Staff Travel Stripped after Mistake.

[OllieWave]

Good afternoon.

Me and my other half work for a TOC and have done together for 7 years, myself as a driver and my other half as ticket office staff. Around two months ago, I left for new pastures for a consultancy firm. On my first day to the new office, having handed in my staff travel pass, and having tapped in and out from my home station to the office for the last 7 years, I was waved through the barrier by a former gate line colleague.

During my journey, I was stopped by Revenue Inspectors who immediately recognised me. I said hello, informed him I was on my way to collect my laptop for my new job, then heading to a nice coffee shop as the job is fully remote. I handed over my Spouse travel card, and was informed that this was not relevant for my journey, and I was issued with a prosecution slip, having had my ticket slip my mind due to the commonality of tapping in and out every other day for close to a decade. I explained myself fully, admitted I was wrong and that I should have known that the spouse travel card should not have been used, but I was informed by the revenue staff that I was not to worry, and I would receive a slap on the wrist.

Today, my other half received an email informing my partner that I, as well as them am to chop up our cards for both of our travel concessions (Priv, FIP and Spouse/Staff travel cards) and we will both be banned from these for life. Due to this, my other half is now looking for other employment and I cannot quite believe the treatment I have received for a mistake having used a travel card for the last 7 years.

Does anyone have any experience of appealing these issues?

 

[Titfield]

We only occasionally see Staff Travel Pass issues on this forum.

Firstly Do you or your partner belong to a trade union which can give you or your partner advice / intercede on your behalf?

Secondly you need to start being 100% accurate in what you say. Unless I have misunderstood you, Line 1 is not correct. You do NOT work for a TOC. You did but not any longer. You are no longer entitled to a priv pass in your own right. I also note you refer to it as a mistake in the last paragraph. That does seem some what unlikely.

Thirdly you knowingly used your spouse card. The journey you undertook was a work journey and should not have been used for that purpose.

On a practical level you could follow the advice we give to fare paying passengers who have evaded the fare:

a) you could apologise most sincerely, explain it was a moment of stupidity , offer to pay for the fare and admin costs and state it will not happen again.(Though of course if you havent got the card it cant. Perhaps state you will make sure you always pay the correct fare). You could even ask that even if they did not see fit to impose a lesser sanction on yourself would they at least consider a lesser sanction on your partner who had no part in this?

b) your spouse could separately write and explain that they had absolutely no knowledge of this and ask that they consider reinstating their priv card etc (ie just for their use only) on the basis that they have not committed any offence nor played any part in what you did.

The sanction that has been applied does seem very harsh certainly for your partner. Have their been any issues before?

 

[OllieWave]

Apologies - To clarify, we, at said TOC, are issued a Duty travel pass, a FIP Card and a Priv rate card. I am now in possession of a spousal travel card, a spouse FIP Card and Leisure Priv rate card. I resigned from this TOC 2 Months ago for pastures new.

While I understand that the journey was not to be conducted using a spouse travel card, not my duty travel card, it was simply muscle memory, as I was waved through the gates at the station by former colleagues. Had I potentially had to go into my wallet to produce my card, I would have likely had my memory jogged that I do indeed have a spouse card, no longer a duty card.

This is the singular and only instance, with no other irregularities coming up. Even during the waiting period to hear back, I refused to travel on my leisure/priv rate cards, even when it was appropriate out of fear of being stopped and checked again. Being lucky enough to still be under 30, I also purchased a 26-30 railcard for my occasional journeys to work prior to this day in which I travelled. I attempted to ask why on earth, if I intended to get free travel, I would have purchased said railcard and wasted 35 pounds, but I got no reply from the Revenue staff.

We have contacted the local RMT Rep in order to seek appeal advice.

 

[Port Road]

I assume you are familiar with this?

Travel Irregularities using Rail Staff Travel facilities

The Rail Delivery Group was set up in 2011 to provide leadership to Britain's rail industry, bringing together the owners of Britain's passenger train operators

www.raildeliverygroup.com

AFAIK your other half is now the main facilities holder and misuse by the partner (you) should only mean possible withdrawal (either temporarily or permanent) of your facilities - not your partner's. (But if the main holder were to misuse the facilities then they and everyone else associated with their facilities lose them).

1. In all cases where the prime cardholder (active or retired employee or widow(er)) is the offender the penalty will be applied to all travel facilities holders within the family.
2. Where the offender is a spouse, partner or dependent child the penalty will be applied to the offender only.
3. Where card, pass or ticket is referred to in the following paragraphs this encompasses all staff travel documents including privilege rate season tickets. Certain paragraphs refer to the use of Staff Travel Cards only.

 

[OllieWave]

I assume you are familiar with this?

Travel Irregularities using Rail Staff Travel facilities

The Rail Delivery Group was set up in 2011 to provide leadership to Britain's rail industry, bringing together the owners of Britain's passenger train operators

www.raildeliverygroup.com

AFAIK your other half is now the main facilities holder and misuse by the partner (you) should only mean possible withdrawal (either temporarily or permanent) of your facilities - not your partner's. (But if the main holder were to misuse the facilities then they and everyone else associated with their facilities lose them).

1. In all cases where the prime cardholder (active or retired employee or widow(er)) is the offender the penalty will be applied to all travel facilities holders within the family.
2. Where the offender is a spouse, partner or dependent child the penalty will be applied to the offender only.
3. Where card, pass or ticket is referred to in the following paragraphs this encompasses all staff travel documents including privilege rate season tickets. Certain paragraphs refer to the use of Staff Travel Cards only.

Ah, that is noted. I think there may be some confusion from the Staff travel team. When I was first stopped, they told me I "Shouldn't" have this pass anymore as I don't work for the company, I then produced the spouse card, but they may have submitted a report on the original matter they stopped me for.

 

[Titfield]

Thank you for the further information.

The problem, as I see it, is that TOCS do not take account of the "why would I do this if....." explanations but focus only on the fact of the wrong doing. Many offences are strict liability offences where it is the fact that it happened which is sufficient for you to be "guilty". Intent does not come into it.

Unfortunately we frequently see on this forum where if a ticket / card etc had been correctly checked at the gate line then the "mistake" which was subsequently discovered would not have happened.

I have just seen post #4 above. This may assist you in "persuading" the TOC to reprieve your spouse. There may have been some confusion at the gate.

 

[OllieWave]

Understood. There has been a deep sense of frustration with the revenue team, having driven trains up and down a mainline for 7 years and pointing out regular evaders to them having no action taken to only have this happen to me... I can't lie but say this is fairly cathartic in some ways but infuriating in others. I will continue with the appeal process and hope I won't get my privileges taken away for life.

 

[Port Road]

Understood. There has been a deep sense of frustration with the revenue team, having driven trains up and down a mainline for 7 years and pointing out regular evaders to them having no action taken to only have this happen to me... I can't lie but say this is fairly cathartic in some ways but infuriating in others. I will continue with the appeal process and hope I won't get my privileges taken away for life.

It does seem very rough treatment, to me anyway, by the on board inspector - considering that they know you and you only produced the wrong card.

 

[Titfield]

Understood. There has been a deep sense of frustration with the revenue team, having driven trains up and down a mainline for 7 years and pointing out regular evaders to them having no action taken to only have this happen to me... I can't lie but say this is fairly cathartic in some ways but infuriating in others. I will continue with the appeal process and hope I won't get my privileges taken away for life.

I get that. Your RMT rep may be of more help than we can be but it seems to me there are two very separate goals:

1. Your partner gets all her priv etc etc back as per the guidance.

2. You get all your rights back through a well written appeal admitting the wrong doing, being contrite and apologetic and then on the proportionality of the sanction being applied.

It does seem very rough treatment, to me anyway, by the on board inspector - considering that they know you and you only produced the wrong card.

Yes it is very harsh but undoubtedly it is because the OP (a) can not claim ignorance (b) should follow the correct procedure at all times.

We all make mistakes (genuine ones) the problem is convincing the TOC this was a genuine one and not a deliberate choice to save a few quid.

 

[AlterEgo]

It does seem very rough treatment, to me anyway, by the on board inspector - considering that they know you and you only produced the wrong card.

They didn't produce the wrong card, they attempted to use the spouse pass for free travel to and from work and never bought a ticket, which I imagine is strictly forbidden by the terms of the pass (it certainly was when I was in the industry).

 

[MotCO]

I'm not in the inustry, so do not appreciate all the nuances, but was the only thing you did wrong was to produce the wrong pass, having the correct pass on you at the time?

Is this not similar to have a wodge of train tickets and inadvertently showing an invalid one before producing the correct ticket? Surely that would not be an offence since you had presented a value ticket for the journey?

 

[methecooldude]

which I imagine is strictly forbidden by the terms of the pass (it certainly was when I was in the industry).

It is, spouse passes are Leisure Travel only

 

[Rab Smith]

Regardless of the mistake, it's classed as a travel irregularity and the penalties are set out in the RSTL terms and conditions.
No ifs, buts or maybes. There could have been a possibility your partner as active staff could also be disciplined.
Staff and dependents really need to understand the rules because it can end in passes being disqualified.

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm not in the inustry, so do not appreciate all the nuances, but was the only thing you did wrong was to produce the wrong pass, having the correct pass on you at the time?

OP did not have any pass or ticket on them which would allow travel. They were supposed to buy a ticket for their commute, but they did not. That is the crux of the issue as far as I can see it.

 

[Port Road]

Regardless of the mistake, it's classed as a travel irregularity and the penalties are set out in the RSTL terms and conditions.
No ifs, buts or maybes. There could have been a possibility your partner as active staff could also be disciplined.
Staff and dependents really need to understand the rules because it can end in passes being disqualified.

But the terms and conditions say

1. Where the offender is a spouse, partner or dependent child the penalty will be applied to the offender only.

 

[Camsus]

Here are the Travel Irregularity Guidelines from RDG​

​

Examples of misuse where a warning is given​

The offender will be given a warning in regard to their future use of travel facilities and advised that these will be permanently withdrawn if the offence is repeated.

• Alteration of one date on a Staff Travel Card provided it is not in the final available box on the card.
• Active employees using a Staff Travel Card to purchase privilege tickets for residential travel to work or a place of education (this practice is permitted for travel between a temporary place of residence and a place of employment or education for a period not exceeding 14 days).
• Retired employees and spouses/partners and dependent children of active or retired employees using a Staff Travel Card to purchase privilege tickets for residential travel to a place of education (this practice is permitted for travel between a temporary place of residence and a place of education for a period not exceeding 14 days).
• Travelling on a published restricted service, or contravening any other aspect of the staff travel restrictions.

​

Examples of misuse where the penalty is withdrawal of travel facilities for a minimum period of 12 months​

In addition to withdrawal of travel facilities the offender will be given a warning as to their future use of travel facilities and advised that their travel facilities will be permanently withdrawn if the offence is repeated.

• Alteration of the date in the final available box on a Staff Travel Card.
• Alteration of more than one date on a Staff Travel Card.
• Travelling in First Class Accommodation (or equivalent) when not eligible.

​

Examples of misuse for which the penalty is permanent withdrawal of travel facilities​

• A repeat of any irregularity detailed in the previous sections.
• Transfer of or attempted transfer of a card or pass to another person.
• Transfer of or attempted transfer of a Privilege Rate Ticket, purchased with a Staff Travel Card or TOC Privilege Card to another person.
• An attempt to use a forgery of a card, pass or ticket (includes a photocopy of the original).
• Alteration/Defacement of card, pass or ticket details including use of cling film, plastic inserts or other such devices.
• Using a card, pass or ticket beyond availability.
• Travelling without a valid ticket. This includes subsequent use of a Staff Travel Card for free travel without dating a box on the card having been warned on previous occasions by a revenue protection officer (see Procedure for Dealing with Travel Irregularities section A1).
• Using a card, pass or ticket for residential travel (to work or a place of education) or business journeys, where it is only valid for leisure travel purposes. This does not apply when used for unpaid voluntary work.
• Retired employees and Spouses/partners or dependent children of active or retired employees using a Staff Travel Card to purchase a privilege ticket for journeys to work.
• Making a false application for spouse/partner or dependent child travel facilities to be issued to an ineligible person.
• Permitting a spouse/partner or dependent child who is no longer eligible to receive travel facilities to retain the cards, passes or tickets on issue to them.
• Failure to notify the issuing office that a spouse/partner or dependent child is no longer eligible to receive travel facilities and where possible return their cards, passes or tickets for cancellation.
• Fraudulent applications for refunds or delay repay payments.

 

[OllieWave]

OP did not have any pass or ticket on them which would allow travel. They were supposed to buy a ticket for their commute, but they did not. That is the crux of the issue as far as I can see it.

That is indeed the case, when I made my offer to purchase a ticket, I was informed that as I was ex-staff, they could not be seen to be preferential.

 

[John R]

When I was first stopped, they told me I "Shouldn't" have this pass anymore as I don't work for the company, I then produced the spouse card, but they may have submitted a report on the original matter they stopped me for.

So did you produce two cards? That's what it reads like.

 

[gray1404]

I would dispute that there is actually a place of employment. If the job is a fully remote working job then it is just that. Therefore the idea of using travel facilities to get to and from work cannot possibly happen.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I would dispute that there is actually a place of employment. If the job is a fully remote working job then it is just that. Therefore the idea of using travel facilities to get to and from work cannot possibly happen.

I'm hardly an HR lawyer, but my reading of it is that this is a dubious defence. If you are not allowed to use travel facilities to get to and from work, and you are caught using them going to work, it doesn't really matter where work is - its what you're going to do, not where

 

[YorkshireBear]

I would dispute that there is actually a place of employment. If the job is a fully remote working job then it is just that. Therefore the idea of using travel facilities to get to and from work cannot possibly happen.

It is work business though which is surely part of it.

 

[AlterEgo]

I would dispute that there is actually a place of employment. If the job is a fully remote working job then it is just that. Therefore the idea of using travel facilities to get to and from work cannot possibly happen.

It's leisure travel only, you cannot use it to go to work whether you go to an office five days a week or are doing a one off site visit 200 miles away from home. This is really clearly stated with spouse passes.

The only dispute here is whether the OP's sanction should have been applied to their partner. This seems not to have followed the stated rules.

OP has been cagey but they say in one breath that they

handed in my staff travel pass

but also say:

When I was first stopped, they told me I "Shouldn't" have this pass anymore as I don't work for the company, I then produced the spouse card, but they may have submitted a report on the original matter they stopped me for.

It's not entirely clear what other pass this was, but it seems they produced one pass (a duty travel pass?) which they would know not to be valid and knew they should not have had anyway, then produced another, legitimately held spouse pass, but which they also knew they could not use.

 

[John R]

Agree, on the basis of what we know, it stretches credibility to say it was accidental. And more to the point, if it stretches our credibility, it’s likely that those looking at the case will be sceptical too at any appeal that it was accidental.

 

[Starmill]

I would dispute that there is actually a place of employment. If the job is a fully remote working job then it is just that. Therefore the idea of using travel facilities to get to and from work cannot possibly happen.

I don't think that's relevant. A journey in connection with work can't be a leisure journey for the purposes of the conditions even if it were combined with a leisure purpose. Unfortunately the industry views use of leisure cards for journeys which aren't leisure very seriously indeed.

 

[fandroid]

I think the summary of opinion here is that the OP has lost all spouse privileges and is very unlikely to get them back.

However, it appears that their partner has been unjustly treated, well beyond the guidelines laid down by the industry, and should be appealing, with the help of their union.

 

[transportphoto]

However, it appears that their partner has been unjustly treated, well beyond the guidelines laid down by the industry, and should be appealing, with the help of their union.

I do not believe there is a given right of appeal.

 

[AlterEgo]

I do not believe there is a given right of appeal.

There is, as per RST's own rules.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/services/rst/RST_TI_Guidelines.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiIs6GOluKQAxWZzwIHHYRaAG4QFnoECCUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1at1yyv0gFu_1WK4Xmr5As

2. Active employees should detail the basis for their appeal in writing to
their employer. This must include any new evidence which may
require a case to be reviewed.
3. The employer concerned will consult the Head of Rail Staff Travel as
to the validity of the grounds of the appeal and whether the original
decision should be revised.
4. Retired employees may appeal direct to the Head of Rail Staff Travel.
However, the employer at the time of their retirement (if still in
existence) will be consulted in regard to the outcome.
5. Appeals must be based on additional evidence, as the Scheme does
not accommodate mitigating circumstances or excuses.

 

[steamybrian]

As a retired railwayman as far as I can see it.......
A big no no...You must not use a railway staff card belonging to someone else.
It is not been stated that the staff concerned was a "protected" or "non-protected" staff for privilege staff travel. Since 1996 "non protected" staff joining TOCs would lose their travel card when they leave employment or retire.

 

[Falcon1200]

I would dispute that there is actually a place of employment.

The OP says in Post #1 that they were travelling to their (new) office! However I do have great sympathy for the spouse and hope that an appeal is successful.

 

[AlterEgo]

As a retired railwayman as far as I can see it.......
A big no no...You must not use a railway staff card belonging to someone else.
It is not been stated that the staff concerned was a "protected" or "non-protected" staff for privilege staff travel. Since 1996 "non protected" staff joining TOCs would lose their travel card when they leave employment or retire.

OP wasn't using someone else's card. OP isn't of age to be protected staff, I don't think.