Jump to content
 

Rail staff - having a bad day? Stop and think.


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Much ado about nothing from both sides.

 

IMHO I would just move on. Life is too short.

This was posted on the first page of this topic.  It is now page three so what has been said or settled other than what was written on page one?  The concern of the parent is understandable and deserves consideration but surely this might thought to be over doing it.

     Brian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Report it . Everyone can have off days but there is no need for that type of behaviour. Bottom line is he failed to do his job in a professional manner on that day. Who is to say he didn’t do something else on the next trip, next day etc etc .  

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a long time since I was a booking clerk, but it was common then for people who looked adult to ask for child tickets, and I doubt if it is any different now - In fact, with so many tickets issued by machine, it may be more prevalent than ever. However this particular Guard's behaviour was over the top. Whether an official complaint is made is up to Pete 75C, but the incident did clearly greatly upset his daughter (and, while I am not doubting what happened, the Guard should be able to give their side of the story). 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a point of information, the byelaw states "Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person" .  So who decides whether the guards suspicion was reasonable and what criteria are used in coming to that conclusion?  What if some easy questions could ally those suspicions, it is still reasonable to have them?

Edited by eastglosmog
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, eastglosmog said:

As a point of information, the byelaw states "Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person" .  So who decides whether the guards suspicion was reasonable and what criteria are used in coming to that conclusion?  What if some easy questions could ally those suspicions, it is still reasonable to have them?

 

But he should have explained that in a professional manner and not made that announcement at the end of the journey .  Faced with this lack of explanation I think Peters daughter did very well in standing up to the intimidation, especially as she was no doubt experiencing discomfort. Hopefully the dentist sorted it . I’d complain and move on , but I think the ticket collectors employers need to know how he deals with these situations , so he can receive the requisite training course

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, didn't make my point clear.  Up thread it has been stated that you have to give your name and address if a guard asks for it if he doubts the validity of your ticket.  I was wondering whether in fact he has that authority if his suspicions are not reasonable or (more importantly) who decides whether those suspicions are reasonable.  I am making no judgment on the rights and wrongs of this case as I was not there and do not know what was or was not said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say it’s a bit like a supermarket letting you buy a four pack of beers from the self service checkout* and then asking you for proof of age when you’ve drunk three of them...

*yeah I know you can’t do it without a member of staff checking you manually, which is kinda my point

( I also know that selling alcohol to minors is illegal but selling child tickets to adults isn’t)

Edited by Talltim
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Pity the employee didn't politely say why.

 

Pity she didn't just comply with the employee's instruction then there would have been less upset all round.  

 

Give in to bullies eh?  That always makes the world a better place.

 

Darius

  • Agree 5
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pete 75C said:

OK. This is a bit of a moan, so feel free to ignore, but I am curious to find out what others think.

Before any current or former rail staff make any assumptions, consider this. Anyone that knows me will know that I spent a sizeable portion of my adult life working as a driver for BR, then Network SouthEast and finally Connex, so I do understand that it's perfectly possible, nay highly likely, to get out of bed and have the mother of bad days.

The incident:

Last week, my daughter (then 15, since turned 16) had to take a half day off school in Sheringham to attend an Orthodontist appointment in nearby Cromer. She's recently had a brace removed and now uses a retainer. Something wasn't right, and she was in considerable pain, so a last-minute appointment was sought. Circumstances dictated that I couldn't drive her, so unfortunately she had to go on her own. "I'm nearly 16, Dad, don't fuss. I'll be fine".

Arriving at Sheringham station, she purchased a child off peak return from the ticket machine which was actually working for a change.

Sheringham - Cromer, not an issue, but on the return journey the Conductor checked her ticket, and handed her a form insisting she filled in her name and address. No explanation. He then walked off. Unsure why she was being asked to do this, my daughter did nothing. He returned a couple of minutes later and my daughter asked what the problem was. He gruffly explained that as it was a school day and the train she was using was within school hours, he didn't believe she was under 16 and he believed her to be travelling as an adult with a child's ticket.

Unfortunately, my daughter had nothing with her to prove her age. She did, however, explain the reason for her journey.

Said conductor was having none of it and insisted rudely that she just "fill out the damn form". Nice.

Being in some pain, and knowing that she was guilty of nothing, my daughter came over all stubborn and refused.

Conductor snatched the pad out of her hand and then walked off ready to open the doors at Sheringham, swearing under his breath. Again, nice.

The final insult was the conductor's tannoy announcement on arrival at Sheringham along the lines of "I'd like to thank all but one of you for travelling with us today".

Was there really any need for that?

At the moment, part of me thinks to brush it off. Yeah - maybe he was having a bad day.

The greater part of me wants to make a complaint, knowing the date and time of the train, so the conductor can be traced and maybe someone can have a word in his shell-like.

What do you think? Leave it alone or complain just to let Greater Anglia know how upset my daughter was and how bl00dy annoyed I was when she told me what had happened?

 

I note that some people have mentioned GDPR regulations earlier in the thread. Having done a bit of training on this, I can say that you must:

 

- Tell the data subject (the person about whom information is to be kept) what the data is to be used for (not done, as the guard didn’t initially explain why the form needed to be filled in or what it would be used for).

 

- Tell the data subject how long the data will be kept for (same problem as above really).

 

- Allow them access to information kept on them (not sure if this is hugely relevant in this case).

 

I assume such rules would be slightly different in police/legal matters, but this isn’t really that sort of situation. I’m sure there’s a fourth key point that I’ve forgotten but I think those are the main ones. It’s probably something about not breaching confidentiality. The announcement would be on the verge of breaking this, as well as just being a bit petty and pathetic really.

 

I find some of these GDPR rules a bit complex and unnecessarily prescriptive but situations like this are probably why we need them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The announcement did nothing whatsoever to breach GDPR, absolutely not even close. There was no personal identifiable information in it at all. It’s entirely possible 3 different people thought it was about them frankly (I imagine not, but it’s possible).

 

I swear GDPR is going to be the new “can’t do that mate, health and safety”.

 

This is also not what GDPR is for, at all. This appears to be a chap doing his job in an unnecessarily brusque and overbearing fashion. It’s not a data protection issue. 

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I find some of these GDPR rules a bit complex and unnecessarily prescriptive but situations like this are probably why we need them.

 

It is really weird how the law is interpreted as it is now impossible to change the House insurance from my late Father in to my Mothers name as she is unable to do it herself! The internet does not ask these questions!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pete, people are suggesting that you report this or not but surely what is more important is whether or not your daughter wants to report it.  It was her that was on the train and suffered any embarrassment and, if you report it, it is her that will have to speak to the complaint, possibly in court or at a tribunal.  Should you not be speaking to your daughter and asking for her views on whether a complaint should be made.  None of us were there and therefore it is not a decision for us to make, your daughter was there, so she should decide what action she wants to take.

 

Whatever happens, I hope that it is settled without any further harm to her.

 

Best wishes

 

Roddy

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

It is really weird how the law is interpreted as it is now impossible to change the House insurance from my late Father in to my Mothers name as she is unable to do it herself! The internet does not ask these questions!

 

That’s also not a GDPR issue, although companies may now have more robust data protection policies in place. 

 

You should never be able to change account holder details without consent (including power of attourney) of the person being changed to, that’s anti fraud. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, njee20 said:

 

That’s also not a GDPR issue, although companies may now have more robust data protection policies in place. 

 

 

 

You tell that to the person on the end of a telephone telling you it is the data protection act why you cant do it! Plus it was not to change an existing policy but a renewal and would not contemplate a new policy without my mother talking to her!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Colin_McLeod said:

One option is to ignore that insurance company and take out a new policy in your name with another insurance company.

 

It is an option but it is not being truthful and if you make a claim it can affect any other policy you hold at renewal!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Not one post here has considered the victim...

 

Anyone asked the girl what she wants to do ?

 

 

What about this one ?

 

1 hour ago, Roddy Angus said:

Hi Pete, people are suggesting that you report this or not but surely what is more important is whether or not your daughter wants to report it.  It was her that was on the train and suffered any embarrassment and, if you report it, it is her that will have to speak to the complaint, possibly in court or at a tribunal.  Should you not be speaking to your daughter and asking for her views on whether a complaint should be made.  None of us were there and therefore it is not a decision for us to make, your daughter was there, so she should decide what action she wants to take.

 

Whatever happens, I hope that it is settled without any further harm to her.

 

Best wishes

 

Roddy

 

I would take issue with the word 'Victim', this word has serious connotations and shouldn't be used lightly.  I've no doubt she was uncomfortable with the situation but would she want to think of herself as a Victim. 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a general observation on modern life, and not a specific comment on the incident in question, I now (well, for quite a while actually) find some of the measures put in place to prevent people "getting away with stuff" to be more intrusive and generally detrimental to my reasonable enjoyment of things than would be a certain amount of "stuff" got away with. It's certainly a major contributory factor in my decision to no longer participate in certain activities or attend certain types of events.

 

Indeed, further to that, I have a theory (well, suspicion really; a theory needs to be at least half baked :-)) that, within reason, a bit of "getting away with stuff" is actually healthy for society as a whole.

 

No, I'm not advocating a wholesale and indiscriminate free-for-all. However, in any kind of free society (and, to a surprising extent, in many less than free societies), compliance with rules is basically by the consent of the majority of those bound by said rules. Compliance is, essentially, voluntary. Enforcement action is only required against the recalcitrant few. However, an implicit condition of that consent and voluntary compliance by the majority is that the rules, and any enforcement action, should be reasonable. Any authority breaching that implicit condition runs a very high risk of losing the goodwill of enough of those who would otherwise behave themselves to make enforcement significantly more difficult/expensive. Perhaps more difficult and expensive than allowing a little leeway might have been.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh believe me, she'd be horrified to be considered a "victim" here and doesn't think like that at all. If she's a victim of anything, it's minor bullying. Yes, of course that's wrong, but hardly up there with say, burglary or assault. She's not the kind of girl to hide in her room for a month when someone says "boo".

When she finally told me what had happened, she then asked if I thought it worth making a complaint, not to make herself feel any better, but because she was worried he "made a habit of treating people that way". For what it's worth, I initially thought it best to just let it go, but then I doubted my gut feeling, that's the reason I started this thread. Simply to get some other opinions.

The consensus seems to be (by quite a margin) to make a complaint so that is what we will do. If this was an isolated incident as a result of the guy having a bad day (my initial thought), then fair enough - little harm done. There is a chance though, that this guy has a history of similar behaviour, and if left unchallenged, I wonder where it will end? If there have been similar complaints against him, then perhaps the guy would be better suited to a less customer-focussed role?

 

Contrary to the suggestion by someone earlier that it "would have been better if she'd just filled in the form", I have to say I'm extremely proud of her that she didn't in this particular case.

  • Like 5
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, eastglosmog said:

As a point of information, the byelaw states "Any person reasonably suspected by an authorised person of breaching or attempting to breach any of these Byelaws shall give his name and address when asked by an authorised person" .  So who decides whether the guards suspicion was reasonable and what criteria are used in coming to that conclusion?  What if some easy questions could ally those suspicions, it is still reasonable to have them?

A minor has to be accompanied by an responsible adult   (parent / social services etc) to be questioned by the police. So a person with even lesser authourity, such as a guard, probably has less rights  to question a minor on anything...

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't the problem that the guard did not believe Pete's daughter was a minor?  Is this then a case of unintended consequences and the guard's way of dealing with it by just handing out the form the only legal way he had of dealing with it?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...