Guards not doing their job properly (and other poor experiences with staff on the railway)

[35B]

Quiet enforcement only works to a certain degree, so does regularly patrolling the train, beyond which you are pretty much by yourself and support is often far away. This isn't anything a guard can fix.

I agree with 90% of what you write, but this one is important to me - because it is something that is within the gift of on train staff. It is about consistency, and you do you and your colleagues a disservice by suggesting that you do no good.

 

[bb21]

I agree with 90% of what you write, but this one is important to me - because it is something that is within the gift of on train staff. It is about consistency, and you do you and your colleagues a disservice by suggesting that you do no good.

Which bit do you mean?

 

[bramling]

I had to be quite stern with an off-duty staff member once when they used their own T keys to open several windows in the coach, when a struggling aircon was slowly working its way to optimum temperature. I had already passed once and all the passengers were happy to either stay or move to an adjacent coach. They boarded mid-journey and asked for a free ride, so knew exactly where I was. Doesn't take much to come knock on the cab door.

In the above situation, TBH I’d side with the off-duty staff. If the air conditioning was “struggling” then that sounds like a pretty good reason for opening the windows.

 

[bb21]

In the above situation, TBH I’d side with the off-duty staff. If the air conditioning was “struggling” then that sounds like a pretty good reason for opening the windows.

It was struggling but still blowing out cold air albeit not on full blast. All it needs is 20 minutes to work its way through once all the windows were closed, and that was indeed the case later on. There are also seven other practically empty coaches they could have moved to which were perfectly chilled.

 

[Russel]

Being cynical about all this, if I was a guard on LNWR and there is this constant backdrop of “route is ripe for DOO operation”, I probably wouldn’t go out of my way to do more than my contractual minimum and what little one could get away with without being performance managed. At the end of the day, if DOO was going to be implemented it would happen even if I was the most wonderful customer service person going.

I’ve always been a bit surprised the Euston route has managed to retain guards yet south central didn’t. One of life’s little peculiarities.

I get what you're saying and I do kind of agree...

But if DOO was to be looked at, shouldn't the RMT be telling their members, "Listen, we all know we can't stop this but you've got a greater chance of being retained in an OBS role if you're seen to be adding value through customer service and revenue protection."?

 

[trentside]

It was struggling but still blowing out cold air albeit not on full blast. All it needs is 20 minutes to work its way through once all the windows were closed, and that was indeed the case later on. There are also seven other practically empty coaches they could have moved to which were perfectly chilled.

It also concerns me that if they were asking you for a free ride they’re also not working for your TOC. In that case they have absolutely no business interfering with your train. I’ve offered assistance off duty before, but the key thing is offering not just taking it upon yourself to get involved.

 

[bramling]

But if DOO was to be looked at, shouldn't the RMT be telling their members, "Listen, we all know we can't stop this but you've got a greater chance of being retained in an OBS role if you're seen to be adding value through customer service and revenue protection."?

Unfortunately the response many will give to that is "where's my mug?".

 

[35B]

Which bit do you mean?

Precisely what I quoted

 

[bb21]

Precisely what I quoted

I don't quite understand. Are you saying if a passenger is quietly / firmly requested to refrain from certain behaviour, which they subsequently refuse, it is then somehow the guard's problem if they deemed it not resolvable because support may be a long way away and escalating the situation may not help? What alternatives would you suggest? I mean I can insist they leave the train (which I have done before), contact Control/BTP for help, and if they still refuse I can hold the train refusing to leave until they are removed which can take hours, in any case not always possible especially if that strands the train behind. Passengers refusing to comply isn't something the guard can fix. They can only try their best. The same with patrolling the trains regularly. It can deter some minor anti-social behaviour and chancers but if the culprit is hellbent on causing trouble, the guard can't fix that problem, the cause of which is multi-faceted.

 

[bb21]

It also concerns me that if they were asking you for a free ride they’re also not working for your TOC. In that case they have absolutely no business interfering with your train. I’ve offered assistance off duty before, but the key thing is offering not just taking it upon yourself to get involved.

Yes that too. I have also helped out on other operators' services but the first port of call was always a discussion with the guard (driver if DOO).

 

[35B]

I don't quite understand. Are you saying if a passenger is quietly / firmly requested to refrain from certain behaviour, which they subsequently refuse, it is then somehow the guard's problem if they deemed it not resolvable because support may be a long way away and escalating the situation may not help? What alternatives would you suggest? I mean I can insist they leave the train (which I have done before), contact Control/BTP for help, and if they still refuse I can hold the train refusing to leave until they are removed which can take hours, in any case not always possible especially if that strands the train behind. Passengers refusing to comply isn't something the guard can fix. They can only try their best. The same with patrolling the trains regularly. It can deter some minor anti-social behaviour and chancers but if the culprit is hellbent on causing trouble, the guard can't fix that problem, the cause of which is multi-faceted.

No, I’m saying that guards can and do make a difference by simply consistently setting the expectation of acceptable behaviour by enforcing the rules.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, I’m saying that guards can and do make a difference by simply consistently setting the expectation of acceptable behaviour by enforcing the rules.

This.

With the greatest of due respect to @bb21, the view expressed in the longer post is essentially summed up as "I want to avoid conflict so I have an easy life", paraphrased.

Telling me to move coach would have resulted in a formal complaint against the guard for failure to enforce the commission of a criminal offence under Byelaw 7 unless it was an invitation to move to first class for free (which Northern obviously don't have, but where it does exist it's a wonderful passive aggressive solution to this sort of problem, people refusing to move out of reserved seats etc).

Frankly, if proactively dealing with ASB isn't part of the guard's role any more, and miscreants no longer need fear the guard, then it's time we follow Merseyrail throughout the network and recruit some staff whose job it is to challenge ASB, even very minor ASB, and prosecute on a zero tolerance, no warnings basis. Minor ASB leads to major ASB, and if passengers can't rely on traincrew to keep them safe and comfortable against miscreants then the railway has no real future for more vulnerable people such as lone females, and that is, bluntly, completely unacceptable

The upshot of that is simply that in the face of rapidly increasing petty crime and ASB that the railway ceases to be a safe environment. And that is not acceptable.

So guards either need to accept the risk involved in challenging ASB, or we need bouncers on trains like Merseyrail effectively have. It isn't OK for us to collectively sit back and let this happen, and it DEFINITELY isn't OK for staff to suggest, per the above post, that if they're not willing to deal with a situation where a criminal offence is being committed, however minor, that passengers may not do so either.

In short I will continue to verbally challenge ASB on trains I travel on, and if I receive resistance from staff about this they will be in receipt of a formal complaint (or if there's any suggestion I rather than the miscreant should leave the train, I will be texting 61016 myself), thought that is yet to actually happen.

 

[bb21]

No, I’m saying that guards can and do make a difference by simply consistently setting the expectation of acceptable behaviour by enforcing the rules.

Oh yes, don't get me wrong. I quite agree. Maybe I didn't explain myself well. Guards should make their presence known on the train and patrol their trains regularly where possible, both for passenger assurance and to provide customer service (incl revenue). I am sure most will challenge anti-social behaviour provided it can be done in a suitable way and not putting anyone in danger, whether directly witnessed or brought to their attention by another passenger.

Much of the anti-social behaviours we witness onboard are fairly minor ones, and challenging them as much as can be safely done consistently will no doubt contribute towards improving the onboard environment in the long run, but in practical terms there will always be differences in how each member of staff judges risks therefore what they intervene in. I'm sure there is a minority who prefer not to bother but the rest will try their best at it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh yes, don't get me wrong. I quite agree. Maybe I didn't explain myself well. Guards should make their presence known on the train and patrol their trains regularly where possible, both for passenger assurance and to provide customer service (incl revenue). I am sure most will challenge anti-social behaviour provided it can be done in a suitable way and not putting anyone in danger, whether directly witnessed or brought to their attention by another passenger.

Much of the anti-social behaviours we witness onboard are fairly minor ones, and challenging them as much as can be safely done consistently will no doubt contribute towards improving the onboard environment in the long run, but in practical terms there will always be differences in how each member of staff judges risks therefore what they intervene in. I'm sure there is a minority who prefer not to bother but the rest will try their best at it.

I agree with this, though I'm yet to see any member of staff proactively challenge a Byelaw 7 offence (playing devices out loud) even from people who are obviously not likely to get violent about it.

I do think (and have suggested to Northern where it seems a particularly bad problem - it's comparatively rare on the south WCML and Chiltern) that the railway should have a big campaign on this sort of issue (maybe once it's finished with removing our refund rights) with the hope of raising awareness that it's not acceptable, together with more forceful signage eg indicating what the maximum penalty is, like used to be found on no smoking signs on every window.

Looking round this 807 I'm on now I can't even see a no smoking sign, and it's not even needed as this particular type of ASB has more or
less totally died out. But other forms have replaced it, and only on Merseyrail (for feet on seats) and some buses is there even signage to suggest it's not acceptable.

 

[bramling]

This.

With the greatest of due respect to @bb21, the view expressed in the longer post is essentially summed up as "I want to avoid conflict so I have an easy life", paraphrased.

Telling me to move coach would have resulted in a formal complaint against the guard for failure to enforce the commission of a criminal offence under Byelaw 7 unless it was an invitation to move to first class for free (which Northern obviously don't have, but where it does exist it's a wonderful passive aggressive solution to this sort of problem, people refusing to move out of reserved seats etc).

Frankly, if proactively dealing with ASB isn't part of the guard's role any more, and miscreants no longer need fear the guard, then it's time we follow Merseyrail throughout the network and recruit some staff whose job it is to challenge ASB, even very minor ASB, and prosecute on a zero tolerance, no warnings basis. Minor ASB leads to major ASB, and if passengers can't rely on traincrew to keep them safe and comfortable against miscreants then the railway has no real future for more vulnerable people such as lone females, and that is, bluntly, completely unacceptable

The upshot of that is simply that in the face of rapidly increasing petty crime and ASB that the railway ceases to be a safe environment. And that is not acceptable.

So guards either need to accept the risk involved in challenging ASB, or we need bouncers on trains like Merseyrail effectively have. It isn't OK for us to collectively sit back and let this happen, and it DEFINITELY isn't OK for staff to suggest, per the above post, that if they're not willing to deal with a situation where a criminal offence is being committed, however minor, that passengers may not do so either.

In short I will continue to verbally challenge ASB on trains I travel on, and if I receive resistance from staff about this they will be in receipt of a formal complaint (or if there's any suggestion I rather than the miscreant should leave the train, I will be texting 61016 myself), thought that is yet to actually happen.

I’m in several minds about all this.

I agree problem behaviours should ideally be pulled up, and ultimately the guard is better placed to do this than a passenger, as the guard at least has some options available to them if greeted with a “what are you going to do?”.

You may be well-built enough to feel confident challenging people, however there’s a few issues to consider with this. Firstly, no matter how well built you are, there’s little you can legally actually do, and people will know this. More of an issue now than perhaps a generation ago, as nowadays the train will likely have CCTV, and the miscreant (plus any other people around) will almost certainly have a camera phone. Woe betide if it gets physical and you’re railway staff. Then, remember the incident on the Guildford line, where a well-built guy pulled someone up for a behavioural issue, and, tragically, it didn’t end well for him.

If we’re saying that a guard has to be well built enough to be able to act as a kind of bouncer then this is unfortunately going to exclude a good proportion of the population from doing the role, which definitely isn’t a road I think any of us would want things to go down.

I’m not overly keen on some of the security types we see around either, and in a lot of cases they’re a waste of space anyway. My experience on GN has been that there was a phase when they were “patrolling” trains (they don’t seem to be doing that now), and frankly it was a total waste of time. You’d have a pair of people huddled in a doorway somewhere, either chatting loudly between themselves, on the phone, or on some cases playing music - whilst at the same time ignoring stuff like feet on seats or passengers playing music out loud. So a total waste of space, and in fact better had they not been there at all.

Which brings us back to BTP. They are the one group who *does* have the actual means to address most of these issues. There needs to be at least a credible chance that problem behaviour is going to result in meaningful BTP action. So “what are you going to do?” can be met with “I’m going to call the BTP”, and it actually has some change of happening.

 

[dodecahedron67]

[]…the view expressed in the longer post is essentially summed up as "I want to avoid conflict so I have an easy life", paraphrased.

Telling me to move coach would have resulted in a formal complaint against the guard for failure to enforce the commission of a criminal offence under Byelaw 7…[]

[]…if passengers can't rely on traincrew to keep them safe and comfortable against miscreants then the railway has no real future for more vulnerable people such as lone females, and that is, bluntly, completely unacceptable

The upshot of that is simply that in the face of rapidly increasing petty crime and ASB that the railway ceases to be a safe environment. And that is not acceptable.

So guards either need to accept the risk involved in challenging ASB, or we need bouncers on trains like Merseyrail effectively have. It isn't OK for us to collectively sit back and let this happen, and it DEFINITELY isn't OK for staff to suggest, per the above post, that if they're not willing to deal with a situation where a criminal offence is being committed, however minor, that passengers may not do so either.

In short I will continue to verbally challenge ASB on trains I travel on, and if I receive resistance from staff about this they will be in receipt of a formal complaint (or if there's any suggestion I rather than the miscreant should leave the train, I will be texting 61016 myself), thought that is yet to actually happen.

Apologies for deleting some of your post but not all needs quoting.

It’s all well and good saying this, but I would love to see you enforce everything to the letter after you’ve spent whole shifts on end getting screamed at, chastised for things completely out your control, and getting backlash for attempting to do things right (tickets, telling people to keep feet off seats, whatever).

I pride myself on being visible and doing full revenue inspections on trains some of my other colleagues wouldn’t (0015 off Man Vic on a Friday night hello!) and even I can only take being called a jobsworth little **** so many times before I retreat to the safety of my cab for the rest of my shift.

Your posts scream of someone who has never been a guard. Everyone starts out bushy-tailed and optimistic. Sadly it gets beaten out of a lot of people after their first Friday or Saturday late shift.

Try dealing with it day in day out and you learn that sometimes it’s easier to just let minor indiscretions (which being honest feet on seats and having TikTok on a little too loudly really are) fly and focus on dealing with bigger issues, such as blatant ticketless travel and other forms of fare evasion, or two drunk people about to swing for each other.

When you get no support if you do deal with things - BTP are often miles away or unable to help, and sometimes even get told off for intervening (for example, if I were to kick someone who was being a nuisance off a train of mine and they complained, I would get a serious talking to at a minimum), is it really surprising that many staff take a more relaxed approach?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have created a new thread with some additional replies to discuss the issue of ASB and how it can be dealt with, so this one can return to discussing things that clearly are within the guard's remit like revenue, failing aircon etc:

Dealing with antisocial behaviour on the railway - how can the issue be resolved?

As noted I've decided to pull this out into a new thread as it's a wider area of discussion than of reports of guards doing/not doing their job, particularly as there's a bit of debate as to what extent it is their job. So, how can minor ASB be effectively dealt with on the railway? I'm very...

www.railforums.co.uk

If planning to reply to some of the above this may be a better place. Thanks and apologies to the mods for going off a bit here.

 

[bb21]

... essentially summed up as "I want to avoid conflict so I have an easy life", paraphrased.

Not at all. All I was trying to convey is that it is a dynamic situation and risk assessments are made in the moment. If the risk of escalation is deemed to be low then I, as well as others, will no doubt intervene and challenge, but if there is a good chance the miscreant can get violent or escalate, most staff will not choose to tackle it head on. This isn't about having an easy life, it is to protect everyone onboard. Railway carriages are confined spaces and have comparatively fewer options for safe space or escape routes if required, hence often it is better to prevent thing from escalating at all.

Telling me to move coach would have resulted in a formal complaint against the guard for failure to enforce the commission of a criminal offence under Byelaw 7 ...

It is a standard approach to managing the safety of everyone, you either remove the risk/danger from people, or remove people from the risk/danger. Most of the time I would expect it to be the former, but the latter is a perfectly acceptable way to deal with a situation, and any worthwhile employer will back their staff up if that was deemed necessary. In your example the guard obviously decided that she could challenge it, but if she judged the risk to be too great then I would not expect her to do so. It is likely to be less applicable in a case of loud music but where there is visible danger to other passengers, the answer is often to move them to another coach.

Frankly, if proactively dealing with ASB isn't part of the guard's role any more, and miscreants no longer need fear the guard, then it's time we follow Merseyrail throughout the network and recruit some staff whose job it is to challenge ASB, even very minor ASB, and prosecute on a zero tolerance, no warnings basis. Minor ASB leads to major ASB, and if passengers can't rely on traincrew to keep them safe and comfortable against miscreants then the railway has no real future for more vulnerable people such as lone females, and that is, bluntly, completely unacceptable

The upshot of that is simply that in the face of rapidly increasing petty crime and ASB that the railway ceases to be a safe environment. And that is not acceptable.

So guards either need to accept the risk involved in challenging ASB, or we need bouncers on trains like Merseyrail effectively have. It isn't OK for us to collectively sit back and let this happen, and it DEFINITELY isn't OK for staff to suggest, per the above post, that if they're not willing to deal with a situation where a criminal offence is being committed, however minor, that passengers may not do so either.

In short I will continue to verbally challenge ASB on trains I travel on, and if I receive resistance from staff about this they will be in receipt of a formal complaint (or if there's any suggestion I rather than the miscreant should leave the train, I will be texting 61016 myself), thought that is yet to actually happen.

I understand where you're coming from, and the frustration over anti-social behaviours, which I am sure everyone can agree is a big problem at the moment, but I go back to the point that there is only a limited number of options open to a lone working member of staff. Most of the ASBs can be eliminated and contained by just having a presence, and some by a polite challenge, however there is a significant minority of situations the guard cannot really do much about without additional support. In problem spots we do need additional security presence and many places have them indeed. I am sure everyone working in a customer-facing role accepts a certain degree of risk however there is a limit to its extent. Conflict avoidance is a concept repeatedly drilled into staff's heads and we are required to remain vigilant and use professional judgement to risk assess at all times. An injured member of staff is no use to anyone.

I don't think anyone will stop you from challenging anti-social behaviour because it is your personal choice, and some people can be more effective at such challenges than others, which I think your fellow passengers will appreciate. It is however my own take that I prefer the average passenger not to do that themselves, as I have witnessed quite a few incidents where things quickly got out of hand and ended up in a nasty way for some involved, mostly starting from an innocent request at the start, but thankfully only in my capacity as a passenger, not the guard. I would rather everyone gets home safe and unscathed over and above anything else, but also in my observation requests from staff do tend to carry more weight than those from a fellow passenger so more likely to lead to compliance.

I agree with this, though I'm yet to see any member of staff proactively challenge a Byelaw 7 offence (playing devices out loud) even from people who are obviously not likely to get violent about it.

I do think (and have suggested to Northern where it seems a particularly bad problem - it's comparatively rare on the south WCML and Chiltern) that the railway should have a big campaign on this sort of issue (maybe once it's finished with removing our refund rights) with the hope of raising awareness that it's not acceptable, together with more forceful signage eg indicating what the maximum penalty is, like used to be found on no smoking signs on every window.

Looking round this 807 I'm on now I can't even see a no smoking sign, and it's not even needed as this particular type of ASB has more or
less totally died out. But other forms have replaced it, and only on Merseyrail (for feet on seats) and some buses is there even signage to suggest it's not acceptable.

I don't know if I wasn't explaining myself well initially and coming across wrongly. We agreed on many things over the years and I don't think this time is that different. I can't speak for others but personally I do challenge loud music in most cases, as I do with feet on seats, and people generally do comply. It is a shame ASBs are widespread but tackling this issue requires a whole-society multi-pronged approach including cultural shifts in what is considered unacceptable. The industry can definitely play our part to help, but cannot resolve these issues by ourselves.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thanks for this reply - I've replied in detail on the new thread linked to from post 137 as I think the issue of how to address antisocial behaviour of this kind on the railway is a worthwhile wider discussion and this isn't a speculative thread.

 

[Flange Squeal]

From past experience in my time as a Guard - and in more recent times witnessing/hearing from colleagues who are Guards - attempting to deal with the things you mention, it's sadly becoming more and more common to just get ignored/blanked, told to "eff off", or indeed get asked "Yeah, what you gonna do? Phone BTP? Hahaha". This last response actually raises a good question.

• BTP are almost certainly not going to come out for someone with their feet on the seats, vaping/smoking or playing music aloud, etc.
• Telling them to leave the train almost always sees them refuse, and traincrew are not allowed to physically manhandle people off trains.
• Refusing to move the train from the next station until they get off, or stop whatever behaviour has caused the situation, will generally see you getting phoned by Control to move the train, possibly followed up by your manager repeating this to you after the event. You also end up delaying a whole train load of customers.

So it's hard to really see what a Guard can do, should their request for someone to stop doing something be ignored. Even where someone does listen, I can't tell you how many times someone removed their feet off the opposite seat, only for me to walk back through once completing my ticket check to find they've put them back up again.

 

[philthetube]

What really gets me angry with some guards, and it oddly seems to be the Leeds based Northern ones for the most part, is trying to board a service with a wheelchair user - with my father using one, I have taken a much greater interest in the matter. On multiple occasions, people have boarded the train with luggage the size of commercial supertankers and put them in the wheelchair spaces and then walked halfway down the train to sit down. Along comes the guard to get the ramp out, looks at the bags and boxes and turns to us and says word along the line of "Sorry... There isn't any space". On one particular occasion, this happened on a Leeds-Blackpool service (a 158 covered for the usual unit) and I pointed out to the guard the empty luggage spaces and they huffed and said "Not getting involved, love, try the next service" and started walking away to the rear set of doors. I asked the guard why and she said, and I quote, "I'm already late and this'll hold things up, yeah? Just get the next one", got in and dispatched.

Some strongly worded letters were sent to Northern about that one

My Mother travels From Burnley Manchester Rd. to Blackpool almost weekly, on trains mainly operated by Leeds crews, she has never had a bad word to say about any staff, infact regularly praises them.

I Meet her at Blackpool and find the staff very helpful, there used to be one exception but they moved on a good while ago.