Rail disruption is often viewed as the thorn in the side for customers and the industry, inflicting inconvenience with no short-term gain. Where it is planned engineering works, customers reap the longer-term benefits in terms of infrastructure upgrades or better reliability, but this 'promise of tomorrow' is of little compensation to those who arrive at their station expecting a train and seeing the dreaded words 'rail replacement' instead. However, the way disruption is managed has a lasting influence on whether customers continue to see rail as a dependable system.
When rail services are replaced by buses, coaches or taxis, the railway temporarily operates under a different set of operational arrangements. Routes change, boarding arrangements vary, and service tracking can become unclear, while responsibility for the journey feels opaque. Coordination can falter, staff visibility reduces and drivers may be unfamiliar with routes. In these moments, the passenger-facing seams of the railway are exposed. What should feel managed and controlled can instead feel improvised, leaving customers uncertain about who is in charge and whether the system is truly working for them.
A new independent study from Great British Rail Replacement (GBRR), part of CMAC Group, indicates that disruption involving rail replacement services creates uncertainty and weakens trust. Inconsistent information, variable delivery and reduced staff visibility contribute to a perception of diminished control.
An inconsistent customer experience
The national study, based on responses from more than 1,500 rail users and non-users, found that 92% believe disruption management has either remained the same or deteriorated over the past year.
Rail replacement introduces non-standard operating conditions. Temporary pick-up points are often selected at short notice, information is delivered through multiple channels and staff roles can differ depending on provider and location. When these elements vary widely, customers encounter a system that can be unpredictable and incapable of dealing with deviations from operational practices and an absence of ownership. This erodes the sense of control and assurance that passengers expect, particularly when travelling alone or at off-peak times.
If disruption is managed frequently badly, longer-term travel behaviour is affected – customers see the dreaded words 'rail replacement' and they choose not to travel. They find alternatives – the car, bus, taxi or just staying at home and even when a full rail service is running, their habits have changed and a train journey is no longer on the agenda. Rail faces the same reality. As the industry works to reduce costs and improve financial sustainability, it cannot afford revenue loss driven by declining customer confidence during disruption.
Why consistency matters
Indeed, CMAC's research suggests that during disruption, many customers reduce travel frequency or choose alternative modes as a response to uncertainty, while some choose not to travel at all. These responses are not always limited to a single journey, with repeated disruption influencing longer-term travel habits, loyalty to rail and decisions to switch permanently to other modes. Some customers don't come back.
All this matters because disruption is not going away, if anything, disruption could become an even bigger sore. Official Office of Rail and Road data underlines the scale involved. In Q3 2025, 1.9m trains were planned across the network, with more than 94,000 full or part cancellations, representing a significant volume of disrupted journeys requiring effective management. Disruption and rail replacement is part and parcel of the railway, not just an infrequent, irritant that can be ignored.
Treating replacement services as a secondary issue is self-defeating. Each time disruption is managed differently, customers expectations are reset and brand confidence is weakened. Over time, this undermines confidence in the network's ability to provide continuity and certainty, even when disruption is unavoidable.
A related issue is the tendency to treat individual disruption touchpoints separately rather than as components of a single end-to-end journey. Information provision, signage, staff visibility, accessibility arrangements and vehicle standards are often managed within different operational silos. From a customer perspective, however, these elements form one continuous experience. Without integration across these layers, variability persists. A more holistic and systematic approach is required if disruption management is to deliver sustained improvement rather than incremental change.
Research shows that customers want simplicity during disruption. They value clear routes, visible and knowledgeable staff, consistent information and confidence that services will operate to a known standard, supported by clear leadership overseeing the end-to-end experience. Disruption often occurs during evenings and weekends, when that leadership can feel less visible.
The case for national standards
As the implementation of Great British Railways progresses, rail replacement presents a practical and long overdue opportunity to address this challenge, once and for all.
A unified structure creates the conditions for consistent national standards covering staff training and capability, information delivery, staff visibility, accessibility and branding. These standards would reduce variability across regions and operators, making disruption easier for customers to understand and navigate.
Public expectations of renationalisation remain cautious and customers are unconvinced. Only 36% of customers believe it will improve rail replacement services, while 42% are unsure. That uncertainty reinforces the importance of visible improvements that passengers can experience directly.
National standards, even before Great British Railways is fully implemented, would support operators and delivery partners by shifting rail replacement from a reactive task to an integrated part of service delivery. They should formalise planning, review and collaboration across all parties, with the shared goal of driving a seamless customer experience and protecting the strength of the brand during disruption. Too often, there's a defeatist sense that the experience and brand should fall apart the moment that rail replacement is place!
Confidence as a long-term outcome
Disruption will always be part of the railway. The question is not whether disruption can be avoided, but whether it is managed in a way that maintains confidence in the system as a whole.
By treating rail replacement as a permanent, 'business as usual' operational layer, and by using the transition to Great British Railways to implement national standards, the industry has an opportunity to strengthen confidence and ensure rail remains a trusted choice, even when services do not run exactly as planned. But this will only happen if rail replacement is much higher up the agenda and not seen as peripheral and the accountability of no one.
