Guest stuartp Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I agree it shouldn't be hived off to a contractor, they should bring it back in house and add the operating costs to fares. At least charging to cover the operating costs means that those who look after their stuff in the first place don't have to pay anything. I can understand the odd glove or shopping bag but a bike and trailer ?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekl Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Anecdotal on lost property: friend who worked in train crew management at Waterloo got a call from a passenger who had left a lap-top on a local arriving at Waterloo (the call having been shunted through various areas before he got it). Passenger identified the train service he had arrived on and the coach where he had been sitting. The train was now on the outward working, identified, guard called on mobile, found the lap-top, brought back to Waterloo by the guard on the service train, and returned to a very relieved passenger. No charge, as far as I am aware, and possibly avoided one of those press stories about missing MoD lap-tops (but that is total speculation). The sort of excellence of service that does occur, but isn't going to appear on a program like this. I was very disappointed by the first KX program - it seemed to me superficial - it perhaps ought to have dealt with the substantial difficulties that occur following problems or out of course running, and how the operational staff approach those issues - mentioned above, and better dealt with in the "Tube" series. The Leeds program was better, in that it was not dealing with out of course running, but the direct interaction between rail staff, BTP and passengers for what might be called "self-inflicted" problems. I have not got around to watching Reading, but will check it on I-player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted February 27, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 27, 2013 But from what I did see there was some of the uusual ignorance from the passengers (and SLW can be rather difficult on Reading - Basinsgstoke depending on which line is blocked).Getting the staff for it being a major one at such short notice. Spare staff to operate emergency crossovers, hand signallers and pilotmen. Last time I was involved on that line was over 10 years ago and I ended up being two hand signallers at Bramley! It took a hell of a lot of extra work on the part of the Signalmen to make sure that operated correctly as a mistake would have left me at the wrong end of the station, not good news. And that was because there wasn't any other way but to shut down the line completely. We had more staff then too. Suprisingly finding staff to stand out in torrential rain for days on end, or in freezing weather and even roasting sun isn't that easy as they get fed up and have lives outside too. There's very little fat left. The first programme made me cringe over certain things and people, the second was miles better and really started to show how far many go to help out as well as the external forces which hammer the railway and its staff get blamed for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
br2975 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 In the Leeds programme I was a little bemused by the antics of the 'p!zzheads" on the "Ale Trail". . My BTP contemporaries were always quick to educate me on the additional powers they had compared to Home Office forces; and one thing was an offence of being 'intoxicated on the railway' where intoxicated included the effects of alcohol, drugs and glue. . Do the BTP ever have purges on the 'p!zzheads" on the " Ale Trail " ? . Methinks it could be a nice little earner (fixed penaly wise) but a pain once a few collars need to be felt ..... . Brian R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Perhaps the difficulties with single line could have been explored a bit more on the programme - to add to the problems suggested on here, maybe the tree that was wedged under a train was also blocking the other line. But I don't think anyone on here should be dismissive of a passenger who was wondering why it wasn't possible, as for all sorts of reasons it's something the old railway managed to set up much more quickly. I thought the Kings Cross programme was guilty of selective editing to show certain individuals up in a bad light, but the Reading one seemed to be a pretty fair portayal of a set of people who were trying their best in sometimes difficult circumstances. The only real unanswered criticism was why the track circuit cables weren't repaired for three hours while waiting for "investigators" who never came. As RAIB has recently reported on an incident answering the same description I presume they are being fingered here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Wasn't particularly impressed with the first one - indeed nearly stopped watching after 15 minutes as all I'd seen so far was people whingeing! Missed the second one, but did see last night's, which I thought was well-balanced (apart from the somewhat negative finale). And of course, FGW have been making some steps forwards (albeit small ones) with the overcrowding issues by converting redundant buffet cars into extra seating capacity (not mentioned in the programme). Was slightly surprised about the 3-hour delay in starting work on the cut cables due to RAIB not turning up, as I've just read the RAIB report on that one! As regards a couple of other issues people have raised: Lost property charges: Personally I don't have an issue with paying what are fairly nominal lost property charges (although on the last couple of occasions when I've left something on a train, the train crew have got it back to me for free!*). After all, there are costs involved - and not just storage, there's also the need to pay somebody to man the lost property office and the cost of insuring the items. But at the end of the day, why should those who don't leave items on trains have to (via fares) subsidise those who do? As regards delay fines, I would anticipate that the fines would go towards passenger refunds/season ticket discounts/replacement bus services etc rather than being something the passenger becomes out of pocket for. So if a train breaks down and as a consequence delays other trains behind it, the other operators are naturally compensated (via NR) for the disruption to their passengers' journeys. What it does give the lie to however, is the common misconception that railway companies deliberately allow trains to run late to save money (yes, that may happen due to ill-thought through savings, but as a general rule as I see it the fines are such as to encourage the TOCs to run as close to time as possible). Richard (who has no connection to the rail industry whatsoever apart from a couple of unsuccessful applications to FGW!) * The more recent occasion did require me to do a lunchtime trip to Oxford, but worth it as I got the unexpected pleasure of seing the Red Arrows doing a display at Benson en route! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 And as regards the issue of SLW on the Basigstoke line, as far as I am aware there are no crossovers between Southcote Jn and Basingstoke, so the whole line would have to be SLW. As the line takes approx 20 mins to traverse and has three passenger trains each way each hour, at the very least SLW would have led to at least a 50% reduction in service frequency, maybe more. And that's before you start factoring in the impact on the Cross Country services further along their journeys. AFAIK the Cross Country services don't normally pass each other on the Basingstoke line, so it's possible SLW was being carried out for the Cross Country trains and the RRBs were replacing the stoppers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Ok just caught up. Thought the 2nd two episodes were better than the first, though as someone said above - still a procession of characters - good human elements. Makes you realise what some of them have to put up with. My wife raised the comments above about the rather elderly looking and portly gang fixing the damaged cable. She also asked why it took more than half-a-dozen watchers to do the job? Even allowing for the fact that someone has to be look out, it did seem quiet a lot. The other comment was about smoking at work - but I guess in the open nobody cares. On the subject of paying for return of lost property - not enough IMO - if you are daft enough to leave treasured possessions on a train then why should the cost of storage and admin be paid for by more thoughtful and careful travellers. I've never lost anything on a train not even a newspaper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2013 My wife raised the comments above about the rather elderly looking and portly gang fixing the damaged cable. She also asked why it took more than half-a-dozen watchers to do the job? Even allowing for the fact that someone has to be look out, it did seem quiet a lot. The other comment was about smoking at work - but I guess in the open nobody cares. It is quite possible that one of the individuals was in charge of the protection arrangements for the gang, the others could have consititued individuals from other departments than the S&T, who may have been sent to site initially, pending clarification of what they were dealing with, how much damage there actually was. We'd rather send too many than too few, assuming they are available in the first place, which isn't always the case, and get the fault fixed asap, rather than find that the S&T fault actually has a PW element, so then having to wait for a PW team to attend. One of the other issues is that when you get to the testing phase, you may need to have individuals in different locations to monitor circuits, so you may have had them all together whilst they were waiting for the RAIB decision. S&T gangs would certainly consist of 3 or 4 individuals anyway, sometimes there is a need to carry heavy equipment to the line from the vehicle etc. As regards the smoking, I don't understand what the concern is? It's not in an office or enclosed space. Also don't understand the issue about age and 'portliness'. Why is that an issue? There are plenty of younger staff in most S&T gangs and other parts of the rail industry, and I just don't think that the weight issue of the individual matters at all. They all have to pass medicals to work on the track. Re your comments on paying for lost property - spot on, by the way. Even in BR days there were dedicated staff looking after lost property, and they needed paying, even then! Whether this kind of activity should be contracted out or not I will leave to others. It may also be worth reflecting, however, on whether the private company performs the lost property service better than an in-house one? The SLW issue has been well answered by Paul in an earlier post. One thing that we frequently find now is that it would take longer to institute SLW than it would to clear the original obstruction, and no doubt some of my colleagues in Swindon Control would have given that matter some consideration - they are extremely experienced in judging what will and won't work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Thank CK for excellent explanation. I did think the number of staff in attendance was quite well explained in the program and the reasons (and obvious frustration) at being held up waiting for some others to attend to make some assessment (RAIB decision?) - who then never turned up, resulting in them being delayed in starting the job. But that sort of delay in the process happens throughout industry and should be a focus of management to reduce and re-examine the process. It certainly highlighted the fragility of the cabling and the maintenance it required. Am I the only one who thought that these cables would have been buried deeper in trunking? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 . But at the end of the day, why should those who don't leave items on trains have to (via fares) subsidise those who do Richard By the same logic, why should those who don't use trains have to (via taxes) subsidise those who do? As Steve said earlier, "because it is the right thing to do"? Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 It certainly highlighted the fragility of the cabling and the maintenance it required. Am I the only one who thought that these cables would have been buried deeper in trunking? The cables in question looked like the 'tails*' connecting the buried/trunked cables to the rail itself or local equipment on/adjacent to the track. They used to be laid between the sleepers but were vulnerable to tamper damage, so then they were laid between the sleepers in orange pipes. This just made them easier for the tamper driver to hit and also meant he could rag them out six at a time instead of having to pick them off individually so now they're clipped to the sleeper tops where they're less vulnerable ... oh hang on... Compare with the track feed on a layout - you can hide most of the bus under the board but at some point bits need to come above ground to actually connect to stuff. (* I've no doubt there's a proper S&T term for this !) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2013 The comment about fees for lost property is interesting - I have some correspondence (quite a lot of it actually) from Kemble station dating from the 1880s/90s and among it is a memo from the Audit Office giving the Stationmaster a ticking off for failing to raise a charge on an umbrella which had been left on a train and was forwarded from Paddington to Kemble for collection by the young lady who owned it. Maybe that particular Stationmaster was easily charmed by an attractive young lady? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Compared to a tamper strike a derailed train is pretty rare and would normally damage the track in lots of ways rather than (as here) just cutting the cables and leaving everything else intact. On that basis putting the tail cables on the tops of the sleepers is the right thing to do. In this particular case I think the RAIB report said that it was failure of track circuits which caused the derailment to be identified. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2013 It is quite possible that one of the individuals was in charge of the protection arrangements for the gang, the others could have consititued individuals from other departments than the S&T, who may have been sent to site initially, pending clarification of what they were dealing with, how much damage there actually was. We'd rather send too many than too few, assuming they are available in the first place, which isn't always the case, and get the fault fixed asap, rather than find that the S&T fault actually has a PW element, so then having to wait for a PW team to attend. One of the other issues is that when you get to the testing phase, you may need to have individuals in different locations to monitor circuits, so you may have had them all together whilst they were waiting for the RAIB decision. S&T gangs would certainly consist of 3 or 4 individuals anyway, sometimes there is a need to carry heavy equipment to the line from the vehicle etc. As regards the smoking, I don't understand what the concern is? It's not in an office or enclosed space. Also don't understand the issue about age and 'portliness'. Why is that an issue? There are plenty of younger staff in most S&T gangs and other parts of the rail industry, and I just don't think that the weight issue of the individual matters at all. They all have to pass medicals to work on the track. And when you suddenly find the cable repair will mean clearing a load of vegetation, shifting a load of troughing lids or taking the nearby barriers on local control they'll be able to do it much quicker with that bunch poised and ready to go. Quite a few of our Pway look a bit like that but they can shift heavy gear, sleepers and rails for a 8 or 12 hour shift, which I'd have been knackered after an hour, as there's a lot of muscle under there too they still breed them tough on the P-way Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caradoc Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Re the lost property charge; If I was stupid or forgetful enough to leave a laptop costing several hundred pounds on a train, I think I would be delighted and grateful to get it back for a mere 20 quid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 A question that needs to be asked; what is the volume of ticket sales compared to seating capacity? Are the operators able to sell tickets for travel without reference to the actual service capacity? (Honest question, I don't know.) The sight of so many jammed to the doors trains at the different locations covered so far... Reference was made in the most recent programme to 90% on time, as though that was a good thing. So that's a late arrival once a week for a five day a week return traveller. There's an attitudinal shift needed within the industry I would suggest. One in a thousand or 99.9% would be more like it before any congratulatory note is heard. Delay arising from collisions with humans bent on ending it all and animals, really major weather events and the like - those don't get counted as essentially random and unpreventable - but the system hardware and operators should be able to deliver a minimum of 99.9% on time in normal operation: is there process capability data? Quite what to do about folks using the network as a suicide machine, that is a difficult one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold JohnR Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2013 Theres a discussion in this months Modern Railways about the validity of PPM (5/10 minutes late as right time) vs Right time (ie within a minute). The argument against right time is are you encouraging lost connections, or signalling right away when some little old lady os toddling down the platform? As a commuter, I regularly travel in trains that are a few minutes late - I think you're right there doesnt seem to be the right attitude amongst some staff. There never seems to be an attempt to recover lost time through smarter/faster driving etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Advance purchase tickets are only valid on specific trains, and are only issued with seat reservations for the train in question (and sometimes also for connecting trains if needed to complete the booked journey). Indeed quota management is used so that if a particular train is filling up then the price of the advance tickets for that train will increase. Open, off-peak and super-off-peak singles and returns are valid on more than one train. Someone booking one of these can ask for a seat on a specific train (and will only get one if seats are available) but may end up perfectly legally travelling on a different train within the validity restrictions of the ticket. Probably most importantly in the case of Reading, season ticket holders cannot in general reserve seats (a few TOCs have tried this - not sure if that includes FGW). Hence if you have a reserved seat and turn up for the correct train you are entitled to a seat (and can claim compensation if you don't get it) but not otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2013 Theres a discussion in this months Modern Railways about the validity of PPM (5/10 minutes late as right time) vs Right time (ie within a minute). The argument against right time is are you encouraging lost connections, or signalling right away when some little old lady os toddling down the platform? As a commuter, I regularly travel in trains that are a few minutes late - I think you're right there doesnt seem to be the right attitude amongst some staff. There never seems to be an attempt to recover lost time through smarter/faster driving etc. There certainly is a lot of effort going into recovering time on our patch and it is a matter of pride that when they get a decent unit they can claw back a minute or two between stations. Overall that can make a huge difference at the next regulating point. There are a few instances where certain people seem to dally but then some will have an axe to grind or just be lazy in any occupation and when they accrue too many they are leaving themselves open to disciplinary procedure. Think about the fact that a guard or gateline member of staff is then presented with an angry customer who blames them personally and you'll see why some help the stragglers on behalf of their colleagues who would otherwise have to deal with them. Out of the thousands who travel it only takes one or two to be raving in your face each day to really demoralise someone. Now if we had cctv recording each of these and showing all the other passengers how some behave maybe they would be more supportive of the staff. I've been on a train where a fare dodger resorted to accusing the guard of assault, despite him clearly being nowhere near him, and in the entire carriage no one else offered any help or to be a witness. None knew I was staff too. Neither the guard or I pointed out the cctv though we did report it so it could be downloaded. The point is that we then wasted 5 minutes at Basingstoke getting him removed by Police and then people complained about the delay despite offering no assistance to the guard! A question for everyone to mull over, would you offer to assist rail staff against abusive ranting customers or those accusing them of abuse? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold CovDriver Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 28, 2013 Theres a discussion in this months Modern Railways about the validity of PPM (5/10 minutes late as right time) vs Right time (ie within a minute). The argument against right time is are you encouraging lost connections, or signalling right away when some little old lady os toddling down the platform? As a commuter, I regularly travel in trains that are a few minutes late - I think you're right there doesnt seem to be the right attitude amongst some staff. There never seems to be an attempt to recover lost time through smarter/faster driving etc. I tend to agree with what your saying regarding the attitude with some members of staff isn't right but to be honest its a very small minority that give the railways in general a bad name. And as for attempting to recover time by smarter or faster driving is not an option to be fair as we have to abide by set rules and regulations and of course speed limits cannot be just flaunted just to get the train service back on time that is not an option as we have to contend with TPWS,Route knowledge etc.... I have spoken to many passengers since this programme started and the now seem to understand what we traincrew have to contend with on a daily basis I've even had many apologies from there previous journeys when they've been a bit abrupt towards me when we've been running late due to various problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Parker Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 If I suggested to a supermarket that I receive a discount because I have taken the products of the shelf myself and therefore expended effort, they would probably think I was a product of 'care in the community'. They might point out that you are getting the product cheaper because it's put on the shelf for self-service so that's where your refund comes from. The same reason you pay for items to be delivered when you order on-line, there is extra cost and it's passed on to you. My feeling is that the programme does a good job showing the railway side of things. Some passengers are made to look like idiots and that's because they are throwing a tantrum so work well on telly. I like the fact that you see there are reaons behind the delays and sense the frustration of staff who want to do a better job in a complex system. Good PR for the train companies generally so far. Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 A question for everyone to mull over, would you offer to assist rail staff against abusive ranting customers or those accusing them of abuse? Yes ... but it would depend on the specific situation (just as with any street scene) I would not wade in without careful thought, some abusive words, in yer face shouting, while unacceptable it does not require more fuel on the flames. Physical assault would be a different matter. Verbal abuse, while not being condoned as acceptable, is something I expect the guard to have received some training for. Just like the police. I also think it is important to note "offer to assist" rather than jumping in. People can lose their temper or become agitated for many reasons - some may be justifiable - in part. Physical assault can only be justified in self defence or defence of others themselves the victim of assault. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium DavidLong Posted February 28, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 28, 2013 I was amazed how much lost property was stashed at Paddington.How do people manage to mislay some of this stuff I don't know.The girl said they had over 100 black bags. Obviously those interminable announcements about taking our personal items with us aren't having the desired effect. Either that or we are just filtering them out as background noise. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 ...The argument against right time is are you encouraging lost connections, or signalling right away when some little old lady is toddling down the platform?... I would argue that adherence to 'right time' is never the cause of a lost connection. The cause is element(s) in the connection not running right time. The railway is of its nature a utilitarian instrument, and on that principle the only permitted deviation from a right time departure is when there is known to be recovery potential sufficient for right time arrival at whatever is the next timed point. Which probably means generally no deviations, no discretion, old lady left behind. I have read several accounts of railway managements tightening up on this principle; and by and large the passengers pretty rapidly got educated on their role in enabling the service to run properly. However, the last such account dates from the 1960s, when self-discipline was a concept still held in high regard, and those who suffered as a result of lack of it got short shrift. So this is probably 'dream on' territory... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.