Another Newspaper Rant!

[313103]

And this one is from everyone's favorite Daily (on here or so i am led to believe) I am not going to write it out as it would take all night. Whilst he chastises the Management a lot i cant help but read once again the generalisation of 'RUDE STAFF'.

Keep selling this to the public and they will believe that every single person that is employed in the Rail industry is 'RUDE'

Although for a left winger like me i actually agree a lot of what he had to say.

READ: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...public-like-idiots-asks-MICHAEL-WILLIAMS.html

Then Discuss

 

[Clip]

Just out of interest why do you assume this is peoples favourite Daily read on here? Is it because some peoples view and opinions may differ from yours and the best way to either try and get a rise out of them is to say they all read the daily mail?

thought as much.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


And now that i have read - and re-read it just to make sure - they only mention rude staff once in the whole report...


P.S its not my favourite daily. That would be the sun. cos it has boobs in it.

 

[313103]

Just out of interest why do you assume this is peoples favourite Daily read on here? Is it because some peoples view and opinions may differ from yours and the best way to either try and get a rise out of them is to say they all read the daily mail?

thought as much.

Well at least i have got a response from you! which is a surprise as you never responded to the last one!!! So at least i got the rise out of you even if i didn't say you was a Mail reader...........

The reason why i ('assume' your words not mine) that it is everyone's favorite paper is the fact that with this forum it is mentioned the most just go to the many topics this forum has got and you will find the Mail being mentioned more then any other paper.

I did not even search for this article as and what you may think about me i was reading the Mail in the comfort of my own living room and read his piece in the paper and not on the web.

If you was to note you would see that i actually agree with a lot of what he had to say, for once the staff at the rough end of the job were only mentioned as being 'RUDE STAFF' once.

Well if it does get the rise out of people who do indeed read the mail, then they are a really delicate and special kind group of people. I don't get the rise when people mention the paper i buy occasionally, i call it Having different views and opinions. Something you it would appear only want it when it goes in the favour of what your beliefs are.

 

[Dennis]

quote from the article linked to....

And as for those delays, a major new survey of passengers by the watchdog Passenger Focus confirms what many of us already know. The key finding is that ­passengers are upset by a ‘lack of respect shown to them as either ­passengers or human beings’.

Is it true that a PF survey key finding is that passengers feel a lack of respect? If it is, a find it quite shocking that a broad spectrum of 'customers' should be treated in such a way. I can understand it in times of disruption, as already discussed ad infinitum on this forum but if this is the normal, everyday view then that's a much more serious issue.

Another good quote is...

Sir Roy McNulty, the former chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority, reckons the railways are wasting £10 billion a year with incompetent decision-making and planning

Looking forward to seeing the final report; that is a colossal sum of money being wasted. Given that 1.2 billion passenger journeys are made each year, I find it difficult to comprehend how for every journey made, the industry can manage to waste about £8; just imagine if that cost could be shaved off every ticket price!

 

[yorksrob]

The article quoted appears to have been prompted by the uneven application of the latest round of fares increases. If the article reflects the opinions of its readership to any extent, it's interesting to note how little appetite there is for greater deregulation of train fares, even amongst a comparatively right-of-centre sector of the population.

 

[Metroland]

It's an error, he reckons they are wasting 1 billion through inefficient management processes.

The article is the usual sweeping generalisations, written in a way that is designed to get people's backs up, in a paper that is designed to get people's backs up, followed by the usual negative comments that seem to be recycled every time, from people that pretend to know so much, but know so blindingly little. (IE usual silly fare comparison, costs of running cars, rants about profits and misunderstanding the way markets work, rants about lazy staff, and the railways so called monopoly)

No further comment required, the usual moaning old nonsense.

 

[Dennis]

It's an error, he reckons they are wasting 1 billion through inefficient management processes.

That'll make me sleep easier tonight

 

[jopsuk]

it's an ad for the writer's forthcoming book...

Which Passenger Focus survey is he talking about? Can't find anything recent from them that fits the bill...

 

[Chapeltom]

Simple solution: Renationalise the railways, take them back from the greedy, incompetent companies running them into the ground.

I'm no Commie but if I ever had a chance to nationalise the railways, I would over anything else.

 

[NJTom]

How about we defund the railway, de-regulate it .. and if it can't make a profit, sell the property and close it.

 

[Nick O. Teen]

Simple solution: Renationalise the railways, take them back from the greedy, incompetent companies running them into the ground.

I'm no Commie but if I ever had a chance to nationalise the railways, I would over anything else.

I'd agree with that if it were not for the risk of an incompetent quango taking over. Such a quango would probably have some tame political appointee at its head (the 'chief executive', natch), who would doubtless require a huge salary, a PA, a board of management (all on six-figure wages, too), and a massive budget to spend on marketing and management consultants.

While all the above eejits get their snouts firmly entrenched in the trough, the likes of us would face redundo and 'cost-cutting' measures, and the poor old customers get what they're given. They are, after all, only the tax-paying public.


Cynical? Moi?

 

[Oliver]

It's an error, he reckons they are wasting 1 billion through inefficient management processes.

The article is the usual sweeping generalisations, written in a way that is designed to get people's backs up, in a paper that is designed to get people's backs up, followed by the usual negative comments that seem to be recycled every time, from people that pretend to know so much, but know so blindingly little. (IE usual silly fare comparison, costs of running cars, rants about profits and misunderstanding the way markets work, rants about lazy staff, and the railways so called monopoly)

No further comment required, the usual moaning old nonsense.

The secret to this story is in the last line of the Mail article. This bloke is flogging a book which is coming out in April. He'll be appearing on "Breakfast" and "Today" any time soon. He's trying to make a name for himself as a railway Jeremiah, but he's not in the same league as Wolmar.

 

[Metroland]

How about we defund the railway, de-regulate it .. and if it can't make a profit, sell the property and close it.

Yes markets are the answer to everything eh? Not. Be interesting to see what that would do to London, where 80% people arrive in the centre by Rail.

Anyway, I realised the bloke was flogging a book. Obviously one of these 'enthusiasts' that just moan about everything, and would be incapable of getting a real railway job themselves. Who in turn give the railways and the rest of us a bad name.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

I love the Daily Mail, I really love the stories that spring from an Editors eternal imagination or even worse only get a half truth, only a few months ago a colleague of mine was chastised and made his life hell because of The Mail and a few other sources, strange if all what was said was true he wouldn't be back doing his job (which he is good at btw) without any disciplinaries etc. must be hard for the Daily Mail letting the truth get in the way of a good story!

 

[Oliver]

I love the Daily Mail, I really love the stories that spring from an Editors eternal imagination or even worse only get a half truth, only a few months ago a colleague of mine was chastised and made his life hell because of The Mail and a few other sources, strange if all what was said was true he wouldn't be back doing his job (which he is good at btw) without any disciplinaries etc. must be hard for the Daily Mail letting the truth get in the way of a good story!

Yes, it's great. My mother-in-law sits there reading it and tut-tutting. According to the Mail half the things in the world give you cancer......and the other half cure it!

 

[90019]

According to the Mail half the things in the world give you cancer......and the other half cure it!

http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/

 

[jon0844]

The other article in the Mail about the 46% fare increases (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1342616/Rail-fares-racket-Prices-jump-46-cent-New-Year.html) had me turning away before I even read the opening paragraph.

Now, yes, that increase IS real. Yes, it IS outrageous (and there's no reason to increase it given those season ticket holders are going against the flow) but the mere fact that the DM tries to suggest to the bulk of the lazy general public who can't read more than headlines, it's an obvious attack on the railway. Fares aren't, generally, going up 46% or anything remotely close to that.

As a result, the increases most people are getting somehow seem like a bargain. Way to go Daily Mail, who missed the opportunity to actually be more accurate and STILL have a valid story, which could then be taken seriously.

And when they used a picture of a packed Thameslink train (note, Thameslink as a TOC, not as the route) they totally lost it. During the Thameslink Project work, there are going to be problems but FCC has introduced many more trains, including brand new ones (even if they are 'borrowed') and has consequently offered many more seats than before. In any case, the huge increase is on the GN side and they've got even more seats still.

By all means attack the TOCs where justified to do so, but the Daily Mail just wants to attack the railway as a whole. Most staff members are not rude at all. Many are incredibly friendly and go the extra mile. That said, some are incredibly rude (and I've met many of them) and have no reason to work on the railway, but let's just concetrate on them, not everyone. Once again, the Daily Mail can't understand the concept of being balanced.

I bet if they wanted to do some proper investigative journalism, they could find the really bad people, and do the whole industry a favour - as I doubt any of the good, honest, hardworking railway workers want these rude freeloaders anymore than the general public. But, that involves hard work and it's much easier to just say that all staff are rude, all trains are dirty and late - and how everything is so much better around the world (not that the Mail should care, as it hates anything outside of the UK).

 

[alloneword100]

The other article in the Mail about the 46% fare increases (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1342616/Rail-fares-racket-Prices-jump-46-cent-New-Year.html) had me turning away before I even read the opening paragraph.

Now, yes, that increase IS real. Yes, it IS outrageous (and there's no reason to increase it given those season ticket holders are going against the flow) but the mere fact that the DM tries to suggest to the bulk of the lazy general public who can't read more than headlines, it's an obvious attack on the railway. Fares aren't, generally, going up 46% or anything remotely close to that.

As a result, the increases most people are getting somehow seem like a bargain. Way to go Daily Mail, who missed the opportunity to actually be more accurate and STILL have a valid story, which could then be taken seriously.

As a journalist myself, for a (non-railway) trade publication, my problem is the way the story is put together, though it may not be the fault of the writers. The story has an important point to make about averaging higher rises on busy routes with lower ones on less-used ones which, if true, is a real story. That should, therefore, be the first par, but as it appears on the website it is the second, behind the 46% figure which is also in the headline. Both points are then made in the body of the story even though they are in some cases contradictory (why give the average increase when you have just explained that the average is misleading?)

The key, I suspect, is that it is bylined by two writers. I think this was originally two stories, one tired and lame piece about increases of up to 46% despite poor performance, and the other about the averaging 'loophole'. At some point the decision has been taken to make them one story, and a subeditor has done a fairly crude cut'n'paste job - if you go through the story it is pretty easy to see alternating pars at the start, and then the averaging story followed by the 'up to 46%' story, with a handful of rentaquotes tacked on the end.

What they should have done is run the real news about averaging and investigated it more thoroughly, but ditch the lame one, which seems to be cobbled together from press releases and clippings.

 

[jon0844]

Maybe I should read it thoroughly, while gritting my teeth, as you're probably right and I have seen multiple stories combined before - even on the BBC website - with the inevitable confusion and mixed messages. I think someone at the Daily Mail was just too desperate to keep the headline figure of 46% in, even though the reality is still good for a story - and the 46% can be mentioned as a particularly extreme example within the body, not as a suggestion that this is the norm to those who can't be bothered to read the whole thing.

The Guardian seems to have done a little more research and presented it in a more useful fashion (although, to be honest, anyone who has a season would have already checked their own individual ticket and not really cared about having a summary!). That said, as I renewed this year, I haven't actually checked the prices yet as I won't pay the 2011 prices until 2012 (well, end of 2011)!

 

[Nick W]

As every reader should know, the Daily Mail sensationalises its stories because people prefer to read about extremes then be presented with a middle position. If you don't like this, don't read the paper.

Apart from this, the Daily Mail makes a serious point: the experiences of many passengers includes rude staff, poor information and the recognition of incompetence, my experiences too. Obviously, not all staff are rude and unhelpful, information about disruption isn't always absent and not all railway controllers are incompetent, but there is a major systemic problem in our railway that cannot be spread under the carpet.

Now I imagine the railway staff that frequent this forum are the more helpful ones, as those that visit a railway forum are likely to be those who care about their job. I'd like to hope that these staff can join the Daily Mail in condemning the rude and incompetent staff that are all too prevalent on the railways that give others a bad name, as well as the lack of information, rather than complaining about the Daily Mail's reporting.

 

[jon0844]

I am sure they do. And there are plenty of threads about poor information, yet in many cases this isn't down to the people 'on the ground' who DO give lots of information (yet that doesn't stop people Tweeting and phoning the Daily Mail/BBC to moan).

It's more down to poor management, and the updating of websites, the National Rail information (such as adding in emergency timetable trains and removing those that are now cancelled), or even the use of modern tools - like Twitter - to convey information to the public. These are issues that happen time and time again when things go wrong. Remember when the National Rail website used to go down because of heavy demand? Precisely the time when information is most essential!!

I think that the people we all face day to day and are friendly and courteous far outnumber the rude ones, so while newspapers can expose the bad ones, they should try and be more balanced. I know it's hard to do, especially on the web where controversial stories get traffic (and the Daily Mail has mastered SEO and should be commended for that, I suppose!).

 

[Old Timer]

As every reader should know, the Daily Mail sensationalises its stories because people prefer to read about extremes then be presented with a middle position. If you don't like this, don't read the paper.

Apart from this, the Daily Mail makes a serious point: the experiences of many passengers includes rude staff, poor information and the recognition of incompetence, my experiences too. Obviously, not all staff are rude and unhelpful, information about disruption isn't always absent and not all railway controllers are incompetent, but there is a major systemic problem in our railway that cannot be spread under the carpet.

Now I imagine the railway staff that frequent this forum are the more helpful ones, as those that visit a railway forum are likely to be those who care about their job. I'd like to hope that these staff can join the Daily Mail in condemning the rude and incompetent staff that are all too prevalent on the railways that give others a bad name, as well as the lack of information, rather than complaining about the Daily Mail's reporting.

Personally I find this post most offensive, and the sweeping generalisation written from a position of great ignorance.

It is an inaccurate and unnecessary slur upon many of the Railway staff who come on here and give up our time to pass on information and knowledge.

I wonder why we should continue if these are the opinions held here.

 

[Metroland]

I'm not aiming this post at anyone in particular, but I'd be interested to know the evidence for the major systematic failure?

There is certainly a major systematic failure in the way the media reports and paints a fair picture of safety and performance. And study after study has concluded this.

And looking at the Transport sector as a whole, judging by the statistics and customer satisfaction surveys, there must be bigger failures elsewhere. Not that it's an excuse, but it's important to keep things in perspective and compare other areas if you are making a judgement.

It's not to say things cannot be improved, and a denial there are some problems, especially around price.

It's not to say there are some people that are not up to the mark - but this is the case in ALL industries and sectors.

Universities have done studies on this sort of thing, and it's a complete myth 1) Railway people don't care about safety and performance 2) They make more mistakes than other workers, or there is a higher ratio of incompetent people than other industries 3) There is some sort of work shy culture. The fact is the railways have, and always have had, a long hours culture where people will turn out at all times of the day and the night to keep the job going.

If you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd be happy to see it. If you haven't got any evidence, then you intended to be offensive, and exercised it from a point of ignorance, like so many people do. People who believe it's really just very straightforward to sort out and if it wasn't for the stupidity of the people involved it could be.

I'm 100% sure Nick didn't mean to be offensive however, but he's just the sort of talented individual that inhabitants the forum, among others, that if their energies were applied in the right direction instead of highlighting negativities harvested through media that makes money out of bad news, would go a long way to solving some of the more tricky issues.

 

[Oliver]

http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/

Great website - contains everything my mother-in-law will ever need to know. In the old days people used to say "don't believe everything you read in the papers". Still true; if you ever witness an event (however mundane) and subsequently read about it in the paper your reaction will be "it wasn't quite like that". Last week our local rag reported us clearing the snow in our street; they got the street wrong, the names wrong and the quotes wrong; nothing malicious, just the way the media is.

When it comes to railways, journalists have a set of prior expectations (or prejudices); people on trains are always "commuters" (even if they're going from London to Edinburgh), fares are "rocketing", staff are rude, and companies are profiteering (even if they are losing money).

A couple of years ago there was an article in The Times of a journalist's reported rail journey which just couldn't have been true; I took this up with the paper and finally the lady had an interview with the editor where he reminded her not to invent stories even if they were more entertaining than the truth.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Personally I find this post most offensive, and the sweeping generalisation written from a position of great ignorance.

It is an inaccurate and unnecessary slur upon many of the Railway staff who come on here and give up our time to pass on information and knowledge.

I wonder why we should continue if these are the opinions held here.

its only a MINORITY of staff that can be rude or ignorant like in every place of work, I agree with you Old Timer

 

[Failed Unit]

its only a MINORITY of staff that can be rude or ignorant like in every place of work, I agree with you Old Timer

It is those remembered good and bad. I once wrote to Central trains complimenting a member of staff who went the extra mile. But with CT and the wonderful company it was it sent me an apology!:roll: I hope someone read the letter and gave the staff member the credit he deserved. He is still there and still very pleasent whenever he is on the train - he just has gone to the darkside driving.

 

[Oliver]

its only a MINORITY of staff that can be rude or ignorant like in every place of work, I agree with you Old Timer

I may be lucky, but I find the train staff I meet to be either pleasant and helpful, or neutral at worst. I suspect that some passengers start with a belligerent attitude and either imagine rudeness or bring out the grumpy side in the staff who have to deal with them.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

On my way to Buxton the other week 4 pensioners got on at Picc and half way through the Journey DEMANDED that I telephone Control and get the train stopped at Dove Holes, I asked him why, he rudely said the previous train was cancelled (it wasn't) (and it ran on time, I checked) and as it was cancelled he demands to be let off at Dove Holes, I politely if not exasperatedly told him that it was not possible as the train was already running late (rush hour) and control would not allow it, he then went on about poor customer service (some people hate being told no) and called me Mr Crap (I have been called worse lol)

I was polite

I told him the truth

and I'm sure he would have complained

incidents like this because the pax didn't get the answer he required can get Train crew into trouble through exaggerated bulls**t that I'm sure he would have put in his complaint.

thats the real world that Train Crew have to live in, truth of the matter is The MAJORITY of incidents are caused by passengers not getting the answer they want.

I'm sure this will cause arguments but to be blunt that is what really happens in well over half of pax complaints, Train Crew/Staff tell them the answer to their question and they don't like it, and to make them feel better they will bad mouth Train staff. as they would never admit that they are in the wrong, seen it too many times to mention

 

[Mojo]

Personally I find this post most offensive, and the sweeping generalisation written from a position of great ignorance.

It is an inaccurate and unnecessary slur upon many of the Railway staff who come on here and give up our time to pass on information and knowledge.

I wonder why we should continue if these are the opinions held here.

I disagree; I thought he made quite a complimentary point about many of the railway staff who come and visit railway forums and I'd be interested in knowing in why you thought it was offensive.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

I'm sorry Mojo but the wordings of the comments mentioned do sound like the MAJORITY of Train staff are ignorant/rude etc etc, as someone who is very proud of his job I do take offense (personally), as I stated yes staff can be rude/unhelpful etc etc but they are in the MINORITY and certainly not the MAJORITY as the post implies