 2.4 million walking and cycling trips annually, was the "right idea, wrong route".

See also:

Campaigners win fight to save UK's oldest bike path

Bike Radar: 29 Mar
By Rosee Woodland

A party is being held to celebrate the Bristol to Bath Railway Path (BikeRadar)

A controversial scheme to build a bus lane on the UK's oldest cycle path has been shelved.

Campaigners planning a protest ride against the plans this Sunday (March 30) will now hold a victory bike procession along the route instead.

Cycling charity Sustrans had planned to hold a party on the Bristol to Bath Railway Path, to highlight its importance, followed by a ride into the heart of Bristol city to make their voices heard.

Local transport chiefs had hoped to build a bus route along half of the 13 mile traffic free route - a plan which campaigners said would destroy wildlife, and discourage people from walking and cycling.

But today (Saturday) the lead councillor championing the project announced it had been abandoned in its current form, due to the level of opposition, and an alternative scheme would be chosen instead.

Speaking to local newspaper, the Bristol Evening Post, Councillor Mark Bradshaw said: "From the work carried out so far, it is clear that shared use of part of the disused railway line linking Bristol and Bath would be technically complex and challenging, and would be very unpopular with the cyclists and walkers on the Bristol to Bath cycle path, with whom the route would be shared.

"Given these difficulties, and working as a partnership, we are committed to providing a full and detailed picture of those route options which do not involve shared use of the disused railway line with the cyclepath - those which are 100 per cent road based.

"In light of the complexities surrounding the city centre to Emerson's Green section of the route, we will be bringing forward detailed proposals for a first phase between Long Ashton and central Bristol in the near future."

Transport planners are now looking at a other options, including a route along a nearby motorway or main road. The path has not been completely saved from threat, as Mr Bradshaw refused to rule out the possibility that shorter sections could still be used.

But, as another route will now be built first, it seems the battle, if not the war, has been won.

And the plans for the first annual celebration of the path on Sunday are likely to raise its profile even higher.

The Bristol to Bath Railway Path was the first cycle route to be built by Sustrans, in the early 1980s, and currently sees 2.4 million journeys a year. It is the most popular route on the National Cycle Network.

Sustrans set up an online petition for people to register opposition to the bus lane plans. A previous petition set up by the Bristol Cycling Campaign received some 8,000 signatures.

Sunday's celebration will proceed down the path from the Fishponds area in Bristol at approx 2.30pm - and people can join there or as the procession passes. The procession will reach the bottom of the path in Newtown Park in St Phillips, at 3pm.

It will then continue along the roads to College Green at about 4.30pm. College Green is overlooked by Bristol's Council House, the base of many of the transport officers and councillors who backed the plans to install the cycle route. Sustrans chief executive John Grimshaw will be among those attending the celebration.

There will also be an associated bike ride, from the city centre to Mangotsfield and back which starts at 12 noon. It will join the procession on its return journey.

To find out more click here. Those who want to attend are being reminded that the clocks go forward the night before.

Posted on 12:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Daily Telegraph: 29/03/2008
By Jeff Randall

"Trains back to normal today," was the headline in Tuesday's Financial Times. "Network Rail said the engineering improvements at the weekend had gone to schedule," was the story underneath.

Inherently flawed: the Conservatives bungled the industry's privatisation, splitting the track company from the operators

The pink paper rarely gets the facts quite so wrong, but one of its news staff had apparently made the error of believing, and then recycling, the rubbish on Network Rail's self-congratulatory website.

This became obvious when I arrived that morning at Shenfield station, just before 8am. Services into the City weren't merely disrupted; they were in disarray. Crowds of wretched commuters were already fighting for places in taxis. It was like a bit of Heathrow in Essex suburbia.

Engineering works, which had closed the line into Liverpool Street during the Easter weekend, were due to have been finished in good time. Instead, a related signalling problem was causing rush-hour chaos.

In all, there were 126 hours of delays and 500 cancellations. Punctuality on National Express's Great Eastern services collapsed to 55 per cent. For regulars, it was a familiar case of low morale, high anxiety and a primeval desire to put the head of an incompetent railway manager on the end of a stick.

At first, Network Rail denied that the problem had anything to do with engineering over-runs. The foul-up was just "a horrible coincidence", the company said. But later, under pressure from National Express, the track operator admitted that it was a "failure of our infrastructure".

Six years ago, Peter Hain, then a cabinet minister, said what frequent travellers had long known from bitter experience: "We [Britain] have the worst railways in Europe. It is an intractable problem."

Since then, little has changed. Despite massive government subsidies, about £5 billion a year, and a surge in demand for rail services, our national network remains, according to Rod Smith, research professor of railway engineering at Imperial College, "on a treadmill of mediocrity".

Worse still, there is no prospect of improvement. The structure of our railways is inherently flawed. The Conservatives bungled the industry's privatisation, splitting the track company from the operators. The result has been open warfare between the two sides, irreconcilable conflicts of interest, and a breakdown of effective planning.

In the middle is the Government, which is interfering in the day-to-day operations with ever greater intensity and diminishing success.

Professor Colin Divall of York University's Institute of Railway Studies says: "It is interesting to note that the micro-management of the railways by the state is now at arguably its highest-ever level. The problem is the lack of a clear overall transport policy."

The operators' seven-year franchise contracts contain extraordinary impositions by the Department for Transport, including how many carriages can be run on each route. Civil servants are dictating timetables and the design of new rolling stock. It is a recipe for costly failure.

Overseeing this miserable confection of in-fighting and point-scoring is the Transport Secretary, Ruth Kelly, one of the least effective ministers of this or any other government. Having been associated with several embarrassing U-turns, including the climb-down over home information packs, she has neither the confidence nor the authority to be radical.

Virgin Trains, which runs services between London and Glasgow, is warning that Network Rail's proposed programme of works on the West Coast Main Line will cause months of disruption and severe over-crowding for the rest of the year. In short, says Virgin, the scheme for upgrading is "unworkable".

By contrast, Network Rail insists that any postponement would have a deleterious impact on other parts of the system. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? What is clear is that this is no way to run an essential national asset. Fixing what we've got cannot be done. We need to start again.

The Government is keen to stress its green credentials, yet seems to be part of a covert conspiracy to drive more and more people back on to the roads. Faced with a demand for rail that way outstrips supply, its policy is to allow train companies to jack up fares on services that are already among the most expensive in the world. It's a depressing example of more for less.

The industry's fragmentation has led to chronic structural weaknesses. Too many organisations are involved in decision-making. Accountability has been lost in a mire of bureaucracy. As rail travellers discover with dispiriting regularity, it's not easy to find out who is ultimately responsible.

Network Rail's status is a joke. When the company screws up, as it did over New Year maintenance schedules, heavy fines are imposed by the rail regulator. The trouble is, as a quasi-state body, all its financial obligations are underwritten by the taxpayer. So we end up suffering twice.

Another area that needs to be looked at is the role of the big banks as lessors of kit to the train operators. One insider told me they had "a licence to print money". Should some of that profit be used to improve services?

If David Cameron wants to put some distance between his new-look party and Labour on an issue that affects voters of all ages and different persuasions, right across the country, a plan for our railways is surely it. His predecessors got denationalisation wrong. Labour inherited that mess, but has made things worse. Now is the time to be bold.

One year ago, when Chris Grayling was shadow transport secretary, he made a speech in which he set out his ideas for an overhaul of British railways. He said: "We think, with hindsight, that the complete separation of track and train into separate businesses … was not right."

Grayling was correct. Opponents claim that European Union rules would prevent the realignment of track and operations, but, as the French and others have proved, if a national government really wants to achieve something there is always a route round the road block.

Consolidation is necessary if cohesion is to be restored. A way must be found to restore vertical integration. What's more, the Government has to face up to the reality that a world-class rail system cannot be acquired on the cheap.

Labour is spending at least £600 billion of taxpayers' money every year. Fortunes are being squandered on welfare handouts that encourage idleness and lock in poverty. Britain would be a less polluted, less congested, more efficient and more attractive place if a few billion pounds were diverted from the social security budget into investment for a 21st-century railway network.

Such action would, of course, require vision and courage. Unfortunately, these are not qualities with which the current incumbents of Downing Street are well acquainted.

So, I fear, for rail travellers the outlook remains bleak: management by Sir Humphry, years of above-inflation fare rises, a deterioration in conditions as over-crowding increases, and yet more mornings like last Tuesday.

See Comments:

The state of the railways, and public transport in general in the UK, reflects the total incompetence prevalent nowadays in running anything in the UK for the benefit of the public. Too many people creaming off profit, and not enough effort going into actually providing a service, based on total contempt for the recipients of the service. (See also NHS, education, local council, central government for similar attitudes).
In Europe, I can travel a 100 miles or so on a train for around 20 Euros. In the UK, a similar journey, e.g. Bristol to London, will cost the best part of £100. And in Europe there is none of the built-in complexity to buying a ticket to ensure further ripoffs and administration costs. I would love to travel long distance by train in the UK, I simply can't afford it. Going by car is cheaper because I have to own a car in any case (due to lack of other forms of public transport), so the fixed costs are there anyway.
Rail tickets are priced so as to control the number of people who are willing to buy a ticket, so the railways can manage the number of passengers. Contrast with "green" policies to get people off the road - one contradicts the other, and the consumer always loses.
Until we control greed and incompetence in the UK, it will only get worse. The tax payer is being ripped off to an unbelievable extent to prop up all these failing services.
Aggie on March 28, 2008 2:35 PM

All you nationalisers and re-integrators. Stop!
The EU won't let the government do it; even if they wanted to. See my earlier post. It's all in EU Directive 91/440.

You could, however, refer to the £10billion per year the government sends to the EU and work out what a great railway system we could get for that. No wonder the French TGV is so good. we've been paying for it!
Cynic on March 28, 2008 2:06 PM

People always blame "the railways" as if they were some sentient organism, responsible for their own failings.
The railways are the victim of a failure to invest that started with WW2.
The cost of WW2 prevented modernisation which resulted in steam power lasting until 1968.
Various governments curtailed investment in order to prevent tax rises and thereby curry favour with voters.
The Tory government of 1955 decided to run down the railways after the 10 day long railwaymens strike.
The roads lobby have successfully demanded more and more money for roads at the expense of rail investment.
Successive governments denied railway investment as car ownership increased.
Initially the prospect of a car owning nation made railways less and less important. Latterly, policy has been to get more and more people into cars in order to raise revenue by taxing all aspects of private motoring to the absolute maximum.
What is certain however is that the private car will become more and more expensive to run and less and less fun to drive as ever increasing costs take their toll.
One day the rails will be as important to our descendants as they were to our ancestors, certainly in cities and for longer journeys. Cities will ban cars and unless battery/hydrogen power improves out of all recognition, journeys of over 100 miles will have to be by train.
Renationalisation is imperative. You cannot have a vital infrastructure run as a profit centre by spivs like Branson.
Whether people like it or not, it WILL have to be done - and the sooner the better. Look at nuclear power - if our gormless politicians had been doing their jobs instead of pandering to the green lobby, the new generation of nuclear stations ( and I live near one ) would have been started 15 yrs ago.
Will we have to wait until Russian oil is $250 a barrel and petrol is £12.50 a gallon before our utterly spineless and dithering leaders actually DO something about the railways ?????
paul atherton on March 28, 2008 1:00 PM

We need a situation analysis as to the state of rail infrastructure - divided into that serving London commuters and the arterial and branch network serving the rest of the UK.
All I ever see from a train (albeit a very new one with the service in the hands of the private franchise holders) is decay, decrepit, filthy stations and the results of half a century or more of poor management, under-investment and rampant asset stripping of former railways land - funds from which were never used to enhance what was left.
It seems to me that there must be more investment in the track and signals, and in stations themselves - including enlarging them for longer, even double-decker, trains - which still represent a single movement on the congested lines - but carry far more passengers.
Go to Holland and you will see double decker trains, go to a major city like Barcelona and you will see them - routed under the very heart of the city and integrated with the underground.
So why pays? The traveller must pay unless the government is making a commitment from state funds for public transport support. The rail franchise companies must pay - because they can make less profit and pay more over to the track and infrastructure side for enhancements.
I'm left with a feeling that despite what amounts to renationalisation, the network is fragmented, badly run, and inefficiently maintained - both in manner and cost management terms. The again is this not a given when the state runs this sort of thing?
Put the Network out to tender, to serious players who can afford to upgrade it - and to cross-subsidise the deal if they get their sums wrong - and link the deal to a set of serious targets for enhancements and changes to the whole system. Vision is what is needed - and a focus on putting rail access where people want it, not where it was right when the Victorians built it all.
simon coulter on March 28, 2008 12:02 PM

Jeff Randall is spot on, as ever. I would go further as many others have advocated-the answer to the current mess is vertical re- integration under umbrella of British Rail. The railways could then return to being run under a single, accountable organisation. The sectors operating within BR in 1980's, (such as Intercity and Regional Railways) were performing well under BR-Intercity was turning a profit. The hash of the Conservative privatisation has resulted in millions of pounds of taxpayers cash being wasted on bureaucracy and generating profits for the bus companies that now operate our railways.
The government -at a subsidy of £5 billion per year-is underwriting the railways far more than ever under BR-yet we the travelling public just don't see the benefits for the reasons Jeff describes. Re-integration-and allow railway professionals to run the railway-it's the only answer to the current, embarrassing mess.
Jonathan Watson on March 28, 2008 11:14 AM

Margaret Thatcher was the best friend the City of London ever had with her string of privatisations and favours to the bankers. Not only trains were sacrificed but the national telephone company WATER ELECTRICITY. Austin-Rover to BAe for a few dollars more....which they ran on a shoestring hoping that HONDA would provide the necessary support. BMW did that for a short time. Now the Indians think they can run Jaguar/LandRover...another false dawn. The problem with all this assett-stripping is that half the country is foreign owned. That would be impossible in Germany or Japan which remain the most successful industrial nations on this planet.
richard bond on March 28, 2008 11:14 AM

Let engineers run the infrastructure. It would then not be held together by string and chewing gum to keep the money coming in.
Lets get back to a highly skilled workforce trained within the industry rather than a ragbag of contractors. I cant come down on contractors to hard though, I do know someone working on safety systems who served a full apprenticeship in NZ. (as a butcher). I can quote many other examples if you like.
Mind the gap.
mike mines on March 28, 2008 11:13 AM

Jeff,

Track and train are separated right across Europe. Witness NED in Holland and DB in Germany for starters. The separation was decreed by the EU which passed Directive 91/440, which prescribed, among other things, the (formal) separation of national railways into a two separate companies, one which deals with the infrastructure, and the other which deals with the transport activities.
Major did botch it in that they went for a private network rather than a state owned one, like the rest of the EU. We did it first, so maybe that was the EU's way of trying it out on us and then rolling our a bug free version to the rest of the EU.
The real malaise, in the UK, is due to years of under-investment, probably right back to WW2 and beyond to create an integrated rail network. Just look at London as an example, with no direct rail links between major stations. There are also two completely different types of electrification; overhead and third rail, plus many diesel only mainlines. The rest of Europe has, at least, standardised on one type of electricication and uses this for all long distance mainline services.
Cynic on March 28, 2008 10:34 AM

Private sector ownership has failed to provide a public service on the railways. Nationalisation would be even worse. We need to convert the railways to mutual ownership, like building societies, with the passengers as the majority stakeholders. There is a Downing Street petition to this effect. I encourage you all to sign it.
Robert C on March 28, 2008 8:45 AM

Why oh why do the British never learn? All we need to do is privatise these state-run companies and everything will be fine. Have we forgotten that nice Mrs Thatcher who used to tell us about the dead hand of government? If only we had listened to her back then, we'd now have the most efficient transport system in the world.
We'd have clean trains that have a seat for every commuter. They'd all run on time, and it would be incredibly cheap to travel. She promised it all. But, no. We chose to keep British Rail and we now have to live with the crippling fares, the record subsidies and arguably the worst service in history.
And just imagine if British Airways and BAA had been privatised. Yesterday's debacle at Heathrow Terminal 5 would never have happened. Every flight would have taken off on time and no piece of baggage would have gone astray. But every organisation in the public sector is stuffed with lazy bureaucrats who take constant tea breaks and are totally incompetent. While every private sector company is full of lean and hungry entrepreneurs who are wedded to efficiency because they respond to the finely tuned incentives provided by a perfect market. So we have only ourselves to blame.
Yes, imagine if we'd only listened to Mrs Thatcher and privatised these industries. We'd all be living a Utopian dream now.
Oh, wait...
John on March 28, 2008 8:40 AM

Shame on you, I thought you were above the Bryony Gordon class of journalist in using your platform to get a private whinge off your chest!
Get back to bashing bankers - Mr Diamond's scandalous pay for example.
That aside, the railways are a mess because it was a privatisation too far. The Tories rushed it through when they knew they would lose the election and Thatcher had said public transport was for losers. Blair, more laissez-faire than most tories, was never going to consider the N-word and so privatisation was to remain.
Unfortunately this meant that shareholder interests were put ahead of passengers so as long as a profit was made then the industry was 'doing well'.
The other problem (apparent in the financial sector with the FSA) is that the regulation was too weak and too close to the industry it was meant to regulate. How else can the train operators, who make a nice profit each year, justify inflation-busting price rises? Where is the incentive for efficiency if the railway companies can hike prices if they see a profit shortfall?
The railway industry is too reliant on infrastructure for privatisation to work - it's not easy to set up a new railway.
I agree we need to spend more money but not if it's going into the back pockets of Stagecoach shareholders or Richard Branson (wake up to the Virgin con people!). We need tough regulation based on customer satifaction or a return to a nationalised system.
Joe Schmo from Cocomo on March 28, 2008 8:37 AM

Railways are a disaster and always will be because the British do not let engineers run them. They are technical systems requiring integration and lawyers and accountants cannot do it.
The shrivelled Post-Beeching railway has little presence outside the South-East and is really a novelty although cities like Leeds pretend it is a railway hub compared to Frankfurt or Cologne it is a backwater.
The British are a race of property-developers and that is what Railtrack became under Bob Horton, the idea of running an integrated railway died when the old freight yards and inner-city land banks were expolited for anything but railway travel
CCTV on March 28, 2008 6:45 AM

It's worth reflecting that in the days of vertically integrated BR they were able to provide a mediocre service for the paltry sum of about £1.5bn in today's money.
I was amused by the comment about the lack of a "clear, overall transport policy." The Victorians has no transport policy at all, clear or otherwise, but it didn't stop them building a railway connecting every town in the country.
Patrick Crozier on March 28, 2008 4:34 AM

Bring back British Rail. At least when I worked in London in the 50's, I could catch the 5.20pm to Bedford and be home 40 minutes later, and on time.Oh yes, and it cost only five bob return.
Ian Harrison on March 28, 2008 2:48 AM

This is a re-run of the 1960's.
The tories screwed the railway system completely, and a Labour government just left the mess, and even compounded it, in some cases.
Now, 10 years after "privatisation" the same scenario has appeared.
Do you realise that the "reason" we can't have electrification and high-speed lines is the government forecast (still adhered to) that oil prices will fall to $35 a barrel by 2012, so we won't need railways, anyway?
G. Tingey on March 28, 2008 12:21 AM

Posted on 07:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

MTI: 29 March 2008

Budapest - Hungary's largest railway union VDSZSZ said it may resume strike in the second half of next week after wage negotiations with the railways MAV management over three months failed to achieve results, the union said in a statement sent to MTI on Friday.

VDSZSZ demands a 10 percent rise in basic salaries for employees of MAV railway's recently outsourced companies as well as a bonus of 250,000 forints (976 euros) paid to each employee from privatisation revenues.

As new demands, the union has added a petition to keep 38 spur lines that face closure going, as well as a 1.1 percent wage hike in compensation for higher inflation.

MAV says the demands are "unrealistic".

VDSZSZ, which represents around 25 percent of Hungary's 36,000 railway workers, suspended its open-ended strike on February 25.

Posted on 07:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Der Spiegel Online: March 28, 2008
Charles Hawley

Germany's magnetic levitation dreams came to an end on Thursday. Now, news reports indicate that the locally developed technology may be sold off to China. German commentators wonder who is to blame for the debacle.

The Transrapid is history. Here, a model of the maglev train with Munich's Frauenkirche in the background.

It was supposed to be a prestige project, elevating Munich into the technological elite. A magnetic levitation train line connecting the city's train station with the airport was to make the Bavarian capital the envy of the world.

On Thursday, though, Bavarian politicians decided the so-called Transrapid wasn't worth the €3 billion new calculations showed it would have cost. And now it looks like ThyssenKrupp, part of the consortium which developed the maglev train, may be interested in selling the technology to China.

According to the online version of Die Welt on Friday, ThyssenKrupp is interested in beginning negotiations with the Chinese government in the coming weeks preparatory to a technology transfer. Citing only "company insiders," the report says that both the sale of licenses and the complete sale of the technology are being considered. China is home to the only commercially operating Transrapid line in the world.

ThyssenKrupp is responsible for the train's propulsion system, which involves a complex arrangement of electromagnets which both levitates the train -- eliminating friction -- and propels the train forward. China has eagerly tried to create a maglev train of its own, but has had difficulty copying the Transrapid propulsion system and is thus interested in acquiring the technology.

According to Die Welt, a spokeswoman from ThyssenKrupp denied that the company is considering such a sale. Chinese experts on Friday, however, said that it was unlikely that China would be interested in buying the expensive technology.

But whatever happens to the Transrapid technology, which was developed in part with some €2.4 billion in German tax revenues invested over the past three decades, its future in Germany looks grim. A number of other planned Transrapid projects have failed in the past and now, after the Munich announcement, German politicians on Thursday and Friday are busy pointing fingers at each other in an effort to avoid blame for the calamity.

But it is the Bavarian conservative party Christian Social Union (CSU) which will likely take the greatest hit. Already, the CSU's floor leader in the federal parliament, Peter Ramsauer, has blasted party leader Günther Beckstein for making a "head-over-heels" decision to cancel the project. The end of the Transrapid, which was to be a legacy of long-time Bavarian governor and former CSU leader Edmund Stoiber -- who retired last year -- has cast doubt on the CSU's handling of the project.

The Social Democrats and the Greens, both of whom were against the Transrapid project from the start, couldn't resist gloating on Thursday and Friday. "Günther Beckstein and Edmund Stoiber acted like amateurs," said SPD politician Klaas Hübner. "The Bavarian state government's strategy of pushing more and more of the cost onto the federal government didn't work."

German papers on Friday also take a look at the failure of the Transrapid in Munich.

Center-left Munich daily Süddeutsche Zeitung on Friday writes:

"The Transrapid, as a means of connecting point A with point B, is a (technology) that is difficult to integrate into a Europe that is already well-served by railways -- and it is simply too expensive. The advantages offered by the Transrapid over a high-speed traditional rail link are not enough to outweigh the high price tag. That was true of (earlier Transrapid projects that also failed) and it was true of the Munich project. One doesn't throw €3 billion out the window just to show the world what one is capable of building. Especially not when comparatively important transportation projects are currently delayed for lack of funding."

"It is not difficult to figure out who really needed and could profit from the Transrapid line to the Munich airport. It certainly wasn’t for the family flying to the Canary Islands for a vacation. Such fliers have to check in two hours before takeoff, have to pray that their flight takes off on time and, if they aren't lucky, have to change planes in Nuremberg or Stuttgart. The time it took to get to the airport was the least of their concerns. But for business travellers who show up at the airport 10 minutes before takeoff with no luggage to check, it was important. Why one should make short flights even more attractive is a question that the Bavarian government must answer -- especially given its rhetorical commitment to combating climate change."

Conservative daily Die Welt on Friday writes:

"The failure of the Transrapid began well before Thursday's announcement. The history of this 70-year-old invention is one of hesitation, the failure of transportation policy and of technophobia. There have been a number of promising possibilities to build the Transrapid. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, for example, when there was just an aged rail link between Berlin and Hamburg. But the project failed again and again because of the cost and, most of all, because of the prevailing attitude in the country."

"Instead, the failure shows what German's industrial policy is missing: resolution and skilful promotion. If this lesson is learned from the Transrapid debacle, then there might be a silver lining after all."

The Financial Times Deutschland writes:

"From a technology standpoint, the magnetic levitation train was genius -- economically, unfortunately, it was stillborn. When the first concrete plans for a Transrapid link were developed at the end of the 1970s, West Germany was already crisscrossed by a comprehensive and modern track network. The ubiquitous presence of the rail network as a highly flexible and affordable transportation option stood in the way of the maglev's success in Germany from the very beginning. But there are some politicians and industrialists who still don't want to recognize that fact. Were there ever a niche market for the Transrapid, it was filled by ICE high-speed trains and by the rapidly declining price of air travel."

The left-leaning daily Die Tageszeitung focuses on the political failures that led to the Transrapid debacle:

"Politicians and industrialists are now passing the buck back and forth: Nobody wants to be seen as guilty for the flop. It is hard enough to believe that construction companies and the manufacturer of the Transrapid erred by so much in their cost calculations. That, though, was likely little more than cynicism: Politicians, primarily the CSU under Edmund Stoiber, wanted the project at all costs. In such an atmosphere, such a non-binding offer could have been expected."

"Both Minister of Transport Wolfgang Tiefensee and the Bavarian CSU leadership claimed on Thursday that they were surprised by the sudden rise in costs and that they were unwilling to spend yet more money on the Transrapid link to the Munich airport. That is a convenient excuse. Everyone was aware just how unreliable the earlier cost estimates were."

See also:

ThyssenKrupp Mulls Sale of Transrapid Technology to China

Deutsche Welle: 28.03.2008

Transrapid: It's the end of the German line for the high-tech Transrapid

Germany's ThyssenKrupp is considering selling its Transrapid high-speed maglev technology to China after a planned track in Munich was unexpectedly scrapped due to spiraling costs, sparking heated debate in the country.

ThyssenKrupp may take its prestigious monorail maglev technology that has trains speeding on a magnetic cushion at 500 kilometers an hour to China after a surprise decision to axe plans for a track linking Munich's airport and the city center due to ballooning costs.

According to a report by Welt Online, Dusseldorf-based ThyssenKrupp is set to negotiate a deal with the Chinese government that could involve the sale to Beijing of either only the license to the company's patented propulsion engine or the technology itself.


Maglev train in Shanghai: The world's only commercial magnetic levitation train is in Shanghai

With a Transrapid shuttle between downtown Shanghai and the city's airport, China is the only country in the world to use the system commercially. They currently only have the rights to construct the train cars, but purchasing additional rights from ThyssenKrupp would mean they could produce complete Transrapid systems and sell them elsewhere.

However, it would also be necessary to obtain the control technology developed by Siemens, as well as the engine know-how.

Chinese expert says deal unlikely

A Chinese transport export on Friday however said that such a deal between Beijing and ThyssenKrupp was "unlikely." Xie Weida, deputy director of the Railway Institute at Shanghai's Tongji University, said the core technology would be extremely expensive but conceded that buying it could benefit China.

A planned extension of the Shanghai Transrapid line by World Expo, which the city will host in 2010, was recently postponed by Mayor Han Zheng.

According to the Welt report, an eight- or nine-figure deal between Beijing and ThyssenKrupp could potentially spare the 220 jobs in Germany that are threatened by the closure of the project.

"I cannot guarantee that we will not lose out to China," said Thomas Schlenz, the head of ThyssenKrupp's works council. "There is a danger that they can pick up this technology and run with it." He added that about 1,000 new jobs would have been created in Germany had the Transrapid plan been carried out.

Klaus-Heiner Roehl from the IW economic research institute, however, said that it will likely "be difficult to sell something abroad that was rejected at home."

The blame game

Transrapid accident scene: Human error caused the 2006 accident

Six months ago, the heads of Siemens, ThyssenKrupp and Hochtief construction group had said the plan to build the Transrapid in Munich would total 1.85 billion euros ($2.9 billion), but federal Transport Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee announced on Thursday, March 27, that costs had risen unexpectedly to nearly double, making the venture too pricy to continue with.

The hope was that a successful Transrapid in Germany would provide the showcase necessary to market the high-speed technology to the rest of the world.

News of the decision to scrap the flagship train link in Munich developed by ThyseenKrupp and Siemens has triggered angry recriminations among politicians in the southern state of Bavaria about who is to blame for the project's abrupt demise.

Bavaria's Premier Guenter Beckstein of the conservative Christian Social Union (CSU) slammed the industrial consortium developing the technology for the failure of the Munich train project, which his predecessor Edmund Stoiber had pushed through shortly before stepping down.

"Those who couldn't keep their promises" are responsible for putting the project on ice, Beckstein told the Friday edition of the Passauer Neue Presse. He added that "no other routes will be built in Germany. The Munich project was the last chance."

CSU secretary general Christine Haderthauer joined the Bavarian premier in placing blame on the project's industrial partners.

"Apparently, industry didn't want a flagship project, but to make a profit," she told Berliner Zeitung.

Opposition to train project

The CSU, Bavarian sister-party to Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union, had long been under fire for the controversial endeavor and critics had accused former Bavarian Premier Edmund Stoiber, who stepped down last year, of trying to make the Transrapid his personal legacy.

"Bavaria's conservative party led a propaganda campaign for the Transrapid for years and splurged taxpayers' money on it," said Franz Maget, head of the Social Democratic Party in Bavaria.

In November, some 13,000 people attended a demonstration against the project in Munich, where the new high-speed train would have linked the airport with the city center. Public disapproval was fuelled by a Transrapid accident that occurred due to human failure during a test run in 2006; 23 people were killed.

German engineers started developing the magnetic levitation system in 1969 and millions of euros of federal and private money has been invested in research and development since then.

Using the magnetic levitation technology, the train floats on a magnetic cushion just above the rail, traveling up to three times faster than standard steel-wheel trains. The project would have shaved travel time between the Munich airport and the city center down to 10 minutes from 40 minutes.

Posted on 07:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Financial Times: March 28 2008
By Hugh Williamson in Berlin

Germany’s reputation as a home of technological innovation was dealt a crushing blow on Thursday when a flagship transport project was scrapped because of soaring costs.

Plans for a high-speed “Transrapid” magnetic levitation train linking the Bavarian city of Munich to its airport were abandoned just seven months after receiving the green light, after construction costs almost doubled from €1.85bn to about €3.4bn, according to Wolfgang Tiefensee, transport minister.

The news is a setback for the engineering companies involved in the project. Peter Löscher, Siemens chief executive, said he “regretted” the decision. Deutsche Bahn, the state-owned rail company that is also involved in the project, said it was “surprised and disappointed”.

Siemens this month partly blamed a profits warning on problems with the Trans-rapid, raising concerns on Thursday that there might be other warnings in future.

Background

* Magnetic levitation, or maglev, trains run up to three times the speed of normal steel-wheel trains, and float on a magnetic cushion of one centimetre above the track.

* Japan Central Railway announced last year that it planned to introduce the technology on a long-distance line by 2025.

German business has been lobbying since the 1980s to build a Transrapid train link in Munich or in other German locations, seeing maglev as a cutting edge technology to open new export markets. Thursday’s decision is likely to mark the end of such ambitions for a project in Germany, experts said. The only maglev train in commercial use is a shuttle from the centre of Shanghai, China's financial capital, to its airport.

German companies were among the pioneers behind the “maglev” technology but have failed in several bids to apply it in their own country. An accident in 2006 at a German maglev test track that killed 23 people was an additional setback. The technology spokesman for the BDI industry federation said Thursday’s decision was “not a good signal” for Germany to be sending.

The federal government had pledged to pay half the construction costs up to a maximum of €925m for the 40km Munich train link that, upon completion in2014, would have cut journey times from 45 to 10 minutes.

However, Berlin baulked at re-quests to contribute an extra €1bn when the cost over-runs became clear, officials said. The project’s collapse is also a severe setback for Bavaria’s conservative government, which had strongly backed the Transrapid. A weakening of support for the Christian Social Union, Bavaria’s ruling party, would be worrying for Angela Merkel, who is relying on CSU voters for re-election as chancellor next year.

The CSU, which has already lost votes in local elections this month, could now face another drop in support in state elections in September. Günther Beckstein, Bavarian premier and a top CSU politician, said the Transrapid decision marked a “bad day for Germany as an industrial investment location”. The Social Democrats, Ms Merkel’s coalition allies in Berlin but in opposition in Bavaria, said the decision was “the biggest possible embarrassment for the Bavarian government”.

Edmund Stoiber, the former Bavarian premier who championed the landmark project before leaving office, joined other politicians in criticising the companies involved for the rapid cost increase.

“A near doubling of the costs in six months is very unusual” Mr Stoiber said. In response, Siemens and ThyssenKrupp, the steel group that was also a member of the project consortium, said they had held to their original cost plans, and indirectly blamed Hochtief, the main construction company involved, for the problem.

A Hochtief spokesman denied responsibility, saying it had not been involved in making the original cost estimates.

Both the government and Siemens said Germany would continue to promote maglev technology and seek customers in international markets such as the Middle East and the US.

See also:

Germany Scraps Transrapid Rail Plans

Deutsche Welle: 27.03.2008

Photomontage of Transrapid against Munich background: This is what Edmund Stoiber dreamt of for Munich

The German government has scrapped plans to build a prestigious high-speed rail link between the Bavarian capital of Munich and its airport because of a massive overrun in costs.

Transportation Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee announced the decision after a crisis meeting in Berlin on Thursday, March 27, at which industry representatives reportedly revealed that costs had risen from 1.85 billion euros ($2.9 billion) to well over 3 billion euros.

"The federal government is not prepared to increase its contribution," Tiefensee said. "We had to conclude that it is not possible to finance this project."

Death knell for mag-lev technology

A Chinese station worker helps a passenger in Shanghai

Industry observers say that without a showcase project in Germany for one of the world's fastest trains, the technology devised by engineers at Siemens and ThyssenKrupp is unlikely to have much success abroad.

The Transrapid technology has currently only been used commercially in China. Another plan to build a magnetic-levitation monorail link between Hamburg and Berlin has already been scrapped. A crash that led to 23 deaths on a test stretch in 2006 was caused by human error, but it was clearly a severe PR setback for Transrapid.

Mutual blame game for the failure of the project

The crash in Lathen im Emsland was blamed on a human error

The firms involved in the Munich project have blamed each other for the runaway costs. Siemens CEO Peter Loescher indirectly attributed it to construction industry partners Hochtief, saying that his company and ThyssenKrupp had kept to the guidelines. Thyssenkrupp officials said they were not "responsible" for Hochtief's figures.

Hochtief rebutted these accusations, saying it had not been involved in the 2004 estimate.

"This is the first time that we have had a proper overview of the cost situation," a company spokesman said.

He added that the company had ascertained that it was not possible to implement the project for 1.85 billion euros.

The German government had agreed to bear half the cost for the train line, but up to a maximum of 925 million euros. The state of Bavaria had earmarked 500 million euros -- with German state railways Deutsche Bahn, the airport, the European Union and the two companies involved making up the remainder.

Bavaria's pride and joy

The new Bavarian state premier said he did his best to keep the project on track

The project was announced last year by then Bavarian Premier Edmund Stoiber just before he stood down as head of the southern state's conservative party in September and many observers saw it as a "parting present" from Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats to the CSU, the CDU's Bavarian sister party.

Bavarian Premier Guenter Beckstein said he had lobbied hard to persuade the federal government to increase its contribution, but to no avail.

"This is a bad day for Germany's image as the home of high-tech industry," Beckstein said.

The Transrapid project would have trimmed the current 40 minute journey from Munich to the airport down to 10 minutes -- and had been billed by many as a coup for the prosperous southern German city.

Posted on 06:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Press Association: 27 03 08

Figures show under-fire train operator FGW has the least punctual service in Britain.

First Great Western, which runs services to Reading, Bristol, South Wales and the West Country, had just 79.7% of trains turning up on time during the last three months of 2007.

The data, released by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), shows FGW lagged more than 15% behind Chiltern Railways, the top rated operator for punctuality with 95.6% of their trains arriving on time.

See also:

‘Great Western branded worst rail service in Britain’

South Wales Echo: Mar 28 2008

UNDER-FIRE train operator First Great Western has the LEAST punctual service in Britain, it was revealed today.

Branded “Worst Great Western” by some passengers, the operator, which runs services throughout South Wales, had just 79.7 per cent of trains turning up on time during the last three months of 2007.

The data, released by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), shows FGW lagged more than 15 per cent behind Chiltern Railways, the top rated operator for punctuality with 95.6 per cent of their trains arriving on time.

Today, passengers at Cardiff Central Station slammed the figures.

Ann Powell, 51, a support worker from Canton, Cardiff, said: “A couple of weeks ago I had to wait three quarters of an hour at a station when I was on my way back to Cardiff. I think the service should be more reliable considering the cost.”

Brendan Doherty, 28, from Tremorfa, Cardiff, who works in finance, and travels to Bristol Parkway every weekday, said: “The London service is quite good but when they get it wrong they get it very wrong. They are good at telling you it will only be a 10-minute delay when it is much longer.”

In January passengers were hit by above-inflation price hikes across the network although FGW’s poor performance prompted fare strikes by some consumers.

Michael Lee, the ORR’s director of access planning and performance, said: “If targets for this route are not met in the near future, then the consequences for Network Rail could be severe. I do not propose, at this stage, to look into whether Network Rail is in breach of its licence – but all parties should be clear that this is an option that may be open in the future.”

A spokesman for FGW said: “FGW has accepted that it has not provided the service levels its customers deserve and we have put in place an improvement plan that has been agreed with the Department for Transport. We are already seeing improved performance and this includes our latest Public Performance Measure figures and cancellation rates – we need to do better to deliver consistently across the FGW Network for all our customers.”

See also:

Topsy turvy rail report

Oxford Mail: 28 03 08
By William Crossley

Oxfordshire rail services are at the top and bottom of the league for punctuality, according to the latest official figures.

Chiltern Railways, which links Banbury and Bicester with London Marylebone and Birmingham, is top of the table, with 95.6 per cent of its trains on time in the last three months of 2007, said the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR).

But bringing up the rear is First Great Western (FGW), which links the county with London Paddington, the West of England and South Wales, which ran just 79.7 per cent of trains on time.
advertisement

FGW's service was recently branded "unacceptable" by ministers.

The ORR is currently overseeing a joint performance improvement plan - developed by track and signal operator Network Rail and FGW - aimed at improving performance on the route and on Wednesday warned Network Rail that it could face severe consequences if it did not cut the amount of delays on the FGW network that it was responsible for.

A spokesman for FGW said: "FGW has accepted that it has not provided the service levels its customers deserve and we have put in place an improvement plan that has been agreed with the Department for Transport.

"We are already seeing improved performance and this includes our latest Public Performance Measure figures and cancellation rates - we need to do better to deliver consistently across the FGW Network for all our customers, but we are moving in the right direction."

CrossCountry Trains, which serves Oxford and Banbury, ran 86.9 per cent of services on time during the survey period, exactly matching the overall on time performance of the country's passenger train operators.

The franchise was taken over by Arriva from Virgin last November.

Posted on 04:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

RMT: March 28 2008

LONDON UNDERGROUND'S two biggest unions today (Friday) announced joint strike dates for more than 7,500 of their station staff and train operator members.

RMT and TSSA members, who are in dispute with the company over a raft of safety and staffing issues, will walk out from 6.30pm on Sunday, April 6 until 6.30pm on Wednesday, April 9 after voting by five to one and four to one respectively for action.

The unions have told LUL that its plans for ticket-office closures, de-staffing, lone working, introduction of 'mobile supervisors', use of agency and security staff and other disputed policies amount to an unacceptable attack on safety standards and the casualisation of safety-critical work (details in notes below).

"Each of these issues is serious in its own right, but together they amount to a fundamental and unacceptable attack on staffing across the network, putting our members' and passengers' safety at risk," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.

"Tube workers will not stand idly by while the security of the network is compromised by managers who clearly believe that staff and passenger safety can be looked after on the cheap."

Gerry Doherty, general secretary of TSSA, said: "This is a dispute about the safety of our Tube system. The last people we want to hit are the travelling public but this seems to be the only way we can make London Underground listen.

"We have been trying to make them understand for months that we will not allow safety standards to be lowered by the use of agency staff. Even at this late stage, we want a negotiated settlement and remain ready to talk next week to achieve one."

ends

Notes to editors:

RMT's strike ballot saw 1,673 members vote for action with 333 voting against.

Ticket office closures and cuts to opening times: LUL temporarily halted plans to close 40 ticket offices and to cut the opening times of many more after the unions' campaign campaign last year led to a public outcry. However, LUL has refused to say that the plans have been withdrawn completely.

RMT and TSSA are demanding the complete withdrawal of the plans

Staffing levels - emergency plans and guidelines: LUL has unilaterally decided to vary Section 4.2 of the Congestion Control and Emergency Plan to remove the specification of the minimum numbers of each grade of station staff that are to be on duty at any time.

RMT and TSSA are demanding the reinstatement of the original numbers of each grade of fully trained and fully familiarised station staff.

Refusal to work on grounds of safety: Under the guise of simplification LUL has changed its policy, undermining safety and breaching legislation.

RMT and TSSA are demanding the immediate re-instatement of the original policy.

Mobile supervisors: LUL wants to introduce 'mobile supervisors' responsible for several stations, and to continue to staff stations recently taken over from Silverlink only during the limited hours decided by the previous franchise holder. But what happens in an emergency when the mobile supervisor is in the wrong place - or even stuck between stations on a train?

RMT and TSSA are demanding that every station is fully staffed during traffic hours by the appropriate number of customer-service and station assistants, supervised by station supervisors in line with agreements and safety requirements.

Terminal 5 staffing: LUL wants to staff the new station with staff subcontracted from other firms but wearing LUL uniforms.

RMT and TSSA believe that this has serious safety implications and has demanded that the station is staffed by people trained and employed directly by LUL.

Use of agency staff: LUL wants to continue using agency staff on former Silverlink stations, including those used for ticketing and revenue duties

RMT and TSSA are demanding that the practice ends when the training of former Silverlink staff is completed and current contracts ends, and a guarantee that only directly employed LUL staff are used for stations and ticketing operations

Use of security staff: RMT and TSSA are demanding an agreement that security at all LUL-owned or -managed stations must be provided at all times by directly employed staff in appropriate grades, supplemented by the normal co-operation with the BTP and Metropolitan police forces.

Lone working: RMT and TSSA are demanding an agreement that there must be no rostered lone working unless undertaken from a place of safety.

Direct recruitment of station supervisors, train operators and service-control staff: LUL is now systematically denying career opportunities to experienced railway staff and recruiting externally, turning on its head an agreement that external advertising can take place if there are insufficient internal applications.

RMT and TSSA are demanding a complete review of recruitment policy to establish a policy that preserves and encourages a career path for experienced railway staff.

Posted on 04:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Swissinfo: March 28, 2008

Strikers at a cargo locomotive depot of the Swiss Federal Railways in southern Switzerland have voted unanimously to continue their three-week strike.

The disruption at a maintenance works in Bellinzona centres on plans by the Federal Railways to axe more than a hundred jobs in the city, which is capital of the southern Italian-speaking canton of Ticino.

On Friday strikers described the latest proposals by their employer to try to solve the dispute as "shameful".

After a meeting on Thursday with strike representatives, Federal Railways chief executive Andreas Meyer had spoken of constructive talks and a step towards a roundtable dialogue.

Swiss Transport Minister Moritz Leuenberger earlier this week appealed to both sides to try to resolve the dispute. He called on workers to end the strike and on the Federal Railways board to review its plans.

The strike was called after the loss-making freight unit announced plans to axe around 400 jobs – 126 of them in Bellinzona. The restructuring plans came after the unit lost SFr190 million ($185.73 million) in 2007.

Posted on 09:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Financial Times: Mar 25, 2008
By Robert Wright

When France's first privately-run freight train for 57 years left Dugny, in eastern France, for Germany in June 2005, trade unionists defending the monopoly of SNCF, the state train operator, set off smoke bombs and flares in an attempt to halt it.

They failed. And, less than three years on, it would be unthinkable for the trade unions in one of Europe's most reluctant rail liberalisers to try to halt the many trains now running daily in competition with SNCF.

Two leading companies - Euro Cargo Rail, owned by Deutsche Bahn, and France's Veolia Transport - are growing fast, eroding the market share of SNCF's loss-making freight division. SNCF's management finally appears to be addressing what most observers believe is the division's profound inefficiency.

Competition has developed still further in other parts of Europe. Poland has a surprisingly vigorous competitive rail market, many freight trains out of Italy over the Alps are now run by private companies, and Germany is competitive despite the overwhelming dominance of Deutsche Bahn, Europe's biggest train operator.

Rail freight has grown rapidly over the past decade in many of the European countries that have worked hardest to open up their rail sectors to competition, according to the UK's Association of Train Operating Countries. The fastest growers include the UK, Switzerland, Germany and Austria.

Yet the sector is still far from fulfilling the vision of the European legislators who first started pushing often reluctant national governments into allowing competition. A series of European Commission regulations has been aimed at allowing trains to operate internationally, unhindered by regulatory differences and technical barriers between countries. Under such conditions, Europe's trains would have the same competitive advantages as those in North America, which can range freely between southern Mexico and northern Canada.

Heiko Fischer, chief executive of Germany's VTG, Europe's largest leasing company for rail wagons and a relative optimist about the outlook, says the vision of the rail market set out in European legislation developed during the 1990s has been 50 per cent delivered.

"The European Rail Agency is now harmonising more and more procedures that used to involve red tape," Mr Fischer says

The next few years will see a further boost to rail freight volumes encouraged by more liberal legislation, he predicts.

"It started earlier with more open economies like Britain and Germany and now the laggards are being brought on board," Mr Fischer says.

Progress looks less positive, meanwhile, to Lord Berkeley, chairman of the UK's Rail Freight Group and a member of the board of the European Rail Freight Association, a private-sector lobby group.

Many European railways lack a rail regulatory body with the powers of the UK's Office of Rail Regulation to make government, rail infrastructure owners and others follow clear rules, he complains.

"You need a regulator for two reasons," he says. "One is to regulate the charges the infrastructure owner makes. The other is for the access rights to the network."

It is particularly important to have a strong regulator in the many European countries where the state-owned train operator either belongs to or is closely involved with the company that owns the rail network, according to Lord Berkeley.

The infrastructure company and dominant train operator are jointly owned in Germany, Italy, Poland, Austria, Belgium and several other countries. In France, much of the work of RFF, the rail infrastructure owner, is contracted out to SNCF. Private train operators often complain that such integrated companies offer their own train operators preferential treatment.

Without a strong regulator, it is impossible, Lord Berkeley says, to challenge local authorities' insistence in some parts of Europe that subsidised passenger services should have nearly exclusive access to the track.

"The passenger services always get priority, so getting a path for a freight train is hard," Lord Berkeley says.

The unresolved legal and regulatory issues often distract railway executives from tackling the often tougher question of technical barriers between countries.

Some of the problems were deliberately invented to prevent either military or civilian cross-border rail traffic in eras when there were serious concerns about future European wars. Such concerns help to explain Europe's mish-mash of electrification systems. Italy and Belgium both use 3,000 volt direct current; the Netherlands uses 1,500 volts DC, France mostly 25,000 volts alternating current and Germany 15,000 volts AC. The track gauge in countries once part of Russia - the Baltic states and Finland - is broader than elsewhere to prevent an invasion.

Such fundamental technical barriers are unlikely to be removed except through the greater use of specially-adapted rolling stock - locomotives fitted with multi-voltage electric systems and wagons fitted with adjustable axles for different track gauges.

However, in signalling, the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) is intended to introduce a single, pan-European standard that will require cross-border trains to carry only one set of electronics to read lineside electronic messages in other countries. The system has faced big problems partly because it is so complex - it needs to be able to apply multiple different operating rules from European railways' still unintegrated rule books.

Yet, even if it is halting and slow, Lord Berkeley says ERTMS is one of many areas in the European railways where steady, unspectacular progress is bringing a more competitive rail system closer.

"There's movement - it's getting better," he says of the overall environment. "But then, in getting better, you find even more, new problems in your way."

Posted on 01:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

EIRO: 24 March, 2008
Máté Komiljovics and László Neumann, Institute for Political Science, Hungarian Academy of Sciences

The Free Trade Union of Railway Workers launched a nationwide strike after several rounds of wage negotiations failed with the Hungarian Railway Company (MÁV).

The trade union is demanding a 10% pay increase for employees of MÁV’s outsourced companies, in addition to a bonus of HUF 250,000 to be paid to all railway workers after last year’s privatisation of MÁV Cargo.

Following the failure of several rounds of negotiations with the Hungarian Railway Company (Magyar Államvasutak, MÁV), the Free Trade Union of Railway Workers (Vasúti Dolgozók Szabad Szakszervezete, VDSZSZ) launched a nationwide strike. Officials of VDSZSZ, which represents 10,000 out of 36,000 employees of MÁV, insisted that they would continue to strike until agreement is reached.

Cause of dispute

VDSZSZ is demanding a 10% pay increase for employees of the companies to which MÁV has outsourced work. In addition, it is calling for a bonus of HUF 250,000 (about €956 as at 11 March 2008) to be paid to all railway workers following the privatisation of MÁV Cargo – the freight transport arm of MÁV. This bonus would be paid by a consortium of Rail Cargo Austria (RCA) and Győr-Sopron-Ebenfurt Railway (Raaberbahn AG, GYSEV), which paid €400 million for 100% of the company’s shares.

According to VDSZSZ, when MÁV outsourced MÁV Cargo in 2006, employees received a 10% wage increase, which established a precedent; it argues, therefore, that the same wage increase should be given to all employees of the outsourced companies. With respect to the bonus of HUF 250,000, the President of VDSZSZ, István Gaskó, referred to the alleged promise of the former Minister of Economy and Transport, János Kóka, to pay a proportion of the privatisation revenue to all of MÁV’s employees in the event of a successful privatisation. The privatisation contract also stipulates that employees of MÁV Cargo should receive 5% of the company’s shares.

Negotiations fail

However, MÁV is contesting the legal grounds of having to pay either the bonus or pay increase, claiming that the demands of VDSZSZ would cost about HUF 30 billion (€115 million), on top of the costs incurred by the strike, which amount to HUF 720 million (€2.75 million) daily.

After several sessions of failed negotiations, the parties requested the help of the Labour Mediation and Arbitration Service (Munkaügyi Közvetítő és Döntőbirói Szolgálat, MKDSZ). The appointed mediator, László Herczog, State Secretary of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour (Szociális és Munkaügyi Minisztérium, SZMM), made recommendations during the negotiations, but so far has not managed to resolve the dispute.

Consequences of strike

During the strike, the majority of passenger and freight trains stopped running and passengers received limited information about the suspended services. The three main railway stations in Hungary’s capital city of Budapest were paralysed as most of the ticket and train inspectors, as well as traffic controllers, were on strike. On the first day of the strike, MÁV brought the matter before the court. The Budapest Labour Court (Fővárosi Munkaügyi Bíróság, FMB) declared that VDSZSZ’s claim for a 10% pay increase was unlawful; however, it also ruled that the strike demand for a bonus after the successful privatisation of MÁV Cargo was in fact legal.

Hungary’s Minister of Economy and Transport, Csaba Kákosy, claims that the trade union has been playing a political game in the run-up to the referendum against privatisation of the healthcare system, which was due to take place on 9 March 2008. Minister Kákosy warned that if the rail strike drags on, funds will be transferred to bus companies so that they can take on some of the public transport services.

Position of other social partners

Although other railway trade unions did not join the strike, both the Trade Union of Hungarian Railwaymen (Vasutasok Szakszervezete, VSZ) and the Trade Union of Engine Drivers (Mozdonyvezetők Szakszervezete, MOSZ) expressed their support for the employees, albeit not for the officials of VDSZSZ. The President of VSZ, Dezső Simon, stated that the strike would jeopardise jobs and make negotiations more difficult with the government over the closure of secondary lines.

The National Association of Entrepreneurs and Employers (Vállalkozók és Munkáltatók Országos Szövetsége, VOSZ) published a statement in which it pointed out that the VDSZSZ President, Mr Gaskó, as President of the Democratic League of Independent Trade Unions (Független Szakszervezetek Demokratikus Ligája, LIGA), had co-signed the agreement in the National Interest Reconciliation Council (Országos Érdekegyeztető Tanács, OÉT) for wage increases of between 5% and 7.5% for 2008.

Meanwhile, the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) sent a letter to Minister Kákosy requesting that the demands of VDSZSZ be met.

Commentary

The recent railway strikes have highlighted the inefficiency of both Hungarian strike law and national wage agreements. In relation to strike law, plans are being made to amend regulations on essential services and on how much notice trade unions need to give in advance of strike action. In terms of wage agreements, the OÉT only makes recommendations for wages, which by definition cannot be enforced; moreover, even signatories may ignore such recommendations in their lower-level actions.

Posted on 11:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yorkshire Post: 21 March 2008
Mark Bradley

AT first listen, most people think that Smokey Robinson's 'Tracks of My Tears' shows a young man putting a brave face on a lost love.

However, after months of painstaking research, I can now reveal the true meaning of this 1965 hit. Smokey was singing about customer service on our railways.

Like George Orwell before him, Smokey was evoking a terrifying future where repair work would mean that no-one could travel at Christmas, New Year or Easter, where people could be held up for 40 minutes between York and Leeds without explanation, and where, and I know this part will strain your credulity, one part of government fines another when it all goes wrong. That's right. The Office for Rail Regulation fines Network Rail.

Train companies tell us that more people are now travelling by train, but that can't be explained by the way the industry is run. Trains don't connect like they used to and tickets don't cross regional boundaries either. It's often possible to travel long haul more cheaply by paying for regional legs individually, rather than for the whole journey at once. Soon we'll need a degree in actuarial studies to purchase tickets – and didn't many of us revert to trains because the roads are too crowded?

We have fewer and shorter trains on some of the UK's main commuter line, as well as delays, cancellations and overcrowding. We've had cases of franchise owners handing out leaflets telling passengers not to board trains, and in one spectacularly telling case, a first-class carriage was missing from a train, so those passengers affected were simply told to occupy seats in standard class.

When someone pointed out to the first-class ticket holder that the seat they had taken was theirs – and they had a reservation to prove it – the train guard refused to act. Perhaps he had been rendered helpless by the complexity of the ticket validity announcement he had to make upon departure.

I could go on, unless I was a customer of First Great Western, of course, in which case I would probably have to remain stationary, since their response to winning the franchise in 2006 was to immediately remove 20 carriages from a service that was already running near full capacity.

The fact that customer service levels are unacceptable on our rail services reveals a deeper malaise. When we interact with an organisation as customers, our experience tells us a lot about what really motivates the people behind the organisation.

Where their focus is on excellence – and our very own First Direct is a good example of this – then this manifests itself in the customer service that we receive. However, where service is indifferent, inconsistent or, in the case of our railways, rarely even apparent, it points to a simple conclusion: the industry pays lip service to the passenger, because we're just not on their radar. Yes, there might be the odd survey and the odd customer service training session, but I'd be surprised if the subject ever made it to a board-level agenda. They're more interested in the economics of their franchise.

If it did, rail companies would be building our advocacy upon feedback, transparency and trust. We would see visible evidence of customer focus in improved services and more accountability when things go wrong. After all, didn't the Government promise us, shortly before they took power, that there would be a "publicly accountable publicly-owned railway"?

Some franchise owners can quite rightly point to impressive developments, such as environmental initiatives, safer stations and ticketing technology, but to claim that the thousands of cheap advance tickets (such as the £37.50 one-way, first-class Leeds-to-London ticket) benefit all, defrauds one crucial constituency – the rush-hour commuter.

Peak-hour travel is just not cost effective, so regardless of the environmental benefits of abandoning the car, it is just not affordable.

Perhaps the answer is simple. If we need a decent rail service, at a fair price, where trains of sufficient length arrive on time at an appropriate frequency, then we need to re-nationalise the railways.

More Train Less Strain, a rail passenger campaigning group, regularly point to the Government's "insane" policy for awarding franchises, explaining that it does not appear to have anything to do with providing a decent rail service.

For example, First Great Western announced an increase in profits of 10 per cent to September last year. Curiously enough, the same 10 per cent as the fare increase endured by its customers.

It could be argued that the only people benefiting from the Government's attitude to the railways are the shareholders and the Exchequer. Add to that the fact that currently we (taxpayers) subsidise the rail companies to the tune of £5bn and one can understand why so many people are now in favour of re-nationalisation.

The problem is that our leaders now acknowledge that it might cost as much as £20bn to put things right. Rather than getting to grips with an issue that could have many positive ramifications for our economy, the Government imply that this money would have to be taken from existing spending plans on other public services like schools and hospitals. Everyone seems to agree that re-nationalisation would be a good thing, but the guilt card has been played.

So is there a journey out of the impasse? Two thoughts spring to mind. First, if our existing rail franchise holders recognised that the most successful organisations (in both service and economic terms) are those who seek, above everything else, to build a community, where leaders, employees and customers feel like equal partners in something worth fighting for, then there's a chance that we could get back on track.

But if that doesn't happen – and I wouldn't put any money on it – then perhaps customer action is the one arrow remaining in our quiver.

More Train Less Strain has, through direct passenger action (involving refusing to show valid tickets as a protest against poor service), achieved a commitment from First Great Western to invest £29m in improving the passenger's lot.

As individuals, we can continue to bemoan the situation, but as a community, we can start to leverage our considerable influence.

Strangely enough, further research reveals that even Smokey Robinson foresaw direct action as being a potential solution to our transport problems. "If you feel like giving me a life time of locomotion," he apparently observed. "I second that commotion."

Mark Bradley campaigns for better customer service in the UK. Author of 'Inconvenience Stores: One Year in UK Customer Service' (www.ardrapress.com), he is a consultant and business speaker.

Posted on 12:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

RMT: March 20 2008

MAINTENANCE AND contract work on overhead power lines along the East Coast and branch lines was cancelled last night after key engineering staff in four Network Rail depots refused to issue work licences on safety grounds.

Workers at Morpeth, Leeds, Doncaster and Hitchen depots invoked 'Worksafe' procedures and sought alternative duties after learning that managers supposedly doing the work of highly skilled staff on strike from the York electrical control room had had as little as six days' training.

RMT members at the York ECR started a five-day strike last night over Network Rail's unsafe plans to slash the number of operators there by a third.

Work scheduled to take place at Heaton depot today was also cancelled after the necessary licences were not issued.

The union has today warned that any attempt to discipline the workers concerned would result in a ballot for strike action among all overhead-line staff.

"I understand that our members were not satisfied that the York electrical control room was being operated safely and invoked the company's own procedures to ensure that they were not placed in danger," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.

"It takes years to train an electrical control room operator, and the idea that managers with six days' training could safely handle the 25,000-volt current has understandably left our members who work on the overhead lines feeling that their safety is being compromised.

"We have already asked the Railways Inspectorate to investigate Network Rail's contingency plans for the five days of the strike, because we believe that they are putting rail workers and passengers at unacceptable risk of electrocution.

"Today I have written urgently to the inspectorate again, because I understand that none of the managers working the control room has current certification, and that none of the six days' training they received was on live equipment.

"RMT has also made it clear that any attempt by Network Rail to discipline members for taking the entirely correct steps to protect their own and their colleagues' safety will result in a strike ballot of all overhead line staff," Bob Crow said.

ends

Notes to editors: Network Rail plans to reduce the complement of operators at the York ECR by a third, from 18 to 12, despite the existence of serious unresolved safety issues.

RMT believes the proposals are budget-led, badly thought out and potentially leave members dangerously exposed in the event of an incident.

RMT's ten members in the control room voted unanimously for action and began five days of strike action at 18:59 on March 19. It will end at 06:59 on Monday March 24.

Posted on 03:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Burnham and Highbridge Weekly News: 20th March 2008
By James Beal

EARLY glimpses of Highbridge Railway Station are unearthed in three photographs sent in from the Highbridge History Project.

The early days: Highbridge Station during the 1870s - with wooden platform

Highbridge Station opened to passengers in August 1854 as part of the Somerset Central Railway section to Glastonbury, before being absorbed into the Somerset and Dorset Railway in 1862.

Three pictures, some more than a century old, give an insight into the development of the station and how it came to be what it is today.

The first of the three photographs featured shows the Station in the 1870s, with an old steam engine pulling up to the platform.

The age of the picture is signalled not only by the men dressed in caps and suits at the station, but also by the wooden platforms the passengers are waiting on.

Photograph number two gives an overview of Highbridge Station in around 1905, where the platforms are no longer made of wood.

Advertising hoardings and privet fencing flank the station, which appears bigger and busier than thirty years previous.

The final photograph shows a group of workers building new platforms at the station in 1932.

The builders pose in the mud and stone foundations of the emerging platform - with a demonstration of their skilful craftsmanship evident on the opposite station side.

Have you got any memories of Highbridge Station in its early years? Perhaps you have some pictures of the station you want to share with readers?

To get in touch with the Weekly News about any of your memories or to send in photographs write to: Weekly Memories, Burnham and Highbridge Weekly News, Royal Clarence House, High Street, Bridgwater, Somerset, TA6 3AT, or e-mail: newsdesk@burnhamnews.co.uk.

Posted on 12:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Oxford Mail: 19-03-08
By George Gaynor

The Government would "lose no sleep" about taking away Oxfordshire rail operator First Great Western's franchise, despite a possible loss of premium payments to the Treasury, MPs were told today.

Rail minister Tom Harris said FGW had "let down their customers very badly" and agreed that passengers were right to think of themselves as victims.

But he refuted any suggestion that the Department for Transport had a conflict of interest in that FGW made large annual premium payments to the Treasury to run the franchise.

Mr Harris told the House of Commons transport select committee that the payments would not be taken into account if FGW failed to improve its performance.

He added: "I would not lose any sleep if there is a decision to end their franchise."

Labour MP Graham Stringer said: "People in the South West must be asking why this wretched company is still there. What does FGW need to do to lose its franchise?

"They are due to pay large premiums. Does not that put the DfT in a difficult position?"

Mr Harris said there were indications that FGW was improving its performance and that the company was aware of "this tremendous chorus of disapproval".

Mr Stringer said that if the franchise was terminated, the Government stood to lose a great deal of money. But Mr Harris said that the money would not be lost, because a new franchisee would be appointed.

See also:

Kelly drops fine in return for £29 million investment

Railnews: 19th March 2008

First Great Western is to fund a £29 million investment programme to compensate for the poor performance that has led to a ministerial warning that the company could lose its franchise.

The operator has also shaken up its senior management team again and agreed a plan to improve operational performance.

Transport secretary Ruth Kelly said the operator had breached its franchise agreement by exceeding the limits on cancellations, and also by misreporting those cancellations. But she said, FGW has already commenced implementation of several initiatives and offered the £29 million package of passenger benefits.

Mrs Kelly said that while she could have fined FGW for under-reporting its performance, this would not in itself help passengers so she had opted for the benefits package.

Issuing FGW with a notice requiring it to produce a remedial plan, she warned that failure to deliver the new commitments would be a default of the franchise which could lead to its termination.

The moves bring to a climax the problems the franchise has suffered since it was launched in April 2006. At the end of both 2006 and 2007 company bosses were forced to apologise for the poor service over the previous year.

First Great Western says it has established a new performance directorate – headed by former London Lines boss Mark Hopwood – to “improve management of disruption alongside Network Rail”.

The company has also started recruiting a further 60 drivers, 40 guards and a number of technicians to improve service reliability.

Five additional Class 150 units will allow cascaded Class 158 diesel trains to lengthen Cardiff/Bristol/ Portsmouth trains. FGW will also have an extra high-speed train.

The operator will also improve station information systems, expand the planned refurbishment of London commuter trains, offer half a million more cheap tickets, and extend its compensation for delayed passengers.

Moir Lockhead, FirstGroup chief executive, said: “We have already put in place actions to address performance at FGW. We are encouraged that during January 2008 performance improved and cancellations were at their lowest level for 18 months. This trend has continued during February.”

As part of First Great Western’s management shake-up following its tough warning, Mark Hopwood has become performance director. He heads the new performance team responsible for train planning, control and performance analysis, and oversees the three route directors with route specific responsibilities across the FGW network.

Mr Hopwood, who was managing director of National Express’s LondonLines until January, was originally joining FGW as one of its three new route directors but is now in the process of recruiting a new team of route directors.

In a written statement to Parliament, Ruth Kelly said the performance of First Great Western has persistently fallen short of its customers’ expectations and has been unacceptable to both passengers and Government.

She said the Remedial Plan Notice requires FGW to submit a plan to bring the standard of services back to acceptable levels. It will be contractual, and ‘material non-compliance’ with the plan could lead to the Government terminating First Great Western’s franchise.

The transport secretary informed MPs that last year FGW told the DfT that it had been miscalculating its performance figures and they were worse than reported.

An FGW internal audit uncovered several errors and DfT officials are now checking systems at other companies.

Andrew Haines, FGW chief operating officer, said: “There is a considerable momentum to transform the business and taken together with the management changes we have made, we are confident of our ability to improve performance.”

As well as Mr Hopwood, FGW has announced a number of other appointments.

Matthew Golton has joined as projects director, responsible for major project liaison with Network Rail and the DfT. He will manage FGW’s input into the Intercity Express Programme, Crossrail, Reading remodelling and North Cotswolds line redoubling. He has worked for EWS for the last decade. Sheridan Flavin has joined as human resources director, while Sue Evans, formerly director of communications at EWS, takes a similar role at FGW.

Posted on 11:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Transport Briefing: 19/03/08

Work to bring new trains into service on the West Coast Main Line is to be overseen by a rival train operator to current franchise holder Virgin Trains.

The Department for Transport today (19 March) published a strategy setting out how it intends to lengthen the current 9-car trains to 11 carriages as well as buying four new 9-car trains that will allow existing rolling stock to be taken out of service for carriage lengthening without disrupting the new Virgin High Frequency timetable, due to be introduced in January 2009.

According to the strategy, the DfT intends to appoint a 'shadow' train operator which will be responsible for taking delivery of new carriages from manufacturer Alstom and liaising with rolling stock leasing company Angel Trains, which will finance and own the new vehicles. The successful bidder would be responsible for testing the trains on the National Rail network in order to secure safety acceptance certificates and would oversee enhancements to train depots and work to extend station platforms to support 11-car services. Responsibility for introducing the new trains would transfer to the new West Coast franchise in 2012 at which point the shadow operator contract would end.

In order to be able to test the new rolling stock, the successful bidder would have to be cleared by Network Rail and the Office of Rail Regulation to run trains on the National Rail network. This means the contract is likely to go to an existing train operator that currently runs passenger or freight services.

Negotiations between the government and Virgin Trains to lengthen the Pendolino fleet have been ongoing for more than three years but have come to nothing with Virgin demanding an extension to its current franchise, due to end on 31 March 2012, in return for ordering the additional rolling stock.

The new Pendolino strategy makes clear that the DfT is not bound to proceeding with the measures described in the document so in theory Virgin could still reach agreement with the government to buy the new carriages. However, the detailed plans to introduce a shadow train operator imply that the government feels unable to reach agreement with the current franchisee. They also raise questions about whether Virgin can hope to win the new West Coast franchise, due to begin in 2012, given that the government feels it needs to work with a third party to expand the train fleet. Meanwhile, the successful bidder for the shadow contract would be able to bring its experience working with the Pendolino fleet to any bid for the new franchise.

Posted on 11:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

BBC News: 18 March 2008

Vehicles that can travel on tram or train lines are to be trialled in the UK for the first time.

The tram trains are already in use in the German city of Kassell

The tram-trains will replace standard trains on the Penistone Line between Huddersfield, Barnsley and Sheffield for a two-year trial from 2010.

The project is a partnership between train operator Northern Rail, Network Rail and the Department for Transport.

Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly said the tram-trains promised a "new era" in public transport.

"Tram-trains will bring quicker journeys and offer a greener travel option for passengers in Yorkshire,"she said.

"Passenger feedback is a vital ingredient in determining the success of the trial and I look forward to hearing what the people of Yorkshire think about the comfort and reliability of tram-trains."

Faster journeys

The trial will seek to establish whether vehicles similar to those operating across Europe are suitable for this country's rail network.

Northern Rail will run a competition for manufacturers to build the tram-trains, while Network Rail will spend £15m in track improvements and alterations to stations.

Heidi Mottram, managing director of Northern Rail, said: "We are very excited to be involved in testing this new form of public transport, which will mean higher levels of comfort and a faster journey for our customers on the Penistone Line.

"This is a great opportunity for us to develop our network and attract more people to use public transport in this part of Yorkshire."

Iain Coucher, chief executive of Network Rail, said: "This trial gives us a fantastic opportunity to see whether the types of technologies used in Europe can be adapted for use on our systems.

"We expect the lighter vehicles will result in less wear on the infrastructure - extending its lifespan, improve journey times and give the option of running future commuter services closer into city centres."

The 37-mile Penistone Line has 17 stations and is used by 1.2m passengers a year.

See also:

Britain announces tram-train trials

Railway Gazette: 18 Mar 2008

UK: Five tram-trains are to be procured for trials on the Penistone line in Yorkshire, Britain's Department for Transport confirmed on March 18. The two-year trial starting in 2010 will 'establish whether tram-trains similar to those operating successfully in Europe are suitable for Britain’s railway network.'

The project is a partnership between DfT, train operator Northern Rail and infrastructure manager Network Rail, and will look at the environmental benefits, operating costs and technical suitability of the tram-trains. Industry watchdog Passenger Focus will lead research into user perception of tram-trains, which will replace conventional rolling stock on the 60 km unelectrified route linking Huddersfield, Barnsley and Sheffield.

An option for a second phase covers testing on Sheffield's Supertram network to see the benefits of extending services onto city-centre tram lines.

DfT will contribute £9m to the trials. Northern Rail will call tenders for and lease the vehicles, while parent company Serco-NedRailways will bring experience of tram-trains gathered by Dutch national operator NS.

Network Rail will spend £15m on track improvements and station modifications for the trials. Chief Executive Iain Coucher said he expects 'lighter vehicles will result in less wear on the infrastructure extending its lifespan, improve journey times and give the option of running future commuter services closer into city centres.'

The Penistone line was selected as it offers a mix of passenger-only and mixed passenger and freight operation. Northern runs one DMU service per hour in each direction on the route, which has 17 stations and carries 1·2 million passengers a year.

The announcement was welcomed by Councillor Ryk Downes, Chairman of the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority, who said tram-trains could be a way of increasing capacity on the line from Leeds to York via Harrogate, and creating a link to Leeds-Bradford International Airport.

Posted on 12:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

RMT Circular No: IR/69/08 18 March 2008

Dear Colleague,
RMT Executive calls referendum to reject Network Rail Infrastructure harmonisation proposals - Ballot for industrial action to follow.
- Voting papers for the referendum will now be sent out on Tuesday 25th March 2008.
- The closing date for this ballot is Friday 11th April 2008.

Further to my Circular IR.34.08 dated 8th February 2008, the matter was once again placed before the General Grades Committee which made the following decision:

“That we fully concur with the sentiments expressed in the resolution unanimously passed at the Special Engineering Conference held at Doncaster on the 11th March 2008 and oppose Network Rail’s current proposals.

Special Branch Meetings to be called to inform our members of this decision with suitable propaganda circulated.”

Please pay particular attention to the last paragraph. I would be grateful if you could inform your members of the contents of this circular and note that National Officers and Executive Committee Members will be available to attend the above meetings.

The referendum ballot is underway and the papers will be sent out to members on the 20th March 2008. Please take action to ensure we get as wide as possible rejection of the latest Network Rail offer.

I will keep you updated of future developments regarding this matter.

Bob Crow
General Secretary

Posted on 06:59 PM | Permalink

SUD-Rail Federation of Railworkers' Trade Unions: 18 March, 2008
17 boulevard de la liberation - 93200 - Saint Denis
Tel 00 33 (0)1 42 43 35 75 - Fax 00 33 (0)1 42 43 36 67
Federation-sudrail@wanadoo.fr
http://www.sudrail.org

Private Rail Sector: Those who fight are right… and are winning!

On Monday, March 17 railworkers employed by private railfreight operator Euro Cargo Rail (E.C.R.) - a subsidiary of English, Welsh, Scottish Railways Ltd (EWS) - at Bourg en Bresse depot went on strike.

Employed by ECR, one of the companies responsible for competition with SNCF through social dumping, these private sector employees went on strike demanding amongst other things:
Payment of accumulated overtime.
Programming of rest days.

A majority of employees at the site were on strike: they got a satisfactory settlement after a one-day strike.

ECR management was forced to listen to them.

Everything has obviously not been settled, there are still problems, but things are no longer as they were before!

Railworkers from the public and private sectors, we are fighting together with our union SUD-Rail!

SUD-Rail sends its congratulations to the ECR strikers for their first victory.

Saint Denis, on 18 March, 2008, at 08.00 hrs

Posted on 06:05 PM | Permalink

SUD-Rail Federation of Railworkers’ Trade Unions: 17 March 2008
17 boulevard de la liberation - 93200 - Saint Denis
Tel 00 33 (0)1 42 43 35 75 - Fax 00 33 (0)1 42 43 36 67
Federation-sudrail@wanadoo.fr
www.sudrail.org

Private sector railworkers for EWS subsidiary Euro Cargo Rail at Bourg en Bresse depot have been on strike since Monday morning.

E.C.R. is one of the companies developing in the rail transport market using social dumping as an economic weapon with contempt for its employees’ health and for railway safety.

Today, these private sector employees have gone on strike to demand:

Rostering their rest days and work days simply to enable them to organize their lives and manage their rest time.

Railworkers employed by private rail companies are subject to working conditions that are hazardous to their health, and to rail safety. Their daily turns of duty are such that fatigue accumulates and it is no coincidence that accidents are beginning to multiply.

Today, staff are saying STOP!

But bosses "always want more”, they are reluctant even to pay for overtime already worked and demand the right to control their employees’ time off.

This is the model that SNCF management wants to impose on their railworkers.

It is not acceptable!

SUD-Rail is proposing instead levelling up working conditions. This will benefit all employees, regardless of their status, and will allow a return to a high level of safety on the national rail network.

The bosses of SNCF and the private companies are in the same bosses’ "trade union": the UTP

Nationalised and private sector railworkers, let’s fight together through our SUD-Rail union !

SUD-Rail gives its full support to the ECR strikers!

Posted on 11:56 PM | Permalink

EIRO: 17 March, 2008
Luminiţa Chivu, Institute of National Economy, Romanian Academy

On 1 February 2008, employees at three Romanian rail companies held a three-hour ‘spontaneous’ work stoppage in a dispute over wage increases for 2008.

The Minister of Transport claimed that the strike had in fact been coordinated by trade unions. If no agreement is reached in current pay talks, trade union leaders state that a nationwide strike may be organised in the railway sector at the end of March.

Roots of conflict

The 2008 collective agreement for the transport sector, effective from 24 January, provides for a gross monthly minimum wage of RON 700 (€187.56 as at 3 March 2008) in the sector, which corresponds to a gross hourly rate of RON 4.12 (€1.10). This represents a 29% pay increase on the previous year.

The sectoral collective agreement forms the basis for subsequent collective bargaining at the level of companies and company groups. Negotiations over collective agreements for railway companies started on 9 January 2008. The trade unions demanded an increase in the minimum wage to RON 700 a month, in line with the provisions of the overall collective agreement for the transport sector.

Despite the reorganisation and split-up of the former National Company of Romanian Railways (Societatea Naţională a Căilor Ferate Române, SNCFR) in 1998, railway companies are still state-owned and operate under the authority of the Ministry of Transport (Ministerul Transporturilor, MT). The government therefore set the national minimum wage at RON 500 (about €134) by regulation, with effect from 1 January 2008, with a chance to raise it to RON 540 (about €145) by the summer of 2008. The railway companies observed this minimum wage rate.

On 30 January 2008, the government adopted a ‘Memorandum regarding the capping of wage costs in public companies monitored for indebtedness and operating at a loss’, based on proposals from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which aimed to limit 2008 pay rises in debt-ridden and loss-making public companies to 8%.

As an effect of the memorandum, those railway companies facing debts and losses went back on their previous agreement with the trade unions. The companies’ decision was due to the fact that an increase in the minimum wage to RON 500 and, later, to RON 540 would have meant a 6.4% and ultimately a 12% pay rise. On average, this would have represented an increase in the companies’ wages of more than the 8% limit set by the government, while a rise to RON 700 would have been equal to a wage increase of 55% compared with the previous year.

Spontaneous work stoppage

Following the government’s decision on 30 January 2008 to cap wage increases, railway workers ceased work without notice at 07.00 on 1 February at the Bucharest North Station, in the entire Timişoara Railway District in western Romania and in other railway districts. The strike lasted until 10.00. As a result of this stoppage, some 290 trains were delayed, totalling about 560 hours of delay and affecting some 20,000 passengers. A total of 2,000 workers were involved, employed by the National Company for Passenger Railway Transportation CFR Călători SA (Societatea Naţională de Transport Feroviar de Călători CFR Călători SA, CFR Călători), the National Railway Freight Company CFR Marfă SA (Societatea Naţională de Transport Feroviar de Marfă CFR Marfă SA, CFR Marfă) and the National Railways Company CFR SA (Compania Naţională de Căi Ferate CFR SA, CNCFR) which is responsible for railway infrastructure.

This spontaneous protest by railway trade union members was supported, through press releases, by the National Trade Union Confederation ‘Cartel Alfa’ (Confederaţia Naţională Sindicală ‘Cartel Alfa’, Cartel Alfa) and the National Trade Union Bloc (Blocul Naţional Sindical, BNS).

Minister Orban’s reaction

The Minister of Transport, Ludovic Orban, stated in television and radio interviews that the protest was illegal and that is was anything but spontaneous, as it started simultaneously all over the country and work was resumed at the same time everywhere. ‘It is hard to believe’, he said, ‘that the 2,000 workers involved did not communicate in order to time their work cessation and resumption.’

In Minister Orban’s opinion, the refusal by some of the employees of the three state-owned railway companies to carry out their work duties was coordinated by trade union leaders, who chose to ignore the staged dispute procedure required by the legislation governing labour conflicts. Minister Orban highlighted that the trade unions could not hide behind a spontaneous protest by their members and that they would be held liable according to law.

The minister also indicated that any pay rise must be earned, based on higher rail revenues, failing which the railway companies should be restructured.

Trade union views and prospects

Trade union leaders claim that the minister’s allegations ‘are mere speculations, and they have to be substantiated’. As to the minister’s comments on restructuring, trade unions argue that this would be tantamount to collective redundancies and dismissals, which they cannot possibly accept.

After the harsh words and actions on both sides, the unions and the authorities resumed negotiations. The trade unions consider that restructuring ‘should start from the top’, because the number of management and administrative staff in the three railway companies has trebled since 1990.

If no agreement is reached, a general strike may be organised in the railway sector at the end of March 2008, according to trade union leaders.

A first step towards a national strike has been taken by the National Federation of Railways Traffic/Trade (Federaţia Naţională Feroviară Mişcare–Comercial, FNFMC) union, which issued a press release on 7 February stating that ‘the conditions are in place for a labour conflict’. The trade union considered the railway companies’ response to its demands to be outside the legal provisions regarding labour conflicts, and consequently FNFMC requested the Bucharest Labour and Social Protection Division (Direcţia de Muncă şi Protecţie Socială Bucureşti, DMPS Bucureşti) to mediate in the conflict of interests that has broken out at CNCFR and CFR Călători.

Posted on 12:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Sunday Times: March 16, 2008
Ben Marlow

HSBC is examining a sale of its train-leasing division.

The move comes as Britain’s biggest bank faces growing pressure to offload noncore assets to raise cash after huge write-downs resulting from its exposure to the American sub-prime mortgage market.

The bank has already contacted potential buyers for HSBC Rail, including the infrastructure and private-equity firms that showed interest in buying Angel Trains, Britain’s biggest rolling-stock company, which is being sold by Royal Bank of Scotland.

Australian funds Babcock & Brown and Macquarie, private-equity firm Terra Firma and American insurer AIG have been battling it out to buy Angel.

The value of HSBC Rail is estimated at £1.5 billion, although a significant proportion of this is likely to be debt, bankers say.

Executives at HSBC are nervous about starting a process when the sale of Angel Trains is taking longer than expected. Babcock & Brown, the preferred bidder, is rumoured to be struggling to fund its bid.

However, HSBC is considering offering some finance to buyers to counteract the lack of debt available in the credit markets.

Posted on 11:43 PM | Permalink

Financial Times: March 14 2008
By Robert Wright

The largest private engineering contractor on the London Underground has insisted passenger safety was not put at risk after allegations that improperly qualified contractors were allowed to gain contracts for upgrade work at Oxford Circus station.

Metronet Rail said it had informed police about allegations over the award of contracts and checked that contractors undertaking electrical work at the station held the necessary qualifications.

Posted on 11:38 PM | Permalink

RMT: March 13 2008

BRITAIN’S BIGGEST rail union has today called for an urgent investigation into another apparently blatant breach of safety rules during the second Lincoln signallers strike, which was held on March 4 and 5.

Evidence that legal documents were falsified to cover the fact that a strike-breaking signaller worked two shifts without the minimum eight-hour break between them has been passed to the railways inspectorate by RMT.

"It seems that Network Rail has once more put the lives of railway staff and passengers in second place to attempting to break a strike," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.

"Network Rail moved staff out of rostered positions in boxes unaffected by the strike to cover those that would not be staffed during the strike, and as a result struggled to keep the unaffected boxes adequately staffed.

"We understand that a non-RMT signaller who worked until 23:36 on March 4 at Sleaford East box then signed on for another duty at 06:50 on March 5 at Sleaford North.

"We also understand that the signaller signed off at Sleaford East at 22:30, but then carried on working and booking trains for another hour in an attempt to make it look like he had taken the minimum eight hours' rest.

"There are no circumstances in which anything less than an eight-hour turn-around is permissible, and it would have to have been OK'd by a manager.

"We are asking HMRI to investigate whether false entries have been made in the Train Register Book, which is a legal document," Bob Crow said.

ends

Note to editors: RMT is already awaiting the outcome of an investigation into an apparently serious signalling blunder during the first strike day, which could have resulted in rail traffic being sent through engineering works.

See also:

Quintinshill rail crash

Wikipedia:

The reason that false entries in the Train Register Book, a legal document, is regarded as a cardinal sin by signallers dates back to a terrible train crash in 1915 at Quintinshill.

The Quintinshill rail crash occurred on 22 May 1915, at Quintinshill, an intermediate signal box (on what is now the West Coast Main Line) with refuge loops on the Caledonian Railway near Gretna Green in Scotland. Involving five trains, the crash killed 227 people and caused by far the most casualties of any rail crash that happened in the UK. The accident is not well known because the majority of victims were soldiers and it occurred during World War I, when all news was subject to official censorship. A trial afterwards convicted two negligent railway workers of having caused the accident.

Diagram of the tracks and signals just prior to the accident

A distracted signalman forgot about a stationary local train that he had shunted on to the opposite running line to let a following express train through, as both adjacent sidings were already occupied. This led to a multiple collision between a troop train and the local train, also involving two coal trains in the sidings and, shortly afterwards, the following express train, which ploughed into the wreckage. In total, 227 people died and 246 were injured — of the 500 soldiers of the 7th Battalion of the Royal Scots on the troop train, only 60 made it to roll call the next morning. The precise number of fatalities is not known because the roll of the regiment was destroyed in the fire. The disaster was made much worse by fire caused by wooden carriages and gas lighting and the coal in one of the coal trains.

The accident took place at a change of shift: George Meakin had worked the night shift and was relieved by James Tinsley. These two men had an informal agreement whereby if the local train were stopping at Quintinshill, Tinsley would travel on it and start work half an hour late. Meakin would record all the details of that half hour on a piece of paper and then Tinsley would copy this into the train register when he arrived, to cover up his late arrival. This arrangement and chatter about war news distracted Tinsley so that he forgot about the local train on which he had himself arrived. Both signalmen had fallen into sloppy practices and neglected several standard safety procedures required by the rules.

The accident was exacerbated because one of the trains involved was a troop train. The heavy wartime traffic and a shortage of carriages meant that the railway company had to press into service obsolete Great Central Railway stock. These carriages had wooden bodies and frames, so had very little crash resistance compared with steel framed stock, and were gas-lit. The gas (oil-gas) was stored in reservoirs slung under the underframe. These reservoirs had just been charged and this, plus the lack of available water, kept the resulting fire burning for two days. It was reported at the time that not one lump of coal from the northbound coal train or the locomotives was found after the fire was extinguished, but this may be more down to exaggerated reporting than fact. The southbound coal train was returning empty wagons to South Wales: it was a Jellicoe Special serving the Royal Navy. The fire probably killed more people than the crash did.

The dead are buried in Edinburgh's Rosebank Cemetery on Pilrig Street.

The two signalmen, James Tinsley and George Meakin, were sentenced to three years and eighteen months in prison respectively for culpable homicide due to gross neglect of duties.

Lessons learned

The Quintinshill disaster would have been avoided if the line had been equipped with track circuits, which detect the presence of trains and prevent the signals being changed to "clear". However, as Quintinshill had good visibility from the signal box, it would have had low priority for the fitting of track circuits.

Quintinshill signal box was also supplied with "lever collars" – devices that should have been slipped over the signal levers to remind the signalmen not to move them until the obstruction had been cleared – but, despite written instructions, the signalmen had got out of the habit of using them. These lever collars are not automatic like track circuits, and hence are not foolproof, but remain in common use to this day.

It was noted that the fireman of the waiting train had failed to report to the signal box and remind the signalman that they were at a stand and ensure that the reminder collars were placed over the signal levers (in accordance with rule 55(g) when there are no track circuits). However, they may have wrongly regarded that, as the signalman had actually got off their train, that duty had been discharged.

The Board of Trade accident report concluded that if the signalmen had followed basic operating rules and used the safety devices provided, the accident would not have happened, and no recommendations for additional equipment or rule changes were necessary.

The trial

Meakin and Tinsley were the only signalmen in the UK to be actually given prison sentences for causing a crash. Others have been convicted of manslaughter but were discharged (e.g. Thirsk). However the level of culpability at Quintinshill was much higher, as the Lord Justice General's lucid summing up showed:

"...They gave the signal that the line was clear and the troop train might safely come on. At that moment there was before their very eyes a local train obstructing that line. One man in the signal box had actually left that train a few minutes before when it was being shunted. The other had a few minutes before directed the local train to go on to the up main line. If you can explain that staggering fact consistently with the two men having faithfully and honestly discharged their duties you should acquit them. If you cannot ... you must convict them."

The jury returned a unanimous guilty verdict in just eight minutes. Thomas (1969) lists eight separate ways in which the signalmen broke operating rules, mostly regularly, not just that morning.

It is interesting to note that as the incident occurred in Scotland and many of the fatalities occurred at the Carlisle main hospital just over the border in England, differences in Scottish and English law rendered the guilty pair indictable in both jurisdictions for manslaughter. Under Scottish law, it is the act that results in loss of life (regardless of where the actual death occurs) that has to occur on Scottish soil. However, under English law, it is the loss of life (regardless of where the fatal act occurs) that has to occur on English soil.

Similar accidents

The Hawes Junction rail crash of 1910 also involved a busy signalman forgetting about a train on the main line, but because the signalman there was extremely busy and fully focused on his job, his momentary lapse was more excusable. Likewise, at the Winwick rail crash of 1934, an overworked signalman forgot about a train in his section, and was misled by a junior. In neither case had track circuits been installed.

Chain of Responsibility

"Chain of Responsibility" is a system where safety is held to be the responsibility of an organisation as a whole and not just of those at the front line.

In the case of the Quintinshill accident, it raises the question "Why did the signalmen not ask for permission to vary the shift changeover times, and avoid the dangerous distraction of rewriting the train register?” If this had been allowed, the risk of an accident could have been reduced.

One can only suppose that management of the railway concerned would have considered such a request uppity if not a sackable offence. Their reasons for wanting to vary the changeover would have been seen as insufficient to justify exemption from the universal shift pattern.

External links

* Board of Trade accident report
* Website with the accident casuality listing reference only

See also

* List of rail accidents
* List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom
* List of British rail accidents by death toll
* List of United Kingdom disasters by death toll
* List of notable accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft
* Fatal Accident Inquiry

References

* Thomas, John (1969). Gretna: Britain's Worst Railway Disaster (1915). Newton Abbot, UK: David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-4645-8.
* Hamilton., J.A.B. (1967). British Railway Accidents of the 20th Century (reprinted as Disaster down the Line).. George Allen and Unwin / Javelin Books. ISBN 0-7137-1973-7.
* Nock, O.S. (1980). Historic Railway Disasters, 2nd ed., Ian Allan.
* Rolt, L.T.C. (1956 (and later editions)). Red for Danger. Bodley Head / David & Charles / Pan Books.

Posted on 03:06 PM | Permalink

RMT in Calais: March 12, 2008

Click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=An1ndA3AChA

You tube video of RMT delegation to French rail union protest against rail privatisation in Calais on ITF International Rail Action Day, 6 March 2008

French rail union CGT organised a Day of Action in Calais to protest against railway privatisation in France. RMT members from Cinque Ports, St Pancras and EPS branches attended and brought greetings from railworkers in the UK and a message for railway trade unionists to unite against European Union rail liberalisation.

Posted on 01:26 PM | Permalink

Thomson Financial: March 10, 2008

LONDON - The UK government is considering proposals by London's mayor to hand over part of Go-Ahead Group's Southern UK rail franchise to the capital's transport authority.

The Department of Transport (DfT) confirmed a Guardian report that it is talking to mayor Ken Livingstone about the future of Southern, which runs trains between London Victoria and Brighton and the south coast.

Livingstone is hoping to merge the inner-city portion of the franchise, which is officially known as South Central, into Transport for London's (TfL) Overground rail network, the Guardian said.

The talks between Livingstone and the DfT have reportedly delayed re-tendering of the franchise, which is due to expire next year.

'We are in discussions with the mayor and other industry partners about how we can respond to what passengers want from South Central, but no decisions have been taken,' a spokeswoman for the DfT said without elaborating.

The spokeswoman said the department hopes to issue a preliminary notice providing potential bidders with information about the future South Central franchise 'soon', but refused to give a timescale.

She also declined to say whether the department is considering rolling out the TfL London Overground model, under which TfL outsources train operations, but retains control of fares and service levels, to other franchises in London or elsewhere in the UK.

TfL declined to comment, although plans for expanding London Overground are expected to form part of Livingstone's transport manifesto, which he is launching today ahead of the mayoral elections in May.

Train operators have reportedly voiced strong opposition to the Southern move and some DfT officials are concerned about the potential complications of splitting one of London's biggest commuter rail franchises, the Guardian said.

But transport secretary Ruth Kelly has told officials she is interested in the plan and believes it could offer 'the best possible deal for Londoners', the newspaper reported.

Livingstone is hoping to integrate more London rail routes into the Overground network, which has already taken over part of the former Silverlink operation previously run by National Express Group PLC.

Posted on 12:48 PM | Permalink

RMT: March 11 2008

Private rail industry still profiteering from £1.3 billion in unpaid tax

A MASSIVE tax loophole that has allowed the private rail industry to profiteer from £1.3 billion in unpaid tax should be closed in tomorrow's budget, Britain's biggest rail union today urges the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The deferred-tax loophole, intended to encourage investment but used instead to fund increases in dividends to shareholders, is an obscenity, RMT says, not least when passengers are facing ever-higher fares, overcrowding and delays.

A study for the union by tax expert Richard Murphy of Tax Research revealed last October that nearly half of the £1.5 billion in dividends paid out in the last five years by nine private train operators and rolling-stock companies has been funded by unpaid tax.

It showed how rail companies are hiding behind accounting rules which allowed them to suggest they are paying more tax than they are, and that real profit levels were far higher and tax actually paid far lower than figures initially declared. (details below)

The call for the loophole to be plugged has been taken up in an Early Day Motion, tabled in the House of Commons by John McDonnell and signed by 30 other MPs by today.

"The six biggest train operators and the three rolling-stock companies owe £1.3 billion in deferred tax, but it will almost certainly never be paid and is effectively a massive hidden subsidy to be divvied up among shareholders," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.

"This is money that should be funding railway engineering, but it is being used instead for financial engineering, turning hidden subsidies into pure profits for shareholders

"When passengers are facing a future of massive fare increases and the government is cutting subsidy to the rail industry by £1.5 billion over the next six years, the government should be telling these companies to stump up the £1.3 billion they owe to restore that funding.

"We need to face the fact that private-sector involvement in the railways is about maximising profit, and stands in the way of delivering the growing, affordable people's railway that our economy and environment desperately need," Bob Crow said.

ends

Early Day Motion 1089
Tax Paid By Railway Companies

Tabled by John McDonnell and signed, at March 11, by 30 others

That this House notes the report by the Tax Justice Network for the RMT union that the privatised rail industry is profiteering from £1.3 billion in unpaid tax and is using a deferred-tax loophole intended to encourage investment to instead fund increases in dividend payouts to shareholders; is appalled that whilst private rail companies are profiting from this tax loophole passengers are being asked to pay higher rail fares and endure delays and overcrowding on many rail services; therefore urges the Chancellor of the Exchequer to use the forthcoming Budget to announce that this tax loophole will be closed; and believes that this further example of shameless profiteering at passengers' expense once again demonstrates the need for a publicly owned and publicly accountable railway.

Notes to editors: An executive summary of the report and biographical notes on Richard Murphy follow.

The companies whose accounts were analysed in the report are: First Group PLC; Go-Ahead Group PLC; Stagecoach Group PLC; Arriva PLC; National Express Group PLC; Virgin Rail Group PLC; Porterbrook Leasing Company Limited; HSBC Rail (UK) Limited, and Angel Trains Limited.

Tax paid by Railway Companies

Executive Summary

This report is based on detailed analysis of the accounts of six railway operating companies and three railway leasing companies operating in the UK. In each case their last five available sets of accounts were reviewed, meaning that the survey concentrates on the period 2002 to 2006.

In this period the declared profits of the companies in question increased from £435 million in 2002 to £810 million in 2006. Their sales income curiously varied little over the period, moving about an average of about £11.6 billion a year throughout the period.

The tax they paid did, however, fall dramatically over the period. According to their profit and loss accounts their tax charges fell from £188 million or 51.4% of reported profit in 2002 to £169 million in 2004, when the declared tax rate was 22.1%, a rate that was also seen in 2006.

But this is not the whole story. The profits these companies declare are not the profit figures on which they pay tax. Most of the railway operating companies (but not the rail leasing companies) have significant goodwill charges in their accounts which are highly unlikely to be tax deductible. This increases their taxable profits by this amount.

At the same time, all the companies include in their accounts charges for 'deferred tax', which can best be described as estimated amounts of tax that might be payable at some time in the future as a consequence of transactions that have already occurred, but with there being no certainty as to when, if, or ever that tax might be due. Overall the amount of deferred tax owed by these companies increased from £948 million to £1,297 million over the period. The increase was less than the total deferred tax charged against their profit by all the companies in the period, which totalled £527 million because of changes in the rules on the way the balances had to be accounted arising as a result of the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards in 2005.

Two points are however clear: first that these balances seem unlikely to be paid and second that deferred tax charges can therefore be ignored as real tax charges. They should instead be considered to be interest free loans to the railway industry for which there is no repayment date. By 2006 one third of all the finance required by the industry was being provided by the government in this way without it taking any credit for the benefit it was providing.

Taking these two adjustments to the profit and tax charge into account a very different picture of tax paid is revealed. Profits now increased from £584 million before tax to £894 million before tax over the period. Taxes due fell from £109 million to £71 million. The tax rate fell from 18.7% to 7.9% (and just 3.8% in 2005).

If tax had been paid on these profits at the 30% headline UK corporation tax rate the sums due would have been £66 million in 2002 and £198 million in 2006. Over the period £731 million of tax was not paid as a result of the low tax rates the industry enjoyed.

Of this sum £527 million is explained by the deferred tax charges. According to the accounts of the companies themselves the second biggest reason is 'prior year adjustments'. What this means is that they have not had to pay tax that they had declared they might. Almost certainly this means that tax planning arrangements the companies had presented to HM Revenue & Customs but were too cautious to assume would work were accepted as valid by that authority, or at least were not challenged.

The resulting impression is of an industry that has saved itself over £700 million in tax in five years and is sitting with £1.3 billion of unpaid tax on its balance sheet: tax that might never be paid but which is being used to provide one third of the funding required to keep this sector going.

Who benefits from this tax lost? Certainly not the government. And there's no indication that it is the consumer. It must be the companies themselves. Profits of the companies surveyed almost doubled during this period. Their tax paid tumbled. And they paid almost £1.5 billion in dividends to shareholders in this five year period. Half of this sum was financed by tax not paid.

There is an obvious question. What better use could have been made of that tax not paid, in the railway industry or in society at large? And why have we allowed the railway industry become a mechanism for financial planning, one of whose primary purposes is to turn unpaid tax into an income stream for shareholders?

It's certainly no way to run a railway.

Richard Murphy - biography

Richard Murphy is a chartered accountant and graduate economist. He trained with KPMG in London before setting up his own firm in 1985 in London. He and his partners sold the firm in 2000 when it had 800 clients. He is a serial entrepreneur, having directed more than 10 SMEs.

Since 2000 Richard has increasingly been involved in taxation policy, both as an adviser and campaigner. He is director of Tax Research LLP and advises the Tax Justice Network, the Publish What You Pay campaign and many NGOs on tax and development.

He is a member of the ACCA's Research Committee and is a research fellow at the Centre for Global Political Economy at the University of Sussex and at the Tax Research Institute at the University of Nottingham.

A regular radio and TV commentator on tax and corporate accountability, he has also addressed UN, EU, HMRC and international diplomatic meetings on these issues. He writes a daily blog at www.taxresearch.org.uk/blog

Posted on 01:14 PM | Permalink

BBC News: 10 March 2008

Workers in a Network Rail electrical control room have voted to go on strike in a row over jobs.

Train services between London and Scotland are under threat

Train services on the East Coast mainline between Edinburgh and London are threatened as a result.

The Rail Maritime and Transport union said a majority of members at York backed industrial action in protest at plans to reduce staff by a third.

Network Rail said consultation was underway and final arrangements were yet to be agreed.

Network Rail has until Thursday to resolve the dispute or industrial action will result, the union said.

'Very disappointed'

General secretary Bob Crow said: "The proposed staffing levels will leave the electrical control room severely exposed in the event of any incident.

"We are not prepared to allow safety to be compromised just to satisfy Network Rail's balance sheet."

Network Rail said: "We are very disappointed by the results of this ballot and continue to speak to our people to avert an unnecessary strike.

"This vote arose from a consultation process and the final working arrangements for the electrical control room have yet to be agreed.

"There is no way that any unsafe working practices would ever be tolerated in any part of Network Rail.

"Anyone displaced by organisational change is dealt with entirely in accordance with the framework agreed with the unions."

The East Coast mainline runs from Edinburgh to London via Newcastle, York, Peterborough and Stevenage.

Posted on 05:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

RMT: March 10 2008

Network Rail given until Thursday to negotiate or face action

SAFETY CRITICAL staff in Network Rail's electrical control room at York have voted unanimously for industrial action over the company's plan to cut the number of operators there by a third, from 18 to 12.

RMT has told the company that pushing through drastic staff cuts in the face of serious unresolved health and safety issues and refusing to honour existing agreements on dealing with displaced staff are unacceptable.

The union's ten members in the control room voted unanimously both for strike action and action short of a strike, and the union's executive has given Network Rail until March 13 to negotiate or face the prospect of industrial action.

"The proposed staffing levels will leave the electrical control room severely exposed in the event of any incident, and we are not prepared to allow safety to be compromised just to satisfy Network Rail's balance sheet," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said.

"There has been no consultation with our local reps, our request that the proposals are put on hold pending proper discussions has fallen on deaf ears, and once more Network Rail is refusing to apply the agreed procedure for dealing with displaced staff.

"Under the circumstances we had no alternative but to ask our members to send a clear message to Network Rail and to vote for industrial action to defend safety, their jobs and their agreements - and you can get no clearer than a unanimous vote for action.

"Network Rail needs to understand that it must address the serious safety issues that our members have been raising," Bob Crow said.

Posted on 10:39 AM | Permalink

RMT: March 10 2008

Renationalise Tubelines to avoid further financial catastrophe, union urges

TUBE PASSENGERS and taxpayers remain exposed to an unacceptable level of financial risk and could face another ten-figure bill if the Tubelines consortium were to go out of business, London Underground's biggest union says today.

As MPs prepared for tonight's debate on the Transport Select Committee's damning verdict on the 'public-private partnership', delivered last month, RMT welcomed a call tabled by London MPs for Tubelines' contracts to be brought back in-house (see EDM below).

The public has already been saddled with a £1.7 billion bill following Metronet's collapse, and the union warns that 95 per cent of Tubelines' debt is also underwritten by the government - meaning that the public faces another catastrophe if Tubelines goes bust.

"The idea that Tubelines is shouldering any financial risk from its PPP contracts is just as big a myth as the idea that Metronet did," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said today.

"The hard reality is that the public is shouldering almost all of the risk, just as it did with Metronet, and if Tubelines goes belly-up it will leave us with another massive ten-figure tab to pick up while the shareholders once more creep quietly away.

"The idea that Tubelines is a success is also a myth - they are just not doing as spectacularly badly as Metronet did - and the PPP is still costing the public a fortune even if Tubelines avoids going bust.

"If Tubelines was delivering according to the script - which it is not - it would still be delivering at benchmarks set five per cent below the levels expected from publicly owned London Underground.

"And the cost of that underperformance is staggering, because central government spending on the Tube increased more than 20-fold in the seven years up to 2005.

"The £160 million pre-tax profit that Tubelines has already made, only four years into its 30-year contract, is not far short of the equity that its shareholders, Bechtel and Amey staked in the first place - and that equity is the limit of their risk.

"The best bet for Londoners and for taxpayers would be for the government to accept that the PPP is the problem and bring Tubelines back in-house before any more damage is done," Bob Crow said.

ends

EDM 1130 - London Underground PPP

Tabled by John McDonnell and signed to date (March 10) by Jeremy Corbyn, Alan Keen, Harry Cohen, Diane Abbott, Rudi Vis and Alan Meale

That this House welcomes the report of the House of Commons Transport Select Committee into the London Underground and the Public - Private Partnership Agreements; notes that the Committee concluded that the collapse of Metronet inclined the Committee to take the view that the PPP model was flawed and probably inferior to traditional public sector management and that proper public scrutiny and the opportunity of meaningful control is likely to provide superior value for money; further notes that the collapse of the Metronet contract is likely to cost the taxpayer £1.7 billion; therefore calls on the government to do all within its power to ensure that the Metronet contracts are bought under the direct control of London Underground at the earliest possible time; and to safeguard the future interest of the taxpayer also calls on the Government to take steps to bring the Tube Lines contract under the control of London Underground.

Notes to editors:

The Transport Committee's Report

Not surprisingly the Transport Committee has strongly criticised the Metronet contract and the PPP structure in general. In summary the Committee said

* The collapse of Metronet inclined the Committee to take the view that the PPP model was flawed and probably inferior to traditional public sector management and that proper public scrutiny and the opportunity of meaningful control is likely to provide superior value for money.
* The Government should not enter into any further PPP agreements without a comprehensive and accurate assessment of the level of risk transfer to the private sector.
* The Secretary of State should make a full assessment of the additional costs that have been incurred as a result of the failure of Metronet and then tell the House what proportion of these costs are to be met by central Government and what proportion she expects residents of London and Tube passengers to pay.
* The Government should bear the Metronet debacle in mind if and when its parent companies next come to bid for publicly-funded work.

Tubelines

Defenders of the PPP say that the PPP model is not flawed because the other PPP consortium, Tubelines, is "delivering" for London Underground. This is a fundamentally inaccurate assessment borne out of a need to justified a failed policy and an ideological obsession that the private sector is always more efficient than the public.

In fact as far back as 2000, an independent report by the Industrial Society (The London Underground Public Private Partnership, An Independent Review) found that the PPP was offering a guaranteed 15.3% return on equity for 30 years with benchmarks for performance set 5% below the levels expected of the publicly owned London Underground.

In 2005 the House of Commons Transport Select Committee published their Performance of the London Underground report. This found that "disregarding the costs of the Jubilee Line extension, central government expenditure in constant terms has increased from £44.1million in 1997-98 to £1,048 million in the current financial year (2004-05); an increase of 2,276% - over twentyfold."

Therefore it would be astonishing if Tubelines was not "delivering" when the benchmark is 5% below that expected of by the former London Underground while benefiting from a twenty fold increase in public funding.

As the 2005 Transport for London report explained, by 2004/05 it was possible to begin to make judgments on the performance of the PPP. TfL does acknowledge some progress but explains that this "could hardly be otherwise" given the sums involved. The verdict is put blunt: "In short, performance is not good enough and is less than was promised". The report goes on to say: "The Infracos and their shareholders are earning significant sums through the PPP, but the volume of real work out on the railway is not consistent with the payments being made."

But perhaps the greatest concern is that RMT fears the taxpayer and fare payer are also being exposed to massive financial risk from the Tube Lines contract.

That is to say, as with Metronet, the government has guaranteed 95% of Tube Lines borrowings from the banks and Tube Lines risk is limited to the amount of equity invested, which RMT believes to be in the region of £180 million: a paltry amount, especially when we know that Tubelines pre-tax profits from the PPP are £158 million to date.

Therefore, as with Metronet, we fear the risk of things going wrong with the Tube Lines contract lies overwhelmingly with the taxpayer. Furthermore whilst Tube Lines claim to have efficiencies and spending under control, this has in large part be helped by the design of the 30 year PPP arrangements which has frontloaded upgrades with less risk at the start of the contract, such as station refurbishment, whilst more complex higher risk work such as new trains and signalling is still to be delivered.

Following the Metronet fiasco and the huge bill faced by the taxpayer the government should review the Tube Lines contract with the view to bringing its work back into the public sector. At the very least, it needs to explain exactly how much risk the taxpayer is exposed to by the Tube Lines contract and why it believes it is right that the taxpayer should pick up the bill if Tube Lines fails. The alternative strategy of crossing their fingers and hoping that Tube Lines does not fail would be astonishingly complacent.

Posted on 10:36 AM | Permalink

The Canadian Press: 11 March 2008

BRUSSELS, Belgium — Canada's Bombardier Transportation warned local authorities today it could be forced to close down its Belgian plant if it does not get a contract from the state-controlled railway to build 1,200 railcars.

The contract is for an express commuter line to be constructed around the capital of Brussels.

Unions have said Germany's Siemens AG has offered to build the passenger cars for less money than Bombardier.

The NMBS-SNCB railway company has refused to comment on which company will be awarded the contract.

Bombardier spokesman Guy Hendrix says some 1,350 direct and related jobs are at risk if the rail company chooses to award the $2.3 billion contract to Siemens, a multinational which has no plants in Belgium.

The warning puts pressure on Belgian political leaders, who are trying to form a national government amid concerns that the economy is headed for a slowdown.

"This contract is extremely important, everybody knows that. There are 850 people that are employed at Bombardier Transportation in Bruges," Hendrix told VRT radio. "We have several other projects still under way but they will come to an end and then the question rises can we get new projects to guarantee the jobs that we have."

Bombardier, France's Alstom SA, Spain's CAF SA and Siemens are all vying for the lucrative contract, the daily De Standaard reported.

Bombardier's plant in Bruges has won numerous contracts with the Belgian rail company and is currently finishing an order for 90 double-deck coaches and a separate order for 100 trams for the Brussels regional transport authority MIVB.

See also:

Bombardier Steamrolls Rail Contract Rivals

Forbes: 03.11.08
Melinda Peer,

Bombardier Transportation shares got a boost Tuesday after the Canadian company steamrolled rival transport companies vying for a Belgian state-controlled railway contract worth $2.3 billion.

The Montreal-based aircraft and rail equipment company threatened to close its Belgian plant if the NMBS-SNCB railway company awarded the contract to another company. The stock gained 12 cents in Tuesday's session, closing up 2.3% at $5.40.

France’s Alstom SA and Spain’s CAF SA are also bucking for the contract to build 1,200 rail cars for an express commuter line circling Brussels. Siemens AG (nyse: SI - news - people ), which doesn’t have a Belgian plant, has distinguished itself by offering the cheapest price. Bombardier Transportation (other-otc: BDRBF - news - people )'s tactic of issuing the ultimatum has almost certainly caught the attention of Belgian political leaders who are worried about an economic slowdown in their current struggle to form a national government.

Bombardier has improved the quality of its rail transportation division in recent years in an attempt to gain new business as global population growth, increased urbanization and energy concerns promise to drive demand for transport systems. The company refined train upkeep with a predictive maintenance system called Orbita. Other new services work to reduce energy consumption and improve security by sharing train car video footage with stations located along the route. The upgrades have helped the company win valuable business in emerging markets like China where the company has laid tracks. Beijing alone plans on spending $32 billion through 2010 on rail-cars and trains (See "The Great Train Catch-Up").

The strength of Bombardier’s business has steeled it against European competitors, allowing it to pull the rails out from under them. Last February, Germany’s national railway bypassed homegrown Siemens, awarding a $1.6 billion contract for 321 regional trains to Bombardier.

The company’s Belgian plant in Bruges has done well locally. It is currently working on a NMBS-SNCB order for 90 double-deck coaches and 100 cars in a separate order from MIVB, Brussels’ regional transport authority.

Posted on 10:18 AM | Permalink

International Herald Tribune: March 10, 2008
By Thomas Fuller

KANCHANABURI, Thailand: The flocks of foreign tourists who visit this storied Thai city usually beat a path to the bridge on the River Kwai and the meticulously maintained cemeteries containing the remains of thousands of British and other Allied prisoners of war who died building the railway during World War II.

Tongyu Chalawankumpi hammered railway spikes and dynamited boulders while working on the Japanese "Death Railway." (Thomas Fuller/International Herald Tribune)

If they come to the quiet residential neighborhood where Urai Bosap grew up and still lives it is probably because they have taken a wrong turn. There are no memorials to the horrors that took place here six decades ago, just a small orchard of banana and lime trees wedged between the walled compounds of well-to-do families.

But Urai, who walks with difficulty on her 78-year-old knees, knows better. She refuses to eat the fruit that grows in the orchard because as a teenager she watched as the bodies of hundreds of ill and emaciated Asian laborers were thrown into mass graves where the trees now stand.

"Sometimes the people were not yet dead," Urai said, her eyes narrowing at the memory. "They were still groaning when they threw them in the hole."

The construction of what is sometimes called the "Death Railway" linking Thailand with colonial Burma in the 1940s became a symbol of the cruelty inflicted by Japanese troops as they sought to conquer the lands of East Asia and beyond. Yet the largest group of victims, an estimated 70,000 Asian laborers, are barely commemorated here in Kanchanaburi and their remains lie for the most part where the Japanese dumped them: scattered up and down the railway line that is still partially in use today.

Some 200,000 to 300,000 Asian laborers - no one knows the exact number - were press-ganged by the Japanese and their surrogates to work on the railway: Tamils, Chinese and Malays from colonial Malaya; Burmese from present-day Myanmar; and Javanese from what is now Indonesia.

"It is almost forgotten history," said Sasidaran Sellappah, a retired plantation manager in Malaysia whose late father was part of a team of 120 Tamil workers from a rubber estate who were forced to work on the railway. Only 47 survived.

Sasidaran, who is helping lead a claim for compensation from the Japanese government, says he has met many families who knew so little about the railway that they failed to understand why their fathers or grandfathers left for Thailand and never returned.

By contrast, the travails of the 61,806 British, Australian, Dutch and American prisoners of war who worked on the railway, about 20 percent of whom died from starvation, disease and execution, have been recorded in at least a dozen memoirs, documented in the official histories of the governments involved and romanticized in the fictionalized "Bridge on the River Kwai," the 1957 Hollywood classic and the best-selling novel by Pierre Boulle that inspired it.

The two cemeteries in Kanchanaburi dedicated to the prisoners of war are decorated with rows of flowering plants, watched over by 15 full-time groundskeepers and bear a resemblance to the Normandy memorials for the fallen soldiers of the D-Day invasion.

Many of the graves here are inscribed with poignantly evocative epitaphs like the one on the headstone of H. S. McLeod, a 34-year-old Australian sergeant who died in 1943: "A smile and a wave of the hand, he wandered into an unknown land."

The Western prisoners of war were usually kept separate from the Asian laborers. Eric Lomax, a British POW, remembers seeing "thin columns of Asians, Chinese, Indians, Malays, Indonesians" that soon became a "flood, a tide of unhappy men."

"It was possible even then, with my small knowledge of the scale of events overtaking all of us, to guess that these pathetic laborers would die in enormous numbers and be the biggest victims of the railway," Lomax wrote in his 1995 memoir "The Railway Man."

Unlike the POWs, who retained the military hierarchical system of officers and enlisted men, the Asian workers were not organized.

Today a dwindling number of survivors, most of them in their 80s and 90s, are the only remaining witnesses to the years of disease, malnutrition, abuse and killings.

When they die an important piece of history will die with them, worries Muthammal Palanisamy, a former schoolteacher in Malaysia who has located 12 former railway laborers, mostly Tamils, and is compiling their wartime accounts for a book. She has placed advertisements in Tamil-language newspapers asking survivors to contact her but says very few survivors have responded, for the same reason they have not written memoirs: most cannot read or write.

The dozen laborers she has spoken to tell similar stories, she said. They were told by the Japanese that the railway was a glorious project that would help liberate India from the grip of the British colonialists. In a time of wartime penury, some Tamils went voluntarily for the promise of wages. Others were forced by the Japanese.

Tongyu Chalawankumpi was taken as a teenager from what is now northern Malaysia after the Japanese offered his mother a handsome cash payment in exchange for his labor.

Tongyu spent two years hammering railway ties and crushing rocks. The railway, 415 kilometers, about 257 miles, long and built through mountainous and malarial jungle, would have been a challenge even with the most modern engineering equipment. But it was mainly built by hand or with the help of elephants, which, according to one Japanese account, were better treated than the workers.

Tongyu escaped because he was weakened by disease and feared he would be thrown alive into a mass grave.

"I was getting sick and I knew I would end up in the hole," Tongyu said in an interview at his house, not far from where the railway passes. He jumped into the Kwai Noi River and floated downstream for seven days and nights, clinging to a piece of bamboo before being rescued and sheltered by a couple of Buddhist monks.

After the war the British colonial government in Malaya distributed a total of $1.5 million to the widows and dependents of Malayan residents who died building the railway. The post-independence government of Malaysia settled its overall claims with Japan in 1967, accepting several million dollars as reparations.

But there is no clear answer as to why there is so little awareness in Southeast Asia about the role of Asian laborers on the railway, especially given the scale of the suffering. In many Malaysian rubber plantations the Japanese demanded that at least one able-bodied son from each family be sent to work on the railway.

Of the more than 85,000 workers who were drafted from Malaya, 33,000 died, according to Japanese records at the time. Yet little is taught about it in Malaysian history books. And there have been no efforts to find and reclaim the countless bodies that remain in the jungles alongside the railway tracks.

Worawut Suwannarit, a history professor at Kanchanaburi Rajabhat University who has spent decades trying to get more recognition for the Asian laborers, has come to a harsh and bitter conclusion.

"This is why these are called undeveloped countries - Third World countries," he said. "They don't care about their people."

Others blame the British, the colonial rulers before and after the war in both Burma and Malaya, the two countries that sent the most workers to the railway, for not doing more to honor the dead.

The Thai government has had little incentive to honor the dead because few Thais worked on the railway. The Japanese feared antagonizing their wartime hosts, who had signed a treaty with Japan allowing the stationing and transit of troops in exchange for preserving Thailand's sovereignty.

In 1990, a Thai charitable organization, hearing from a Kanchanaburi resident about the possibility of a mass grave, partly dug up the area where the lime and banana trees stand today. Using a backhoe, a piece of equipment usually reserved for construction, not a historical excavation, the crew found more than 500 skeletons. After an inspection crew arrived from the Australian Embassy to ascertain that they were not former Allied soldiers, the charitable group brought the bones to a crematorium in Bangkok and incinerated them.

This angered Worawut, who persuaded the governor of Kanchanaburi to allow him to examine the excavated site. He unsuccessfully pleaded with officials that the mass grave be made into a museum and memorial to the Asian laborers.

"They never answered me," Worawut said.

With no funding available he removed 33 skeletons he had unearthed and filled in the hole.

"I believe there are still more bodies there - a lot," he said. "But nobody wants do anything about it."

He handed over the skeletons to the historical department of Kanchanaburi Province for safekeeping. In February, Worawut, accompanied by a reporter, returned to the department to inquire about what had happened to the laborers' skeletons.

He was greeted by Pichit Rongrithikrai, one of the managers of the department, who said the bones had been discarded three or four years before because workers and visitors complained of an odor.

"There was a stale smell," Pichit said.

The bones, he said, were buried not far from the compost heap by a maintenance worker.

The anonymity of those discarded bones is in stark contrast to the neat rows of graves in the Allied war cemeteries in Kanchanaburi, described in a stone carving as the "perpetual resting place of the sailors, soldiers and airmen who are honoured here."

Or as the mother of F. Buckland, a British soldier who died in June 1945, only two months before the end of the war, had inscribed on his headstone: "Sleep on, my beloved son, your memory will always remain."

Posted on 09:48 AM | Permalink

Deutsche Welle: 09.03.2008

A massive German rail strike planned for Monday, March 9 has been called off thanks to an agreement between train drivers and rail operator Deutsche Bahn. The deal signals the end of an 11-month wage fight.

Train employee holds up a green sign next to a train

Two days of emergency negotiations averted an open-ended strike which threatened to plunge Germany into transportation chaos by halting most passenger, freight and suburban trains.

The German train drivers' union GDL planned to have its members walk off the job first thing Monday morning. The strike would have affected half of regional passenger services in western Germany and 90 percent of those in the eastern part of the country where GDL has high membership.

"It's a good day today, and what we had planned from tonight...will not happen," the head of GDL, Manfred Schell, told reporters Sunday.

Collective bargaining a sticking point

Women wait for a trainBildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: German commuters won't be kept waiting

Germany's state-owned Deutsche Bahn had insisted that all three union representing railway employees be part of a collective wage contract. This angered the GDL, which had come to a separate agreement with Deutsche Bahn in January after months of negotiations that included several strikes.

Bahn chief Hartmut Mehdorn said Deutsche Bahn had agreed terms with the GDL and its two rival unions, Transnet and the GDBA, who represent the bulk of the railway's employees.

Train drivers will be granted a special status "that will fit into Deutsche Bahn's collective wage contract without problems," Mehdorn said.

Mehdorn described the 11-month negotiations, which lead to short strikes in major cities and the freight sector last year, the worst labor mess in the Deutsche Bahn's history.

"We have a result which brings calm for the next few years," Mehdorn told reporters. "I am very happy for Deutsche Bahn and for our clients."

Berlin strike continues

Train carrying carsBildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: There was concern that a strike would hurt the German economy

In Berlin, a separate wage disagreement brought local transportation services to a halt since Wednesday. There had been concerns that the GDL strike would further paralyze the city.

Germany had also been faced with warning strikes from public sector employees represented by the trade union Verdi. Those were put on hold Friday to give arbitrators a chance to try and reach a compromise over pay and working hours. The agreement covers some 2 million federal and local government staff.

The head of Germany's BDA employers association, Dieter Hundt, said excessive wage deals could “threaten the current positive development of the economy and of the labor market."

"Continued strikes could lead to a situation, where the number of unemployed will be decreasing by less than the expected 300,000 to 400,000 this year," Hundt told Bild am Sonntag newspaper.

See also:

Rail Strike Averted, but German Work Stoppages Continue

Spiegel Online: March 10, 2008

STRIKE SEASON

A last minute deal for Germany's train drivers' union has averted a far-reaching rail strike on Monday morning. But the German capital remains snarled in a public transportation strike, and there is no end in sight.

German rail managed to avoid a strike, but in Berlin, public transport is still at a standstill.

A confluence of strikes on Monday in Germany was not quite as bad as expected, after the German train drivers' union, GDL, forged an eleventh-hour agreement with Deutsche Bahn.

Buses, subways and streetcars remained at a standstill in Berlin, but commuter rail lines in major German cities -- the so-called S-Bahn, run by Deutsche Bahn -- ran on a limited schedule.

"We've gotten off to a better start than expected," said a Deutsche Bahn spokesman on Monday morning, according to the Associated Press. S-Bahn trains were expected to run on an "emergency schedule" on Monday, but in most regions the schedules were almost back to normal. Long-distance train schedules were still spotty, though. "The system has to be brought back up step by step," said the spokesman.

Striking, Striking Everywhere

Still, Germany's largest union, Ver.di, continued a series of nationwide strikes by shutting down Berlin's local public-transport system, which caused some chaos in morning traffic. Ver.di is a broad public-sector union that represents government workers from teachers to garbage collectors. Last Monday it started an open-ended strike against the capital's public-transport operator, BVG, which runs streetcars, buses and subways. Police said more cars and bikes were on Berlin streets on Monday as a result.

Ver.di wants a 12 percent pay increase for its transport workers in Berlin. It mounted warning strikes in various sectors last week -- not just Berlin transport but also airport workers in other parts of the country -- and it's threatening a strike among postal workers by the end of March. Nationwide it wants an 8 percent raise for its 1.3 million public sector workers.

In January, after a series of rail strikes during the fall and early winter, GDL won an 11 percent wage increase for its locomotive engineers. But GDL insisted on having the option to negotiate independently of two other unions who also represent German rail workers. There were also disagreements as to who GDL should represent, given that the other unions, Transnet and GDBA, also have some train drivers on their membership roles. The three unions agreed to work more closely together in the future, though both sides went away from weekend negotiations claiming victory.

In Berlin, a solution to the strike remains a long way off. Both Andreas Sturmowski, head of Berlin public transport, and Ver.di head Frank Bäsler say that no agreement is in sight and they haven't even made an appointment to continue negotiations.

Posted on 11:29 PM | Permalink

The Observer: March 9 2008
Nick Mathiason

The government and Network Rail are considering a £31bn proposal to build a network of 187mph high-speed railway lines that would boost the British economy and slash journey times.

New studies drawn up by Atkins, the engineering consultancy, show how developing the existing west and east coast main lines could see journey times from London to Manchester reduced to 74 minutes, London-Birmingham to just one hour, and London-Sheffield to 79 minutes.

Economic gains to the UK of £63bn far exceed the £31bn cost of building the network, says Atkins.

The government welcomed the report: 'We will be looking at the need for new transport capacity as part of our new approach to planning. We will consider all available options to provide the most efficient and beneficial solutions for passengers and taxpayers.'

Network Rail said at the weekend: 'In the future it is likely we are going to have to build new lines, and whilst there are obvious advantages to do this using existing high-speed technology, we must not forget the wider picture.

'The challenge is to look at the developing and changing demographics, and demand along particular corridors, and see what fits best. High-speed travel is likely to be one of a multitude of ultimate solutions. As we develop our plans to build a bigger, better railway over the next few years, we will look at this in more detail.'

Atkins's report envisages that high-speed lines would run on the east and west sides of the country, going as far north as Glasgow and Edinburgh. They would replace most of the existing services and free up capacity for local trains.

The current plan for rail is to make strategic investments to maximise capacity, but increasing passenger growth within 20 years will require bolder thinking.

Renewed enthusiasm for high-speed rail comes thanks to the success of the high-speed channel tunnel rail link - Britain's first high-speed line - which opened last November. Passenger levels have exceeded projections.

See also:

Fast rail links would bring £63bn benefit

Sunday Times: March 9, 2008
Dominic O’Connell

NEW TGV-style rail lines linking southeast England to the Midlands and Scotland would bring economic benefits of £63 billion, according to a study to be released this week.

Atkins, the engineering group, will say that without new lines, the network will run out of capacity by 2026 - or even 2016 if the recent rapid growth in rail passenger numbers continues.

The conclusions come from an update of the investigation into the case for high-speed rail commissioned by the government from Atkins in 2003.

The consultants looked at three options – a new line for the west coast, one up the east coast, and the “full network” option, which includes both.

It said the latter generated the highest benefits, worth about £63 billion. The full network would cost about £31 billion to build.

Atkins also looked at expanding the road and airport network as an alternative, and found this option wanting. “A major expansion of the road network may lead to some reductions in journey times, although these are likely to be marginal outside peak hours,” the report will say, adding: “High-speed lines need to be viewed less as a rail project and more as a national transport, economic and environmental project, as the benefits and costs go far beyond the rail industry.”

The report is likely to receive the backing of Theresa Villiers, shadow transport secretary, and Network Rail, which owns and operates the UK network.

Posted on 09:13 AM | Permalink

Reuters: Mar 8, 2008
Reporting by Kerstin Gehmlich, editing by Mary Gabriel

BERLIN - German railway operator Deutsche Bahn and trade union officials met on Saturday for last-ditch talks aimed at preventing new rail strikes next week.

Train drivers' union GDL is threatening strikes on the railways from Monday, escalating a months-long wage dispute with Deutsche Bahn.

"We will talk with each other today," the head of the GDL union, Manfred Schell, said, adding he did not know how long the negotiations would last.

In January, Deutsche Bahn and GDL ended months of tortuous wage negotiations and disruptive strikes with a deal that gave the union's 34,000 drivers an 8 percent pay increase from March and another 3 percent rise from September.

But they are still haggling over a so-called basic wage contract, which would set out how wage deals Deutsche Bahn had agreed with other unions fitted in with the GDL accord.

Deutsche Bahn personnel chief Margret Suckale said on Friday the operator wanted to make an offer focusing on how the different rail trade unions would work together in the future.

"We want to use the weekend for a last attempt ... to avoid this senseless strike," Suckale told reporters.

Deutsche Bahn has said it wants to keep its employees under the aegis of a sector-wide agreement. The rail operator had reached separate deals with two other unions, Transnet and GDBA.

But one of GDL's core demands is that it have its own deal.

"If a partner is being forced to give up its independence, that has nothing to do with balancing power," GDL official Claus Weselsky told Tagesspiegel am Sonntag newspaper.

Deutsche Bahn has also filed a legal complaint to prevent the strike, which will be examined from Monday.

If Monday's strikes were to go ahead, they would coincide with a separate labour dispute at Berlin local transport operator BVG, which has paralysed public transport in the capital since last Wednesday.

More strikes could also be looming in the public sector in Germany, after talks between the government and Verdi ended on Friday without a wage deal for some 2 million federal and local government staff and headed for arbitration.

Verdi, which has been demanding an 8 percent wage rise, said it was unsure whether arbitration would succeed and said new strikes were possible from April if no deal was reached.

Workers at postal delivery firm Deutsche Post could also go on strike in April, a Verdi official told Euro am Sonntag magazine, saying employers had to make a convincing offer on pay and working conditions by the end of the month.

Economists have voiced concern that a series of high wage deals in Europe's largest economy risked driving up inflation. This year has already seen a 5.2 percent pay rise for German steel workers, their biggest in 16 years.

Posted on 08:23 AM | Permalink

Canadian Press: 08/03/08
The Moose Jaw Times Herald, Leith Knight

Railway labourers escaped from being held against their will

In August 1896, the Canadian Pacific Railway recruited 82 labourers in Ontario for its ballasting gangs working on the roadbed between Moose Jaw and Medicine Hat and on the Soo Line between Moose Jaw and Portal.

Every labourer had to pay two dollars to the company for his work contract, and agree to a $10 reduction from his wages to repay the cost of his transportation to the Prairies.

The labourers were taken from Owen Sound to Fort William (now Thunder Bay) by boat. By the time the boat docked, some of the men had lost interest in the venture and wanted out of the contract.

The railway company said no and forced all 82 men into two railway cars and locked the doors.

As the train sped westward, the men tried escaping through the windows and a few were successful. When heads were counted at Winnipeg, 13 men were missing — along with the wallet of one of the guards.

During a brief stop at that point, the train was guarded by almost the entire Winnipeg CPR police force, which was kept busy pushing the men back into the coaches as they tried to leave via the windows.

When the train pulled out of Winnipeg, a row broke out on board, which escalated to a revolt at Brandon. In the melee, 23 labourers escaped, and between Brandon and Moose Jaw five more disappeared.

When the men were herded into the CPR dining hall at Moose Jaw for breakfast, only 41 heads were counted.

“Even after the arrival here, the leakage did not cease,” reported the Moose Jaw Times.

“Before night, when the gang was loaded up on the trains to be taken to the scenes of the ballasting, nine more had vanished, and of the 82 originally sent west under contract, only 32 reported themselves present.”

Eight were sent to work on ballasting gangs west of Moose Jaw while the remaining 24 were assigned to the Soo Line.

“Some of the men were orderly and appeared very respectable,” observed the Times.

“They had embraced what seemed a cheap opportunity to come out and see this country . . . The conduct of their companions had forced the company to harsh measures, which did not add to the pleasure of the trip.”

One escapee caught at Moose Jaw was charged under the Masters and Servants Ordinance, found guilty and fined $20 or one month in jail.

The next episode involving the rail company and immigrant labourers became a national scandal that aired in the House of Commons.

On the night of April 1, 1913, residents of Boharm heard what sounded like gunfire, and saw several men jump from a slow-moving train near the first crossing west of the village.

By the following morning, the mysterious incident was common gossip and spreading fast. No one could understand why the CPR and Mounted Police pretended to know nothing about it.

A week later, the cat was out of the bag. The Moose Jaw Evening Times reported that the CPR, while transporting a large number of Eastern European immigrants to railway work camps in British Columbia, kept the men in locked rail cars under the supervision of armed guards, and neglected to feed them.

When the immigrant train reached Boharm, the labourers had had enough. They broke through a door and 17 escaped before guards opened fire.

Apparently three men were wounded but no attempt was made to pursue them.

The Moose Jaw Evening Times called the incident a “scandalous affair,” and a “brutal disregard of the law of humanity.”

“An investigation is demanded into the CPR’s methods of hiring and treating its foreign labour, and no attempts to hush up the matter should be tolerated,” fumed the newspaper.

“What right has the railway to import labourers under armed guards, to lock them up without feeding them, and then have its men fire on those who resent being treated worse than criminals?”

The railway attempted to cover up the whole nasty affair and even accused the Times of manufacturing sensationalism, but within two weeks it had become a national scandal.

The Russian consul-general in Montreal strongly protested the alleged maltreatment of the immigrants, and on the local level the Moose Jaw Trades and Labour Council appointed a committee to investigate the railway’s violations of laws.

W.E. Knowles, MP for Moose Jaw, rose in the House of Commons and armed with the labour committee’s report, accused the railway of brining in workers under contract and transporting them under armed guards, all in violation of the law, and called upon Prime Minister Robert Borden to launch an investigation.

Gradually the hubbub subsided and the incident forgotten in the passage of nearly a century, but from then on railways probably behaved better when transporting their workers.

Posted on 09:55 AM | Permalink

Canadian Press: 8 March 2008

Criticizes CN's 'culture of fear' as counter-efficient

OTTAWA — A panel reviewing Canada’s railway safety is especially critical of Canadian National Railway for its “culture of fear and discipline’’ in the railway’s safety management plan.

The panel report concluded Canada’s railways are safe but should be safer and made 50 recommendations to improve the safety record of railways across the country.

Federal Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon tabled the report — titled Stronger Ties: A Shared Commitment to Railway Safety, — in the House of Commons Friday.

He launched the review in December, 2006, following several serious rail accidents in B.C., Alberta and Quebec.

The panel report states the industry faces specific, safety-related operations issues that affect both people and equipment.

“These include fatigue management, locomotive design, locomotive event and voice recorder, rail traffic control locations, track and infrastructure, training, train dynamics and drug and alcohol programs,’’ the report states.

CN and CP operate about 74 per cent of Canada’s rail network. The report said passenger railways, VIA Rail in particular, have commendable safety cultures.

It also said Canadian Pacific Railway has made great strides in improving its safety culture.

On the other hand, the report said, CN Rail’s strict adherence to a rules-based approach focused on disciplinary actions when mistakes were made.

CN “has instilled a ‘culture of fear and discipline’ and is counter to an effective safety management system,’’ the report said. “CN needs to acknowledge this openly and take concrete steps to improve.’’

CN Rail trains wrecks were responsible for at least two of the environmental disasters that set off the safety review.

In 2005, a chemical spill from a CN train into the Cheakamus River, near Squamish, B.C., sterilized the river, killing more than half a million fish down river.

A defective rail was responsible for the August 2005 rail spill where 700,000 litres of bunker C oil and chemicals were dumped in and around the shore of Lake Wabamun near Edmonton.

“The panel makes it clear that (the statement) is an opinion, it’s not tied to a particular recommendation,’’ said CN Rail spokesman Jim Feeny in reaction to the report.

He said CN officials are going through the review and will look at all the findings, “because we share their goal of promoting rail safety.’’

Posted on 08:36 AM | Permalink

Swissinfo: March 7, 2008

The announcement by the cargo division of Swiss Federal Railways that it's cutting more than 400 jobs has triggered a wave of protests.

Angry workers at the Bellinzona depot protested against the job cuts

The cuts – which will affect depots cross the country – come after the freight operation suffered a loss of SFr190 million ($185 million) last year.

Workers at one of the four affected sites immediately went on strike and are planning demonstrations on Saturday.

The state-owned company – with a workforce of more than 4,400 –said it would relocate a further 200 jobs, mainly to the western town of Yverdon.

"Our decision is well thought out and necessary," Thierry Lalive d'Epinay, chairman of the board of the Federal Railways, said on Friday.

The aim is to cut spending by SFr70 million annually in an effort to lift the unit out of the red. The cargo division has repeatedly posted deficits and changed top management since a major reorganisation eight years ago.

The measures, proposed by a task force set up by the board of directors last year, are due to take effect next year.

The administrative headquarters of the cargo division in Basel is likely to be hardest hit, while 126 jobs will go at the locomotive repair facility in the southern town of Bellinzona.

The sites at Fribourg and Biel are also set to lose jobs.

Angry reaction

Railway cargo employees are sitting out work to protest at planned job cuts

The main railway workers union called on management to reconsider its decision and announced a series of protests.

It criticised the board of the Federal Railways for neglecting its duties and came out in support of workers in Bellinzona who have begun a strike.

Politicians from the Ticino region, including Bellinzona, are calling for talks with Transport Minister Moritz Leuenberger and for a fair solution taking account of regional interests.

Other cantonal and local authorities expressed their disappointment and urged the government to provide financial support for those affected by the latest restructuring of the cargo unit.

The federal government said the job cuts were unfortunate, but the cargo division had to act quickly to shore up its financial situation. The government spokesman said the collective labour agreement should ensure that no layoffs occur.

For its part the Road Hauliers' Association demanded a partial privatisation of the cargo division in a bid to remain competitive in the long run – a proposal rejected by Federal Railways.

Pushed by the market

Cargo boss Nicolas Perrin argued that regional interests should not influence company strategy. He said that the move was in the best interests of the company.

"Swiss Federal Railways Cargo is an business enterprise," he said. "We cannot make our decisions based on regional politics."

Market forces and international competition have put a strain on the Federal Railways over the past few years. Management had been contemplating reducing the cargo division since 2006.

Moves are also underway to make transportation by truck a less attractive alternative to rail.

A comprehensive SFr5.9 billion renovation of the country's rail network is in the works and authorities have plans to sharply increase fees for truck traffic.

Posted on 08:23 AM | Permalink

Reuters: Mar 7, 2008
Reporting by Berlin Newsroom; Editing by David Holmes

BERLIN - Rail operator Deutsche Bahn AG filed a legal complaint to prevent a strike by train drivers planned from Monday, a German court said on Friday.

The complaint would be examined on Monday from 0900 GMT, a spokesman for the labour court in the western city of Frankfurt said, adding it was not clear when a ruling would be made.

The German train drivers' union GDL has threatened strikes from next week, escalating a months-long wage dispute with Deutsche Bahn [DBN.UL].

The rail operator said taking legal action had been its last option to prevent a new strike.

"The behaviour of the GDL officials is no longer comprehensible and (is) irresponsible," Deutsche Bahn personnel chief Margret Suckale said in a statement.

Michael Sommer, head of Germany's DGB trade unions federation, also blasted the GDL in an interview with the Passauer Neue Presse on Friday.

"This is an attempt by a mini trade union to pursue its selfish interests at the expense of others," Sommer said.

The DGB has said the GDL's actions risk rupturing the sector-wide consensus on wage bargaining among German unions.

In January, Deutsche Bahn and the GDL ended months of tortuous wage negotiations and disruptive strikes with a deal that gave the union's 34,000 drivers an 8 percent pay increase from March and another 3 percent from September.

But they are still haggling over a so-called "basic wage contract," which would set out how wage deals Deutsche Bahn had agreed with other unions fitted in with the GDL accord.

Deutsche Bahn had reached separate deals with two other unions, Transnet and GDBA. It was one of the GDL's core demands that it have its own agreement.

Deutsche Bahn has said it wants to keep its employees under the aegis of a sector-wide agreement.

See also:

RAILWAY DISRUPTIONS EXPECTED MONDAY

Emergency Plan to Deal With Train Drivers Strike

Der Spiegel Online: 07 March 2008

Germany's train drivers are set to go out on strike yet again on Monday in a move that has angered many. Rail service will be severely compromised but Deutsche Bahn has drawn up an emergency plan to ensure some trains will run.

A nationwide train drivers strike on Monday will have a big impact on services.

Germany's national railway, Deutsche Bahn, is seeking a court injunction against a massive strike planned for Monday by a major train drivers' union. The court, however, will not be able to rule on the issue until 10 hours after the strike is set to begin at midnight on Sunday.

"The behavior of the GDL officials is no longer comprehensible and is irresponsible," said Deutsche Bahn personnel chief Margret Suckale.

However, the GDL train drivers' union says it will go ahead with the strike anyway. "The strikes will begin as planned," said GDL deputy Claus Weselsky. The union said it would only return to work if the Frankfurt labor court issued a "legal ruling against the strike." The last time GDL went on strike late last year, Deutsche Bahn unsuccessfully sought a court injunction to stop the walkout.

Deutsche Bahn claims the union has no reason to call a strike -- the parties agreed in principle to a wage deal on January 30, but GDL is demanding an agreement that allows its 20,000 drivers to negoatiate their salaries separately from two other unions that represent rail workers.

The stakes are high for the national railway. According to Reuters, economists estimate a 62-hour rail strike by GDL in November (more...) cost the German economy €75 million ($114 million) a day. In addition to moving passenger traffic, Deutsche Bahn is the country's most-important logistics company, moving masses of freight.

But GDL chief Manfred Schell seems ready for a fight. "We can continue our labor struggle longer than Germany can handle it," he told Hanover's Neue Presse newspaper.

Schell's general tenor has miffed many. And some heavy hitters have stepped up in support of Deutsche Bahn. In an interview with the Passauer Neue Presse on Friday, the head of Germany's DGB trade unions federation, Michael Sommer, said: "This is an attempt by a mini trade union to pursue its selfish interests at the expense of other."

Serious Disruptions to Service

Deutsche Bahn on Friday said it had drafted an emergency plan to deal with Monday's massive strike. The company said that even if the walkout by GDL goes ahead, at least half of long distance trains, in particular high-speed ICE services between major cities, will continue to operate. Intercity services were expected to be suspended almost entirely.

In western Germany regional train services will be cut by about half, but in the east only 10 per cent of trains will run. There will also be reduced services in Germany's major cities. In Hamburg the S-Bahn commuter train will run every 20 minutes, while the S-Bahn in Berlin, on some lines, will run only every hour. However, Berlin's S-Bahn ring line was expected to operate every 15 minutes.

If you are traveling in Germany, you can get English-language information on updated train schedules by calling Deutsche Bahn tollfree at 08000 99 66 33. From abroad, you can reach them at +49 1805 334444.

See also:

German strikers to idle railways indefinitely

Earth Times: 07 Mar 2008

Berlin - Germany was careering headlong Friday towards an all-out rail strike, which could bring much of its industry grinding to a halt, after a squabble among rail unions and the Deutsche Bahn rail company escalated out of control. The GDL union of train drivers said it would halt nationwide passenger, freight and suburban trains indefinitely from Monday and would remain on strike until Bahn gave in to its demand for a separate contract.

Deutsche Bahn published timetables for skeleton services to be operated by non-union drivers and asked other railways companies to provide engines to haul essential freight to German factories.

Bahn applied for a court injunction against the strike, arguing that the GDL had no legal right to close down essential services in what was essentially a demarcation dispute among unions, not a pay claim. GDL had accepted Bahn's pay offer.

But the case will not be heard till the middle of the day Monday, after the strike has begun.

Bahn's chief personnel officer, Margret Suckale, called a weekend meeting with GDL and its adversaries, the Transnet and GDBA unions. She promised intense negotiations to avert the strike.

The rail company refuses to recognize the militant GDL as sole voice of drivers and has encouraged the bigger unions not to surrender their voices in collective wage bargaining.

Ulrich Wilhelm, Chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman, criticized the fresh escalation in a dispute that has dragged on for nearly a year.

He appealed to the company, which is owned by Berlin but independently managed, and the GDL to end their dispute for the sake of other employees, rail customers and the German economy.

A spokesman for Transport Minister Wolfgang Tiefensee said, "A strike would be immensely bad for the economy, for millions of passengers. We appeal to the common sense of both parties to come to a settlement at the last minute."

Bahn said many express trains would be idle from Monday, but scheduled trips by most ICE bullet trains would run on time. Services would be sparser than during past strikes because Bahn could not exhaust non-striking workers during a dispute that might last a long time.

A separate wage strike shut down Berlin's municipal mass-transit services for a third consecutive day on day Friday.

Rolling strikes in Germany's public services were, however, put on hold until the end of this month, when public employers invoked German labour law to terminate wage negotiations with unions and put the issue to arbitrators. Strikes are illegal while that happens.

The services union Verdi had organized weeks of pinpoint strikes by nurses, refuse workers, airport workers, administrative staff and childcare professionals to press its pay demands.

Posted on 11:11 PM | Permalink

Reuters: March 7
Reporting by Sylvia Westall

BERLIN -- The German train drivers' union on Friday threatened long strikes on the railways from next week, as the country struggles with a wave of public sector strikes disrupting hospitals, kindergartens and transport.

The GDL rail union plans fresh strikes on passenger and freight services from Monday, escalating a months-long wage dispute with rail operator Deutsche Bahn and which could cost Europe's largest economy millions of euros .

"We can keep striking as long as Germany can stand it," GDL chief Manfred Schell told the Neue Presse newspaper. The union has agreed a pay rise for its 34,000 members but is unhappy with the terms of the proposed contract.

Germany has already been hit this week by two other separate wage disputes. Around 80,000 public sector workers staged token strikes to increase pressure on the government to improve wages by 8 percent.

Unions have threatened to stage more strikes if there is no agreement in the fifth round of wage talks, which started in the eastern city of Potsdam on Thursday, and continues on Friday.

A separate wage dispute in Berlin has crippled trams, buses and underground trains for a third day running.

On Wednesday, some 100,000 workers took part in walkouts, causing flight cancellations and bottlenecks in traffic.

Posted on 10:20 AM | Permalink

Press Association: 7 March 2008

Network Rail has been given a one-week deadline to improve a pay and conditions offer to 7,000 signalling and other workers or face the threat of strikes.

The move followed rejection of a two-year pay offer worth 4.8% this year and the rate of inflation plus 0.5% in 2009 by members of the Rail Maritime and Transport Union and the Transport Salaried Staffs Association.

Members of the two unions heavily rejected the proposed deal in a consultative ballot and could now move to a vote on whether to take industrial action.

The unions have said the pay offer for this year is acceptable but they are not happy with the amount of money being proposed in year two.

The unions argued that the second stage of the proposed deal would not protect workers against the rising cost of living, such as higher fuel bills and pension contributions.

Bob Crow, general secretary of the RMT, said his members rejected the offer by a margin of two to one, adding: "Their verdict is quite clear and we have today told Network Rail that unless there is an acceptable offer on the table within seven days, we will put in place arrangements for a ballot for strike action."

Manuel Cortes, assistant general secretary of the TSSA, added: "We are happy to accept 4.8% for this year but next year's offer would mean a cut in our members' living standards, with soaring power bills and higher pension contributions.

"They have demonstrated by this vote that they will not accept that situation and are now ready to vote on industrial action unless Network Rail comes back to the table with a sensible offer."

A spokesman for Network Rail said: "A very fair offer has been put on the table that includes a 4.8% pay rise in year one and inflation plus 0.5% in year two, as well as increases in other benefits and allowances.

"We feel this is a good deal for our people. However, we will continue discussions with the unions to resolve the issue as soon as possible."

Posted on 10:10 AM | Permalink

RMT: March 6 2008

Protest at Iranian Embassy from 12:30 today

MEMBERS OF transport union RMT have today joined colleagues from across Britain's trade union movement in public events to demand the release of Mansour Osanloo, the Iranian busworkers' union leader who has been imprisoned and tortured simply for being a trade unionist.

Osanloo, who leads the busworkers' union in Tehran, has been beaten and is held in Evin prison, where he is in danger of losing the sight in one eye as a result of his treatment.

As part of a world-wide action day for Osanloo, organised by the International Transport Workers' Federation, commuters were leafleted at major railways stations in London, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Bristol, Liverpool and Leeds this morning

RMT members will also join a protest scheduled to start today at 12:30 at the Iranian Embassy, at 16 Princes Gate, London SW1

RMT general secretary Bob Crow, who joined members of several unions to leaflet commuters at Kings Cross said:

"Across the world trade unionists are today demanding the release of our brother Mansour Osanloo, whose only crime is to fight for better pay for busworkers.

"Whether in Britain or Iran, trade union rights are human rights, and we would appeal to everyone to sign the petition to the Iranian authorities on the Labourstart website."

ends

Note to editors: more information about Mansour Osanloo can be found at the ITF website at http://www.freeosanloo.org/, and a petition for his release can be found at www.labourstart.org/iran

Posted on 10:14 AM | Permalink

RMT: March 6 2008

NETWORK RAIL has today been given seven days to improve its two-year pay and conditions offer to 7,000 signalling and other key operational staff or face ballots for industrial action by the two biggest rail unions.

In co-ordinated referendums that closed today members of RMT and TSSA in operational, customer services and project and engineering-support grades voted heavily to reject the offer, of 4.8 per cent this year and RPI plus 0.5 per cent in 2009.

Members of Unite have also been urged to reject the offer in a referendum yet to close.

The unions had signalled that the offer for year one would be acceptable, but that the second-year element would not protect members against the rising cost of living, with key costs, including fuel bills and pension contributions, rising far faster than the official inflation rate.

RMT general secretary Bob Crow today said: "By a margin of two to one our members have voted decisively to reject an inadequate offer that would leave them less well off.

"Their verdict is quite clear and we have today told Network Rail that unless there is an acceptable offer on the table within seven days we will put in place arrangements for a ballot for strike action."

TSSA assistant general secretary Manuel Cortes said: "We are happy to accept 4.8 per cent for this year but next year's offer would mean a cut in our members' living standards with soaring power bills and higher pension contributions,"

"They have demonstrated by this vote that they will not accept that situation and are now ready to vote on industrial action unless Network Rail comes back to the table with a sensible offer."

ends

Notes to editors: The company's current two-year offer is of an increase of 4.8 per cent from January 2008 and Retail Price Index (RPI) plus 0.5 per cent from January 2009. It has also tabled a 6.7 per cent increase in London & South East allowances from April 2009, although with nothing offered in 2008, and an increase in the travel subsidy to 50 per cent in April 2008 and 60 per cent in April 2009.

Posted on 10:11 AM | Permalink

BBC News: 4 March 2008
By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News website

The UK needs a "modal shift" from road to rail if greenhouse gas emissions from transport are to be curbed, a report concludes.

The report urges pricing of transport impacts such as air quality

The Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) says changes are needed to government policies on transport pricing, energy and town planning.

A train journey can produce about one tenth of the carbon emissions generated if the same trip is made by air.

The report's authors say substantial investment in the railways is needed.

"New developments should take account of what we can learn from the Japanese system" - Bill Banks, IMechE

"We have ambitious government targets for transport emissions, but transport emissions are static," said Cliff Perry, vice president of IMechE's Railway Division and a former head of Thameslink under British Rail.

"Eighty-five percent of transport emissions come from roads, so if we are serious about doing something, we must hit road transport."

Learning Japanese

Comparing emissions between various forms of transport is not a straightforward matter, as factors such as the efficiency of engines, the number of people on board and, for electric trains, how the electricity was generated all affect the final equation.

IMechE calculates that on average London to Paris trips, people travelling by car generate two and a half times more CO2 than those relaxing in a train, while an air passenger produces 10 times more.

Road pricing is set to spread to more areas of the UK

But achieving a substantial shift from road to rail would need a coherent policy covering issues such as how secure passengers feel, the convenience of connections, the cost of tickets, and reliability.

Emissions from electric trains are of course much lower if the electricity comes mainly from low-carbon sources.

The report's authors said Britain could learn much from countries with superb rail systems, such as Japan, where trains routinely arrive and depart on the minute, equipment failures are rare, and where many railway stations form centrepieces of cities and districts.

"Spatial planning has to be considered, and new developments should take account of what we can learn from the Japanese system," observed Bill Banks from Strathclyde University, deputy president of IMechE.

Train companies should consider offering services like wi-fi internet access throughout, and improving catering services so that rail travel becomes something to look forward to.

Top prices

The report's authors acknowledge that the price of rail tickets can be prohibitive, sometimes costing many times more than the air equivalent.

One remedy they suggest is proper pricing of all transport options to include environmental impacts.

They also suggest tickets could include references to the relative carbon output of different modes of transport.

Whatever changes are made, IMechE considers the "modal shift" will necessitate some investment in infrastructure, including new high-speed lines that can carry more trains significantly faster than the UK's existing stock.

Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

Posted on 05:34 PM | Permalink

RMT: March 5 2008

TALKS BETWEEN London Underground and the Tube’s two biggest unions over a raft of safety and staffing issues broke down today when the company said it intended to continue using agency and security staff and ‘mobile station supervisors’, despite promises otherwise.

Negotiators representing more than 7,500 TSSA and RMT station staff and drivers were astonished to hear that LUL intended to renege on its pledge to ensure that all station staff are directly employed and fully trained to LUL safety standards.

The unions are in dispute with LUL over a range of issues, including ticket-office closures, lone working and de-staffing, which add up to an attack on safety standards and the casualisation of safety critical work (details in notes below).

"After finally getting LUL to discuss these matters in the round our talks team believed that progress was being made, but today LUL told us that it was going back on its promise to stop using agency and security staff on stations," RMT general secretary Bob Crow said.

"When LUL took guards away they said there was no need to worry because there would be enough station staff to keep things safe, but the concept of mobile station supervisors drives a coach and horses through the safety regime and the rule book, and passengers should be worried.

"What happens when there's a fire, someone under a train or any one of dozens of possible emergencies and the person in charge is at the wrong station or even stuck between stations?" Bob Crow said.

"Experienced station supervisors are a cornerstone of Tube safety, because their key role is to oversee safe operation and cope with emergencies, and if you expect any individual to supervise several stations at once that becomes impossible," said TSSA senior regional organiser John Page.

"This dispute boils down to LUL wanting to put casual staff on stations in place of properly trained Tube staff," John Page said.

ends

Notes to editors: TSSA's ballot for industrial action is scheduled to close on March 11, and RMT is currently serving notice of its ballot on LUL.

Ticket office closures and cuts to opening times: LUL temporarily halted plans to close 40 ticket offices and to cut the opening times of many more after the unions' campaign campaign last year led to a public outcry. However, LUL has refused to say that the plans have been withdrawn completely.

RMT and TSSA are demanding the complete withdrawal of the plans

Staffing levels - emergency plans and guidelines: LUL has unilaterally decided to vary Section 4.2 of the Congestion Control and Emergency Plan to remove the specification of the minimum numbers of each grade of station staff that are to be on duty at any time.

RMT and TSSA are demanding the reinstatement of the original numbers of each grade of fully trained and fully familiarised station staff.

Refusal to work on grounds of safety:Under the guise of simplification LUL has changed its policy, undermining safety and breaching legislation.

RMT and TSSA are demanding the immediate re-instatement of the original policy.

Mobile supervisors: LUL wants to introduce 'mobile supervisors' responsible for several stations, and to continue to staff stations recently taken over from Silverlink only during the limited hours decided by the previous franchise holder. But what happens in an emergency when the mobile supervisor is in the wrong place - or even stuck between stations on a train?

RMT and TSSA are demanding that every station is fully staffed during traffic hours by the appropriate number of customer-service and station assistants, supervised by station supervisors in line with agreements and safety requirements.

Terminal 5 staffing: LUL wants to staff the new station with staff subcontracted from other firms but wearing LUL uniforms.

RMT and TSSA believe that this has serious safety implications and has demanded that the station is staffed by people trained and employed directly by LUL.

Use of agency staff: LUL wants to continue using agency staff on former Silverlink stations, including those used for ticketing and revenue duties

RMT and TSSA are demanding that the practice ends when the training of former Silverlink staff is completed and current contracts ends, and a guarantee that only directly employed LUL staff are used for stations and ticketing operations

Use of security staff: RMT and TSSA are demanding an agreement that security at all LUL-owned or -managed stations must be provided at all times by directly employed staff in appropriate grades, supplemented by the normal co-operation with the BTP and Metropolitan police forces.

Lone working: RMT and TSSA are demanding an agreement that there must be no rostered lone working unless undertaken from a place of safety.

Direct recruitment of station supervisors, train operators and service-control staff: LUL is now systematically denying career opportunities to experienced railway staff and recruiting externally, turning on its head an agreement that external advertising can take place if there are insufficient internal applications.

RMT and TSSA are demanding a complete review of recruitment policy to establish a policy that preserves and encourages a career path for experienced railway staff.

Posted on 03:12 PM | Permalink

BBC News: Tuesday, 4 March 2008

Rail operator First Great Western has been warned by a Govenment minister in the House of Commons that it could be stripped of its franchise if services do not improve.

FGW said it would be recruiting more drivers and guards

Speaking in the Commons, Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly urged company managers to "get a grip".

She said the firm was being put "on notice" to improve services, which had been "unacceptable for far too long".

First Great Western said it had already put in place a £29m package of improvements, which includes hiring more drivers and guards.

In a statement the company said it accepted it had not provided the service level its customers deserved.

"We have put in place a remedial plan that has been agreed with the Department for Transport, it said.

"We are already seeing improved performance and this includes our latest cancellations figures for February, which are the lowest level of cancellations for 18 months."

'Worst Great Western'

Ms Kelly said the company had recorded the highest level of passenger dissatisfaction in a survey last autumn.

North Wiltshire MP James Gray remarked how services from Paddington to the West Country and Wales used to be called "the Great Western Railway or even God's Wonderful Railway" but now it was known as "Worst Great Western".

Ms Kelly said: "I certainly agree their performance has been unacceptable for far too long."

She said a package of improvements announced last month, which is part of a remedial plan agreed between the operator and the government, included a doubling of compensation for disrupted services, new rolling stock and more cheap tickets.

'Red card coming'

Stroud's MP David Drew said he welcomed the "slap of firm government" but urged her to go even further in tackling "countless delays and cancellations".

Mr Drew said: "This yellow card is welcome but what do we now need to expect to make sure that if they don't reform themselves, there will be a red card coming in due time?"

Ms Kelly told him: "First Great Western have definitely been put on notice. Their performance has to improve. That's why we have agreed a remedial plan.

"If they breach that remedial plan it is open to me to withdraw their franchise."

See also:

GET A GRIP, MINSTER TELLS FIRST GREAT WESTERN

The Bath Chronicle: 5 March 2008

Ministers have reiterated their threat to boot an embattled train operator off the railways unless it improves its services.

Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly told the Commons this week that First Great Western bosses had to "get a grip" as she responded to anger expressed by Tory MP for North Wiltshire James Gray over the firm's poor performance.

Mr Gray highlighted "shortened trains, late trains, cancelled trains, terrible catering, terrible passenger information services and the highest price per mile of any transport system in the western world," and argued it was time to re-examine why the company had been given the franchise in the first place.

He recalled how train services from London to the west country were once known as "the Great Western Railway or even God?s Wonderful Railway" ? but now had been dubbed "Worst Great Western".

During transport questions at Westminster, Ms Kelly said the operator had recorded the highest level of passenger dissatisfaction in a survey last autumn.

"I certainly agree their performance has been unacceptable for far too long," she said.

It was revealed last week that the Government had served notices on FGW, which runs services between Bath and London, after the firm breached its service agreement by breaking the limits on cancellations, and also "misreporting" them.

The company was ordered to submit a "remedial plan" to bring back up its services to acceptable levels. Failure to deliver risked it being stripped of its franchise.

Ms Kelly said: "First Great Western have definitely been put on notice. Their performance has to improve. That's why we have agreed a remedial plan. If they breach that remedial plan it is open to me to withdraw their franchise. First Great Western have to get a grip."

As part of the turnaround plan, the firm has committed to take on more train drivers and crew, lay on extra carriages, and take other steps aimed at cutting the number of cancellations.

In addition, the train company has offered a package of passenger benefits totalling ?29 million.

After doubling passenger compensation for this year, the firm will also further improve compensation payouts from 2009 to 2010, provide an additional 500,000 cheap off-peak tickets on some of the most popular routes from April, and also install extra information systems at more stations than it had previously committed.

After the debate, Mr Gray said: "A great many of my constituents have raised with me FGW's late and cancelled trains and poor passenger information services and I know just how strongly people feel about recent fare increases, which have not brought about the corresponding improvements in services."

Reader comments

Still no sign of improvement from FGW. The 0652 from Bath to Paddington this morning had three and a half almost empty first class carriages with the standard class passengers squeezed into just three carriages. Perhaps they think if they make standard class sufficiently unbearable, their customers will pay extra for first class!
Anon, Bath

Posted on 05:46 PM | Permalink

NZPA: 3-Mar-2008
By Pam Graham

The Australian owner of rail assets that the New Zealand government wants to buy back is not talking up a sale.

If Toll Holdings is in talks about a further nationalisation of New Zealand rail assets, it did not tell its shareholders in its latest interim profit report.

The idea of the Government buying back the rail business to go with the track it has already bought back was floated late last year.

Finance Minister Michael Cullen said all options were on the table.

But in Toll's interim report the company doesn't mention selling. It talks about buying more assets in New Zealand in the freight forwarding area.

"Toll remains committed to the New Zealand rail sector," the company said.

It said the migration of freight from road to rail was a focus. The company revealed it had won a contract to cart 50,000 tonnes of lime from Auckland to Mount Maunganui, which was previously trucked.

Toll's New Zealand chief executive, David Jackson, declined to comment on whether the talks with the Government were about selling rail assets.

"We are still in discussions. They are complex," he said today.

In the interim accounts, the company said it was "continuing to work collaboratively with the Crown to develop a track access regime and infrastructure development programme, which will support the long term future of rail and enable much needed rolling stock capital expenditure to be acquired".

It said the talks were progressing slowly but it was hopeful of an outcome in the next few months.

The company has talked optimistically of a resolution of issues with the Government before but none has eventuated.

The interim accounts also reveal that Toll has exercised an option to acquire rail equipment under a GATX lease.

This is another signal that Toll is committed to rail. The lease was one of the former Tranz Rail's financial engineering feats. Tranz Rail sold 15 percent of the company's rolling stock and leased it back, getting cash up front and paying an annual rent to use its old rolling stock.

That lease was due to expire in December this year and Toll had to decide whether to leave the rolling stock with the lessor or buy it back.

It said in the interim accounts it has exercised the option to buy the rail equipment, but didn't give details.

Toll continues to talk about more acquisitions in New Zealand. It has purchased a number of trucking businesses since it bought Tranz Rail.

New Zealand was an attractive fright forwarding market from which to support customers sourcing product from Asia, the company said.

Toll New Zealand reported a 14.5 percent increase in profit on flat revenue in the six months to December 31.

Earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) rose to $26.8 million in the six months from $23.4 million last year on revenue of $383 million.

The company said cost controls and selective capital expenditure improved its EBIT margin. The company reported an EBIT margin for Australia but did not release one for New Zealand.

The company was the winner of an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority award this year for innovation in fuel efficiency in rail.

"The benefits of rail over road from a greenhouse emissions perspective is clear and consequently the company believes that rail's share of the freight task will increase accordingly."

Toll also said it was able to integrate Toll NZ with its warehouse and express freight businesses better after Toll NZ was delisted from the sharemarket and became a wholly owned subsidiary.

See also:

Editorial: Why asset sales were worthwhile

New Zealand Herald: March 11, 2008

Labour came to power eight years ago promising an end to "asset sales", recognising rightly that the sale of state services to private shareholders had been the most unpopular element of 15 years of economic reform. It was careful, though, to avoid the logical extension of that promise - a buy-back of privatised companies.

Its caution was probably not a concern for the cost alone, but perhaps also on advice that, by and large, asset sales have been good for the economy. Governments have not been very good at explaining the benefits. Proponents have preferred to defend the sales with dollar figures for the receipts and the amount of public debt retired. But the figures, in truth, were not always impressive. Some so-called assets were state liabilities and others, the retooled Telecom the prime example, were sold too cheaply in hindsight. Many assets were a venture into the unknown, based on arbitrary valuations of services that had just begun to operate on business lines as "state-owned enterprises".

The principal benefit of asset sales, as for the creation of SOEs, can be summarised in one word: transparency. Private ownership quickly reveals the pure economic value of an asset. And a strong economy needs to know the economic value of all assets using the resources available to it. The more resources consumed in activities of low value, the weaker the economy will be and the harder it becomes to sustain its jobs, taxation, social services and living standard.

Labour inherited an economy much stronger and more efficient for the corporatisation and privatisation of former state assets, many of which were by then exposed to competition and sharemarket reporting requirements. The Government has kept its word, selling nothing of public concern but not anxious to re-nationalise assets either.

It took a near-collapse of Air New Zealand to cause the Government to take an 80 per cent stake in the airline. And it repurchased the railway, though not the rolling stock, more by accident than design. Auckland public transport planners wanted the lines through the city and were preparing to pay the former owner, Tranz Rail, far too much for them.

More recently, the Government has been negotiating with the current rail operator, a subsidiary of Toll Holdings of Australia, to buy back the trains, not because it particularly wants to run a national railway but because it finds itself unable to recover the costs of maintaining the network from Toll New Zealand. Finance Minister Michael Cullen says that if the state has to subsidise a private operator he would sooner "subsidise ourselves on behalf of the people of New Zealand".

If Toll and the Treasury can agree on a price, the wheel will turn full circle: New Zealand railways will be a state-owned business again, privatisation will be said to have failed, just as it was said to have failed the national airline. But "failure" in the private sector is instructive.

Toll's inability to pay the amount it is charged for track maintenance confirms the lesson of Tranz Rail before it. Tranz Rail did not maintain the network adequately, probably because it could not - a business does not deliberately run down a profitable asset. Air New Zealand is a different case, an asset that when the crunch comes the country will not see fail or, like Auckland Airport now, pass into foreign control.

If the public now wants a railway at any cost, just as it wants a national airline, it can pay for it. But it does so now with its eyes open to the once-hidden costs on the economy. That is not failure, it is a policy working as intended. The economy is stronger and the country richer for it.

Posted on 12:33 PM | Permalink

Reading Evening Post: 4/3/2008

A welder killed on the railway line at Ruscombe Junction last April was warned at least three times of an oncoming train.

That was the finding of a Rail Accident Report into the death of Charles Stockwell, 50, who was killed on Sunday, April 29, while working with a maintenance team.

But the conclusion has been rejected by Mr Stockwell’s family who say he was always careful and followed instructions.

The report made a series of recommendations as a result of the incident, but found the immediate cause was failure of the maintenance team to move to a position of safety when warned the train was coming.

A summary of the events in the report by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch stated: “At 11.20hrs the lookout warned of an approaching train on the down mainline.

“It is likely that this was the first train on the down line after the team has moved to their new positions.

“The welder was warned of this train by touch and then informed that a train was approaching on the down main line.
“At this point, it is reported that he looked up, verbally confirmed his understanding and said he would continue working.”

It went on: “The welder continued to carry out welding on the crossing nose.

“The train 5Z71 neared the work site, in the vicinity of Milley Bridge, 314 metres away. It is believed that the driver sounded the horn and this was acknowledged by one of the team raising his arm above his head.

“‘The welder was given a repeat warning and again the welder responded by looking up, verbally confirming that the train was on the down mainline and that he would continue working.

“At this point, the lookout turned to look for any approaching trains on the up mainline (to check for a train that could potentially trap the team in their position) and as he looked back he became aware that the train was approaching them from the down mainline via the 850 points crossover.

“The train was now less that 75 metres from the team and the train covered this distance in 2.5 seconds.”

The two other workers at the scene stepped back, but “the welder was still sitting in his chair in his working position”.

The dad-of-two was struck by the train.

The conclusion of the investigators was that the immediate cause of the fatality was the fact the team did not move to a position of safety.

Contributory factors included “relationships and interactions within the team” and the driver being ‘late’ in perceiving the team had not moved clear and did not ‘repeatedly’ sound his horn.

The report also found the air ambulance helicopter called to help Mr Stockwell had landed on the line after the accident without proper authority and recommended new protocols to control its deployment on the track.

Further recommendations include identifying and recording hazards to reduce the proportion of weld repairs at points and crossovers on the line, research into the impact of peer pressure on safety decision-making and training for train drivers.

Mr Stockwell, from The Hydes, Tilehurst, had worked for the railways for two decades.

His widow Karen described him at the time of his death as “a great father and husband” who was second to none.

Posted on 10:52 AM | Permalink

Financial Times: March 3 2008
Andrew Bolger

A group of former British Rail engineers has developed a system that allows trains to bypass tracks under maintenance, potentially saving millions of pounds.

The Non-Intrusive Crossover System, being tested by Network Rail, allows trains to be switched safely to an adjacent track or to a new siding without installing a permanent connection, and without interfering with the existing track and signalling system.

Posted on 08:42 AM | Permalink

Sunderland Echo: 03 March 2008
By Tim Booler

Ambitious plans to reinstate a mothballed rail service have received a major boost from transport chiefs.

The old Leamside line

Campaigners are calling for the 21-mile long Leamside line, which closed in 1992, to be revamped and reopened to benefit freight and passenger travel around Wearside.

Network Rail has previously cold-shouldered the plans for the new Tyne-Tees railway, which would see the reopening of the disused Leamside line, at a cost of more than £65million.

But the rail infrastructure operator has now given its first indication that the scheme is not a dead duck.

It has been included in a 209-page document outlining future plans to meet growth on the East Coast Main Line (ECML), which includes more seats on more and longer trains.

It said: "The reinstatement of the former Leamside Line would require major capital expenditure, and it is very unlikely that this could be justified with network flexibility benefits alone."

However, the report recommended a study into the Ferryhill to Newcastle route, which would establish the level of benefits that could contribute to Leamside reinstatement costs.

Network Rail told the Echo that the Leamside's future would depend on if demand on the ECML doubled, as is predicted in some quarters, in the next decade.

Houghton and Washington East MP Fraser Kemp, who has spearheaded the campaign to reopen the route, said: "This is the first time Network Rail has recogni
sed the importance of the Leamside Line as something that needs further development.

"This is the biggest step forward in decades.

"Nobody doubts that there would be capital costs involved, but they would be small in terms of investment into the rail network over the next decade."

Mr Kemp said that the next step will be to get major companies behind the idea before taking it to ministers.

The Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Authority and Metro operator Nexus have commissioned a report into reopening the Leamside track, which runs through Washington, Penshaw and Durham before joining the ECML near Teesside.

The scheme already has the backing from North East politicians and transport groups.

The proposition could see stations opening in Washington North, Washington South, Penshaw, Fence Houses and Gateshead East, on a route carrying up to 2,000 passengers a day.

Posted on 08:30 AM | Permalink