News
BackThe Commission would clearly like to make the rail transport sector more appealing to private operators - whatever it takes. Hence, the Commission proposes among other in its by now Fourth Railway Package the complete opening of the domestic passenger transport sector, the institutional separation of infrastructure and railway operators, but also maintaining the standard of qualifications of personnel. Whether the legislative package will also benefit society, is probably at best playing a minor role in the Commission’s considerations.
EU Transport Commissioner Siim Kallas was beaming with joy when he presented the Fourth Railway Package this Wednesday. And those who are more familiar with the Transport Commissioner know - the broader his smile, the better for major companies and groups and the worse for society, i.e. employees, passengers and taxpayers. Only recently, Kallas attracted adverse attention with his legislative proposal on the Groundhandling Directive and his comments on Monster trucks - overlong HGVs with a length of up to 25.25 metres and a weight of up to 60 tons. The emphasis concerning these two projects was obviously only on satisfying the interests of a small number of commercial enterprises instead on concentrating on social objectives socio-political objectives.
With its now published proposal on completely opening the domestic passenger transport sector to private transport operators, the Commission continues to pursue its long established policy of “cherry picking”. International passenger transport and freight transport have already been open to private operators for a number of years. What sounds a good idea initially turns out to be a boomerang for the population. Because private operators only want to service routes that promise a good yield. However, this neoliberal strategy will cost public rail operators dearly: they are losing more and more profitable routes and are only left with loss-making ones, which they may operate without competition. It is obvious that by adopting this concept the cost of public railways can only rise. From a passenger point of view, incentive offers by private operators are beneficial in the short-term, however, it is fairly unlikely that ticket prices will stay low in the medium-term; after all, private operators are interested in making profits. And these have to be financed. What is even more disadvantageous for passengers, however, is the fact that gradually more and more secondary lines will be restricted or even closed due profit instead of supply orientation. And annoying for the society as a whole is the circumstance that it has to shoulder losses, whereas profits are filling the coffers of a small number of companies. The proposal in respect of further separating railway and infrastructure operations only complete the picture regarding the neoliberal ideas.
However, the Commission opens its social heart when the issue concerns employees being taken over by new contractors, because this should basically be an option. The qualification of employees shall also be ensured. Apart from that, the Commission proposes that railway companies, which operate Europe-wide, have to establish European works councils. However, this employment initiative is counteracted by the somewhat subliminal comment that the Westbahn in Austria would operate more cost-effective on the Salzburg-Graz route than ÖBB, as personnel costs would be 20 % lower. As a result, Westbahn could offer seven, unlike ÖBB, which can only offer three connections. Somehow this comment already sounds like an invitation to lower wages, which cannot be described as a motivation for potential newcomers taking up a job in the railway sector. In particular against the background that the railway sector will urgently need new staff in the coming years, as about 30 % of EU railway personnel is due to retire during the next 10 years.
It must be feared that it is the intention of this transport policy to push rail transport in the European Union even further into the background. This is at least what it looks like given the first three railway packages and the very road-friendly policy during the past two decades. There is still a small chance that the neoliberal approach adopted by the Commission will be corrected by the negotiations in the Council and the European Parliament. Should, however, the current course be continued, Europe’s railways could soon find themselves on the scrap heap.
Additional Information:
Fourth Railway Package of the European Commission
With its now published proposal on completely opening the domestic passenger transport sector to private transport operators, the Commission continues to pursue its long established policy of “cherry picking”. International passenger transport and freight transport have already been open to private operators for a number of years. What sounds a good idea initially turns out to be a boomerang for the population. Because private operators only want to service routes that promise a good yield. However, this neoliberal strategy will cost public rail operators dearly: they are losing more and more profitable routes and are only left with loss-making ones, which they may operate without competition. It is obvious that by adopting this concept the cost of public railways can only rise. From a passenger point of view, incentive offers by private operators are beneficial in the short-term, however, it is fairly unlikely that ticket prices will stay low in the medium-term; after all, private operators are interested in making profits. And these have to be financed. What is even more disadvantageous for passengers, however, is the fact that gradually more and more secondary lines will be restricted or even closed due profit instead of supply orientation. And annoying for the society as a whole is the circumstance that it has to shoulder losses, whereas profits are filling the coffers of a small number of companies. The proposal in respect of further separating railway and infrastructure operations only complete the picture regarding the neoliberal ideas.
However, the Commission opens its social heart when the issue concerns employees being taken over by new contractors, because this should basically be an option. The qualification of employees shall also be ensured. Apart from that, the Commission proposes that railway companies, which operate Europe-wide, have to establish European works councils. However, this employment initiative is counteracted by the somewhat subliminal comment that the Westbahn in Austria would operate more cost-effective on the Salzburg-Graz route than ÖBB, as personnel costs would be 20 % lower. As a result, Westbahn could offer seven, unlike ÖBB, which can only offer three connections. Somehow this comment already sounds like an invitation to lower wages, which cannot be described as a motivation for potential newcomers taking up a job in the railway sector. In particular against the background that the railway sector will urgently need new staff in the coming years, as about 30 % of EU railway personnel is due to retire during the next 10 years.
It must be feared that it is the intention of this transport policy to push rail transport in the European Union even further into the background. This is at least what it looks like given the first three railway packages and the very road-friendly policy during the past two decades. There is still a small chance that the neoliberal approach adopted by the Commission will be corrected by the negotiations in the Council and the European Parliament. Should, however, the current course be continued, Europe’s railways could soon find themselves on the scrap heap.
Additional Information:
Fourth Railway Package of the European Commission