I've been reading recently about the problems on Southern Railways where, if I understand it correctly, the company plans to cut out conductors and run trains with only a driver. However the company protest that safety will not be effected, I can't help wondering what happens when someone falls ill, when a fight breaks out or when someone starts to threaten other passengers.
I'm not a regular commuter but this week I had the horrendous experience of travelling during the rush when there were problems on the line. Some trains delayed by more than an hour. Other trains kept at stop for long periods between stations. Commuters crammed in like sardines.
At one point a man shouted 'I don't know why you lot put up with this all the time' to which others replied 'We don't have any choice' and 'What can we do?'
Is the problem really as simple as I see it? A private company with a monopoly and with its eye on maximising profits will always sacrifice the comfort of travellers if it means it makes a bigger profit. Trains held up or cancelled because of a damaged track is caused by cuts in the maintenance budget; trains cancelled because of shortage of staff is caused because of cuts to staffing.
Repayment of fares for delays is short change compared with the massive savings made by cuts in the company's outgoings, so passenger inconvenience and distress is of little concern.
Market forces might work when there is competition, but train companies have a free hand when passengers have no choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Good to have your feedback. Thanks for commenting.