I found the coverage of Via Rail's recent announcement of non-stop service between Montreal and Toronto quite interesting, but not in the way you might think. In case you don't know, Via Rail was planning to make four trains between the two cities non-stop, which would mean no service for Dorval, Cornwall, Brockville, Kingston, Belleville and Cobourg, to name the more important stops in Eastern Ontario and west of Montreal in Quebec. The trains chosen for this pilot were Trains 60, 61, 68 and 69.
What went missing in the coverage was that Train 50 from Toronto to Ottawa would skip stops in Belleville and Kingston, as a near non-stop train. There was no word on what the status of this train was, from the coverage I read.
As you can telling from my wording, Via Rail has decided to halt the pilot project, which was due to start on Sept. 29. The railway cited operational constraints from CN, its landlord on most of the rails between the two cities. This comes just days after Via made its announcement seemingly out of the blue.
As always, there are two sides to this story. Via Rail claims that this new service would allow travellers to arrive 30 to 40 minutes sooner. The railway says it chose the trains for this pilot project based on the lowest ridership counts at the smaller stations between the cities. In other words, the trains with the lowest demand in Kingston, Cornwall and Brockville for example, were chosen for the non-stop service.
I find it interesting that Via Rail was going to try this experiment now, as it has taken a beating publicly for its abysmal on-time performance in recent years, which is a function of the speed restrictions CN has placed on Via's Venture train sets. For more detailed information on this ongoing saga, head on over to Trackside Treasure. No one has done a better job of explaining this story than Eric Gagnon.
I guess my point is, Venture trains have been consistently late for years now, so I wonder what difference 30-40 minutes will make given the restrictions Via Rail faces on CN-owned tracks? Also, is 30-40 minutes enough of a time savings to justify this service? If the train arrives in 3 1/2 hours as opposed to 4, I can't say that would be enough to sway me if I was on the fence about taking the train. It still does not compare to a flight, which still gets you to your destination faster, even after you factor in the security, screening, pre-boarding, baggage claim etc.
The mayor of Kingston Bryan Patterson raised some interesting points, to support the case for continued full service for his city. He said Via Rail didn't consult any of the communities along the line to give them a warning that these service cuts would be happening. And make no mistake, although Via Rail maintains that these communities would all still be well served by the remaining intercity trains that call on these stations, the coverage was overwhelmingly negative. Service cuts by any other name are cuts, in the eyes of civic leaders.
The local media was unequivocal in describing the move as cuts and you can't blame leaders in smaller communities and cities to say anything otherwise. Via Rail making a decision like this with no consultation to the cities it serves is poor communications.
Patterson also pointed out that Via Rail is also turning its back on the 1 million people who live between Toronto and Montreal, many of whom count on these trains. I would think at the very least, Kingston's stops would be left untouched, as Kingston has a high student population at university or college. As we all know, students have always made up a large chunk of Via's fares in the corridor. I took the train many times in my university years.
The mayor also pointed out that taking away more options from these towns and cities means Via Rail will attract fewer customers. It's a fair point.
As someone who has worked in communications for 25 years, I don't agree with the hasty approach here. Had I been in the room, I would have suggested that Via Rail perhaps choose one train pair (60 and 61, for example) and give itself 6 months to a year to prepare a proper promotional campaign outlining this service. Also, it would give the railway time to speak to the leaders of the communities who would be missing out on future service.
The rollout of this announcement was hastily planned out; the response was not at all what the railway was likely expecting. In theory, non-stop service between major cities makes sense and provides Via with a compelling product for customers. But the way this was handled was unfortunate from a communications point of view. When customer already booked on these non-stop train pairs were being forced to transfer their spots onto the next available train, it's a bad look.
It also doesn't necessarily engender trust in this railway at a time when Via Rail's reputation is already in tatters thanks to the Venture set debacle with CN. The railway has already endured a lot of wounds since the Venture fleet was brought into service.
But its communications strategy is producing unnecessary self-inflicted wounds. It makes me wonder how a company comes back from what Via Rail has been through in the last several years.
This leaves me with one last thought. Many of these smaller communities in the corridor are very quick to complain when the prospect of Via Rail service cuts are floated. However, just how strong is the customer demand in some of these communities? I'm sure Via Rail took a hard look at its numbers and reassured itself that losing a few extra customers on these non-stop trains would be balanced out by the increased demand from travellers in Montreal and Toronto who might be more keen to take a faster train.
That is the logic, although as an infrequent train traveller, I have my doubts that there would be a substantial benefit from such a small reduction in travel time.
But just how soft are the numbers? If I was a politician in one of these affected towns, I'd be very careful about being too vociferous in my complaints. I'm sure Via's attitude is use it or lose it. We've already seen many smaller towns in the corridor who have lost Via service in past years due to lack of customer demand.
Then there's the issue of the investments that have been made in the new train stations in Belleville and other towns in the corridor. When you strip away this much service, what becomes of these stations? I have already seen many examples of Via Rail stations that have essentially become white elephants in many towns across Ontario. They are far too big relative to their use. Many have been repurposed for other uses, like the stations in Stratford, St. Marys and Smiths Falls.
I suppose the point of all this is Via Rail, once it emerges from the Venture set fiasco with CN, needs to reflect on what kind of passenger railway it wants to be. This past week's circus leaves it unclear to me what that answer is.
No comments:
Post a Comment