Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
There are many ticket office staff who are very helpful to passengers for all sorts of reasons, but there is also a responsibility in the role for protecting the TOC's revenue along with helping the traincrew and so why should a ticket clerk trust a passenger they don't even know that they will buy a railcard in the future, by adding the discount on an advance ticket sale, when that passenger might never buy the railcard? What if the passenger isn't eligible for a railcard but lies about their age? It is different if the clerk sells advance tickets to a passenger who has forgotten their railcard but who the clerk has served before and knows they hold a valid railcard - then obviously common sense should be applied.
You might think this is a negative view of the travelling public, but unfortunately there are a lot of people who will try it on if they can, particularly so on the railway I have found. The argument that it is for the guard to ensure the passenger has a valid railcard when travelling is also flawed, because it puts unnecessary extra risk of potential conflict on the guard, when the much simpler and safer solution is for the booking office to check this at the point of sale.
That's not the job of a ticket office and if you think it is, you are contributing towards the demise of ticket offices. The demise of many ticket offices is unavoidable, but there are some locations where the case is marginal, and attitudes such as demanding users posses and show Railcards when buying tickets in advance is the sort of behaviour that will reduce the viability of ticket offices at marginal locations.
and so why should a ticket clerk trust a passenger they don't even know that they will buy a railcard in the future, by adding the discount, when that passenger might never buy the railcard?
Any passenger inconvenienced in this way can simply buy online and I hope they do; quite why anyone would subject themselves to this instead of buy online is beyond my comprehension.
I've had obstructive ticket office staff refuse to sell me tickets for a group of passengers before; I am very glad that these days I can put the journey details into a website, be sold the cheapest combination of tickets, simply send out the PDFs and not have anyone refuse to serve me. I am very glad we've moved on from where we were a few years ago and I am no longer obstructed by staff who act in such a manner.
You might think this is a negative view of the travelling public, but unfortunately there are a lot of people who will try it on if they can, particularly so on the railway I have found.
The argument that it is for the guard to ensure the passenger has a valid railcard when travelling is also flawed, because it puts unnecessary extra risk of potential conflict on the guard, when the much simpler and safer solution is for the booking office to check this at the point of sale.
Sadly, the railways have a generally negative and suspicious attitude towards their customers. In the last years of British Rail there had been a definite improvement in the treatment of passengers, but the situation hyas since gone backwards. There is an attitude of 'I've got a job for life, the customer can get stuffed'. Not surprisingly, people don't like it, and many think, 'sod it, let's get in the car'. Of course, this is only a generalisation - there are a lot of railway workers with a sense of public service, and road travel has plenty of its own frustrations
You are right, and the evidence is here, on this very thread.
Another example is when I was refused the sale of an Advance ticket by a ticket clerk at York station who didn't want to do his job properly. He claimed I was too late, but I was there in time based on what the sign said at the entrance. He refused to look at the sign. I wrote a complaint which was upehld and the member of staff was "spoken to". I am aware of countless more examples experienced or witnessed by myself and many others which people have told me or I've read about here or I've provided advice about in a professional capacity.
Misbehaviour among staff at ticket offices is absolutely rife. I rarely have to use a ticket office these days, which is good news as far as I'm concerned.
...as well as a significant proportion who are not, yes.
That's not the job of a ticket office and if you think it is, you are contributing towards the demise of ticket offices. The demise of many ticket offices is unavoidable, but there are some locations where the case is marginal, and attitudes such as demanding users posses and show Railcards when buying tickets in advance is the sort of behaviour that will reduce the viability of ticket offices at marginal locations.
Another example is when I was refused the sale of an Advance ticket by a ticket clerk at York station who didn't want to do his job properly. He claimed I was too late, but I was there in time based on what the sign said at the entrance. He refused to look at the sign. I wrote a complaint which was upehld and the member of staff was "spoken to". I am aware of countless more examples experienced or witnessed by myself and many others which people have told me or I've read about here or I've provided advice about in a professional capacity.
Misbehaviour among staff at ticket offices is absolutely rife. I rarely have to use a ticket office these days, which is good news as far as I'm concerned.
Of course revenue protection is part of the ticket office role - do you think we should start giving out tickets for free as well in order to be more 'passenger friendly'? The ticket office is a purchase point not just a customer information centre.
How do you know whether this advance ticket you speak of hadn't been removed from the reservation system due to either being sold out or being too close to the train departure time? Since May there has been a minimum 5 minute cut off point before the train departure time for the sale of Northern advance singles.
I could go to your ticket office and ask for a ticket from Wick to Thurso for someone other than myself for a months' time and you would be obliged to sell it. You do not know who is going to be using the ticket, nor how they are going to get there. I'd be entitled to ask for a Railcard discount and the passenger wouldn't need to buy one until the date of travel.
How do you know whether this advance ticket you speak of hadn't been removed from the reservation system due to either being sold out or being too close to the train departure time?
Because they literally refused to serve me; they wouldn't even engage on the basis that they were only selling tickets for that day as I was "too late".
I too have found uniformly patronising and indifferent service from my local ticket office, who seem to find customers a great inconvenience. Frankly, the sooner it closes the better - it will be a much better passenger experience.
I use trainsplit for most things, which is a great improvement in terms of service, though it annoys me that even they seem incapable of sending me an email when my train is delayed, giving alternatives and options, and links to automated delay repay. This is simple stuff, how come everything seems to be difficult.
There are many ticket office staff who are very helpful to passengers for all sorts of reasons, but there is also a responsibility in the role for protecting the TOC's revenue along with helping the traincrew and so why should a ticket clerk trust a passenger they don't even know that they will buy a railcard in the future, by adding the discount on an advance ticket sale, when that passenger might never buy the railcard? What if the passenger isn't eligible for a railcard but lies about their age? It is different if the clerk sells advance tickets to a passenger who has forgotten their railcard but who the clerk has served before and knows they hold a valid railcard - then obviously common sense should be applied.
You might think this is a negative view of the travelling public, but unfortunately there are a lot of people who will try it on if they can, particularly so on the railway I have found. The argument that it is for the guard to ensure the passenger has a valid railcard when travelling is also flawed, because it puts unnecessary extra risk of potential conflict on the guard, when the much simpler and safer solution is for the booking office to check this at the point of sale.
Is this a genuine post? I think you're just deliberately trying to wind people up.
Of course the ticket office staff should sell what they're asked to. It's their job. The reason we're seeing ticket office closures is because of people misguidedly upholding the views you hold dear. If ticket office staff sold what they were asked their jobs would be a lot more secure. But most of them would rather uphold unfriendly pointless rules and loose their job.
If ticket office staff don't sell a railcard ticket then the customer will buy it online or from a TVM. Or simply not travel by rail. A guard has no idea where a ticket was purchased so has to ask for railcard anyway. The ticket office seeing it saves noone any work and gains the TOC no more money. Potential loosing the TOC money if the customer decides not to travel by train.
Real life example, I'm going on holiday with my three children. I want to book in advance to get cheapest fares and take seat reservations. One year I book at the end of the school holidays, the next year at the start of the school holidays, thus one 12 month railcard will two holiday trips. If the ticket office won't sell me the first tickets without the railcard, then it's costing me more money so I won't go by train and the railway looses out a lot, just for upholding a stupid pointless rule.
Is this a genuine post? I think you're just deliberately trying to wind people up.
Of course the ticket office staff should sell what they're asked to. It's their job. The reason we're seeing ticket office closures is because of people misguidedly upholding the views you hold dear. If ticket office staff sold what they were asked their jobs would be a lot more secure. But most of them would rather uphold unfriendly pointless rules and loose their job.
If ticket office staff don't sell a railcard ticket then the customer will buy it online or from a TVM. Or simply not travel by rail. A guard has no idea where a ticket was purchased so has to ask for railcard anyway. The ticket office seeing it saves noone any work and gains the TOC no more money. Potential loosing the TOC money if the customer decides not to travel by train.
Real life example, I'm going on holiday with my three children. I want to book in advance to get cheapest fares and take seat reservations. One year I book at the end of the school holidays, the next year at the start of the school holidays, thus one 12 month railcard will two holiday trips. If the ticket office won't sell me the first tickets without the railcard, then it's costing me more money so I won't go by train and the railway looses out a lot, just for upholding a stupid pointless rule.
Have a look at one of the railcard websites and go to the terms and conditions section, you'll see that in one place it mentions that railcard holders may be asked to present their railcard when buying the ticket; it doesn't specify any particular circumstances, so yes ticket office staff are within their rights to ask to see evidence of the valid railcard before issuing the discounted ticket, even for future travel.
I'm not against using discretion for checking railcards in the right circumstances, but it's these kind of arrogant views on this thread which make me more keen to spell out the facts in black and white.
Well, if ticket offices are passenger unfriendly then they should all be closed. If staff in customer facing roles don't have the necessary skills they should be offered training and if they don't improve sacked.
'The Railway' could eliminate a proportion of railcard issues by not having so many cards. Back when some form of full-time education was required up to age 18 so for the majority until the end of the academic year during which they reached age 18 the 'child' fare age should have been raised to and including age 18 too. So just 4 railcards ? Disabled, forces, 19-29 and Senior. For all others e.g. friends & family, two together simply apply the discount when the appropriate tickets are purchased together and mark the tickets as only valid when all are produced together. While doing this would mean more purchases were discounted longer term would it be balanced by more ticket sales because rail was more cost effective ?
Is this a genuine post? I think you're just deliberately trying to wind people up.
Of course the ticket office staff should sell what they're asked to. It's their job. The reason we're seeing ticket office closures is because of people misguidedly upholding the views you hold dear. If ticket office staff sold what they were asked their jobs would be a lot more secure. But most of them would rather uphold unfriendly pointless rules and loose their job.
If ticket office staff don't sell a railcard ticket then the customer will buy it online or from a TVM. Or simply not travel by rail. A guard has no idea where a ticket was purchased so has to ask for railcard anyway. The ticket office seeing it saves noone any work and gains the TOC no more money. Potential loosing the TOC money if the customer decides not to travel by train.
Real life example, I'm going on holiday with my three children. I want to book in advance to get cheapest fares and take seat reservations. One year I book at the end of the school holidays, the next year at the start of the school holidays, thus one 12 month railcard will two holiday trips. If the ticket office won't sell me the first tickets without the railcard, then it's costing me more money so I won't go by train and the railway looses out a lot, just for upholding a stupid pointless rule.
I have to say my experience of ticket offices over the years has been rather indifferent.
Just in recent memory I can think of quite a few errors, which simply wouldn’t have happened if I’d been using a machine:
* Return to Shelford instead of Shalford
* Asked for day return London to Letchworth for tomorrow. Got a single to Letchworth for today and a single from Letchworth to London for tomorrow.
* Asked for return Letchworth to Cambridge. Got a return from Hitchin to Cambridge.
* Asked for an off-peak return to London. Got a peak one.
My local station is pretty helpful, but the opening of the windows is indifferent - you just can’t rely on it being open when advertised. And of course when it is open, nowadays it’s only ever one window, so it only takes someone dragging their feet for whatever reason and you can be waiting for 10 minutes. Then there’s the experience of buying PRIV tickets at London termini which tends to be a horrific experience.
Having said all that, all these issues are not beyond the realms of being solved. A decent ticket office is still, in my view, an asset, and better than a free-for-all over machines, which is often the alternative. Booking halls on TFL have become rather more chaotic since the windows went, especially at some of the busier stations.
Rest assured ticket offices are being closed; I think this will be a good thing overall for passengers as it will lead to more ticket types being available online as well as re-allocating staff into more customer facing/focussed roles.
It's clear from this thread that some ticket office staff are highly obstructive and act in a way that encourages the demise of the role.
Well, if ticket offices are passenger unfriendly then they should all be closed. If staff in customer facing roles don't have the necessary skills they should be offered training and if they don't improve sacked.
Perhaps you (and some others here) could try working in the role yourselves before making judgemental statements? And I don't mean a quiet outstation where nearly all of the customers/villagers know 'Joe Bloggs' at the booking office (who puts on a cheerful face but often doesn't do the job properly or is lazy). I mean a busy station where it's often constant with lots of complex requests (sometimes because the outstation couldn't do it) and where a substantial minority of the passengers treat the station staff poorly (to use a mild expression!).
UK ticketing is a mess, everyone knows that. A lot of moves to reform ticketing have had push back from Treasury, likely over concerns about maybe having to do its job if farebox revenue changes over the transition period.
Honestly, bus fare structures are a fever dream compared to rail, outside of the two cities that actually run acceptable bus service (London, Nottingham).
I hope one day to be promoted to director of upsetting passengers. I have some freah ideas to make things much worse
It gives me such a warm feeling inside knowing, after a hard day at work, that i can relax at home safe in the knowledge that i have made life harder for the little people.
Perhaps you (and some others here) could try working in the role yourselves before making judgemental statements? And I don't mean a quiet outstation where nearly all of the customers/villagers know 'Jim' at the booking office (who puts on a cheerful face but often doesn't do the job properly or is lazy). I mean a busy station where it's often constant with lots of complex requests (sometimes because the outstation couldn't do it) and where a substantial minority of the passengers treat the station staff poorly (to use a mild expression!).
This is not an excuse in my opinion. Many of us have to work under pressure at times and have to experience difficult customers but that doesn't excuse us offering poor service. On any other industry it would be seen in a very negative light and would be deemed unacceptable by the employer.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
UK ticketing is a mess, everyone knows that. A lot of moves to reform ticketing have had push back from Treasury, likely over concerns about maybe having to do its job if farebox revenue changes over the transition period.
Honestly, bus fare structures are a fever dream compared to rail, outside of the two cities that actually run acceptable bus service (London, Nottingham).
Perhaps you (and some others here) could try working in the role yourselves before making judgemental statements? And I don't mean a quiet outstation where nearly all of the customers/villagers know 'Jim' at the booking office (who puts on a cheerful face but often doesn't do the job properly or is lazy). I mean a busy station where it's often constant with lots of complex requests (sometimes because the outstation couldn't do it) and where a substantial minority of the passengers treat the station staff poorly (to use a mild expression!).
I'm not surprised that you think that passengers treat you poorly. I think I'd get frustrated with the customer service you describe.
It's entirely possible to do a difficult and tiring job, follow the rules, work in the company's best interest, and still send customers away happy with the products they want. Unless you work in the railway apparently, when its an optional extra.
I'm not surprised that you think that passengers treat you poorly. I think I'd get frustrated with the customer service you describe.
It's entirely possible to do a difficult and tiring job, follow the rules, work in the company's best interest, and still send customers away happy with the products they want. Unless you work in the railway apparently, when its an optional extra.
This is not an excuse in my opinion. Many of us have to work under pressure at times and have to experience difficult customers but that doesn't excuse us offering poor service. On any other industry it would be seen in a very negative light and would be deemed unacceptable by the employer.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I don't see how this is relevant and I don't see how any such reforms would solve the issue of poor customer service.
Bus fares are far more opaque than rail fares but that's a debate for another thread.
Refusing to add a railcard discount to a ticket when the customer doesn't hold a valid railcard, or asking to see proof of a valid railcard before applying the discount, is not poor customer service and if you think it is then you are mistaken in my opinion. Perhaps neither of you have worked in retail before? I'll also repeat again that one of the conditions of the railcard is that the passenger may be requested to present their railcard when buying discounted tickets. There are other conditions which some ticket office staff follow to the letter which I would say are a lot more pedantic and 'passenger unfriendly' than the issue in question, but I won't bother going into them.
And once again if I held some kind of loyalty or discount card for a store then I would take responsibility and bring it with me whenever I wanted to buy something from that store, or apply in good time and wait to receive it before going to purchase things with it. I'd also fully expect to be asked to present it and have it checked for validity if I was buying something at the counter and claimed I held one. Why should we make exceptions for railcards?
Take a pub for example - would you really expect the bar staff to take your word for it that you held a CAMRA discount and knock a percentage off the price of the drink without showing proof of it?
Refusing to add a railcard discount to a ticket when the customer doesn't hold a valid railcard is not poor customer service and if you think it is then you are mistaken in my opinion. Perhaps neither of you have worked in retail before? I'll also repeat again that one of the conditions of the railcard is that the passenger may be requested to present their railcard when buying discounted tickets. There are other conditions which some ticket office staff follow to the letter which I would say are a lot more pedantic and 'passenger unfriendly' than the issue in question, but I won't bother going into them.
And once again if I held some kind of loyalty or discount card for a store then I would take responsibility and bring it with me whenever I wanted to buy something from that store, I'd also fully expect to be asked to present it and have it checked for validity if I was buying something at the counter and claimed I held one.
Take a pub for example - would you really expect the bar staff to take your word for it that you held a CAMRA discount and knock a percentage off the price of the drink without showing proof of it?
Most stores will allow an old receipt barcode to be scanned to add the points. Will the railway refund if you send in images of your railcard and tickets?
Refusing to add a railcard discount to a ticket when the customer doesn't hold a valid railcard is not poor customer service and if you think it is then you are mistaken in my opinion
Someone wants to travel in 5 weeks time; you want them to either have a Railcard for 5 weeks in which they won't use it or for the passenger to forego the Advance rate.
A website would sell the fare without quibble.
You think I am mistaken to call this poor service? Are you serious?
I've done a wide range of jobs and right now in particular there are some people who are very keen to avoid unnecessary expense of the sort you are advocating.
I'll also repeat again that one of the conditions of the railcard is that the passenger may be requested to present their railcard when buying discounted tickets
May; but shouldn't be if it's an Advance ticket. Unfortunately this isn't spelt out.
And this is where there are two possible outcomes; staff may take a pragmatic approach or they may take an approach of doing their job to the letter (what they perceive as that anyway) without any application of common sense.
And that is where we differ as if I didn't apply common sense and pragmatism in the jobs I've done, I would have been sacked.
Some jobs allow people to get away with interpreting rules against the customer and applying them rigidly without considering the wider implications.
. There are other conditions which some ticket office staff follow to the letter which I would say are a lot more pedantic and 'passenger unfriendly' than the issue in question, but I won't bother going into them.
And once again if I held some kind of loyalty or discount card for a store then I would take responsibility and bring it with me whenever I wanted to buy something from that store, I'd also fully expect to be asked to present it and have it checked for validity if I was buying something at the counter and claimed I held one.
Take a pub for example - would you really expect the bar staff to take your word for it that you held a CAMRA discount and knock a percentage off the price of the drink without showing proof of it?
And once again if I held some kind of loyalty or discount card for a store then I would take responsibility and bring it with me whenever I wanted to buy something from that store, or apply in good time and wait to receive it before going to purchase things with it. I'd also fully expect to be asked to present it and have it checked for validity if I was buying something at the counter and claimed I held one. Why should we make exceptions for railcards?
Take a pub for example - would you really expect the bar staff to take your word for it that you held a CAMRA discount and knock a percentage off the price of the drink without showing proof of it?
And I'll point out, again, that many stores don't need you to have your card.
If I go into Paperchase or Holland and Barrett they'll say "Oh, you've not got your card, give me your postcode or email address and I'll look it up". If I go into Sainsbury's or Tesco they'll say "not got your card, bring it in with your receipt and Customer Services will add your points".
Rail conditions do say you can be asked to show your Railcard. But does that help? Does it improve anything for the passenger? Does it give them a better service? Or does it provide no benefit for the railway and put people off using ticket offices?
Most stores will allow an old receipt barcode to be scanned to add the points. Will the railway refund if you send in images of your railcard and tickets?
Yes, this was brought in a few years ago; if a passenger forgets their railcard then only the undiscounted fare is available to purchase at the time, but the passenger can claim the difference back if they show proof of the valid railcard at a future point.
Yes, this was brought in a few years ago; if a passenger forgets their railcard then only the undiscounted fare is available to purchase at the time, but the passenger can claim the difference back if they show proof of the valid railcard at a future point.
Refusing to add a railcard discount to a ticket when the customer doesn't hold a valid railcard, or asking to see proof of a valid railcard before applying the discount, is not poor customer service and if you think it is then you are mistaken in my opinion.
I agree. It is quite a while since I was a booking office clerk - 1984, long before on-line sales, e-tickets etc were a thing, but we would not have dreamed of selling someone a Railcard-discounted ticket without (politely of course) asking to see the Railcard, if not already presented. Just because a discounted ticket can be bought on line without proof of actually having a Railcard (whether that should change is another thing) does not mean that it is wrong to ask to see the Railcard during an in-person transaction; After all, during on-train ticket inspection staff always (in my experience) ask to see the Railcard, so bringing it when actually buying the ticket does not seem a huge or unreasonable imposition to me.
And yes, ticket office staff are very much responsible for protecting the railway's revenue, for example the number of 'children' who ask for half-fare tickets despite clearly being older than 16, we questioned such in my day and I expect staff still do. Should anyone asking for a child ticket just be sold one without quibble ?
Someone wants to travel in 5 weeks time; you want them to either have a Railcard for 5 weeks in which they won't use it or for the passenger to forego the Advance rate.
Given that Railcards last for (at least) a year I personally don't see that as the end of the world either, in fact buying one in advance of travel is precisely what my elderly Mum does.
And I'll point out, again, that many stores don't need you to have your card.
If I go into Paperchase or Holland and Barrett they'll say "Oh, you've not got your card, give me your postcode or email address and I'll look it up". If I go into Sainsbury's or Tesco they'll say "not got your card, bring it in with your receipt and Customer Services will add your points".
Rail conditions do say you can be asked to show your Railcard. But does that help? Does it improve anything for the passenger? Does it give them a better service? Or does it provide no benefit for the railway and put people off using ticket offices?
The railway ticket office software doesn't have such a system of storing the postcode or email address to look up railcards which aren't physically/visually present in the example you provide. I would say it'd be a good idea for ticket offices to be able to have this function and offer more flexibility but right now they don't and you can't blame booking office staff for this.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Someone wants to travel in 5 weeks time; you want them to either have a Railcard for 5 weeks in which they won't use it or for the passenger to forego the Advance rate.
A website would sell the fare without quibble.
You think I am mistaken to call this poor service? Are you serious?
A better solution would be for ticket office software, or railway ticketing systems in general to be able to advance-date railcards with a 'start date' and 'end date' clearly shown to prevent fraudulent use and prevent people from losing a few weeks of the railcard validity unnecessarily. As it is the software only prints the expiry date rather than the start date and until this changes railcards can't be advance dated (unless a renewal without break of continuity). Again though, you can't blame the booking office staff for this.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I agree. It is quite a while since I was a booking office clerk - 1984, long before on-line sales, e-tickets etc were a thing, but we would not have dreamed of selling someone a Railcard-discounted ticket without (politely of course) asking to see the Railcard, if not already presented. Just because a discounted ticket can be bought on line without proof of actually having a Railcard (whether that should change is another thing) does not mean that it is wrong to ask to see the Railcard during an in-person transaction; After all, during on-train ticket inspection staff always (in my experience) ask to see the Railcard, so bringing it when actually buying the ticket does not seem a huge or unreasonable imposition to me.
And yes, ticket office staff are very much responsible for protecting the railway's revenue, for example the number of 'children' who ask for half-fare tickets despite clearly being older than 16, we questioned such in my day and I expect staff still do. Should anyone asking for a child ticket just be sold one without quibble ?
Given that Railcards last for (at least) a year I personally don't see that as the end of the world either, in fact buying one in advance of travel is precisely what my elderly Mum does.
Have a look at one of the railcard websites and go to the terms and conditions section, you'll see that in one place it mentions that railcard holders may be asked to present their railcard when buying the ticket; it doesn't specify any particular circumstances, so yes ticket office staff are within their rights to ask to see evidence of the valid railcard before issuing the discounted ticket, even for future travel.
I'm not against using discretion for checking railcards in the right circumstances, but it's these kind of arrogant views on this thread which make me more keen to spell out the facts in black and white.
Refusing to add a railcard discount to a ticket when the customer doesn't hold a valid railcard, or asking to see proof of a valid railcard before applying the discount, is not poor customer service and if you think it is then you are mistaken in my opinion. Perhaps neither of you have worked in retail before? I'll also repeat again that one of the conditions of the railcard is that the passenger may be requested to present their railcard when buying discounted tickets. There are other conditions which some ticket office staff follow to the letter which I would say are a lot more pedantic and 'passenger unfriendly' than the issue in question, but I won't bother going into them.
And once again if I held some kind of loyalty or discount card for a store then I would take responsibility and bring it with me whenever I wanted to buy something from that store, or apply in good time and wait to receive it before going to purchase things with it. I'd also fully expect to be asked to present it and have it checked for validity if I was buying something at the counter and claimed I held one. Why should we make exceptions for railcards?
Take a pub for example - would you really expect the bar staff to take your word for it that you held a CAMRA discount and knock a percentage off the price of the drink without showing proof of it?
Surely the crucial word is MAY. You seem to read this as MUST and won't tolerate any deviation from this.
I spent many years working in retail at a well known supermarket, latterly as the store customer service manager. It was drilled into us, and we had to drill it into others, that there are only two rules of customer service. Rule 1-the customer is always right. Rule 2-when the customer is wrong, reread Rule 1. One Saturday we had a family returned from holiday come to do a massive shop to stock up again at home. It all went through the till and only then did they realise they hadn't got any payment. I let them take it home and come back to pay us later. Why? Because it's good customer service. We gained customers for life there, they told all their friends and family how good we were.
The sort of service you provide all you're get is "that grumpy bloke at the ticket office was a waste of space, I'll go by car" Railway staff are, often (but not always), clueless about customer service. I'd challenge you to work in real retail and not quit after the first day. You'd never manage it.
Surely the crucial word is MAY. You seem to read this as MUST and won't tolerate any deviation from this.
I spent many years working in retail at a well known supermarket, latterly as the store customer service manager. It was drilled into us, and we had to drill it into others, that there are only two rules of customer service. Rule 1-the customer is always right. Rule 2-when the customer is wrong, reread Rule 1. One Saturday we had a family returned from holiday come to do a massive shop to stock up again at home. It all went through the till and only then did they realise they hadn't got any payment. I let them take it home and come back to pay us later. Why? Because it's good customer service. We gained customers for life there, they told all their friends and family how good we were.
The sort of service you provide all you're get is "that grumpy bloke at the ticket office was a waste of space, I'll go by car" Railway staff are, often (but not always), clueless about customer service. I'd challenge you to work in real retail and not quit after the first day. You'd never manage it.
So now you're being patronizing as well. 'Real retail' is a meaningless phrase (there are just different types of retail with different sets of circumstances) and 'customer is always right' is an overused cliche and not always accurate; for example if a customer isn't happy about the price they have to pay for a ticket or a ticket not being eligible for refund and they give the staff abuse for it, are they still 'in the right' in your opinion?
So now you're being patronizing as well. 'Real retail' is a meaningless phrase (there are just different types of retail with different sets of circumstances) and 'customer is always right' is an overused cliche and not always accurate; for example if a customer isn't happy about the price they have to pay for a ticket or a ticket not being eligible for refund and they give the staff abuse for it, are they still 'in the right' in your opinion?
In my experience staff who get abuse are always the same staff. Many staff go their whole career with no abuse because they handle situations well. If you're getting a lot of abuse change the way you deal with situations, you'll be amazed what a difference it makes. If you can't change the way you deal with it then maybe customer service isn't the job for you.
In my experience staff who get abuse are always the same staff. Many staff go their whole career with no abuse because they handle situations well. If you're getting a lot of abuse change the way you deal with situations, you'll be amazed what a difference it makes. If you can't change the way you deal with it then maybe customer service isn't the job for you.
Again like your previous post you're taking it personal and assuming I'm the one getting constant abuse when I haven't said any such thing; I'm speaking for ticket office staff as a whole.
Perhaps you (and some others here) could try working in the role yourselves before making judgemental statements? And I don't mean a quiet outstation where nearly all of the customers/villagers know 'Jim' at the booking office (who puts on a cheerful face but often doesn't do the job properly or is lazy). I mean a busy station where it's often constant with lots of complex requests (sometimes because the outstation couldn't do it) and where a substantial minority of the passengers treat the station staff poorly (to use a mild expression!).
How does telling a passenger you can't sell them their ticket as they don't have their railcard handy make the job any less complex or encourage the passenger to be any more polite?
There are many ticket office staff who are very helpful to passengers for all sorts of reasons, but there is also a responsibility in the role for protecting the TOC's revenue along with helping the traincrew and so why should a ticket clerk trust a passenger they don't even know that they will buy a railcard in the future, by adding the discount on an advance ticket sale, when that passenger might never buy the railcard? What if the passenger isn't eligible for a railcard but lies about their age? It is different if the clerk sells advance tickets to a passenger who has forgotten their railcard but who the clerk has served before and knows they hold a valid railcard - then obviously common sense should be applied.
You might think this is a negative view of the travelling public, but unfortunately there are a lot of people who will try it on if they can, particularly so on the railway I have found. The argument that it is for the guard to ensure the passenger has a valid railcard when travelling is also flawed, because it puts unnecessary extra risk of potential conflict on the guard, when the much simpler and safer solution is for the booking office to check this at the point of sale.
None of this makes any sense. Anyone can just buy any old ticket, railcard or not, online or from a TVM. And you could just forget to bring the railcard on the day regardless of whether a ticket clerk checked it when they bought the ticket.
And I'll point out, again, that many stores don't need you to have your card.
If I go into Paperchase or Holland and Barrett they'll say "Oh, you've not got your card, give me your postcode or email address and I'll look it up". If I go into Sainsbury's or Tesco they'll say "not got your card, bring it in with your receipt and Customer Services will add your points".
This is a prime example of what Yorkie would call "false equivalence." When shops like Holland & Barrett ask for your postcode or email address, it's so they can check your true status on their computer. In other words it's not different from a ticket office clerk asking to see a passenger's Railcard.
Supermarkets' loyalty cards are different. They allow you to add points which will grant you a discount at a future date. By allowing customers to pay in full for their current purchase and later, on presentation of appropriate evidence, crediting points to that customer's card is completely different from a ticket office clerk asking for proof before selling a discounted ticket.
I am bewildered by the perverse attitude being expressed in this thread that the railway industry should not take reasonable steps to reduce fare evasion and fraud; in particular, the idea that insisting on proof of status before selling tickets at a discount is somehow reprehensible. We have several threads in this forum about fare evasion with detailed first hand evidence of the kind of tricks that a rogue element gets up to. The railway today is in a period of financial crisis which threatens its future existence. This is exactly the right moment to crack down on fraud and if doing so drives away that rogue element, so much the better. Honest people do not object to being asked to prove their status and it's delusional to imagine they would shun the railway forever more if asked to do so.
I live in London and, because of my age, I have a Freedom Pass. That does not entitle me to turn up at a station without my pass and breezily declare "I'm entitled, I'm entitled" and just catch a train. I have to bring my Freedom Pass with me and if I don't, I can't travel. Being obliged to carry evidence is no imposition at all and I'm astonished that some posters think it is.
There is another element at work here. Any system for processing people will have a high failure rate, whether it's an education system, a military system, a criminal justice system or whatever. That insisting on evidence of status inconveniences, even incommodes a small minority is not proof that the system is wrong, nor that it is highly flawed.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
