First has made a structural management change. What, another? It comes with the territory when you get a new big boss: it’s expected. But this one’s different. Beforehand, restructures appeared to come with every timetable change, as if those at the very top of First couldn’t quite sit still. This did little to foster good morale among managers & directors. It seemed to heighten institutional paranoia. Now, Giles Fearnley’s in charge and he’s had a chance to reflect upon First UK Bus, it’s business and its priorities. Hence, a business-focused change that everyone feels may be longer-lasting.
A year ago, when both Dave Kaye & Nicola Shaw left First, then managing director UK Bus & Rail Mary Grant reacted (over-reacted?) swiftly by inserting “regions” with their own over-arching regional MDs, above local company boards. The First regions were and are:
- South West & Wales
- Midlands & East Anglia
- North
- London
- Scotland
What’s interesting is that no two English regional boards are the same. Is this an example of First recognising that different parts of its bus business need different solutions? Or, given that ultimately the end game everywhere is revenue & profit growth, is this just a short-sighted muddle where one size really would have fitted all?
Take South West & Wales as an example. There’s the same Bristol-based regional MD. New posts are two service delivery directors, one for Bristol, Somerset, south Gloucestershire & south Wales; and the other for Hampshire, Dorset, Devon & Cornwall. Their remit is, well, service delivery. To you and I this means “Operations”… or dare I call it “Traffic”?
Actually, it’s not quite “Traffic” because the commercial side for the whole region—from Premroke to Penzance to Portsmouth—is now in the hands of just one person, former Hampshire, Dorset, Devon & Cornwall man Marc Reddy. His patch is huge and varies from the Cornish graveyard to the buoyancy of Bristol. With him is the Swansea Metro, the Fareham-Gosport BRT, most of Greyhound and the Greater Bristol Bus Network. Not to mention smartcards. But most importantly, there’s the little matter of First’s branding.
But will it work? What became of the “local is better” mantra that initially came with Giles Fearnley’s tenure? Since each region operates as a whole, with regional engineering and finance directorships, how can this dove-tail into the promise of more local control for managers? Or has Fearnley et al managed to accomplish the aspiration of merging both? I guess only time will tell.
But for those who might’ve expected smaller operating companies with local MDs concentrating on developing their own markets and improving stakeholder management, perhaps a little like Go Ahead, there will be some disappointment. After all, some see this as a particularly First weakness. On the other hand, a formal regional approach will make the sharing of good practice and good ideas that much easier. You chose.
The final bit of news is that Reddy not only covers Premroke to Penzance to Portsmouth, he gets Portadown as well (sort of). His commercial sphere of activity also covers the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. A little bit of a homecoming for a Bournemouth lad!

29 comments:
Where, pray tell, is "Premroke"?
Somewhere near Hilford Maven, perhaps? :)
Surely Penfro and Aberdaugleddau?
Boyo?
Interesting speculations.Thats all.What is Mr Fearnley saying?Has anybody asked?How about a comment from Marc Reddy?My opinion is that first will concentrate on rail rather than bus and buses will be concentrated in the larger conurbation only.eg bristol etc
I thought it was Mark Reddy who wrote this column? (-:
I thought it was Mark Reddy who wrote this column?
No, not Mark, no-one from First Group I dont think.
My money is on ChrisHarris from Wilts marketing as your colummnist!
But soemone else will have to say whether we are right or wrong or not.
I've no idea who Busing is, but I would suggest it not the best idea to try to "uncover" him because I imagine it would almost certainly lead to the end of Omnibuses.
More to the point though...will the new style First work ?
Spot on Neil (12:36)
It would certainly be counter productive to publicly identify our worthy blogger.
hi pete.the smoke screen is working
Does anyone have any thoughts on the subject matter?
"Does anyone have any thoughts on the subject matter?"
Yes! I think it will be interesting to see the outcome of such a divergence in management structures, and one has to presume that Giles Fearnley knows what he is about given his long experience in the game, both bus and rail. Like others have said, I too might have expected a a degree of local identity development from Giles, but perhaps that's me being nostalgic rather than hard-nosed and commercial.
Two questions.
Presumably the local company boards (eg FHD, FDC, FSA) will continue to exist. these are legal entity companies so presumably boards will have to meet for Companies Act purposes.
How does Mark Reddy's remit (Commercial) differ from Operations (or Service Delivery or whatever it is called this week). Who develops new routes, deals with LAs Etc.
Marc will need his Reddy Brek if he is to get around the 16 English local authorities (Counties and Unitaries) in his patch, the 12 or so Welsh ones (I'm not sure how far up the valleys he wants to explore), plus the unknown number in the island of Ireland (North and South).
Best of luck! And then there's the small matter of running the bus service!
If the legal entities remain then they have to continue to trade as seperate companies and have seperate boards & seperate sets of accounts so the article as written makes no real sense unless the company stucture is going to be revised.
It may be another matter as to whether the operating licences remain under the name of a non trading company. That probably does not come under company law so would depend on the traffic commsioners view. They certainly though could not use a non trading company as the legal identity
"we believe legal entities of the former operating companies will remain, e.g. First Cymru Buses Ltd, and would be required for operator licencing."
I'm sure there is no reason why First South Wales and West Buses Ltd (or whatever it is called) could not have an operator license and register services in just the same way as the 'former operating companies', so I don't think it necessarily follows that the old companies need to be retained. However, this would entail a lot of administrative work, in that the regional companies would have to obtain the relevant licenses, and the old ones would need to be surrendered - to no particular benefit.
First could of course retain the former operating companies, and place the same people on their boards as the regional companies. The boards could then meet for the formal occasions, as required by law, for each of the companies in succession. They would also have to prepare separate sets of accounts for each company, but the accounting system is presumably already set up to handle multiple subsidiary companies, so would probably not incur a great deal of extra cost.
There may be some taxation implications, depending on whether the former operating companies continue to trade, and that no doubt will have some influence on the final decision.
The legal entities of the local Operating Companies will remain for various reasons, including for operating licencing, but the business will be run from a regional perspective with one regional board.
To answer the question re Commercial vs Service Delivery - Service Delivery is product delivery, ie getting buses on the road and Commercial is product design and development, ie route development, network, pricing, stakeholder relations, marketing etc
Hope the above answers some of the questions.
Marc
Thanks for answering the questions; much appreciated.
Good luck in the new role, which sounds very interesting.
Marc Morgan Huws is Busing, surely???
They cannot do that. If the LEGAL ENTITIES remain and they trade as that company it is a totally diferent company and cannot be run REGIONALY. A legally registered company has its own companany number, own board & own P&L and is run by its own directors. It can be a wholly owbned subsiderry of the holding company or it could be a wholly owned subsiderry of say the regional company but it is still a totally seperate company.
Perhaps what they are going to do is to just have a REGIONAL COMANANY that they will registered at companies house and the existing companies would cease. They could still probably use the existing company names as a TRADING name. They could still have local management and they could still call them Directors although they would not be company directors & would not have the powers of a company director and would not sit on the board
@Anon 2310
"Marc Morgan Huws is Busing, surely???"
He must have interviewed himself then (-:
http://omnibuses.blogspot.com/2009/12/omnibuses-meets-marc-morgan-huws.html
Although it's intriguing to speculate on who Mr Busing is in real life,I don't think that it's helpful to the continued existence of this forum.
As the 'possibles' become whittled down, the remaining identity will inevitably become known (Ryan Giggs anyone?). And if his employer is forced into a corner, it could result in the closure of Omnibuses. And where would we all be then?
The poorer, without an informed insight into what's going on in the industry that we love.
I suggest that it's best that we keep our suspicions to ourselves, without putting names in print.
I'm Busing and so is my wife.
I'm Spartacus!
"They cannot do that. If the LEGAL ENTITIES remain and they trade as that company it is a totally diferent company and cannot be run REGIONALY."
You're missing the point, you can be a director of more than one legal entity therefore presumably the regional board serves as directors on all the companies concerned and separate minutes, p&l's are filed to meet the legal requirements.
GoAhead have been doing it for years with their Go South Coast consortium of companies - last count 7 individual companies?
Busing is Giles Fearnley and I claim my five pounds.
@realitycheck
So naive.
Quote"You're missing the point, you can be a director of more than one legal entity therefore presumably the regional board serves as directors on all the companies concerned and separate minutes, p&l's are filed to meet the legal requirements."
No I am not missing the point at all but I think you are. What is the point of a Regional Company if it is not doing anything?
If the existing companies are retained each will have its own board & P&L and be responsible for it's operation which leaves it pretty pointless having a regional company which will also have to have its own board & own p&L and file its own accounts. It makes no sense
The only logical approach is you have a Regional Company with its Board & accounts. The orginal local companies then cease to exist but they continue to operate under the old company names minus the Ltd or PLC depending on what they used. They can still have their own local management and directors(but not company directors) THey would in effect operate as cost centres of the Regional company.
Anonymous said...
"The only logical approach is you have a Regional Company with its Board & accounts."
That is one logical approach, but certainly not the only one. First Group can decide for themselves how the various responsibilities are distributed, and which ones are handled locally, and which ones regionally. There is no set formula, and Marc Reddy has already explained in his comment of 10 June that First have divided the responsibilities to the various levels.
Businesses determine these matters to suit their requirements, and, as we can see, re-arrange them every so often. Some business management consultants consider that it is a good idea to reorganise every few years to keep the staff on their toes, but I'm not sure I agree with that!
Post a Comment