Customer information during person under train incidents

[greyman42]

Personally, I think it’s about time the railway stopped reporting these incidents publicly. Given contagion effects, it seems really irresponsible to be tweeting it out all day, every time it happens.

I think in the real world people can handle "person hit by train". There are worse things reported on the national news most days.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

---

An action by a member of the public means that trains will be non-stopping at X.

We need the “means that”.

We don’t need to know what happened that caused it.

It isn’t useful.

That's the point, though... they specifically put "emergency services dealing with an incident" on the screens at all the stations either side of the instance - but the opposite platform at the station in question was still open and everyone could see the screens up with paramedics going in and out from behind the screens to treat the collapsed passenger; trains were running through that platform non stop at the time.

 

[Snow1964]

Emergency services dealing with implies the railway couldn't deal with it, so that doesn't look great either.

Next problem is a person up the line doesn't know if that phrase means a policeman stopped a pickpocket (and your train will be few minutes late), or it is going to be 5 hours delay because it is major.

People don't find general announcements useful, in some ways giving out vague wishy washy details is worst than an an announcement saying we are trying to get an estimate of likely delay time.

People waiting down the line much prefer an announcement saying delay might be over 2 hours, so please consider alternative routes. Instantly followed by ticket availability update, eg in process of getting ticket acceptance. etc.

 

[bramling]

What do you mean when you say "contagion effects"? Are you suggesting that the more it is tweeted about the more people will commit suicide on the railways?

There does seem to be that effect, yes. It has been noticed that incidents often seem to happen in clusters, though of course cause doesn’t always equal effect (in other words there could be other reasons for this phenomenon).

Not publicising when they happen is a relatively simple way to try and mitigate against this, though personally I think it introduces other issues. Not least that being evasive puts staff on the receiving end of more potential abuse/conflict than being transparent.

 

[Krokodil]

I’d almost go as far to say nondescript information winds regular passengers up.

Agreed, passengers hate being treated like children.

It’s not in common at all to have someone shouting in your face suddenly calm down when you expand more on the reason.

But like I say, I can only base this on personal experience. I’d be interested to know if that’s an experience others have had or not.

I think that most of my colleagues would agree with you.

I think ‘a fatality’ would be a potentially less blunt reason.

Not all PHBTs are fatal. For that matter, not all PHBTs are suicides.

Personally I don’t see what’s wrong with “An incident caused by an action of a member of the public”

It implies blame which could prejudice an investigation. It is also vague which won't stop people haranguing the staff until they're told the real reason.

Not publicising when they happen is a relatively simple way to try and mitigate against this

While I agree that advertising the location or connecting what has happened with suicide may plant the idea of 'suicide by train' in others' heads, the phrase "person hit by a train" conveys the gravity of the situation and encourages passengers to be sympathetic without actually specifying whether it was a suicide, an accident, or worse a murder.

 

[The exile]

The problem with giving people a time for how long disruption is expected to last, is that some people don't grasp what an estimate is, and just use it as a promise, when really it's a bit of a length of string guess.

True - but stating the rough time it happened might help. If it’s four o’clock it might make quite a difference whether “emergency services were called to an incident” at ten to one or ten to four. More generally, in my opinion, the railway’s first duty is towards its staff and passengers - not others who might just possibly read a tweet.

 

[Kenny G]

In Japan the remaining family have to pay the railway firm for costs incurred by the delays. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2...tracks-who-pays-for-deadly-railway-accidents/ confirms. BTW the cost being in the case reported approx £42K.

I have also heard some lines are cheaper than others and therefore in Tokyo there are particular lines which are more popular.

 

[Jim the Jim]

It's not good for safety or staff mental health to risk making passengers angry with vague excuses (or no excuses!) for why trains aren't running. If you say someone's been hit then almost everyone will be sympathetic to the fact that it's not the railway's fault.

There might also be a safety benefit from the occasional reminder that trains are extremely dangerous things to put yourself in front of.

 

[185143]

I suppose the other issue is that it is just a blind guess. Usually a person hit by a train, in a city location, takes two hours. If there's no one available for the body, make that 3 or 4, if it is suspicious then it could be 6 or more. Which number do I give out?

"Usually it's around 2 hours, but nothing's moving until the Police say so. It could be a lot longer, it could be less."

And then if they kick off, "you're getting home tonight. Someone else isn't."

But I agree it's tricky. I don't think there's necessarily one answer to it. Personally speaking if I heard "Person hit by a train" and it had just happened, I'd probably be inclined to make alternative arrangements, but if it's simply a case of BTP nicking/looking for someone I definitely wouldn't. Both are "Emergency services dealing with an incident". Treat people like the adults that they are, and let them make an informed decision about their journey.

 

[43066]

In Japan the remaining family have to pay the railway firm for costs incurred by the delays. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2...tracks-who-pays-for-deadly-railway-accidents/ confirms. BTW the cost being in the case reported approx £42K.

I have also heard some lines are cheaper than others and therefore in Tokyo there are particular lines which are more popular.

That’s absolutely sick, and says something deeply worrying about their culture.

 

[Purple Train]

The problem with giving people a time for how long disruption is expected to last, is that some people don't grasp what an estimate is, and just use it as a promise, when really it's a bit of a length of string guess.

You cannot please everyone. An estimate will be understood by the vast majority of people.
The majority of people are understanding - substandard information should not be given just to avoid those that aren't kicking off, especially on such a sensitive issue as this.
Some people just cannot be satisfied/placated, as I have heard every time I've been on a heavily delayed train!

 

[jkkne]

If ever a thread typified a ‘locked in the railway bubble of the 90s’ mentality that we occasionally see on this forum, then it’s this thread.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current policy. To talk it down or referred to it in vague terms so us mere passengers just assume the railway is once again failing, is not only demeaning to the poor soul whose taken that action but also to passengers.

It also goes completely against the current open conversations around mental health which some of our TOCs handle extremely well

 

[TurbineEnginee]

Then what was the point of giving a time estimate at all? If it is just a blind guess at between 2 hours and 5 it's not useful.

Im afraid I'm unconvinced that it is anymore use than just telling someone what has happened and letting them decide how to proceed with that information and the alternative routes (if there is one of course).

Disagree.

If the best estimate that can be provided is between 2 and 5 hours then that tells me all I need to know.

They just don’t know and I need to work on the alternate.

I would far rather they work internally on finding ways to better refine their estimates, than put the onus on me to come up with my own.

Again. I don’t need to know what happened. I need the best possible estimate of impact.

There is no universe in which me interpreting the details independently should or could ever be better than the best estimate achievable by staff.

I just want the best estimate achievable. Make it the best estimate possible and hit me with it.

 

[43066]

If ever a thread typified a ‘locked in the railway bubble of the 90s’ mentality that we occasionally see on this forum, then it’s this thread.

Not really, most of the railway staff on here are agreeing with the current policy!

 

[AlterEgo]

I think in the real world people can handle "person hit by train". There are worse things reported on the national news most days.

There is real evidence of contagion though - especially with people who have a specific but latent suicidal ideation around trains.

People who are prevented from committing the act under a train don't tend to then go on and use another method to try to kill themselves.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 May 2023 ==

If ever a thread typified a ‘locked in the railway bubble of the 90s’ mentality that we occasionally see on this forum, then it’s this thread.

If it was locked in the 90s then staff would just say "well why don't we report it as person killed by a train at Harrow and Wealdstone?". But that is not what staff mostly think, and it is not the policy.

It also goes completely against the current open conversations around mental health which some of our TOCs handle extremely well

The discussion or broadcasting of specific methods of suicide, or the literal mechanical act of it, is not helpful, though.

 

[jagardner1984]

In my experience, there were very few circumstances in which passengers were not unreasonable about a delay (some seemed to suggest we wanted it to happen) - but “we are being held here whilst we await Emergency Services at (future station)” - whether that be a medical incident on a train, passenger behaviour on a platform or … the worst …. Seemed to be one of the few ways in which people would show a bit of humanity to the staff involved.

And should they choose to pursue the journey by other means, give an indication of which areas to avoid (if possible).

I would imagine some of the language is also about ensuring the deceased person’s family receives a knock on the door before they read about the incident on Twitter, which seems again to show a degree of humanity (although I am sure not always possible for various reasons).

I am sure there are those on this forum who have dealt with the aftermath in a variety of roles, but it is clear that for some staff, life is never the same again, and I do think the railway deserves huge credit for the work done with the Samaritans and other organisations.

 

[Intercity110]

That’s absolutely sick, and says something deeply worrying about their culture.

I wouldn’t say it’s worrying, as that’s normal to them.

 

[KGX]

There is real evidence of contagion though - especially with people who have a specific but latent suicidal ideation around trains.

People who are prevented from committing the act under a train don't tend to then go on and use another method to try to kill themselves.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 May 2023 ==


If it was locked in the 90s then staff would just say "well why don't we report it as person killed by a train at Harrow and Wealdstone?". But that is not what staff mostly think, and it is not the policy.

The discussion or broadcasting of specific methods of suicide, or the literal mechanical act of it, is not helpful, though.

Yes, exactly this. Most are completely missing the point, ignoring the evidence, and just looking at the benefits to staff and passengers about openly discussing these incidents. No one is denying it makes lives easier for staff or placates passengers. Although, I’d argue it helps no one in the long run if it leads to imitational behaviour and more incidents.

 

[bramling]

Not really, most of the railway staff on here are agreeing with the current policy!

Is there even a current policy? There seems to a wide variation between different operators.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 May 2023 ==

Yes, exactly this. Most are completely missing the point, ignoring the evidence, and just looking at the benefits to staff and passengers about openly discussing these incidents. No one is denying it makes lives easier for staff or placates passengers. Although, I’d argue it helps no one in the long run if it leads to imitational behaviour and more incidents.

Hardly a case of ignoring evidence. There is no right or wrong answer, therefore any view given on this is going to be an opinion, which everyone is entitled to have.

It is quite reasonable for someone to articulate an argument that essentially says I am aware of the potential for copycat incidents, however on balance the extra conflict for staff and extra aggravation for (potentially very many) disrupted passengers trumps this. Especially when the case for copycat incidents is rather circumstantial.

What doesn’t help, of course, is that mental health care in this country is utterly dire. Issues should be able to be nipped in the bud long before they reach the railway.

 

[Edsmith]

Personally, I think it’s about time the railway stopped reporting these incidents publicly. Given contagion effects, it seems really irresponsible to be tweeting it out all day, every time it happens.

Is there a contagion effect? Just tell people what's happened and they'll be more understanding than they would be about a signal failure or whatever, there's no need to sugercoat things.

 

[AlterEgo]

It is quite reasonable for someone to articulate an argument that essentially says I am aware of the potential for copycat incidents, however on balance the extra conflict for staff and extra aggravation for (potentially very many) disrupted passengers trumps this. Especially when the case for copycat incidents is rather circumstantial.

The Samaritans say the evidence for suicidal contagion is "substantial": https://media.samaritans.org/documents/Guidance_for_reporting_rail_suicides_FINAL.pdf

You can find most of the basis for the railway's dispassionate comms strategy in that document.

 

[Cambus731]

I haven't read through the thread, but having had 35 years now of experiencing the public's reaction to thos as well as other reasons for disruption, I now realise that it's best to call a spade a spade. And simply tell people that sometimes had been killed by a train, intentionally or otherwise. Generally about 99% of punters are understanding as such a thing is completely outside of the railway's control. Although some seem to think that the railway can somehow magic up replacement buses at the drop of a hat. Even during school closing times.

 

[bramling]

The Samaritans say the evidence for suicidal contagion is "substantial": https://media.samaritans.org/documents/Guidance_for_reporting_rail_suicides_FINAL.pdf

You can find most of the basis for the railway's dispassionate comms strategy in that document.

Very circumstantial though, isn’t it, especially when seemingly the best “evidence” they can present relates to a German goalkeeper. I wouldn’t class that as “substantial”. Sounds a bit like the so-called evidence for masks being effective!

By contrast, it’s abundantly clear that if staff skirt around reasons for a substantial delay, this *will* substantially increase the likelihood of conflict.

 

[AlterEgo]

Very circumstantial though, isn’t it, especially when seemingly the best “evidence” they can present relates to a German goalkeeper. I wouldn’t class that as “substantial”. Sounds a bit like the so-called evidence for masks being effective!

By contrast, it’s abundantly clear that if staff skirt around reasons for a substantial delay, this *will* substantially increase the likelihood of conflict.

I don't agree all the evidence - collected by people trained to do so - is any more circumstantial than your assertion I bolded. Circumstantial also.

Anyone who has worked in railway control could point to equally "circumstantial" patterns of copycat suicides. How could we possibly know if they were so inspired? We can't - but I'm not buying your "abundantly clear" line when you give again, only circumstantial evidence.

There's really no evidence at all that saying "emergency services are dealing with an incident, this could be a few hours" gets someone punched or spat at when if only they'd said "look someone got torn to shreds by a train, it might be a few hours", the assault doesn't happen.

I think I would rather err on the side of saving a few lives a year.

 

[Fleetmaster]

I was under the impression that "This train is delayed/terminating short/canceled due to a police incident" was standard practice already. If not, it really should be.

It makes sure people aren't blaming the railway (i.e. abusing staff for delays outside their control)

It is sufficiently "coded" that most will likely guess what it is, but is sufficiently vague that they can also imagine it's nothing quite so tragic but which adequately accounts for the disruption.

It doesn't invite queries on Twitter, and anyone who persists can be given the stock (and I would have thought entirely true) reply, that the company cannot give out details of ongoing police incidents. You cannot stop speculation, but it gives people little to speculate about.

It helps avoid giving a location, since how would that help anyone better understand the delay? You give out only what is needed to understand the alternative options, which on the raiway will typically be far removed from the actual location. E.g., all services past Station X are temporarily suspended due to a police incident.

Avoiding "emergency services" avoids needlessly having passengers distressed as they contend with the news, hopefully in blissful or at least conscious ignorance of why their journey has been disrupted. And it's not a lie, police would always attend an incident of this nature.

It obviously gives leeway for staff to be more explicit if a passenger really makes a fuss, without inviting anyone to really question what is going on. Just as you wouldn’t really question an actual police officer manning a tape where the cause of the closure is out of your view. If it is stopping your journey, you simply ask what are the alternative options, rather than asking why the tape is there.

It even helps parents. Children young enough to be seriously distressed by any remotely truthful explanation, and yet old enough to tell when an adult is keeping them in the dark (guaranteed to invite further queries), wouldn't bat an eyelid at a more benign reason why the police might be holding up the railway.

 

[GatwickDepress]

Very circumstantial though, isn’t it, especially when seemingly the best “evidence” they can present relates to a German goalkeeper. I wouldn’t class that as “substantial”. Sounds a bit like the so-called evidence for masks being effective!

By contrast, it’s abundantly clear that if staff skirt around reasons for a substantial delay, this *will* substantially increase the likelihood of conflict.

The Samaritans document is intended as a factsheet and guidance for the media, not a summary of academic work related to suicidal contagion. Robert Enke committed suicide by standing in front of a train in Neustadt am Rübenberge, and thus the railway element is particularly relevant to the studies mentioned here.

 

[43066]

Is there even a current policy? There seems to a wide variation between different operators.

Only in so far as “person hit by a train” seems to be back in vogue at many operators, whereas it seemed to disappear altogether a few years ago.

Is there a contagion effect? Just tell people what's happened and they'll be more understanding than they would be about a signal failure or whatever, there's no need to sugercoat things.

Yes, there absolutely is, as noted above.

For me the half way house of explaining what has happened, but not giving detail as to where, seems the best compromise.

EDIT: The statement in the Samaritans’ guidance that railway suicides are “relatively rare”, is interesting (and wrong), when viewed from a railway standpoint. From the point of view of traincrew, and drivers in particular, they seem to happen quite often, and a high proportion of drivers have one at some time in their careers, some have several. I know of a few who have had three or four, and one who has had seven(!).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I must admit that I'm slightly sceptical about how cut and dried the "contagion effect" is. There's almost certainly some degree of it at play, but I'm not sure how direct it is in many cases. Tragically we don't get to hear from those who are "successful" for want of a better word about why they made the choice they made. For me personally, as someone who has suffered from that sort of ideation in the past, hearing about others doing so is more likely to dissuade me from such actions. Though obviously that's anecdotal.

There are no easy answers to this, and whilst ideally nobody would get to the point where they're considering such drastic action, we don't live in an ideal world. The railway has taken some really positive steps to reduce this sort of thing by having staff trained to approach anyone who they're concerned about, and to spot the warning signs... which is all the more reason to increase staffing levels rather than reduce them.

 

[Fleetmaster]

It stands to reason that a suicidal person is alert for ideas, for want of a better phrase. I would imagine numerous studies of a psychological interview nature will have proven it beyond doubt.

 

[Horizon22]

If ever a thread typified a ‘locked in the railway bubble of the 90s’ mentality that we occasionally see on this forum, then it’s this thread.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current policy. To talk it down or referred to it in vague terms so us mere passengers just assume the railway is once again failing, is not only demeaning to the poor soul whose taken that action but also to passengers.

It also goes completely against the current open conversations around mental health which some of our TOCs handle extremely well

Only evidence from Samaritans and those who do work with at risk people contemplating suicide suggest that use of "person struck by a train" identifies that as a viable method, attention is drawn towards it and it becomes a feedback loop.

Many who die by suicide do so as part of a staged approach - they weren't necesarily going to do so and can be talked out of it (as railway staff do on a daily basis) so anything that is suggested could be helpful should be listened to.

The research wasn't done by a few people in a railway forum. That being said, some of the research is 7-8 years old, and things may have changed.