Ambulance Services Privatisation

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Of course there's loads of private companies already working with the armed forces as there has been for many years.

Why not let private companies run ambulances if they can do it cheaper and more effectively (big if)

G4s were allowed into a certain police force for10 yrs to see if this worked.
It didn’t.

I used to work on a police contract and it couldn't work. The police were just impossible to work with and some of the staff were so disruptive it was impossible, officers deliberately sabotaging the contract etc, was an absolute nightmare.

[SydneyRover]

Of course there's loads of private companies already working with the armed forces as there has been for many years.

Why not let private companies run ambulances if they can do it cheaper and more effectively (big if)

Pud, is there any public information that compares the performance/cost for any operation before/after privatisation?

[Bentley Bullet]

So many untruths in here.

The best one overtime is cheaper.  I spent years working in outsourcing in a plc (and I saw good and bad through it).  Overtime was the devil for us, largely the difference between profit or loss, we spent huge amounts of time and money avoiding it.  It will never usually be effective.

Worth remembering that often those shareholders you reference are your pension scheme.

Typically, overtime costs less. It costs to find new staff, train them, pay for their benefits, and all other costs associated with recruiting new staff. Also, the workload may only be temporary.

If employees are happy to work overtime to cover the workload, and it is within the law, reducing their overtime through recruitment will cause resentment on the shop floor.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Of course there's loads of private companies already working with the armed forces as there has been for many years.

Why not let private companies run ambulances if they can do it cheaper and more effectively (big if)

Pud, is there any public information that compares the performance/cost for any operation before/after privatisation?

No idea, Google is your friend. Its unlikely that full details will come out because it's usually sensitive data.  There may be stats about how much goes back in house to public entities, probably not that much, certainly not in my areas.

So many untruths in here.

The best one overtime is cheaper.  I spent years working in outsourcing in a plc (and I saw good and bad through it).  Overtime was the devil for us, largely the difference between profit or loss, we spent huge amounts of time and money avoiding it.  It will never usually be effective.

Worth remembering that often those shareholders you reference are your pension scheme.

Typically, overtime costs less. It costs to find new staff, train them, pay for their benefits, and all other costs associated with recruiting new staff. Also, the workload may only be temporary.

If employees are happy to work overtime to cover the workload, and it is within the law, reducing their overtime through recruitment will cause resentment on the shop floor.

Short term I agree, long term you'd never do it. Every business I've worked in wants to avoid it and yes it can be an issue with the unions and workforce.  Often goes away when you remind them they'll make it back in their bonuses from achieving more profit (if you have the right structure in place).

[BillyStubbsTears]

The problem with a highly networked system like trains is that if you cut staffing to the bone and rely on overtime to fill in gaps, you're f**ked when a member of staff doesn't turn up, or arrives at node X in the network too late to run the train that's supposed to be going to nose Y. Because you've got zero spare capacity to fill in the gap. And so the problem ripples through the system, and you end up with a cluster f**k like the Transpennine service which was only running 70-80% of its scheduled service this time last year.

On the issue of private Vs public ownership in the rail system, we are the only country in the world that has our train operations broken up into loads of separate private companies.

Can I suggest that anyone who reckons that's a good way to run a system compares it with the state owned German, French, Dutch or Italian systems?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Oh yeah, and although BB neatly ignored my question when he was ranting on this topic last night, it's worth noting that one of the most efficient, punctual and cheapest per mile rail services in the country is LNER. Which was run into the ground by two private sector companies, and is now run perfectly well as a nationalised service.

[danumdon]

Oh yeah, and although BB neatly ignored my question when he was ranting on this topic last night, it's worth noting that one of the most efficient, punctual and cheapest per mile rail services in the country is LNER. Which was run into the ground by two private sector companies, and is now run perfectly well as a nationalised service.

its not an equal playing field when you compare LNER with lots of other Toc'c as the ECML has always had preferential treatment in infrastructure spending, upgrades and capex. Also as the main supplier on this route they get the pick of the plum pathing and train diagrams ahead of the open access Tocs like Grand Central, Hull trains and Lumo.

Your other point about the previous operators does stand, National Express have to be the real pariah in all this,  there operating standards were and are still disgraceful, whilst ever this current franchise system is in place they should never be allowed anywhere near a railway contract ever again.

With a change of government it would not be a bad idea to expand on the current  not for profit operating standard that LNER and others now operate under.

[SydneyRover]

''Pud, is there any public information that compares the performance/cost for any operation before/after privatisation?'''

'''No idea, Google is your friend. Its unlikely that full details will come out because it's usually sensitive data.  There may be stats about how much goes back in house to public entities, probably not that much, certainly not in my areas''

Therefore, unless you have intimate knowledge of an entity before and after a privatisation/nationalisation has occurred your position is as informed as anyone else's, no?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Oh yeah, and although BB neatly ignored my question when he was ranting on this topic last night, it's worth noting that one of the most efficient, punctual and cheapest per mile rail services in the country is LNER. Which was run into the ground by two private sector companies, and is now run perfectly well as a nationalised service.

its not an equal playing field when you compare LNER with lots of other Toc'c as the ECML has always had preferential treatment in infrastructure spending, upgrades and capex. Also as the main supplier on this route they get the pick of the plum pathing and train diagrams ahead of the open access Tocs like Grand Central, Hull trains and Lumo.

Your other point about the previous operators does stand, National Express have to be the real pariah in all this,  there operating standards were and are still disgraceful, whilst ever this current franchise system is in place they should never be allowed anywhere near a railway contract ever again.

With a change of government it would not be a bad idea to expand on the current  not for profit operating standard that LNER and others now operate under.

And yet Branson's mob went bust running that featherbedded ECML...

[roverstillidie91]

Oh yeah, and although BB neatly ignored my question when he was ranting on this topic last night, it's worth noting that one of the most efficient, punctual and cheapest per mile rail services in the country is LNER. Which was run into the ground by two private sector companies, and is now run perfectly well as a nationalised service.

It is because all I'm saying is factually correct.

It simply doesn't work and you can't expect a safe and reliable railway cutting it to the bone.

Remember the rail disasters from years ago that is what will end up happening again if the government keeps refunding it.

These franchises do end so its pretty simple to bring it back into public hands.

[tyke1962]

The railways are already nationalised it's just that the dividends paid out from profits go to shareholders and it's dressed up as private enterprise .

I say that because the government handed over £13bn to the industry last year and we all know where governments get their money from .

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

''Pud, is there any public information that compares the performance/cost for any operation before/after privatisation?'''

'''No idea, Google is your friend. Its unlikely that full details will come out because it's usually sensitive data.  There may be stats about how much goes back in house to public entities, probably not that much, certainly not in my areas''

Therefore, unless you have intimate knowledge of an entity before and after a privatisation/nationalisation has occurred your position is as informed as anyone else's, no?

Except I do, I've worked on both sides on many many different things.  You seem to think everything is public and cited. You couldn't be further from the truth.

I've worked on things with the press and many thought politics involved and sat there wishing the truth would come out, usually it doesn't.  Simply, not everything you see is out there, that's a fact.

[SydneyRover]

''Pud, is there any public information that compares the performance/cost for any operation before/after privatisation?'''

'''No idea, Google is your friend. Its unlikely that full details will come out because it's usually sensitive data.  There may be stats about how much goes back in house to public entities, probably not that much, certainly not in my areas''

Therefore, unless you have intimate knowledge of an entity before and after a privatisation/nationalisation has occurred your position is as informed as anyone else's, no?

Except I do, I've worked on both sides on many many different things.  You seem to think everything is public and cited. You couldn't be further from the truth.

I've worked on things with the press and many thought politics involved and sat there wishing the truth would come out, usually it doesn't.  Simply, not everything you see is out there, that's a fact.

Nope, not at all

[SydneyRover]

Of course there's loads of private companies already working with the armed forces as there has been for many years.

Why not let private companies run ambulances if they can do it cheaper and more effectively (big if)

G4s were allowed into a certain police force for10 yrs to see if this worked.
It didn’t.

So was China

[roverstillidie91]

So many untruths in here.

The best one overtime is cheaper.  I spent years working in outsourcing in a plc (and I saw good and bad through it).  Overtime was the devil for us, largely the difference between profit or loss, we spent huge amounts of time and money avoiding it.  It will never usually be effective.

Worth remembering that often those shareholders you reference are your pension scheme.

Typically, overtime costs less. It costs to find new staff, train them, pay for their benefits, and all other costs associated with recruiting new staff. Also, the workload may only be temporary.

If employees are happy to work overtime to cover the workload, and it is within the law, reducing their overtime through recruitment will cause resentment on the shop floor.

Depends I would say, I get your logic. However such as the railway  does rely on people's goodwill to cover shifts on overtime especially the TOC's where overtime for Sunday's is now part of the working week so they don't get any extra money. And guess what, they've decided not to do any additional Sunday's as it isn't worth it now.

Hence why you see trains cancelled all the time. Because there isn't enough staff.

Plus the monstrosity of an initiative by the government to attempt to get rid of guards and ticket offices.

[roverstillidie91]

The problem with a highly networked system like trains is that if you cut staffing to the bone and rely on overtime to fill in gaps, you're f**ked when a member of staff doesn't turn up, or arrives at node X in the network too late to run the train that's supposed to be going to nose Y. Because you've got zero spare capacity to fill in the gap. And so the problem ripples through the system, and you end up with a cluster f**k like the Transpennine service which was only running 70-80% of its scheduled service this time last year.

On the issue of private Vs public ownership in the rail system, we are the only country in the world that has our train operations broken up into loads of separate private companies.

Can I suggest that anyone who reckons that's a good way to run a system compares it with the state owned German, French, Dutch or Italian systems?

Put in railway privatization I believe there is a documentary which appears top of the search and many others which clearly shows privitzation has been a failure.

Or look up weownit.org online or on social media which gives you the facts.

All sold as a lie by the Tories and who ever else has done the same. It is clear to see what is happening with our NHS the impact of things when you defund and tender it out to the private sector.

Private companies are here to make profit, not give a good service.

[roverstillidie91]

So many untruths in here.

The best one overtime is cheaper.  I spent years working in outsourcing in a plc (and I saw good and bad through it).  Overtime was the devil for us, largely the difference between profit or loss, we spent huge amounts of time and money avoiding it.  It will never usually be effective.

Worth remembering that often those shareholders you reference are your pension scheme.

It is cheaper to pay overtime, especially on the Railway. If you have a member of staff earning lets say £2000 a month and you have 4 staff. Both work a paid days overtime 1 shift per month and is £250 a shift. That's £1,000 a month and throughout these companies that's a significant saving.

Shareholders I am refering to are in relation to who runs the TOC's not to do with pension schemes, it is the same for Water privitization where the infrastructure has been neglected for years and now we are supposed to have higher bills to pay for it.

Private companies do not pay for the maintenance and upgrade of infrastructure. It is Us sadly.