Seated rail staff, passengers standing

[Subbsi]

I am a frequent peak-time passenger on the Leeds-Manchester route; TPE disruption over the last year has meant that peak time services are often full and standing with First frequently declassified. One of my frustrations is the common sight of uniformed or lanyarded rail staff (albeit often not TPE staff) seated in both First and Standard while myself and other paying passengers are standing. I have never known conductors or revenue staff to ask them to move.

I’d be interested to know what rules or guidance are given to rail staff for these situations - it seems quite a bad look for them to be seated comfortably in uniform while passengers stand.

 

[ComUtoR]

Do you know if they have paid for a ticket or are getting free travel ?

 

[Subbsi]

We quite regularly have revenue protection people on this line and I’ve never seen a ticket shown, just nodded through despite a thorough inspection for everybody else. I have occasionally seen those not in uniform but clearly in ‘work clothes’ show their ID on a lanyard so I assume this is all commuting or duty travel.

 

[RPI]

Certainly at the TOC I work for this is a huuuuge no no, I will always ask them to give up their seat when I encounter it, I do it discreetly and there are times when I've noticed a person I know doing this and I may even text them to save any embarrassment. Its quite often the case that you can get on a train when it isn't full and standing and it gradually fills up around you, and you don't notice.
There are always reminders being sent out about this issue too

 

[Bluejays]

Surely the issue is with the company for short forming? I can understand why it would be annoying to see members of tpe staff on the passenger seats, when there may be crew area/crew seats they could take. But other toc staff in uniform? they're either going from or to work or travelling for work. I don't understand why that makes them less worthy of a seat.

Bit of an edge case admittedly . But should a 60/70 yr old staff member vacate a seat for a 20 yr old passenger?

 

[twpsaesneg]

If the staff members mentioned are travelling using status passes / priv etc. then they are in breach of the conditions of use. However, it is a common myth that all rail staff are entitled to free or discounted travel. I am rail infrastructure staff and have to pay just like everybody else, and I occasionally travel in a branded polo shirt. Whilst I would give up my seat that I've paid for, for an elderly / disabled person I'm not going to do so for everyone and anyone.

 

[Gloster]

Is it in their Terms and Conditions? Recollection from BR days was that somewhere or other it was clearly stated that staff travelling on duty and, I think, on priv tickets had to give up their seats to paying passengers if the train was full and standing.

 

[AlterEgo]

Bit of an edge case admittedly . But should a 60/70 yr old staff member vacate a seat for a 20 yr old passenger?

Yes.

 

[Bluejays]

If the staff members mentioned are travelling using status passes / priv etc. then they are in breach of the conditions of use. However, it is a common myth that all rail staff are entitled to free or discounted travel. I am rail infrastructure staff and have to pay just like everybody else, and I occasionally travel in a branded polo shirt. Whilst I would give up my seat that I've paid for, for an elderly / disabled person I'm not going to do so for everyone and anyone.

Too bloody right. If on discount, you've paid your money and taken your choice as to restrictive conditions. If you've tapped in or paid full fare you're a regular punter and deserve your seat as much as anyone

 

[43066]

If I’m en route to work via another TOC I’ve paid for my seat and I’ll remain in it, thanks very much! I’d offer my seat in the same scenario as at any other time - ie disabled/elderly person.

When passing at work I’ll generally sit in 1st where it’s quieter than standard, or failing that a back cab. I’ve never known all seats to be taken up in 1st, though.

 

[Class800]

Yes.

No - because we are a hopefully still polite society where we respect older people

 

[AlterEgo]

As former rail staff and passholder myself. Yes, staff should stand and give up their seats for customers. That wouldn't be a difficult dilemma in most industries.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jul 2023 ==

No - because we are a hopefully still polite society where we respect older people

How old are you?

 

[The Puddock]

Whilst I would give up my seat that I've paid for

You haven't paid for a seat, though. Nor has anyone else on the train. Your ticket doesn't guarantee you a seat even if you have a (free) reservation.

 

[twpsaesneg]

You haven't paid for a seat, though. Nor has anyone else on the train. Your ticket doesn't guarantee you a seat even if you have a (free) reservation.

Semantics. The seat that I'm sat in!

 

[AlterEgo]

You haven't paid for a seat, though. Nor has anyone else on the train. Your ticket doesn't guarantee you a seat even if you have a (free) reservation.

Even so, passengers who happen to be staff on full public rate tickets don't *need* to give up their seat, although visibly sitting in a rail staff uniform polo while others are standing is bad form. I wouldn't do it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes.

Or rather "yes, unless the 60-70 year old would be in a position where it would be appropriate to give up a priority seat to them".

60 is barely middle age with some people.

 

[Western Sunset]

I can't quite believe we're even having this discussion...

 

[3141]

If the staff members mentioned are travelling using status passes / priv etc. then they are in breach of the conditions of use. However, it is a common myth that all rail staff are entitled to free or discounted travel. I am rail infrastructure staff and have to pay just like everybody else, and I occasionally travel in a branded polo shirt. Whilst I would give up my seat that I've paid for, for an elderly / disabled person I'm not going to do so for everyone and anyone.

As a passenger aged 83, I would hope that a railway worker travelling at a discount, or free, would give up their seat, especially if it was a long journey. And certainly if their terms and conditions say they should. But I wouldn't see any reason, just because they are in railway uniform or other branded clothing, they should give up a seat to everyone.

Surely the issue is with the company for short forming? I can understand why it would be annoying to see members of tpe staff on the passenger seats, when there may be crew area/crew seats they could take. But other toc staff in uniform? they're either going from or to work or travelling for work. I don't understand why that makes them less worthy of a seat.

Bit of an edge case admittedly . But should a 60/70 yr old staff member vacate a seat for a 20 yr old passenger?

Ha, blame the company. It must be their fault. Another person might blame the unions if there are fewer trains because of an overtime ban and those that run are crowded. But why not focus on the actual issue raised by the OP?

 

[185]

Passengers or staff from Manchester (1 hour journey) should take priority over all passengers or staff from Dewsbury or Huddersfield for their short 10 or 20 minute journey.

Really, the well funded PTE should be providing additional services for commuters in it's county.

 

[Bluejays]

As a passenger aged 83, I would hope that a railway worker travelling at a discount, or free, would give up their seat, especially if it was a long journey. And certainly if their terms and conditions say they should. But I wouldn't see any reason, just because they are in railway uniform or other branded clothing, they should give up a seat to everyone.


Ha, blame the company. It must be their fault. Another person might blame the unions if there are fewer trains because of an overtime ban and those that run are crowded. But why not focus on the actual issue raised by the OP?

I was focusing on the issue. It seems strange to me that a lack of seats is blamed on 'the wrong type of people sitting down', rather than a lack of seats being provided.

 

[AlterEgo]

Or rather "yes, unless the 60-70 year old would be in a position where it would be appropriate to give up a priority seat to them".

60 is barely middle age with some people.

Well quite, but not just on account of their age.

Anyone who is disabled or has an issue with standing should have a seat, regardless of age, but it wasn't what was asked.

I was focusing on the issue. It seems strange to me that a lack of seats is blamed on 'the wrong type of people sitting down', rather than a lack of seats being provided.

It's you who's trying to enforce a norm about "the wrong type of people sitting down" by sniping at posters who say, that when there is a shortage of seats, that staff members should vacate those seats for members of the paying public. Again, that wouldn't be a controversial thing to say in any other industry.

 

[43066]

As a passenger aged 83, I would hope that a railway worker travelling at a discount, or free, would give up their seat,

To be fair at 83 you’d be firmly in the category of person who could legitimately expect to be offered a priority seat on any train, certainly by anyone of working age (absent a disability themselves).

I was focusing on the issue. It seems strange to me that a lack of seats is blamed on 'the wrong type of people sitting down', rather than a lack of seats being provided.

It strikes me this isn’t something that would even be noticed, let alone annoy anybody, other than those who are actively looking to be annoyed. I do hope this thread doesn’t lead to unpleasant scenes with enthusiasts demanding staff vacate their seats, especially in the current fraught climate!

 

[Florence Rox]

I am a 66 year old still working full time for TFL. Some shifts are up to 12 hours, so I would only give up my seat to someone clearly less able to stand than myself. I can’t imagine many fit 20-40 year olds asking a pensioner for their seat.

 

[twpsaesneg]

As a passenger aged 83, I would hope that a railway worker travelling at a discount, or free, would give up their seat, especially if it was a long journey. And certainly if their terms and conditions say they should. But I wouldn't see any reason, just because they are in railway uniform or other branded clothing, they should give up a seat to everyone.

I would quite like to think that any able-bodied passenger would give up their seat for you out of respect for their elders to be honest, regardless of whether they have a discount or otherwise.

 

[AlterEgo]

I do hope this thread doesn’t lead to unpleasant scenes with enthusiasts demanding staff vacate their seats, especially in the current fraught climate!

Most rail staff actually are bound by their terms and conditions to vacate seats, even where they have a Priv ticket: https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/d...0.0PRXw4XOKta2QUln-o9eFmsTzahC4LE_FaRphPgMCX0

Staff travellers must ensure priority is given to fare-paying passengers. They should, whenever possible, seek to travel on lightly-loaded services. When this is not possible and travel is undertaken on a crowded train, they should stand back to allow fare-paying passengers to obtain seats.

 

[Bluejays]

Well quite, but not just on account of their age.

Anyone who is disabled or has an issue with standing should have a seat, regardless of age, but it wasn't what was asked.


It's you who's trying to enforce a norm about "the wrong type of people sitting down" by sniping at posters who say, that when there is a shortage of seats, that staff members should vacate those seats for members of the paying public. Again, that wouldn't be a controversial thing to say in any other industry.

I'm not trying to enforce any kind of norms. I've answered a one word response by yourself, and a seperate response by a poster who accused me of not answering the op's question.

For what it's worth, I think bletchleyites response added a level of context that both of our earlier comments missed.

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm not trying to enforce any kind of norms. I've answered a one word response by yourself, and a seperate response by a poster who accused me of not answering the op's question.

For what it's worth, I think bletchleyites response added a level of context that both of our earlier comments missed.

That's fair. Ceasefire.

 

[ComUtoR]

Staff travellers must ensure priority is given to fare-paying passengers. They should, whenever possible, seek to travel on lightly-loaded services. When this is not possible and travel is undertaken on a crowded train, they should stand back to allow fare-paying passengers to obtain seats.

Whilst I agree with your very first post in this thread...

Just to play devil's advocate...

It states 'should' and not 'must'

 

[Fokx]

We quite regularly have revenue protection people on this line and I’ve never seen a ticket shown, just nodded through despite a thorough inspection for everybody else. I have occasionally seen those not in uniform but clearly in ‘work clothes’ show their ID on a lanyard so I assume this is all commuting or duty travel.

The guards and revenue staff know the the regular travellers and the traincrew working the trains. If you’re in another operators uniform and I can clearly see a work lanyard with ID, and you’re heading to/from an obvious work location then I don’t need to see their ticket.

There are some staff that I can picture now where I can predict where they’re travelling to/from and what time because of their shift patterns

Most Train companies have reciprocal travel arrangements for staff on duty to get to/from their place of work as well as pass rides on other operator services. You also won’t find me charging or denying rail staff in uniform for a ticket as we all work for the same DfT now. It’s essentially all one company with different shareholders at the top.

Also if you look after your fellow traincrew they look after you in times of disruption and passenger incidents.

 

[AlterEgo]

Whilst I agree with your very first post in this thread...

Just to play devil's advocate...

It states 'should' and not 'must'

No, it says must, and then explains the actions you should take to carry out the must. It is unequivocal. Doesn't matter how you ensure this, but this is an obligation on anyone with a TOCNE card, which is the overwhelming majority of rail staff in 2023:

Staff travellers must ensure priority is given to fare-paying passengers