Passenger left behind...

[royaloak]

Is that true? I worked on and used the GN for around 20 years with DOO in operation. Drivers always checked along the platform as they started off, for that very reason.

Try it on a 165 or 166 and see how you get on, you have to physically stand up beside the drivers seat to be able to see out the cab door which isnt really conversant to driving away at the same time.

[royaloak]

The Rule Book requires that drivers look out when starting if safe and possible. Unfortunately with most modern traction units it is not possible as the drivers seat is positioned too far away from the side window. I like sprinter units as I can pop my head out and look back for as long as I like as long as there are no overbridges or overhanging vegetation.

Which covers the issues perfectly, you will look out the window but we will allow the trains to be designed so it is impossible to do it.

Edited December 12, 2017 by royaloak

[royaloak]

No staff should have to take abuse, but the individual this thread is about did not seem to be aggressive towards staff, if anything they ignored him which sadly is life for those with disabilities nowadays.

The point I was trying to make was maybe the staff had 'issues' with said gentleman in the past and have decided to ignore him, now I can understand why that would look wrong but it would comply with most TOCs 'get into an argument and its your fault' policy oops I mean conflict avoidance policy, so by ignoring him they are avoiding conflict.

 

As I said early, we need a lot more info before saying who is at fault here, but for some it will always be the staffs fault because they are only there to be abused and be used as slaves anyway!

Edited December 12, 2017 by royaloak

[EddieB]

So what if the M.D. of the parent company had also been on the train, watching the events unfolding, and had done nothing to help? Clearly not their job, but they’d be criticised mercilessly (and quite rightly).

 

What happened to good old-fashioned customer service? It might not be my job, but I represent the company I work for, so I make it my job to find the person best placed to deal with it. Goes for all the jobsworths identified in the OP.

[chriswright03]

I think this is going in a direction that helps no one.  None of us know the facts let alone the full facts so I think we are back to something I posted earlier.  We no doubt all agree that the person should not have been left.  We are not in a position to judge who if anyone was at fault and therfore should not.

 

It is a fact that a small percentage of the public are truly unpleasant and are very good at being offensive.  Many will make false complaints in an effort to cause problems for whoever for no valid reason.  I have come across this myself on rare occasions but have represented many bus drivers who have been subject to it.  On occasions drivers react badly and make matters worse and without doubt on occasions drivers have started the problem with poor attitude.

 

We all have a right to be able to work without being abused. 

 

There are several reasons that this could have occured which have been discussed.  Ranging from a mistake by staff through negigence by staff to the passenger may be banned or didn't want to travel.  We don't know.  I hope it was reported in order that it can be investigated but I doubt we will ever know the answer.  Jumping to conclusions and blaming someone without knowing any facts is neither helpful nor right.

[royaloak]

 Jumping to conclusions and blaming someone without knowing any facts is neither helpful nor right.

But it is very common.

[kevinlms]

I think this is going in a direction that helps no one.  None of us know the facts let alone the full facts so I think we are back to something I posted earlier.  We no doubt all agree that the person should not have been left.  We are not in a position to judge who if anyone was at fault and therfore should not.

 

It is a fact that a small percentage of the public are truly unpleasant and are very good at being offensive.  Many will make false complaints in an effort to cause problems for whoever for no valid reason.  I have come across this myself on rare occasions but have represented many bus drivers who have been subject to it.  On occasions drivers react badly and make matters worse and without doubt on occasions drivers have started the problem with poor attitude.

 

We all have a right to be able to work without being abused. 

 

There are several reasons that this could have occured which have been discussed.  Ranging from a mistake by staff through negigence by staff to the passenger may be banned or didn't want to travel.  We don't know.  I hope it was reported in order that it can be investigated but I doubt we will ever know the answer.  Jumping to conclusions and blaming someone without knowing any facts is neither helpful nor right.

On the face of the evidence presented in the OP, the wheelchair passenger, was either deliberately ignored or mistakenly overlooked.

 

I can understand the driver, not being allowed to leave the cab, if that is what his rules state. But someone out of the other employees/contractors, ought to have approached the would be passengers and either assisted him on-board, or else advise him that for whatever reason, he couldn't alight the train. Maybe some of the staff members were too busy with small talk to notice what was going on?

 

Yes, there is no excuse for any one to abuse anyone, be it passenger or employee.

 

Some of the comments on this topic are downright rude, or of a condescending attitude of 'you have no understanding of my job'.

[chriswright03]

On the face of the evidence presented in the OP, the wheelchair passenger, was either deliberately ignored or mistakenly overlooked.

 

I can understand the driver, not being allowed to leave the cab, if that is what his rules state. But someone out of the other employees/contractors, ought to have approached the would be passengers and either assisted him on-board, or else advise him that for whatever reason, he couldn't alight the train. Maybe some of the staff members were too busy with small talk to notice what was going on?

 

Yes, there is no excuse for any one to abuse anyone, be it passenger or employee.

 

Some of the comments on this topic are downright rude, or of a condescending attitude of 'you have no understanding of my job'.

All of which shows why it needs to be investigated properly to find out what went wrong, how it could be done better and to ensure that ALL staff involved receive training or advice to help prevent it happening again.  None of that can be achieved on here by people working out in their heads what happened without either being there and seeing or it or actually knowing the facts as ascertained by an investigation.

 

It is a fact of life that some will go the extra mile to assist if they can and some will do all they can to avoid doing anything at all.  There is no evidence to suggest which category anyone involved in this fits into yet some still insist on using that awful expression 'jobsworth'.  None of us know what the RPO were doing at the time and whilst it is true that it looks like they could have helped by at least bringing the passenger to the attention of the train staff none of us know why they didn't.  So with that in mind branding them as Jobsworth seems to be Judge and Jury and that to my mind is just as wrong as someone not doing the right thing in everyday life.

 

None of us are perfect.  Everyone makes mistakes be it at work or in our personal life.  I cannot see that anyone bickering with another or second guessing what happened on the day helps anything.  So what I would suggest is that we hope this is resolved in the proper manner and that all involved learn from it.  Included in that is that perhaps we could all take a moment to look at ourselves and try and make sure that we do what is expected of us in our day to day lives.  In my working career I have made mistakes, have not always dealt with people as I should due to rising to the bait and lost it on occasions.  I believe that to be normal.  Making a mistake is normal doing the same thing on a second occasion means that you have not learnt from your mistakes and that leads us into bad habits and that is what we should all try and avoid.

[jim.snowdon]

In addition to that, none of us know anything about the mobility scooter, particularly its weight and the ability of the portable ramp to carry it. It would also be worth doing the common sense check on Southern's policy and/or the national conditions of carriage on the carriage of wheelchairs/mobility buggies. That might shed some useful light on the matter.

 

Jim

[kevinlms]

In addition to that, none of us know anything about the mobility scooter, particularly its weight and the ability of the portable ramp to carry it. It would also be worth doing the common sense check on Southern's policy and/or the national conditions of carriage on the carriage of wheelchairs/mobility buggies. That might shed some useful light on the matter.

 

Jim

But the OP suggests no one tried!

 

As a matter of interest, what is the status of lines where some/all trains CANNOT provide assistance to such passengers? Are there prominent signs at the entrance to such stations, at or near eye level for someone in a wheelchair/mobility scooter to see? A standard sign with a wheelchair in a red circle, with the diagonal line, would seem the obvious. Brief wording could appear underneath, explaining the restrictions and/or requirements - 24 hours notice? Edit to add. Or perhaps No assistance can be provided.

 

Or are such passengers, expected to take pot luck, on whether or not, they can board trains? Perhaps they can look it up on a website, but not everyone has, or can use a smart phone.

Edited December 13, 2017 by kevinlms

[chriswright03]

I do not know what the signage or notifications are at stations as I have not looked.  One or two on here have commented that TOC have advice on their web sites and I would expect without fail all will have to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.  The fact that not everyone has access to a smartphone is a little bit simplistic. 

 

I doubt very much someone would just turn up at a railway station expecting to be able to catch a train to their chosen destination without first finding out if one went to there and the times of them.  That being the case information re access would be not far from that information.

 

The fact that someone may be disabled and need a mobility scooter or wheelchair does not mean they are incapable of any of the functions to check basic information to plan a journey or have someone do it on their behalf. 

[Dagworth]

I do not know what the signage or notifications are at stations as I have not looked.  One or two on here have commented that TOC have advice on their web sites and I would expect without fail all will have to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.  The fact that not everyone has access to a smartphone is a little bit simplistic. 

 

I doubt very much someone would just turn up at a railway station expecting to be able to catch a train to their chosen destination without first finding out if one went to there and the times of them.  That being the case information re access would be not far from that information.

 

The fact that someone may be disabled and need a mobility scooter or wheelchair does not mean they are incapable of any of the functions to check basic information to plan a journey or have someone do it on their behalf. 

 

 

Please don't start quoting legislation that doesn't apply.

 

The DDA was repealed in 2010 (Except in Northern Ireland)

It is replaced with the Equality Act 2010

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act-2010/what-equality-act

 

Andi

[chriswright03]

Sorry Andi you are quite right and I should know better.  Despite it changing it was still (wrongly) always called that when I was on the buses.  Thanks for the correction.

 

However the point remains the same about information having to be available.

[Dunsignalling]

Please don't start quoting legislation that doesn't apply.

 

The DDA was repealed in 2010 (Except in Northern Ireland)

It is replaced with the Equality Act 2010

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act-2010/what-equality-act

 

Andi

The Act was indeed repealed but, as I understand it, its provisions were incorporated into the Equality Act 2010 in their entirety.

 

The practical implications are therefore (AFAIK) unchanged.

 

John

[royaloak]

All of which shows why it needs to be investigated properly to find out what went wrong, how it could be done better and to ensure that ALL staff involved receive training or advice to help prevent it happening again.   to be normal.  Making a mistake is normal doing the same thing on a second occasion means that you have not learnt from your mistakes and that leads us into bad habits and that is what we should all try and avoid.

So you are assuming something went wrong and the staff need training!

[royaloak]

In addition to that, none of us know anything about the mobility scooter, particularly its weight and the ability of the portable ramp to carry it. It would also be worth doing the common sense check on Southern's policy and/or the national conditions of carriage on the carriage of wheelchairs/mobility buggies. That might shed some useful light on the matter.

 

Jim

But everyone is still assuming the person actually wanted to catch the train and the staff were in the wrong.

[beast66606]

But the OP suggests no one tried!

 

 

Cough - including the OP

[chriswright03]

So you are assuming something went wrong and the staff need training!

No not at all although that post looks like it I will grant you.  If you read my other posts you should see I agree with you in pretty much most of what you say.

 

I do think it should be investigated because the OP formed the opinion that something was wrong enough to post on here.  Whether he felt strongly enough to report it is a different matter.  Others are blaming the RPO for doing nothing yet do not know anything other than what the OP said.  I agree it could well be that the passenger had no intention of boarding, had been banned or any other of the scenarios mentioned.  Nothing at all is known factually by any of us and as such we should not (as I said earlier) second guess who did or did not do anything.

 

Having been on the wrong end of false complaints, represented Union members for the same I am only too well aware of how easy it is to complain and how easy it is to fall foul of all manner of blue tape. 

 

What I should have said is that 'if' after an investigation anything untoward is found then training is better than punishment .  Discipline should be about education and not punishment.

[Colin_McLeod]

That depends on whether it is an education problem.

[chriswright03]

Indeed.  That depend on the definition of education though.

 

Sometimes at my depot drivers needed to be educated in the form of don't do that again because you know now it is wrong and to do it again will be costly to you.

 

Also at times rules or laws had changed and some had not realised for whatever reason.  Sometimes they changed because of a different interpretation of them!  It really was difficult persuading a certain manager that the Company had a responsibility to ensure that carrots were used instead of sticks!

[Harry Lime]

Cough - including the OP

 

And I will put my hand up to that!

[caradoc]

To go right back to the OP; Given that a major part of the Guard's duties is to close the train doors, and having satisfied themself that this has been done and no passengers are trapped, give the ready-to-start signal to the Driver, how could he/she possibly not have been aware of the passenger, plus mobility scooter, waiting on the platform ? Is it more likely then that this was a known person/enthusiast who never intended to travel, and would it be worth contacting the TOC to establish whether this was actually the case ?

[Coryton]

To go right back to the OP; Given that a major part of the Guard's duties is to close the train doors, and having satisfied themself that this has been done and no passengers are trapped, give the ready-to-start signal to the Driver, how could he/she possibly not have been aware of the passenger, plus mobility scooter, waiting on the platform ? Is it more likely then that this was a known person/enthusiast who never intended to travel, and would it be worth contacting the TOC to establish whether this was actually the case ?

 

If anybody is going to make a complaint about this, wouldn't the person who (perhaps) wanted to get on the train and couldn't be the logical person to do so?

[Mike Storey]

Try it on a 165 or 166 and see how you get on, you have to physically stand up beside the drivers seat to be able to see out the cab door which isnt really conversant to driving away at the same time.

 

OK, ok! They were almost all 317's in my days there, although 365's were starting to appear. I guess the cab is a similar design to the 165? They also had mirrors and CCTV platform screens, which I guess also helps. When do the on-board CCTV screens go off when a train is leaving the platform in more modern DOO operations?

[njee20]

But everyone is still assuming the person actually wanted to catch the train and the staff were in the wrong.

Occum's razor...

 

I'm also not sure everyone is assuming that, you do seem rather to be looking for that inference.

Edited December 13, 2017 by njee20