• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Bus driver sacked after preventing theft

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
1 Jul 2024
Messages
178
Location
Derbyshire Dales
BBC News : Bus driver sacked after chasing and punching thief

A London bus driver who chased a thief and punched him unconscious has been sacked, following a tribunal.

Mark Hehir, who told the hearing he was seen as a "hero" by the public, was driving the 206 bus for Metroline, which runs between Wembley and Maida Vale in north-west London, when a man stole a passenger's necklace.

Hehir gave chase and retrieved the necklace, but said the man returned to the bus to confront him, and threw "the first punch". The tribunal heard Hehir responded in self defence and then restrained the man for almost "half an hour".

The headline seenms to be misleading. According to the report, the driver chased the thief and recovered the stolen goods, which he returned to the victim. The thief returned to the bus ("in order to apologise" according to his defence), and a confrontation occurred in which the driver punched the thief.

It rather seems to me, even given the linited scope of the article (which doesn't mention the thief's name) that tris is a miscarriage of justice.

Does anyone have better information?
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

thealexweb

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
1,106
What a farce. This will almost certainly go to an employment tribunal and he'll easily win with a comfortable pay-out.

This Alina Gioroc getting absolutely slated across the news and social media. Surely she'll have go before she's pushed.
 

pwharley

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2011
Messages
81
What a farce. This will almost certainly go to an employment tribunal and he'll easily win with a comfortable pay-out.
Err, the news report is about a tribunal, where the driver lost his claim.

This Alina Gioroc getting absolutely slated across the news and social media. Surely she'll have go before she's pushed.
It's Metroline who should be "slated", for allowing such a person to dismiss drivers.
 

thealexweb

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
1,106
Err, the news report is about a tribunal, where the driver lost his claim.


It's Metroline who should be "slated", for allowing such a person to dismiss drivers.

Ah my bad. I mis-read the article thinking this was still internal investigation by Metroline.

But yes Metroline has a lot to answer for here. Why must driver/passengers live in fear of muggings. And 30 minutes with no police response?
 

GatwickDepress

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2013
Messages
2,588
Location
Leeds
Having just finished reading the tribunal judgement, I do empathise with Mr Hehir. I can also understand Metroline's decision.
 

alex397

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Messages
2,029
Location
UK
For those wishing to take the time to read it, the full text of the tribunal judgment is here: https://assets.publishing.service.g...ROLINE_LTD_6018181_2024_Reserved_Judgment.pdf

It's 17 pages, so I won't quote it, but as you'd expect, it goes into some detail of the three-stage internal disciplinary procedure, why all three stages declined to reinstate, and why the Tribunal agrees.
Thank you for posting the full text. It’s often hard to interpret events in news stories, which often have lots of detail missing. Though, even after reading the full 17 pages, I can’t pretend to completely understand it.
Gioroc seems a bit naive in being sure the assailant was coming back to apologise! I’m not quite sure how she could come to that conclusion.
I can understand he broke company policy, and probably should have been disciplined, but it seems a little unfair to lose his job over it. But, the world is a very unfair place sadly.

I wonder what would have happened if he had followed policy, and contacted police. They would have taken 30 minutes to arrive, then probably not investigate it or not find enough evidence. The lady would have been distraught, the driver would have felt powerless and maybe a bit guilty for not doing anything, and the assailant would likely just get away with it.
 
Last edited:

JasonL

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2024
Messages
218
Location
Earlestown, Merseyside
Correct me if I'm wrong but unfortunately he would have got sacked for leaving the cab of his vehicle while there are passengers on board and would have casued the bus to run late and also he would have also got sacked for acts of vigilantism which is against the law. Can't do good deeds without being drilled or punished these days sadly.
 

duncombec

Member
Joined
3 Sep 2014
Messages
1,149
Thank you for posting the full text. It’s often hard to interpret events in news stories, which often have lots of detail missing. Though, even after reading the full 17 pages, I can’t pretend to completely understand it.
Gioroc seems a bit naive in being sure the assailant was coming back to apologise! I’m not quite sure how she could come to that conclusion.
I can understand he broke company policy, and probably should have been disciplined, but it seems a little unfair to lose his job over it. But, the world is a very unfair place sadly.

I wonder what would have happened if he had followed policy, and contacted police. They would have taken 30 minutes to arrive, then probably not investigate it or not find enough evidence. The lady would have been distraught, the driver would have felt powerless and maybe a bit guilty for not doing anything, and the assailant would likely just get away with it.
I can't say I understood every word either, especially not when they refer to past cases, but it does set out a summary of what happened up to that point. The notable elements for me were
- The manager in charge of the final review had revised previous decisions, but declined to act in this case. That suggests he thought it was reasonable, and wasn't just a cursory "manager is always right" decision.
- It suggests the thief was knocked unconscious. There have been other "one punch" cases that have ended up in manslaughter charges. Whatever we may want to do with thieves, acting as the driver did always carries a risk.

Correct me if I'm wrong but unfortunately he would have got sacked for leaving the cab of his vehicle while there are passengers on board and would have casued the bus to run late and also he would have also got sacked for acts of vigilantism which is against the law.
The text of the judgment explains there are three reasons, of which leaving the vehicle unattended is just one. He was not sacked for vigilantism.

Can't do good deeds without being drilled or punished these days sadly.
Has he just ran after the thief and got the stolen property back, that might have been the end of it. It seems to have been the subsequent actions which led to his dismissal. Punching someone, whatever they have done, in company uniform and in the middle of a shift is unlikely to end well for anyone.
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,713
It is ironic that one factor leading to dismissal is bringing the company into disrepute. Not sure many people are aware that it's not TfL that runs London buses and the result of this hearing is more likely to bring Metroline into disrepute.
 

alex397

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Messages
2,029
Location
UK
.
- It suggests the thief was knocked unconscious. There have been other "one punch" cases that have ended up in manslaughter charges. Whatever we may want to do with thieves, acting as the driver did always carries a risk.
…..

Has he just ran after the thief and got the stolen property back, that might have been the end of it. It seems to have been the subsequent actions which led to his dismissal. Punching someone, whatever they have done, in company uniform and in the middle of a shift is unlikely to end well for anyone.
You’re right, if he hadn’t have retaliated, that would likely be the end of it. It’s certainly not a great look, so I can understand him being disciplined for that. But it’s hard to know how much threat was perceived - I’m sure it would have been worrying for the driver and the lady to see the robber return (not exactly a usual response from a criminal!), and we don’t know what his behaviour was like.
I think a better course of action would have been to have suspended him and put him on a mandatory training course, rather than sacking - though that’s easy for me to say behind a keyboard, not managing a depot and having to keep bosses above me happy.

Being sacked for this surely means he may find it difficult to find another job too.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,395
What a farce. This will almost certainly go to an employment tribunal and he'll easily win with a comfortable pay-out.

This Alina Gioroc getting absolutely slated across the news and social media. Surely she'll have go before she's pushed.
So she damned well should. How to prove to your staff that wholly out of touch management do not have their backs.
 
Joined
1 Jul 2024
Messages
178
Location
Derbyshire Dales
Well, I haven't often been in an emergency situation, but I know what adrenalin is like. And from some of the responses here, I don't want an emergency happening to me when the possible assistance has an accountant mind. I recall an incident when firemen were prevented from rescuing a boy whose foot was stuck in a drain, because the senior officer said it was unsafe. I was once on a late night bus in Manchester when a drunken bully picked a fight with another passenger. The wrong one, as it happened- the meek looking victim smashed the bully flat. The driver drove to the nearest police station (they were manned and open at night then) and ofloaded the bleeding wreck.

The London bus driver should be put in charge of passenger protection policy at Metroline, and paid double whatever the idiot who sacked him was. Or do you really think we have no need for heroes?
 

jumble

Established Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,484
Err, the news report is about a tribunal, where the driver lost his claim.


It's Metroline who should be "slated", for allowing such a person to dismiss drivers.

So she damned well should. How to prove to your staff that wholly out of touch management do not have their backs.
And for her bizarre actions in disagreeing with the Detective Sergeant as to if the the claimant has used excessive force
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,395
And for her bizarre actions in disagreeing with the Detective Sergeant as to if the the claimant has used excessive force
Indeed. Bet that she has a degree in sociology or something equally useful....
 

Stephen42

Member
Joined
6 Aug 2020
Messages
804
Location
London
You’re right, if he hadn’t have retaliated, that would likely be the end of it. It’s certainly not a great look, so I can understand him being disciplined for that. But it’s hard to know how much threat was perceived - I’m sure it would have been worrying for the driver and the lady to see the robber return (not exactly a usual response from a criminal!), and we don’t know what his behaviour was like.
I think a better course of action would have been to have suspended him and put him on a mandatory training course, rather than sacking - though that’s easy for me to say behind a keyboard, not managing a depot and having to keep bosses above me happy.

Being sacked for this surely means he may find it difficult to find another job too.
In terms of perceived threat, the driver was happy to chase after him which suggests generally low threat. The driver stated in the original incident report the next day that the third party intended to apologise and then changed his version of events at the disciplinary hearing. The summary of events from the disciplinary hearing sided on that original version:
b. That the CCTV did not capture the recovery of the necklace however the claimant accepted that there had been dragging and pulling and that he retained the man by his shoulder;
c. That 3P returned towards the bus with the clear intention to apologise and shake hands with the Female Passenger, but that it was understandable that the Female Passenger did not want to shake his hand;
d. That when the 3P intended to shake hands with the claimant, the claimant pushed the 3P away rather than stepping away himself and that the 3P had not been aggressive until this point;
e. That the 3P came towards the claimant after this with a closed fist but did not punch the claimant;
f. That the claimant pushed the 3P way again then punched him such that the 3P fell to the ground unconscious and that this punch was intentional and unnecessary;
g. That the claimant then dragged and restrained the 3P for almost half an hour which she said she found to be an excessive use of force and disproportionate;
h. That she appreciated the claimant’s good intentions to retrieve the stolen necklace and act in defence of the Female Passenger, and that some of the passengers also appreciated this; and
i. That the claimant could have avoided the confrontation if he had not taken matters into his own hands and had instead used the emergency procedure to call the police.
While I can understand the police taking no action, I can also understand an employer expecting their employees to act professionally and take steps to avoid escalation. The third party may have interpreted the push as a threat or that the driver was intending to attack. Not sure how much mandatory training would achieve, the driver knew the policy, had followed it before and decided not to that time.
So she damned well should. How to prove to your staff that wholly out of touch management do not have their backs.
Why her though? She was the most junior manager of the four involved. It seems weird that her name is all over the media and none of the other more senior managers are. One of the allegations not yet mentioned was around safety. The driver left the bus with engine running and did not make sure the cab door was fully closed. Leaving a bus with passengers where someone could potentially drive it off is going to be treated seriously.
The review was undertaken by Nick Harris, Chief Operating Officer, who wrote to Ms Johnson with his decision on 30 August (pp158-159). Mr Harris reviewed the disciplinary file and the CCTV. He declined to change the decision of the disciplinary and appeal managers. Mr Harris did not meet with the claimant in conducting his review, but he was not required to. His obligation was to consider the matter and provide a written response. Mr Harris in cross examination said that his view was that most citizens, without seeing the CCTV or having the full information would have sympathy with the claimant as a good citizen, but that, on reviewing the CCTV and full information this view changed. I find that this was Mr Harris’s genuinely held view and that although Mr Harris could have sent the case for a rehearing, and he has previously reinstated employees after disciplinary cases, here he did not decide to reengage
To me at least this feels a situation where something goes viral and loads of people without context jump on someone who may have acted reasonably based on the fuller picture they had. It's hard to know either way without watching the CCTV and no one here or on social media (myself included) will have the benefit of that.
And for her bizarre actions in disagreeing with the Detective Sergeant as to if the the claimant has used excessive force
This is covered in the tribunal judgement. In part the police review didn't consider footage after the punch which included dragging the person off the bus onto the pavement or the long period of being restrained. The judge says:
The decision makers did not accept the claimant’s position (even though it was supported by the police) that the claimant acted in self-defence, and they explain why not. I find that those explanations were reasonable.
 

Cheers Drive

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2026
Messages
60
Location
Penzance
If the driver left the bus unattended then that’s dangerous if he locked passengers inside that dangerous the company policy for most drivers is you don’t get out of the cab for anything except (depending on company) to assist a wheelchair user there are many sides to this story it’s not the drivers responsibility to go and chase a thief what if he got stabbed what happens to the bus will it roll away will it cause an obstruction will it be safe will the passengers on board be safe what if the bus was in a location where it caused an accident the driver could be responsible for many other things you don’t get out of the cab for anything
Even if it looks like the best thing to do why are you risking your life and passengers over a theft
I have done this job for nearly three decades and I know drivers mentality very well a lot of drivers are quite rough and aggressive people they look for conflict they also think they know best but also I see the point where the driver wanted to help and be a hero and do the right thing unfortunately you’re responsible for so many things and like most companies say no conflict policy just do your job imagine the bus wasn’t secured rolled away or someone stole it smashed it up and injured people in board and elsewhere the driver could get done for manslaughter the press is obviously going to twist the story for drama narrative but company policies aren’t there for nothing a lot are due to insurance and more importantly the companies operating licence all of this is risked by this driver so means the company has its hands tied and they ay agree with what he did and most likely would have but again your first responsibility is to all the passengers and other road users not to mention it makes the company’s reputation in dispute this is also why most bus company employment contracts state never ever to speak to the press or post anything on social media it’s gross misconduct and immediate dismissal not to mention if violence was involved.
If the driver worked for a smaller operator it would most likely not be such a big deal but being it’s a major operator and made the news the companies hands were tied. I’m sure the driver will get another job as there’s a lot of work around and his story will stand out.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,395
If the driver left the bus unattended then that’s dangerous if he locked passengers inside that dangerous the company policy for most drivers is you don’t get out of the cab for anything except (depending on company) to assist a wheelchair user there are many sides to this story it’s not the drivers responsibility to go and chase a thief what if he got stabbed what happens to the bus will it roll away will it cause an obstruction will it be safe will the passengers on board be safe what if the bus was in a location where it caused an accident the driver could be responsible for many other things you don’t get out of the cab for anything
Even if it looks like the best thing to do why are you risking your life and passengers over a theft
I have done this job for nearly three decades and I know drivers mentality very well a lot of drivers are quite rough and aggressive people they look for conflict they also think they know best but also I see the point where the driver wanted to help and be a hero and do the right thing unfortunately you’re responsible for so many things and like most companies say no conflict policy just do your job imagine the bus wasn’t secured rolled away or someone stole it smashed it up and injured people in board and elsewhere the driver could get done for manslaughter the press is obviously going to twist the story for drama narrative but company policies aren’t there for nothing a lot are due to insurance and more importantly the companies operating licence all of this is risked by this driver so means the company has its hands tied and they ay agree with what he did and most likely would have but again your first responsibility is to all the passengers and other road users not to mention it makes the company’s reputation in dispute this is also why most bus company employment contracts state never ever to speak to the press or post anything on social media it’s gross misconduct and immediate dismissal not to mention if violence was involved.
If the driver worked for a smaller operator it would most likely not be such a big deal but being it’s a major operator and made the news the companies hands were tied. I’m sure the driver will get another job as there’s a lot of work around and his story will stand out.
This is a really informative and useful post, thank you.

I just wish that it had been split into paragraphs to make reading, particularly on a phone, easier.
 

jumble

Established Member
Joined
1 Jul 2011
Messages
1,484
I find this highly amusing

BORIS JOHNSON: The sacking of a hero bus driver for knocking out a necklace thief says it all about the wet, woke, legalistic pettifoggers who run Starmer’s Britain​


If you have tears, prepare to shed them now. If you have missed the martyrdom of London bus driver Mark Hehir, 62, I promise you his ordeal will make you choke with incoherent rage.
As you read of his suffering at the hands of the system, it will crystallise everything that is wrong with the wet, woke, anal, legalistic pettifoggers who run Starmer’s Britain and who have long since abandoned all links with common sense.
The saga began two years ago when Hehir was plying the No206 route between Wembley and Maida Vale. On June 25, 2024, a female passenger got on board, closely followed by a male passenger, who observed that she was wearing a rather nice necklace.
This man then grabbed the necklace, yanking it off her neck, and jumped off the bus. Now how did the rest of the passengers respond?
Well, how do you think? We are living in Starmer’s Britain, and Khan’s London. I am sure that they expressed shock and sympathy with the victim but, other than that, it does not look as though they did much to intervene.
It was a scary, horrible but sadly routine event – and they probably didn’t expect anyone actually to do anything about the robbery. I expect the thief was operating under the same assumption. Well, he reckoned without Mark Hehir.
Even though he was then 60 years old, with his best sprinting days behind him, the bus driver did not hesitate. As he later said, 'You have seconds to think, so I am going, I am not letting this guy get away…'
He got out of his cab, chased the man 200 yards down the street, overhauled him, overpowered him – and retrieved the stolen necklace. He then brought it back to his female passenger.


At which point it seems that the thief – plainly feeling a bit of a chump – came back at him and threw a punch, to which Hehir responded by knocking him down and out, holding him prone until the police arrived.
All this was confirmed by the CCTV and also by the evidence of Detective Sergeant Waddington, who said that Hehir had used force that was proportionate and necessary in the circumstances to defend himself and his female passenger.
On the face of it we are all thinking: What a man! What a champ! What’s the right recognition for his public service and his bravery? An MBE? Freedom of the City of London?
Hehir’s conduct is not unprecedented, of course. Every day there are transport staff in London and up and down the country who behave with enormous courage, and who hold their nerve in the face of outrageous provocation. But there was something very special about Hehir.
He did not have to get out from behind his plexiglass shield and run the risk of chasing down a much younger man who could have been armed, after all, with a knife. In that instinctive decision to help a victim of crime, he was obeying the central teaching of Jesus Christ himself, in the story of the Good Samaritan.
The whole point of that story is that the Samaritan’s act was supererogatory - one in excess of what is morally or legally required. He didn’t have to do it. He didn’t have to help the man who had been robbed on the road to Jericho; indeed, there were plenty of respectable people who did nothing.
There were the priest and the Levite, who saw the crime victim in distress, and who passed by on the other side. Every day on the streets of London I am afraid there are now people who pass by on the other side, literally edging past pensioners who are being mugged on the pavement – but not Hehir.
He got stuck in, and helped the victim in the best way possible, by catching the thief and restoring her property. So how does modern Britain reward a Good Samaritan? Well, what do you think?
He was sacked! He duly reported the incident to his bosses, and insanity descended. The bus company, Metroline, decided that he had broken protocols in two ways, in that he had hit a passenger - the thief - and above all that he had left his bus with the engine running to do so.

He had therefore 'brought the company into disrepute' – and a tribunal in Watford has now decided, sadly, that the company acted within its legal rights.
But really! Disrepute? Have you ever heard such nonsense? What could be better for the reputation of a bus company, than the idea that its drivers actually care about the passengers?
Hehir hasn’t brought his former company into disrepute. It’s the crazed and pharisaical response of the company. No one disputes that the theft took place, and that Hehir showed outstanding guts in restoring the necklace.
Metroline even acknowledged the theft, though they claimed in the tribunal that the thief came back to 'shake hands' with the victim and apologise. A likely story, and one not supported by the police evidence.
What kind of robber comes back to say sorry? And yet the have-a-go hero has been thrown to the wolves. It’s sickening, and also amazing. How on earth has it happened?
I used to be responsible for every one of London’s 8,000 buses (during which period crime on buses fell 40 per cent), and I can tell you exactly why the bus company has decided to persecute Hehir.
What they hate is the very fact that he showed initiative, and that he went over and above the call of duty. What Metroline hates is that he did NOT just sit in his seat, and declare a 'code red', which is what the protocols require.
Read More
EXCLUSIVE
No-go Knightsbridge: Residents abandon area after rise in moped thugs, ram-raids and stabbings
article image
By acting as he did, he exposed the moral indifference – or cowardice – that is built into the system. The Pharisees of the Metroline Human Resources department have thrown the book at him, precisely because he did not do the expected thing – because he did not pass by on the other side.
It is time for London’s apology for a Mayor to get off whichever West End red carpet he is currently gracing and get a grip of all this. Can he not see what is happening in his city?
Does he not know how people around the world are trashing the reputation of our capital? Sometimes I feel that is unfair but there is no doubt that there has been an increase in street robbery in the last few years, and when people are fearful to visit – because they think their phones or watches or jewels are going to be snatched – then that has to be addressed.
Here is a bus driver who has stepped in bravely to prevent a robbery, and the least Khan can do is get him into City Hall and publicly thank him. The managers of Metroline should make a penitential pilgrimage, on their knees, the length of 206 route between Maida Vale and Wembley, weeping and groaning and scourging themselves with their fat TfL contracts.
As for anyone who next sees a woman having her necklace snatched on a bus, I say don’t just applaud the actions of Hehir, but go and do thou likewise!
 

stevieinselby

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Messages
1,667
Location
Selby
I'm sure it's a very entertaining piece of storytelling, but given its provenance it is completely and definitively unreliable as to any actual facts or truth.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,414
I find this highly amusing
That just clearly illustrates what an utter jerk Mr Lockdown Parties, aka Mr Brexit, aka Mr "You Must Stay At Home (TM)" While I Flout My Own Rules, aka Mr Failed Prime Minister, is.

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of this case, the torrent of abuse in this article is just another example of the vacuous populism these right-wingers indulge in. "Wet, woke"? What a pile of abusive, bullying, reactionary nonsense. How do we know the decision was made by a "woke" person? They might not have been "woke" at all. They might have been a Conservative voter, maybe even a fully paid-up member for all we know. We have no idea.

I suggest he disappears off to his country of birth permanently, takes Farridge with him, and the pair of them spend the rest of their lives in Mar-a-Lago where they belong, with their like-minded chum Donald.
 
Last edited:

Mwanesh

Member
Joined
14 May 2016
Messages
948
This will.give all the yobs enough bravado .They know nothing will happen to them
 

canary fan

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2024
Messages
52
Location
Camberley
I find this highly amusing

BORIS JOHNSON: The sacking of a hero bus driver for knocking out a necklace thief says it all about the wet, woke, legalistic pettifoggers who run Starmer’s Britain​


If you have tears, prepare to shed them now. If you have missed the martyrdom of London bus driver Mark Hehir, 62, I promise you his ordeal will make you choke with incoherent rage.
As you read of his suffering at the hands of the system, it will crystallise everything that is wrong with the wet, woke, anal, legalistic pettifoggers who run Starmer’s Britain and who have long since abandoned all links with common sense.
The saga began two years ago when Hehir was plying the No206 route between Wembley and Maida Vale. On June 25, 2024, a female passenger got on board, closely followed by a male passenger, who observed that she was wearing a rather nice necklace.
This man then grabbed the necklace, yanking it off her neck, and jumped off the bus. Now how did the rest of the passengers respond?
Well, how do you think? We are living in Starmer’s Britain, and Khan’s London. I am sure that they expressed shock and sympathy with the victim but, other than that, it does not look as though they did much to intervene.
It was a scary, horrible but sadly routine event – and they probably didn’t expect anyone actually to do anything about the robbery. I expect the thief was operating under the same assumption. Well, he reckoned without Mark Hehir.
Even though he was then 60 years old, with his best sprinting days behind him, the bus driver did not hesitate. As he later said, 'You have seconds to think, so I am going, I am not letting this guy get away…'
He got out of his cab, chased the man 200 yards down the street, overhauled him, overpowered him – and retrieved the stolen necklace. He then brought it back to his female passenger.


At which point it seems that the thief – plainly feeling a bit of a chump – came back at him and threw a punch, to which Hehir responded by knocking him down and out, holding him prone until the police arrived.
All this was confirmed by the CCTV and also by the evidence of Detective Sergeant Waddington, who said that Hehir had used force that was proportionate and necessary in the circumstances to defend himself and his female passenger.
On the face of it we are all thinking: What a man! What a champ! What’s the right recognition for his public service and his bravery? An MBE? Freedom of the City of London?
Hehir’s conduct is not unprecedented, of course. Every day there are transport staff in London and up and down the country who behave with enormous courage, and who hold their nerve in the face of outrageous provocation. But there was something very special about Hehir.
He did not have to get out from behind his plexiglass shield and run the risk of chasing down a much younger man who could have been armed, after all, with a knife. In that instinctive decision to help a victim of crime, he was obeying the central teaching of Jesus Christ himself, in the story of the Good Samaritan.
The whole point of that story is that the Samaritan’s act was supererogatory - one in excess of what is morally or legally required. He didn’t have to do it. He didn’t have to help the man who had been robbed on the road to Jericho; indeed, there were plenty of respectable people who did nothing.
There were the priest and the Levite, who saw the crime victim in distress, and who passed by on the other side. Every day on the streets of London I am afraid there are now people who pass by on the other side, literally edging past pensioners who are being mugged on the pavement – but not Hehir.
He got stuck in, and helped the victim in the best way possible, by catching the thief and restoring her property. So how does modern Britain reward a Good Samaritan? Well, what do you think?
He was sacked! He duly reported the incident to his bosses, and insanity descended. The bus company, Metroline, decided that he had broken protocols in two ways, in that he had hit a passenger - the thief - and above all that he had left his bus with the engine running to do so.

He had therefore 'brought the company into disrepute' – and a tribunal in Watford has now decided, sadly, that the company acted within its legal rights.
But really! Disrepute? Have you ever heard such nonsense? What could be better for the reputation of a bus company, than the idea that its drivers actually care about the passengers?
Hehir hasn’t brought his former company into disrepute. It’s the crazed and pharisaical response of the company. No one disputes that the theft took place, and that Hehir showed outstanding guts in restoring the necklace.
Metroline even acknowledged the theft, though they claimed in the tribunal that the thief came back to 'shake hands' with the victim and apologise. A likely story, and one not supported by the police evidence.
What kind of robber comes back to say sorry? And yet the have-a-go hero has been thrown to the wolves. It’s sickening, and also amazing. How on earth has it happened?
I used to be responsible for every one of London’s 8,000 buses (during which period crime on buses fell 40 per cent), and I can tell you exactly why the bus company has decided to persecute Hehir.
What they hate is the very fact that he showed initiative, and that he went over and above the call of duty. What Metroline hates is that he did NOT just sit in his seat, and declare a 'code red', which is what the protocols require.
Read More
EXCLUSIVE
No-go Knightsbridge: Residents abandon area after rise in moped thugs, ram-raids and stabbings
article image
By acting as he did, he exposed the moral indifference – or cowardice – that is built into the system. The Pharisees of the Metroline Human Resources department have thrown the book at him, precisely because he did not do the expected thing – because he did not pass by on the other side.
It is time for London’s apology for a Mayor to get off whichever West End red carpet he is currently gracing and get a grip of all this. Can he not see what is happening in his city?
Does he not know how people around the world are trashing the reputation of our capital? Sometimes I feel that is unfair but there is no doubt that there has been an increase in street robbery in the last few years, and when people are fearful to visit – because they think their phones or watches or jewels are going to be snatched – then that has to be addressed.
Here is a bus driver who has stepped in bravely to prevent a robbery, and the least Khan can do is get him into City Hall and publicly thank him. The managers of Metroline should make a penitential pilgrimage, on their knees, the length of 206 route between Maida Vale and Wembley, weeping and groaning and scourging themselves with their fat TfL contracts.
As for anyone who next sees a woman having her necklace snatched on a bus, I say don’t just applaud the actions of Hehir, but go and do thou likewise!
What I find most ridiculous about Johnson’s article is that once again he is lying ( I know there is nothing unusual in that!). He gives the date of the original attack as June 25 2004 and says the passengers did nothing because ‘we are living in Starmer’s Britain’ The problem is that we weren’t . This was before the General Election, so we weren’t still suffering the dying embers of the Tory misrule he had been part of. Foot in your mouth again, Boris!
 

Ballyheigue

Member
Joined
11 Sep 2025
Messages
316
Location
Leeds
I remember a time when drivers rightly could physically throw someone off a bus, now they can't even swear at them without the threat of sacking. If someone has done something wrong, like commit robbery, then the driver should be allowed to man handle them in any way they see fit. I remember in the days where CCTV was poor, one brainless moron thought he could have a go at a driver for missing his stop, result was the driver threw him off in the far lane of 3 lanes of standing traffic, that taught him a proper lesson when he had to get through the traffic to the path and hope none of it moved lol.
 

harz99

Member
Joined
14 Jul 2009
Messages
913
Whatever the rights and wrongs of what Driver Hehir did or didn't do, I'm amazed that the people in Metroline who were responsible for the disciplinary process did not foresee the public's reaction and what would happen, when inevitably the outcome became known...a period of retraining and a Final Written warning would've been a sensible outcome, if it was really necessary to take formal disciplinary action at all.
 

alex397

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Messages
2,029
Location
UK
Whatever the rights and wrongs of what Driver Hehir did or didn't do, I'm amazed that the people in Metroline who were responsible for the disciplinary process did not foresee the public's reaction and what would happen, when inevitably the outcome became known...a period of retraining and a Final Written warning would've been a sensible outcome, if it was really necessary to take formal disciplinary action at all.
They probably didn’t foresee it, as these stories don’t usually interest the press. This story seems to have gone ‘viral’. I don’t think this story is even as ridiculous as some of the other stories I’ve heard of drivers getting sacked.
 

LUYMun

Established Member
Joined
15 Jul 2018
Messages
1,375
Location
Cancelled
Metroline claiming the thief was returning to the bus to apologise gave the biggest laugh out of me.
 

Cheers Drive

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2026
Messages
60
Location
Penzance
I remember a time when drivers rightly could physically throw someone off a bus, now they can't even swear at them without the threat of sacking. If someone has done something wrong, like commit robbery, then the driver should be allowed to man handle them in any way they see fit. I remember in the days where CCTV was poor, one brainless moron thought he could have a go at a driver for missing his stop, result was the driver threw him off in the far lane of 3 lanes of standing traffic, that taught him a proper lesson when he had to get through the traffic to the path and hope none of it moved lol.
So you condone violence and endangering a man’s life for that? This isn’t the act of a professional which is what drivers are meant to be. Thats also assault I don’t see how you can condone this violence. I’ve been driving buses and coaches for nearly three decades all over the uk in very rough areas and never had an issue that needed this. The driver can be assertive without being aggressive. A lot of driver cause their own issues by being hostile or unwelcoming whereas I have always said hi to all my passengers and explained what would happen if there is problems and then you have the other passengers backing. There is no need to get violent with people and you’ll more likely end up suffering the consequences either from the company or other passengers. When I was at NXWM Birmingham we had a no conflict policy which means if a passenger gets on without paying or is smoking etc you just record it. The main reason being a driver got stabbed in the neck when he tried to break up a fight and another driver eho tried to stop two children fighting got charged with assault for touching them. The job is merely bus driving and issuing tickets anything on board is a controllers issue or the police if needed but if we called the police and controllers for every issue then no buses would ever run. You have to have the patience of a saint to be a PCV driver in many training courses we had ex lorry drivers just leave because they couldn’t be tactful or patient.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Whatever the rights and wrongs of what Driver Hehir did or didn't do, I'm amazed that the people in Metroline who were responsible for the disciplinary process did not foresee the public's reaction and what would happen, when inevitably the outcome became known...a period of retraining and a Final Written warning would've been a sensible outcome, if it was really necessary to take formal disciplinary action at all.
It might have been under gross misconduct which they have to honour.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,395
I remember a time when drivers rightly could physically throw someone off a bus, now they can't even swear at them without the threat of sacking. If someone has done something wrong, like commit robbery, then the driver should be allowed to man handle them in any way they see fit. I remember in the days where CCTV was poor, one brainless moron thought he could have a go at a driver for missing his stop, result was the driver threw him off in the far lane of 3 lanes of standing traffic, that taught him a proper lesson when he had to get through the traffic to the path and hope none of it moved lol.
Had that "brainless moron" been hurt or killed as a result that driver would have got serious jail time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top