Disabled scooter user humiliated by Train Manager for using disabled space on GWR service.

[bnm]

An absolutely disgraceful way to treat a disabled person. If this is wholly as reported then I would have zero sympathy for the Train Manager involved if they were to face disciplinary action. Beyond despicable to treat a disabled person like this.

From the BBC:

A comedian has hit out at a train operator after she was "harassed and humiliated" for using a disabled space for her mobility scooter.

Tanyalee Davis, who lives in Norwich, found herself embroiled in a row on the Great Western Railway (GWR) service between Plymouth and London on Sunday. She said a train guard threatened to call the police if she did not leave the space.

GWR said staff who saw the video were "collectively horrified".

Canadian-born Ms Davis, 47, who has a form of dwarfism, was travelling on the 11:00 service with her partner, Kevin Bolden, who filmed the incident on a mobile phone. She was told to move from the unreserved space after a young mother asked to use it for a pram.

She said she felt "personally and publicly humiliated" after the guard threatened to call the police. "He made an announcement... saying that it was 'the woman with the mobility scooter' that was causing problems and that the train would be delayed indefinitely. It was humiliating and I cried for most of the journey home," she said.

Ms Davis had been travelling back to Norfolk after headlining the Plymouth Comedy Club on Saturday.

In a tearful video after the journey, she said: "I don't know what it is about this country, they really make you feel disabled. Just because I use a mobility scooter it doesn't make me a pariah, it doesn't make me less disabled".

"I'm just trying to make a living, to make people laugh," she added.

Dan Panes, from GWR, said a team from the train company had watched Ms Davis' video and were "collectively horrified. We got it wrong, it made no sense. A wheelchair space is a wheelchair space, it's not for luggage or pushchairs," he admitted. "The priority is really clear. Tanyalee should not have been asked to move."

He confirmed that an investigation is under way - but did not say if any action would be taken against the train guard involved.

 

[Wolfie]

A comedian has hit out at a train operator after she was "harassed and humiliated" for using a disabled space for her mobility scooter.

Tanyalee Davis, who lives in Norwich, found herself embroiled in a row on the Great Western Railway (GWR) service between Plymouth and London on Sunday.

She said a train guard threatened to call the police if she did not leave the space.

GWR said staff who saw the video were "collectively horrified".

Canadian-born Ms Davis, 47, who has a form of dwarfism, was travelling on the 11:00 service with her partner, Kevin Bolden, who filmed the incident on a mobile phone.

She was told to move from the unreserved space after a young mother asked to use it for a pram.

She said she felt "personally and publicly humiliated" after the guard threatened to call the police.

"He made an announcement... saying that it was 'the woman with the mobility scooter' that was causing problems and that the train would be delayed indefinitely," she said.

"It was humiliating and I cried for most of the journey home," she said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-44858107

No if, no buts - that guard should be fired!

 

[Wolfie]

If GWR do not take action I sincerely hope that the Equality Commission commence legal action against the company for apparently condoning such appalling behaviour.

 

[68000]

Is the staff member personally liable for his actions? maybe the legal action should be taken against the staff member as well

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is the staff member personally liable for his actions? maybe the legal action should be taken against the staff member as well

Rather depends on what actually happened. I'm sure GWR will download the CCTV to see; we don't have that information, just one side of the story.

Is it possible that the situation was something like the guard asking her if she would move over a little to allow the pram to share the space on a busy train, for example?

 

[Wolfie]

Rather depends on what actually happened. I'm sure GWR will download the CCTV to see; we don't have that information, just one side of the story.

Is it possible that the situation was something like the guard asking her if she would move over a little to allow the pram to share the space on a busy train, for example?

The quote from GWR's Dan Panes later in the article proves that to be palpable false

'Dane Panes, from GWR, said a team from the train company had watched Ms Davis' video and were "collectively horrified".

"We got it wrong, it made no sense. A wheelchair space is a wheelchair space, it's not for luggage or pushchairs," he admitted.

"The priority is really clear. Tanyalee should not have been asked to move."'

The article goes on to say that Dan Panes confirmed that an investigation is under way - but did not say if any action would be taken against the train guard involved.

I actually agree that any action should not be publicised at least initially.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, it's very surprising they have commented in that way. Perhaps they have already investigated, but it does seem a pretty knee jerk response.

One thing of note that she mentions on her YouTube but hasn't made it onto the thread was that the reason the pram was going to be left up was that the baby was a newborn and the mother was unable to hold the baby because of an arm injury. That's the kind of situation that requires a bit of give-and-take on board to resolve. She does also mention the baby had a car seat, though, and often these days the buggy itself could be separated from the base and placed on a couple of seats.

It's also not completely clear what the guard actually said. The published video isn't from on board, it's her speaking later on. If he asked her to remove the scooter entirely that would seem bizarre. I'd be interested to know what she had been asked to move and where to, and how she responded to it (i.e. did phrases like "do you know who I am?" get used causing a spectacular "attitude test" failure).

 

[SwindonBert]

To quote a saying a friend who's a barrister specialising in family law, there's 3 sides to every case, his, here & the truth.

Unless one was there, or, the full video is released we'll not know what actually happened, even then it will be a matter of perspective as what A calls insulting B won't.

Let's wait to see what GWR say / do next.

 

[bradders1983]

Yes, it's very surprising they have commented in that way. Perhaps they have already investigated, but it does seem a pretty knee jerk response.

One thing of note that she mentions on her YouTube but hasn't made it onto the thread was that the reason the pram was going to be left up was that the baby was a newborn and the mother was unable to hold the baby because of an arm injury. That's the kind of situation that requires a bit of give-and-take on board to resolve. She does also mention the baby had a car seat, though, and often these days the buggy itself could be separated from the base and placed on a couple of seats.

What, by asking a disabled person to move from a disabled space designed for disabled people?

 

[al78]

"He made an announcement... saying that it was 'the woman with the mobility scooter' that was causing problems and that the train would be delayed indefinitely."

If that is true then the guard is not actually applying the rule that a disabled person has priority in a disabled space. Since we haven't got anything to go on other than the news report, I will form the opinion that the guard should be collecting his P45 until some solid evidence comes by that vindicates him. I find it hard to believe that the lady would have a problem with merely being asked to move over a little. The guards reported actions sound extreme, and in no way representative of my experience of rail staff, it is possible that the report is exaggerated and the guard wasn't quite as bad as reported. Ideally the guard concerned would be browsing this forum and offer their version of events.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What, by asking a disabled person to move from a disabled space designed for disabled people?

Possibly by asking her to see if she could shuffle her scooter along a bit in the space to allow both to be accommodated, which provided it could be done safely would surely be the optimal solution.

Did she have a permit for her scooter? GWR policy appears to require one, though I'm sure this would have been requested before the ramp was used.

https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/assisted-travel/scooter-permit-march-2018-v3.pdf?la=en

Was it a Class 2 scooter per the above?

 

[Monty]

Don't think I've ever heard of an incident where a staff member instructed a person with a mobility impairment to move from a wheelchair area for the benefit of a passenger with a pushchair. Truly bizarre if not shocking, I won't comment on things such as disciplinary action as it's not really appropriate at this stage.

 

[richw]

Was Ms Davis in her scooter or transferred to a chair.
The mother who couldn't hold the baby due to an injury is also arguably disabled, and also becomes a safety issue.

 

[DarloRich]

Don't think I've ever heard of an incident where a staff member instructed a person with a mobility impairment to move from a wheelchair area for the benefit of a passenger with a pushchair. Truly bizarre if not shocking, I won't comment on things such as disciplinary action as it's not really appropriate at this stage.

Agreed. This seems very wrong.

Ps: are you allowed to take mobility scooters on the train?

Ideally the guard concerned would be browsing this forum and offer their version of events.

Ideally not!

 

[al78]

From the same news report:

"Dan Panes, from GWR, said a team from the train company had watched Ms Davis' video and were "collectively horrified".

"We got it wrong, it made no sense. A wheelchair space is a wheelchair space, it's not for luggage or pushchairs," he admitted.

"The priority is really clear. Tanyalee should not have been asked to move."

He confirmed that an investigation is under way - but did not say if any action would be taken against the train guard involved."

I'm afraid this does little to put the guard concerned in a better light. I could be forgiving and take the view that the guard likely made a gross error of judgement, in which case re-training would be preferable to sacking him, sometimes people should be given a second chance.

 

[bradders1983]

Possibly by asking her to see if she could shuffle her scooter along a bit in the space to allow both to be accommodated, which provided it could be done safely would surely be the optimal solution.

Did she have a permit for her scooter? GWR policy appears to require one, though I'm sure this would have been requested before the ramp was used.

https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/assisted-travel/scooter-permit-march-2018-v3.pdf?la=en

Was it a Class 2 scooter per the above?

So now you have moved onto the argument that she shouldn't have been on the train in the first place?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ps: are you allowed to take mobility scooters on the train?

In GWR's case under specific circumstances only:

https://www.gwr.com/~/media/gwr/pdfs/assisted-travel/scooter-permit-march-2018-v3.pdf?la=en

Scooters are typically used by people who can walk short distances, and the policy does mention that they may be requested to be folded and the user take a seat nearby if necessary, though I'd have thought this would more be the case if a wheelchair user boarded than a pram.

 

[Scotrail84]

An absolutely disgraceful way to treat a disabled person. If this is wholly as reported then I would have zero sympathy for the Train Manager involved if they were to lose their job. Beyond dispicable to treat a disabled person like this.

From the BBC:

I assume you know the full story going by your comments.

You would have zero sympathy is they lose their job? Never made a mistake in your job I take it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So now you have moved onto the argument that she shouldn't have been on the train in the first place?

If we are going to discuss the matter, all possible sides of the matter need to be discussed before villifying the guard which some people seem to prefer to do.

 

[al78]

Agreed. This seems very wrong.

Ps: are you allowed to take mobility scooters on the train?

Ideally not!

Why not? If he really has been unfairly judged he may well want an opportunity to put forward his version of events on here. If someone can justify their actions, why shouldn't they have or want the opportunity? I would if I were in a similar situation. If an opinion is formed and evidence follows that contradicts that opinion, the logical thing to do is update the opinion to take into account the new evidence.

 

[DarloRich]

You would have zero sympathy is they lose their job? Never made a mistake in your job I take it?

The experts here don't make mistakes.

If we are going to discuss the matter, all possible sides of the matter need to be discussed before villifying the guard which some people seem to prefer to do.

Indeed.

Why not? If he really has been unfairly judged he may well want an opportunity to put forward his version of events on here. If someone can justify their actions, why shouldn't they have or want the opportunity? I would if I were in a similar situation. If an opinion is formed and evidence follows that contradicts that opinion, the logical thing to do is update the opinion to take into account the new evidence.

Hang on. lets get your point straight. Are you honestly saying that if you were subject to a potentially disciplinary action at work you would go on the internet on a forum for your work area and set out your case ? Is that what you are saying?

It is not for someone to justify their actions to "experts" here. They need to justify their actions to their employer and I would expect that process to be carried out in accordance with company procedure and in private.

That is his opportunity "to put forward his version of events". To suggest he do it here is preposterous in the extreme!

 

[Wolfie]

I assume you know the full story going by your comments.

You would have zero sympathy is they lose their job? Never made a mistake in your job I take it?

Less than zero. For the reported announcement alone the guard is not fit to be in any customer facing role.

 

[bradders1983]

If we are going to discuss the matter, all possible sides of the matter need to be discussed before villifying the guard which some people seem to prefer to do.

So working on the assumption that maybe the scooter wasnt allowed on the train, a) this isnt mentioned as being mentioned by the guard as a reason to move, and b) assuming the description of events is accurate, does that excuse his actions?

 

[Crossover]

Is the staff member personally liable for his actions? maybe the legal action should be taken against the staff member as well

In this situation, I would highly doubt it as doesn't sound like negligence (as opposed to the James St incident which was ruled as such) - action would presumably be against the company with the worst case for the employee of a P45 (if it were to come to such)

 

[QJ]

Whatever the rights or wrongs may be in the treatment of the person with the mobility scooter was not the mother with the baby herself disabled?

As stated elsewhere in ghe thread. .... “ arm injury so could not hold the baby.”

 

[bradders1983]

Whatever the rights or wrongs may be in the treatment of the person with the mobility scooter was not the mother with the baby herself disabled?

As stated elsewhere in ghe thread. .... “ arm injury so could not hold the baby.”

In which case maybe the Guard should have gone down the train with her and found her another space, unless all the disabled space on a reasonably long train were filled at 11am on a Sunday morning.

The transport companies arent going to win with this. There was that guy who successfully sued First West Yorkshire when they said he couldnt get on a bus because people with prams were taking up the space designed for wheelchairs.

 

[Mag_seven]

Thank goodness GWR will hold an inquiry and get all sides of the story rather than the forum judge, jury and executioner.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So working on the assumption that maybe the scooter wasnt allowed on the train, a) this isnt mentioned as being mentioned by the guard as a reason to move

I can't comment on this as he isn't on here to say what he said.

and b) assuming the description of events is accurate, does that excuse his actions?

Highlighting the passenger to other passengers, assuming he did this, would be the height of unprofessionalism, so that certainly isn't justified. Any announcement should just have referred to something like a "passenger incident" and nothing more specific.

 

[Wolfie]

Whatever the rights or wrongs may be in the treatment of the person with the mobility scooter was not the mother with the baby herself disabled?

As stated elsewhere in ghe thread. .... “ arm injury so could not hold the baby.”

NO! A short-term arm injury in no way, shape or form meets the legal definition of a disability

 

[Bletchleyite]

NO! A short-term arm injury in no way, shape or form meets the legal definition of a disability

In practice it did mean the mother could not occupy a normal seat with the baby.

Should she not have travelled?

This kind of situation, particularly if the train was busy, requires "give and take", not shouting about legal definitions and rights. If I'm reading it right, the lady in the scooter could walk a short distance, so if I was her I would have transferred to a seat (the guard could have required the giving up of a nearby seat for her) to accommodate someone else who was not able to do so.