Who decides, at what level, of GWR?

[ComUtoR]

And who decides to employ attendents who can barely pronounce English words so that their loudspeaker announcements are unintelligable apart from the 'thank-you!' at the end?

English is a rather odd language. Everyone speaks it differently.

The further North I go, the less I understand. Even at my TOC, too many people 'talk funny'. I can barely understand some of the native speakers, let alone those whose first language may be different.

 

[Snow1964]

Posters have broadly covered the bases already; but as a GWR fleet controller - We will always work with the adage of a short train is better than no train at all. None of us have any awareness or interest in the financial “cost” element of our jobs (how much delay repay it will cost to do x or how much will be paid in delay minutes to do y). And certainly none of us ever, ever do anything on whim - that suggestion is sickening and insulting.

We would love a much larger fleet of 9 car IETs.

We would love enough spare units everywhere to cover every potential failure.

We wish every call we made was “right” and didn’t disrupt anyone.

Unfortunately we have to run the train service with the tools that we have. We have to look at the whole picture - and that picture is bigger than just the one train Mr Bloggs happens to be travelling on.

That is a well balanced argument, and the same also applies to the virtually permanent short forms on GWR Wessex services. On those they have given up even offering reservations as the formations change so much.

Some people have been a bit too keen to defend, without explaining whilst a train leaves Paddington whilst loads of units are parked in the depot, or why the maintenance isn’t upto scratch so that trains are failing so regularly, or why if it is deemed important to avoid overcrowding so little is being done to get it back to long term reliable (and if that means more trains, they should be ordered).

There appears some who are taking the we work with what we have got approach, even though we know we haven’t got enough. That is a very much we have given up on restoring quality approach, but that is not a position that should be defended except as a short term crisis view. It is too much defending the current mess, and no explaining how and when it will be improved that annoys.

 

[Falcon1200]

There appears some who are taking the we work with what we have got approach, even though we know we haven’t got enough.

Those such as myself who have responded to explain how and why decisions are made do not, or did not in my case, have the power to change things, no matter how much we complained (and we certainly did make our views known!). Overall policy is decided at a much higher level.

It is too much defending the current mess, and no explaining how and when it will be improved that annoys.

Again, those who manage the service, ie Control staff, deal with it on a day to day basis and rarely have any insight into future policy.

 

[ComUtoR]

This ought be a key criteria for new hires, and a key competency for existing staff

It is at my TOC

If they can't achieve this, they're not suitable for using a public address system,

We also have an automated system. They would only need to type in a number. Maybe the human part of the process should be removed all together ?

as in the event of a derailment or other incident, they'd be absolutely incompetent and hopeless: a danger to passengers on board (and other staff).

Why would they be a danger ?

 

[43096]

Why would they be a danger ?

I'd have thought that would be obvious. In such a situation, passengers need/want clear, precise instructions on what to do. If someone can't communicate that, then there is an increased risk.

Having been on a train that terminated short that had a guard who was incapable of communicating using the PA, it was interesting to see what happened. PA comes on, guard mumbles something that no-one understands. What was actually needed was a very clear "Can I have your attention, please, this is an important announcement. This train is terminating here due to ____. Please leave the train now." What it became was a protracted kerfuffle as it took about ten minutes to empty the train - all due to one incompetent guard.

 

[railfan99]

Why would they be a danger ?

Because if they were barking instructions at individuals but passengers couldn't understand the accent or quality of the English they spoke, precious time might be lost, say if there was a fire.