I still don't, at heart, get it 😡

[jon@gruene.social]

I still don't, at heart, get it

Why is the European Commission picking such a big fight with state owned railway companies in #PassengerPackage, in order to defend a slogan driven policy?

The Commission could get a better outcome and less opposition with one change: ticketS not ticket.

[ffeth@hostux.social]

@jon now I'd like to know what a reasonable connection time is, and how the ratp would be responsible or not if the compulsory connection in Châtelet between Sens and Troyes is late.

[jon@gruene.social]

@ffeth Because - currently - everything RER is just basically ignored in the calculations. SNCF, legally and operationally, thinks of Paris terminals as like Nord and Est where you can walk between them, and that time is known. So the public transport total is known from, say, Nord to Montparnasse. But there is no liability on Ile de France Mobilités if they don't get you there on time.

[jon@gruene.social]

I suppose in the end I am the weird one regarding #PassengerPackage

I want a workable outcome, that works for occasional passengers, and regular passengers, and does not overly burden railway companies. And have done enough thinking to know what that outcome is

Pretty much no one else is is approaching the conundrum this way

[henkvandereijk@mastodon.green]

@jon Could this be part of an 'it will be watered down anyway'-strategy? If they can push railway companies to unity (1 ticket), it's a win, if they can't, your option may be the next best thing?

[jon@gruene.social]

@HenkvanderEijk Maybe. But I am not sure whether anyone in the Commission has really thought all of those parts through in quite that way. They most definitely have not thought of regular passengers *at all*.