Fishburn Hedges

14.07.2009

Fishburn Hedges director, Paul Sweetman, discusses the implications for staff on the East Coast Main Line following the announcement that it will be taken over by the Department for Transport.

Life in the rail industry is never dull. The announcement that the Department for Transport will be taking over the East Coast Main Line franchise is the latest chapter in the complex history of our privatised railways. But amidst the angst over implications for the industry and the potential cost to taxpayers, one factor has been largely overlooked – what’s the impact on the people who work there?

Imagine yourself as a front-line employee working on the East Coast Main Line. When the government takes over (probably in the Autumn), it will become your third employer in the last few years. This will rise to four if the franchise is then re-let to another operator, with each change bringing new expectations, values and required behaviours. Given this background, it’s likely that employees will view these latest developments with a mixture of trepidation, anger and diffidence. You can hardly imagine employees redoubling their efforts or increasing their commitment to the cause.

This creates a problem for the government. When it begins its role, it will need to give customers, stakeholders - and potential franchisees - a sense of stability and 'business as usual'. It will want to gain plaudits for its own role in running services, but it will also want to showcase the operation's commercial value to attract potential bidders.

Mere words from ‘on high’ will not create this impression; it will have to rely on front-line employees to build a strong reputation through performance, efficiency and high-quality customer service. In any case like this, employees are the reference point for customers and how they behave with those customers shapes perceptions of the organisation and its services. Yet these people are the most likely to be turned off by these latest shenanigans, with real risks to their engagement and commitment to the business.

It won’t be easy to address this. After all, DfT’s involvement will be temporary and it will be tendering for new franchisees soon after it takes over. This means that the people it asks to run the operation - even if they’re drawn from existing management - will only ever be seen as a ‘stop gap’, keeping the seat warm for a successful bidder. This will add to the uncertainty and enhance the risk of a tail-off in employee performance.

The key to progress will lie in early preparation. DfT must ensure that the ‘human factor’ is a fundamental element in discussions with the existing franchise holder and that it builds a clear and practical plan for engaging, equipping and supporting the staff on whom it will need to rely.

This means understanding the current environment, recognising employee concerns and harnessing the existing infrastructure to build clear, proactive and consistent communication with employees. It can’t pretend to have all the answers, but the government can make a firm connection with its new staff and assure them that they will be kept informed and involved on developments that might affect them.

Lord Adonis and his team will then need to carry through their commitment to employees as they operate the franchise. They will need to use all available channels to keep employees in touch and to give them whatever information it can on the re-tendering process and timescales.

Employees will expect to hear news first-hand, and to have the chance to raise questions/concerns; the government will have to meet these expectations if it is to circumvent the grapevine and help employees keep focused on ‘business as usual’.