Sorry if I seem to be commenting in a negative fashion, but since privatisation, there hasn't been much, if anything to celebrate regarding rail freight transport in QLD, and especially in regional areas. With ex-mining exec's in charge of Aurizon, the focus was always going to be on bulk mineral freight at the expense of all others. I have absolutely no sympathy for this smeg company, except for its long suffering workers of course.
Aurizon is also a below rail operator. Maintenance of assets including infrastructure. You need extra people to do this. To simply blame "excess" people for the shedding of intermodal freight is simplistic and quite frankly disgraceful. I'm sure you'd understand if your job was under threat.Id think that the intermodal operation is quite distinct from the below rail operation, indeed the vast majority of it would run on non Aurizon track (i.e. ARTC, QR, metro networks etc). So I'm not sure what point youre making.
Company and community.....BS.
I would refer you to Fatty's post near the top of this thread quoting the Aurizon boss part of which readsPlenty of empty slots on PN services as well. Let's not fool ourselves.
"Unfortunately, over the years we have continued to see significant financial losses in this part of the business.The reality is that in a market serviced by a number of well-established transport providers, we have been unsuccessful in establishing a significant scale and customer base to make it profitable"
So losing money and unable to win new business to try to stem the losses which ties in with things like too high a cost base (unable to offer competitive rates) and the mention of empty slots on services where the competitor seems to be running fully loaded trains.
Sounds like simple business economics to me.
Interesting to know what the reasoning behind shedding the SCT load was, whether that was losing money as well or if it was just spite or even clearing the decks for this very announcement
BG
Some feedback on the sale
https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/rail-freight-system-going-backwards
The Aurizon interstate intermodal business was a greenfields business. It had no legacy overmanning problems to contend with. Its competitor, PN, was the one with the legacy manning (albeit only as far back as National Rail). However, it is the interstate intermodal business which loses the most and is unviable to the point of not being able to sell to anyone and having to shut down. Can't blame the workers there, only the management.Sorry if I seem to be commenting in a negative fashion, but since privatisation, there hasn't been much, if anything to celebrate regarding rail freight transport in QLD, and especially in regional areas. With ex-mining exec's in charge of Aurizon, the focus was always going to be on bulk mineral freight at the expense of all others. I have absolutely no sympathy for this smeg company, except for its long suffering workers of course.
Except if those long suffering workers are part of the problem - i.e. they are being provided with jobs where the jobs are not supported by revenue....
There is a bit of AZ bashing around the boards, but I bet that PN went through a similar sort of exercise post privatisation. Getting rid of LCL (which saw SCT come to the fore) was probably one of these actions. Too many people and too much cost to make it work, easier thing is to get rid of it entirely and start again later...
Plenty of empty slots on PN services as well. Let's not fool ourselves.
The Aurizon interstate intermodal business was a greenfields business. It had no legacy overmanning problems to contend with. Its competitor, PN, was the one with the legacy manning (albeit only as far back as National Rail). However, it is the interstate intermodal business which loses the most and is unviable to the point of not being able to sell to anyone and having to shut down. Can't blame the workers there, only the management.Sorry if I seem to be commenting in a negative fashion, but since privatisation, there hasn't been much, if anything to celebrate regarding rail freight transport in QLD, and especially in regional areas. With ex-mining exec's in charge of Aurizon, the focus was always going to be on bulk mineral freight at the expense of all others. I have absolutely no sympathy for this smeg company, except for its long suffering workers of course.
Except if those long suffering workers are part of the problem - i.e. they are being provided with jobs where the jobs are not supported by revenue....
There is a bit of AZ bashing around the boards, but I bet that PN went through a similar sort of exercise post privatisation. Getting rid of LCL (which saw SCT come to the fore) was probably one of these actions. Too many people and too much cost to make it work, easier thing is to get rid of it entirely and start again later...
Come on. Don't let management off like that.
Fair point on the first, however it might have been that the same operational policies were applied to the new interstate business, lumbering it down with costs.
Im not. If it happened it wouldnt have been without management approval.
Fair point on the first, however it might have been that the same operational policies were applied to the new interstate business, lumbering it down with costs.Come on. Don't let management off like that.
It was Interrail. A separate entity which had its own enterprise agreement. Nothing to do with Queensland conditions.
Interesting to know what the reasoning behind shedding the SCT load was, whether that was losing money as well or if it was just spite or even clearing the decks for this very announcementSCT has said publicly that they withdrew their loading on the BM/MB Aurizon service because Aurizon couldn't guarantee them a long-term service contract. Now, you could infer that Aurizon management was looking at winding down their interstate intermodal service for at least a year or two based on that, but on the other hand Aurizon also managed to poach the substantial K&S Freighters intermodal contract off Pacific National earlier this year as well. I get the feeling that maybe Aurizon management was trying to hold onto the SCT loading after all, but also wanted to get a more lucrative deal out of them by using a short-term contract as a bargaining tool. I can understand that move, given that the Interstate unit was incurring those losses. Obviously it was a poor gamble in hindsight and now they're cutting their losses on the whole thing.
Oh to be an SCT shareholder right now.I'd argue that precisely because you or I can't be SCT shareholders is one of the reasons why they're still in the game. The sharemarket can be pretty ruthless - just look at Aurizon's performance yesterday on the ASX. We'll see how they fared on the day after in a couple hour's time.
Oh to be an SCT shareholder right now.I'd argue that precisely because you or I can't be SCT shareholders is one of the reasons why they're still in the game. The sharemarket can be pretty ruthless - just look at Aurizon's performance yesterday on the ASX. We'll see how they fared on the day after in a couple hour's time.
From the North West Star:
Queensland Labor Senators Anthony Chisholm and Murray Watt said that Aurizon needed to confirm its long term commitment to Queensland following the company announcement.
The announcement was concerning for workers and the broader freight network.
“The company have also indicated that they intend to hand back the Regional Freight Transport Services contract at the end of the year,” the two Senators said in a joint statement.
That last sentence probably means the end of all freight trains in Queensland apart from bulk and North Coast mainline.