BBC Documentary 'The Railways'

[GNER 373]

You also end up looking like a berk if you threaten to call the BTP and then decide that the tickets which you've been arguing are invalid, to the point that you're threatening to call the BTP, are in fact valid and that you have been wrong this entire time.

I've seen this first hand and speaking of hands you could warm yours on the TM's face when they realised!

 

[Flamingo]

I have to say first off, I didn't see the episode in question, which is why I have refrained on commenting on the specifics of the case.

However, unless I had Revenue on the train, or the person was travelling to a station where I was 100% certain they would attend (and that does not include Paddington), I would probably not bother all that much. I rarely involve BTP for tickets, unless the passenger has been abusive or violent, as they are not interested in simple ticket disputes.. I may issue a UFN if I have time to jump through all the hoops involved. Regards doing a TIR or MG11, when my TOC shows me how to do one and who to send it to, or even issues them to me, I might start.

Sorry Ferret, I'm afraid from the sound of this incident, I would have dealt with it in a similar manner - in fact I may have not even asked the passenger to leave, not because of any regard to the platform staff, but simply to avoid the flak for causing a delay over a ticketing issue.

 

[burneside]

We know he didn't take details and report for prosecution because he would not be evicting the passenger if he'd done so. We saw part of an exchange on the platform which suggested BTP weren't called at the time. Now, even his own colleagues are criticising him openly per a post from Pumbaa - that should tell you all you need to know. I strongly suspect that subsequently the BTP have investigated, hence the pixellating of his face in the footage, which is at least something.

I think the pixellation was done more to hide the identity of the man who appeared to be accused of wrongdoing, but it was never proven.

 

[richw]

I would have dealt with it in a similar manner - in fact I may have not even asked the passenger to leave, not because of any regard to the platform staff, but simply to avoid the flak for causing a delay over a ticketing issue.

It wasnt even made clear if the passengers actual destination was Crewe, I know the TM ensured the passenger left the train at Crewe, however the passengers destination was not made clear and may well have been crewe.

 

[Flamingo]

Lto be brutally honest, I probably wouldn't have even asked to see the YP...

 

[Ferret]

It wasnt even made clear if the passengers actual destination was Crewe, I know the TM ensured the passenger left the train at Crewe, however the passengers destination was not made clear and may well have been crewe.

I did wonder about that too, but discounted it because of the altercation on the platform.

Flamingo - well - the key part of what you've said is the last bit; not asking him to leave to avoid causing a delay. Which is the key part of what I have to say regarding why he was in the wrong!!!!

 

[AlexS]

Some guards do seem to have a bit of a nasty habit of thinking of platform staff as bouncers - if you ring me to attend your train to deal with a revenue issue you'd better have called someone else as well, either a police officer or an RPO, because I'm not getting involved otherwise! It's not like I can do any more to remove someone from the train than the guard can and I have no idea about tickets having received practically no training on them other than the very basics. Unless there's been an assault or similar my only involvement tends to be keeping the signaller up to date on the situation and to tell the driver to get on the phone to the 'box to get the signal back if required and then carry out management of the station working to get around the problem as needed.

Unfortunately it must be said I have little more interest in ticketing irregularities than guards must have in drunks that deposit themselves on my station and knock themselves out or make an arse of themselves :P

 

[Flamingo]

I think it's not because platform staff are bouncers as such, but any issues in stations can get a faster response (in theory) from police than an on- train incident with the next station 25 minutes away.

Anyway, on-train staff accuse platform staff of just wanting to shift their problem onto the train and away!

 

[AlexS]

It all depends! I work on a large, busy mainline station and due to the closure of the local full time BTP office (now there's only a 'neighbourhood' style cover on a rotation) unless your luck is in, you have to wait for officers to attend from another city, which is nearly 30 miles away. If it's really serious you might get civil police turn up instead but they're only any use as a holding measure till BTP arrive as they tend to have no idea about railway law.

As it happens, most of my 'problems' are usually unconscious in an inconvenient location like a loading bay, toilet cubicle or in one case recently, the middle of the taxi rank so I don't get much chance to hoof them on to a train At that point things do become rather more bouncer like as you have to try and persuade them to leave by any means other than physical intervention!

 

[Flamingo]

It all depends! I work on a large, busy mainline station and due to the closure of the local full time BTP office (now there's only a 'neighbourhood' style cover on a rotation) unless your luck is in, you have to wait for officers to attend from another city, which is nearly 30 miles away. If it's really serious you might get civil police turn up instead but they're only any use as a holding measure till BTP arrive as they tend to have no idea about railway law.

As it happens, most of my 'problems' are usually unconscious in an inconvenient location like a loading bay, toilet cubicle or in one case recently, the middle of the taxi rank so I don't get much chance to hoof them on to a train At that point things do become rather more bouncer like as you have to try and persuade them to leave by any means other than physical intervention!

Telling them there is free beer in the pub down the road sometimes works!

 

[GlosRail]

When I was up at Manchester in June there were notices up saying they were filming today, and please ring a number, or speak to the staff if you didn't want to be shown. I did see the camera crew, but the bit I saw being filmed wasn't shown.

To add to the discussion, there would have been notices arund the station warnibg that filming was going on, so people could keep out of the way if they wanted.

I was on the Matlock train one day ehen the BBC were filming Pete Waterman. Even though I was in the next coach, the TV crew came through the whole train asking people if they minded them filming.

(Though I'm not sure what you could do if you were the one person who did mind except lock yourself in the khazi.)

 

[DarloRich]

Finally got to see this episode. Another good one which hopefully helps the public, especially passengers like that prat at Euston complaining that people dont work nights, get a wider appreciation of what people go through and do to try and keep the trains running. I would prefer to see more on the maintenance and repair side of things but that may be covered in later episodes.

I imagine many people assume the majority of engineering tasks are still done by hand and it was good to see things like the TRT and other equipment being highlighted. It also showed some of the challenges and pressures there are in trying to maintain the railway and the short windows of opportunity for that maintenance or replacement work.

I have read quite a lot of this thread an i am dismayed by the level of spotterish wibble at times. Do try to remember that the films are designed to be viewed by the general public and so are shot and edited to hold the casual viewers interest for the longest period of time.

Finally, there is a lot of whining about things like people smoking, swearing, having a joke or being hand picked to appear on the programme. Frankly, i would prefer to see real people doing their real jobs, warts and all than a nice PR savvy person.

That said i think all the people shown have been a credit to the railways and have shown their employers in a good light.

 

[Crossover]

Really enjoyed last nights episode I think it was the best so far to be honest. Loved the VT TM thought he was brilliant, especially the way he got so excited about getting to go track side (even if his passengers weren't so amused ). The VT RPI was also really good, I was really impressed by the way she handled the lady who'd bought the wrong ticket for a train twelve hours earlier (and how that trains TM handled it). And both the Stockport signaller and the track maintenance people were really interesting. I was a bit disappointed that more wasn't made about NR's track replacement train as that's a seriously impressive bit of kit. It would be been nice to get some figures about what it can do and what a traditional gang could do for comparisons sake.

The editing was interesting on this episode, especially when they were showing the catering on the VT service. We got shots of breakfast, evening meal, weekend, evening meal and back to breakfast in one after another at one point. The first time, I think, that the editing has been a bit dodgy (not that it matters as only people like us would spot it).

I'm not sure why but I think I may have been happy to do something like a rotation check, as that TM did. As another poster said, it can be that when things start going up the wall, it can be more interesting, rather than just "another day in the office". It depends on the person really, I guess.

As for the editing, I did notice the 350 sounding Pendolino approaching Manchester hock:

 

[reb0118]

You do not eject somebody from the train over revenue issues. Simple as.

You can in Scotland, no ticket & no means to pay means off at the next stop* even if you provide a name and address.

This is usually a last resort though, if the passenger plays fair with us we will usually let them travel to their destination. Of course the usual rules regarding vulnerable passengers applies.

We are also no longer allowed to ask the "big man" for assistance.


Edit: *Should be the next staffed station

 

[RJ]

My lot would consider disciplinary action for what that TM did. You do not eject somebody from the train over revenue issues. Simple as.

I think it varies according to the TOC. EMT TMs have tried on numerous occasions to have me put off their trains short of my destination. Invariably without success, despite various threats being made! As a consequence, I always travel on trains that don't stop between London and Leicester where possible. On one occasion a TM tried to get me off the train at Luton and Bedford, then called revenue protection who then tried and failed to get me off the train at Leicester!

 

[Ferret]

RJ, do you think there's a clue in there somewhere

 

[GNER 373]

I think it varies according to the TOC. EMT TMs have tried on numerous occasions to have me put off their trains short of my destination. Invariably without success, despite various threats being made! As a consequence, I always travel on trains that don't stop between London and Leicester where possible. On one occasion a TM tried to get me off the train at Luton and Bedford, then called revenue protection who then tried and failed to get me off the train at Leicester!

So what your saying is you travel by train refusing to buy a ticket and then boasting about not being ejected from the train on this forum? Or am I completely missing the point?

 

[gimmea50anyday]

I think it varies according to the TOC. EMT TMs have tried on numerous occasions to have me put off their trains short of my destination. Invariably without success, despite various threats being made! As a consequence, I always travel on trains that don't stop between London and Leicester where possible. On one occasion a TM tried to get me off the train at Luton and Bedford, then called revenue protection who then tried and failed to get me off the train at Leicester!

And why would so many different TM's all see the same need to make you leave the train? Clearly there is some issue that you are generating that is causing this

 

[ainsworth74]

RJ uses tickets which are totally valid, however EMT guards dispute the validity as they are sometimes not obviously valid. EMT guards continue to refuse to accept the tickets, even when shown why they are valid using the Routeing Guide, NRCoC, etc and demand that payment of a new ticket be made. RJ, understandably, refuses to buy such tickets and therefore this could lead to some wanting him put off the train.

Make no mistake RJ travels with valid tickets.

 

[yorkie]

And why would so many different TM's all see the same need to make you leave the train? Clearly there is some issue that you are generating that is causing this

Yes, it's called taking routes that are permitted in the Routeing Guide, but not usually taken by passengers. Some guards (such as yourself ) will listen to the passenger and be willing to learn. But some guards are not.

 

[CC 72100]

Well, just watched the episode on iplayer. All the staff came across positively (surprise surprise with Beardie involved ), but I did like the Virgin TMs enthusiasm, getting a bit of a buzz for the out of the ordinary. The guy at Man Picc came across well, so did the American woman at Euston. Other than that, I still can't quite believe that the woman who didn't understand the 24 hour clock was allowed to travel, and on a peak time service at that. Amazing what can happen when a TV camera is there. Cynic me?

 

[GNER 373]

RJ uses tickets which are totally valid, however EMT guards dispute the validity as they are sometimes not obviously valid. EMT guards continue to refuse to accept the tickets, even when shown why they are valid using the Routeing Guide, NRCoC, etc and demand that payment of a new ticket be made. RJ, understandably, refuses to buy such tickets and therefore this could lead to some wanting him put off the train.

Make no mistake RJ travels with valid tickets.

Got it!

Well that is a shame, Seems a little more education needed on the guards part however if RJ is seen as being smug with them this may get the guards backs up therefore leading to them not believing/not listening and trying to throw him off, which technically is still wrong but not in the guards eyes at the time.

Trying to see it from both angles, not to say RJ is smug or anything

Anyway looking forward to this week episode...who's with me?

 

[Captain Chaos]

I think it was a more a case that the woman was given the benefit of the doubt. I would have let her travel myself too. She's made a genuine and honest mistake. It's not like she's boarded and tried to blag it. I'm always happy to help someone if they are open and honest.

 

[CC 72100]

I think it was a more a case that the woman was given the benefit of the doubt. I would have let her travel myself too. She's made a genuine and honest mistake. It's not like she's boarded and tried to blag it. I'm always happy to help someone if they are open and honest.

In all honesty you raise a very point there. She made an effort as opposed to sitting there hoping she wouldn't be caught. I'd like to think that if you find yourself in a sticky situation, you get a little more patience and leniency by making an effort yourself and not blagging later, so on second thoughts, fair enough.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Have to agree with GNER 373 there, however the whole issue of ticketing is a very complicated subject, and far too little is given in the way of training to train staff, revenue and even ticket offices that make it clear what can and can't be done. ATOC don't exactly help themselves by the useless bull$h1t they come out with fare increases etc, and ticket selling is now getting geared more towards buying tickets in one direction only especially on line whereas rovers, returns etc which are often cheaper often get forgotten about. the travelling public is getting ripped off by the likes of thetrainline.com and even common sense information such as same platform connections instead of getting lost in main terminals is being lost in favour of so called convenience!!!!

As long as you have the info required to back you up and are able to present it there should be no problem. But at the same time don't go creating one by being a twit with the train crew. Be nice. Remember we are human too!

 

[455driver]

Make no mistake RJ travels with valid tickets.

Except when he doesnt have his railcard with him!

 

[Juniper Driver]

Just watching episode two now,seen one and three.Wasn't too impressed with three at first but now as I have watched other episodes I have liked it more,plus I was involved with a desiro eight car with door troubles during the Twickenham Rugby today and learnt more about desiro's even though I have been driving them for nine years.So the public seeing what it is really like may not be such a bad thing.

 

[ainsworth74]

Except when he doesnt have his railcard with him!

Got me But lets not start that again

 

[martybabes]

...if for instance that person was put off the train and then died or fell onto the tracks, then that member of staff who chose to throw them off would be accountable for the death of a passenger. A bit of a stretch of the imagination granted but believe me it's true.

Tosh. If you substitute the term "responsibility" for the often mis-used expression "duty of care" then, in the circumstances described above, it is very difficult to see why a TM should have responsibility for the actions of the person who throws himself under the next train, or trips up the subway steps. This would be like saying that the person who sold a pax a ticket at the booking office has a duty of care for that pax until such time as he (the pax) gets home (and maybe even, then too!).

A duty of care will exist if there is a relationship created whereby one person/body has a legal responsibility for the safety of another and that responsibility has not ended or been superseded by another intervening act. The pax getting off the train, voluntarily or otherwise, will be such an intervening act (novus actus interveniens for you Latin scholars).

 

[GNER 373]

Tosh. If you substitute the term "responsibility" for the often mis-used expression "duty of care" then, in the circumstances described above, it is very difficult to see why a TM should have responsibility for the actions of the person who throws himself under the next train, or trips up the subway steps. This would be like saying that the person who sold a pax a ticket at the booking office has a duty of care for that pax until such time as he (the pax) gets home (and maybe even, then too!).

A duty of care will exist if there is a relationship created whereby one person/body has a legal responsibility for the safety of another and that responsibility has not ended or been superseded by another intervening act. The pax getting off the train, voluntarily or otherwise, will be such an intervening act (novus actus interveniens for you Latin scholars).

If they left voluntarily then yes, your 'responsibility' ends there. If you put them off a train for any reason, including for ticketless travel, you then fail to except the 'responsibility' of safely carrying a passenger between points A & B. and I like the sound of 'Duty of Care' anyway!