Appalling: Rules of travel for under 18s - TfL

[zwk500]

If they didn't publish the list they couldn't apply the perfectly reasonable, sensible sanction.

So up until now they've had no right to remove a pass they issue to any under-18 for any reason?

 

[RJ]

Nothing on this list applies specifically to children, nor is it reasonable to single them out for these behaviours.

Often it's the children with no parents (or no relationship with their parents) who end up keeping company that behaves like this. It's not just parents failing the children.

They could do this beforehand, it didn't need a separate list.

I don’t know about that. The school I went to there were children who had both parents at home setting off fireworks, throwing eggs, burning seats, happy slapping random people and engaging in brawls on the bus home. While at the same time behaving to a standard their parents would be proud of in front of the teachers. Can never assume.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

How dare organisations set out minimum standards of behaviour from children using their services indeed!!

If feral (or overly privileged) parents don't set boundaries for their offspring then what right does a service provider have!

Of course now they have published the list of unacceptable behaviours, it means that they can remove a privilege if the rules are broken. Whether the individuals read the rules or not.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Nov 2022 ==


"Our Young Person's Behaviour Code exists to ensure you travel safely and show respect for others.
You must follow it or you risk losing your concession or your Zip Oyster photocard."

No zip, no concession, no available sanction = no rules applicable to the child (beyond the ones that apply to us all).

Why should these standards of behaviour be set out to children alone?

 

[Scotrail12]

Completely agree but it seems like ageism is acceptable in society when it's against the young. I'm relieved to be in my 20s and not listen to that kind of BS any more.

As for the one on giving up seats, that seems a bit daft, I'd say an under 18 is just as entitled to a seat as an adult and most adults don't need a child to give their seat up for them, the average 20, 30, 40 something is just as physically able to stand as a 17 year old is. Putting bags on seats is another matter but it's not like adults don't ever do that...

 

[matt_world2004]

Should be a behaviour code for freedom passes and staff passes too.!

 

[Parallel]

I think the ‘Under 18s’ wording is unnecessary. If it’s regarding the free travel pass, why not change the wording to ‘those holding a free travel pass’? The current wording comes across as very old school headteacher.

 

[Parjon]

Why should these standards of behaviour be set out to children alone?

Actually, if you read the rules it's clear that they apply to everyone through bylaws.

Maybe the question should be why should children get away with only having their pass taken away (which they haven't paid a penny in tax for) and instead be prosecuted, like they are in other parts of the country.

I note it is incredibly generous of TfL to also allow miscreants the possibility of earning a pass back.

Children need boundaries. They can be incredibly spoilt and entitled sometimes, and it's good to remind them that there are expectations behind entitlements.

I appreciate this has caused some to have a tantrum, but it's actually a reasonable and positive charter.

 

[NI 271]

Shall we have a code of conduct purely for football fans?

We already have one. It's called the law, where many 'offences' apply to football supporters that don't apply to any other demographic anywhere, at any time. I can go watch any other sport/event, in the same grounds in many cases, and not be subject to laws that only apply around football, including travelling to and from those fixtures/events on trains and coaches.

As analogies go, that was a poor one.

 

[3141]

I think the point is more that TfL can withdraw the Zip Oyster in line with a breach of the rules. Not that the rules themselves are going to stop anti-social behaviour, but if they catch someone doing x, y or z they can confiscate vs published ts&cs.

They need to move on from kids giving up seats for adults though. There’s been a generational shift and that just doesn’t happen anymore.

What is a "generational shift" and why doesn't it mean that younger people should give up their seat to older ones? I stopped being an under-18 in 1958 and nowadays I'm grateful if someone does offer me their seat, though if my journey is a short one I may thank them and decline the offer, especially when the person making the offer is a good deal older than 18.

Offering a seat to someone considerably older is polite and civilised.

I agree with the OPs concern that, apart from clarifying a particular sanction (withdrawal of concessionary travel) that only applies to under 18s, the list of expected behaviours published by TfL should apply to everyone, and the way they've sought to make their point is clumsy and not properly thought out.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Children need boundaries. They can be incredibly spoilt and entitled sometimes, and it's good to remind them that there are expectations behind entitlements.

I appreciate this has caused some to have a tantrum, but it's actually a reasonable and positive charter.

The way you are referring to children does make you seem rather stern, intolerant and somewhat resentful - a bit of an "in my day" type. This paragraph itself speaks volumes of the attitude of some "old world" middle-aged people. I mean, the way you've referred to me taking issue with this as having "a tantrum" in itself is very condescending.

 

[Parjon]

The way you are referring to children does make you seem rather stern, intolerant and somewhat resentful - a bit of an "in my day" type. This paragraph itself speaks volumes of the attitude of some "old world" middle-aged people. I mean, the way you've referred to me taking issue with this as having "a tantrum" in itself is very condescending.

"In my day" when I was a child, I could at times be spoilt, entitled, and throw tantrums in common with and just as well as any of my peers.

I would have had my zip pass taken away from me and burned.

One can only speak from experience when one has it and realises they have it.

Your assumptions about me and my motivations are condescending. I accept you're not happy about the rules. But you don't seem to accept that I think they're A-OK. So who is the intolerant one!!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

"In my day" when I was a child, I could at times be spoilt, entitled, and throw tantrums in common with and just as well as any of my peers.

I would have had my zip pass taken away from me and burned.

One can only speak from experience when one has it and realises they have it.

Your assumptions about me and my motivations are condescending. I accept you're not happy about the rules. But you don't seem to accept that I think they're A-OK. So who is the intolerant one!!

I haven't made any assumptions about you - rather, I've been very careful not to do just that as this whole thread comes from my dislike of stereotypes and assumptions - I have simply told you how I feel it comes across when you refer to the majority of "children today" as entitled and then consider young people's objection to being automatically categorised as troublemakers as "tantrums."

 

[E27007]

It may be to do with the age when criminal responsibility applies, under 10 years of age, they cannot be charged with a criminal offence, 10 to 17 years of age they can be arrested, but the justice system will utilise youth courts, ie soft/lenient.
If the youths abuse their privileges of a travel pass, it may be a lot harder to "sort them out" than an adult

 

[Parjon]

I haven't made any assumptions about you - rather, I've been very careful not to do just that as this whole thread comes from my dislike of stereotypes and assumptions - I have simply told you how I feel it comes across when you refer to the majority of "children today" as entitled and then consider young people's objection to being automatically categorised as troublemakers as "tantrums."

I made no mention of "children today", only "children". I also didn't even say "majority"'. I would say many. Quote what people say, don't make things up to suit your viewpoint. Now that would be living up to a modern stereotype, wouldn't it.

 

[Master29]

I must be the only one who doesn't see the problem. It's just guidelines and keep in mind the vast majority of under 18s will follow it, it's more aimed at the annoying snots who cause trouble. Free travel is a perk not a right.

Those annoying little snots wouldn't take any notice anyway.

 

[stuu]

I honestly cannot see any issue with this. Those basic rules apply to adults too and can be found in the TfL conditions of carriage. Every time you buy a ticket you are entering a contract to agree to the conditions of carriage. Putting them somewhere more concise and making it clear that the concession can be withdrawn if they are broken makes it much easier for the holder of such a pass to understand what the rules are. No one is being singled out.

I am a bit surprised about standing though, that doesn't happen at all any more and I didn't expect it to still be in something official.

 

[JamieL]

I agree, no real issue with anything in those rules - the essence applies to adults as well, it has just been framed for the audience reading the page (I.e. under 18s seeking concessionary travel).

The mandatory standing discussed in this thread - but not on the page - would be unlawful.

 

[HullRailMan]

I don’t have an issue with any of this…..there clearly have been issues with behaviour from some members of this demographic to prompt this; I can’t imagine someone at TfL just decided to do this for no reason.

As has been made clear elsewhere, this is about reminding people that their concessionary travel is a privilege, one not available to most of their peers across the country, and that privilege comes with responsibility. If you behave, great. If you act up, you lose your pass. Seems reasonable to me.

I can’t see any presumption anywhere that they think young people will all act this way, no more than a ‘no smoking’ sign doesn’t assume that everyone would smoke if it wasn’t there.

 

[JaJaWa]

So up until now they've had no right to remove a pass they issue to any under-18 for any reason?

The page has been there ever since the cards were introduced

 

[AlterEgo]

I wonder if this has been produced with some sort of "community engagement" in mind, visiting schools etc, and it being something to point to when telling kids how to behave on public transport.

 

[chris_in_salop]

Honestly I don't see the problem with this document. And these rules need to be enforced.

As a season-ticketed commuter, my heart sinks when I see children get on the train. Saturdays are unbearable largely because of families and children: screaming babies, loud beepy electronic devices, luggage in the gangways.

(Of course the football fans and hen parties don't help either.)

 

[zwk500]

Honestly I don't see the problem with this document. And these rules need to be enforced.

As a season-ticketed commuter, my heart sinks when I see children get on the train. Saturdays are unbearable largely because of families and children: screaming babies, loud beepy electronic devices, luggage in the gangways.

(Of course the football fans and hen parties don't help either.)

I've been on journeys with all 3, and football fans and hen parties make screaming babies feel like country vicars in comparison. Notably it's the middle aged football fans who are by far the worst. Groups of teenage football fans are generally as well behaved as anybody else on the train.
Large groups of students heading for a night out tend to be bad as well, but they are generally only going a couple of stops.

 

[E27007]

Honestly I don't see the problem with this document. And these rules need to be enforced.

As a season-ticketed commuter, my heart sinks when I see children get on the train. Saturdays are unbearable largely because of families and children: screaming babies, loud beepy electronic devices, luggage in the gangways.

(Of course the football fans and hen parties don't help either.)

Some schools send out staff as marshals to travel on public transport to "keep the peace" when their pupils are traveling at peak times.
As for football supporters, do they believe a football match is free license to publically shout swear and intimidate as they act out their boorish fantasies?
i avoid traveling when there are football supporters on the route.

 

[Falcon1200]

I don't think I can express how genuinely I angry I am having read this. Why on earth should these rules - don't swear or put your feet on seats, don't smoke or dodge fares - be dedicated in a list of rules specifically to Under 18s?

On first reading the OP I shared the outrage, but thinking more about it, perhaps the issue is that (some, not all) Under 18s are less likely than (most but not all adults) to be aware of, or care, how their behaviour affects others, and the possible penalties if they transgress? But, of course, all passengers should behave in a respectful manner.

An example, I'm 19 now, but two or three years ago I tried to board a Voyager at Stockport, and the catering host just would not let me board at the first class door because he could not believe a teenager would have a first class ticket. He went bright red when I produced it

Having been on one of those ECML trains and being asked four times if I knew I was in First then asked to show a ticket before being allowed to sit down, I get why people don’t like it.

I have only ever once been challenged entering a First Class coach (on a Voyager also) and I was too taken aback to respond as I should have, ie by asking the challenger how they could possibly know what ticket I held. BTW I might not have been wearing a three-piece suit that day but I was not particularly scruffy, and I was in my 50s! Challenging people boarding First Class vehicles on the basis of their appearance is outrageous, ticket checks during the journey are sufficient.

 

[zwk500]

Challenging people boarding First Class vehicles on the basis of their appearance is outrageous, ticket checks during the journey are sufficient.

We're digressing, but totally agree. It isn't any passengers business whether or not another passenger has the correct ticket. A polite 'may I see your tickets please' from a staff member is all that's required.

 

[185]

In fairness to TfL, they've budgeted for young people to get free travel, paid for by the other passengers and taxpayers. If I was offered free travel at that age, I'd wear a tutu if I was told to. Thus, they pretty much can, at the behest of the mayor make good behaviour demands to encourage.... well, good behaviour.

That said, the other major group of free passholders should also be told this, however they are a little less likely to be swinging from the bars, drill rapping stood on the seats or climbing out of the upstairs back fire escape - as they'd probably drop their walking frame in the process.

 

[Mike Machin]

Whilst travellers of all ages commit ant-social acts and sometimes display disruptive behaviour, under 18s are children and some of them do need to be reminded of their obligations and how to behave.

 

[skyhigh]

I haven't made any assumptions about you - rather, I've been very careful not to do just that as this whole thread comes from my dislike of stereotypes and assumptions

For what it's worth, I agree with you.

 

[43066]

I have only ever once been challenged entering a First Class coach (on a Voyager also) and I was too taken aback to respond as I should have, ie by asking the challenger how they could possibly know what ticket I held. BTW I might not have been wearing a three-piece suit that day but I was not particularly scruffy, and I was in my 50s! Challenging people boarding First Class vehicles on the basis of their appearance is outrageous, ticket checks during the journey are sufficient.

Lots of people wander into first class completely oblivious, hence our hosts often check asap to prevent people sitting down and then having to be asked to move. They also ask to check tickets before delivering refreshments. I wonder if this kind of thing is what is being encountered, rather than checks based on appearance as such (which I agree would be inappropriate).

 

[Purple Train]

On first reading the OP I shared the outrage, but thinking more about it, perhaps the issue is that (some, not all) Under 18s are less likely than (most but not all adults) to be aware of, or care, how their behaviour affects others, and the possible penalties if they transgress? But, of course, all passengers should behave in a respectful manner.

Agreed.

While I don't like the way the TfL page is phrased, I think it's a message that needs to be put across to the younger demographic in this way. Older troublemakers should know perfectly well how to behave, and have stronger repercussions if they don't, and giving under 18s guidance like this is a good way to dissuade some of them from minor things that they may not think about the consequences of (for example, if all under-18s complied with the rule: "ensure that only you can hear your music", that would definitely make some fellow passengers' journeys pleasanter).
That said, I agree with the poster(s) above who said that it won't dissuade the under-18s who really cause trouble. And I don't like the idea that I must give up my seat for anyone over 18. (For example, on a recent journey I made from Manchester to the Yorkshire coast, my initial TPE train was shown as cancelled (I later discovered that it wasn't) so I was sent via Sheffield. After spending an hour, carrying two heavy bags, standing in the vestibule of a 156, I definitely wouldn't have wanted to give up my seat on the Scarborough train at Sheffield for a fit 19-year-old travelling only as far as Doncaster, despite the fact that people were standing in the aisles, but maybe I'm just mean like that!)

Personally, I make every effort to behave sensibly and properly at all times on transport infrastructure - I think the worst I've done so far is direct a woman at Reading asking for the platform for the Newbury train to platform 2, where the slow 165 (departing 50 minutes afterwards) was pulling in - there was a fast train to Newbury departing 40 minutes before the 165 . I know lots of people my sort of age who behave far, far better than I could dream of on public transport (they don't feel the need to go "ooh!" every time they pass Acton Yard), and, for those people and, I would hope, for myself, this sort of advice isn't needed. But far too many under 18s don't know how to behave on trains, and aren't taught how to behave better. That's why I think we need guidance like this.