Disabled passenger claims Northern guard's behaviour gave her panic attack.

[Bletchleyite]

If you don't want your actions becoming public then don't work in a public facing role.

That is true. But, and it is a VERY big but, if it turns out those actions are company policy you really do have to word your publication such that the company is being villified, not the individual.

You really cannot seek to villify someone for doing their job as per its terms and conditions. It genuinely, in a strict rules based organisation like the railway, is more than their job is worth.

So by all means mount your campaign - but most campaigners do it totally wrong by blaming the individual. So what this individual should have posted, if she disagreed with how she was treated, was something like "Railway's disgraceful and inconsistent policy caused me to have a panic attack". And to be honest, I'd be on side then - to me, this kind of thing needs a national policy. Same with cycles[1], luggage etc.

[1] Obviously the number per train will differ, but the policy needs to be standardised, e.g. "if the train is reservable you must have a reservation; if not it is turn up and (try to) go, the number carried is shown in the timetable".

 

[OneOffDave]

Of course they are.



Organisations frequently don't back their staff, which is why methods like plastering their actions all over social media are a very, very bad idea. It's extremely unfair to the staff concerned.

Picture the following scenario, if you will.

Let me give you a counter scenario. Guard announces that an individual disabled passenger is the reason for the delay. Aggrieved passenger throws disabled person off the train resulting in fatal injuries. Just as likely as your scenario.

 

[Bromley boy]

Are you aware of the details of all the TOCs policies that might affect you on all the services you travel on?

If I was a disabled user I would make myself aware of them.

When has the example you gave happened or is it just whataboutery?

As for entitlement, how would you feel about being disproportionally affected by disruption every time it happened compared with other passengers? How do you like being tutted at just for having the audacity to use one of the six spaces on a train where able bodied passengers have a choice of over 700 spaces? Should we just go back to the 70s and stay in homes so our presence doesn't cause offence?

It’s a hypothetical example roughly equivalent to the scenario in the OP. In any case You’ve seen my whataboutery and raised me a straw man! Nobody has said disabled people shouldn’t have access - quite the opposite many staff bend over backwards to accommodate them.

Seriously though, why do you think the filming was justified in this case? And would it be justified in my hypothetical example?

 

[OneOffDave]

That is true. But, and it is a VERY big but, if it turns out those actions are company policy you really do have to word your publication such that the company is being villified, not the individual.

You really cannot seek to villify someone for doing their job as per its terms and conditions. It genuinely, in a strict rules based organisation like the railway, is more than their job is worth.

So by all means mount your campaign - but most campaigners do it totally wrong by blaming the individual.

There are two issues, one is the policy and the other is the behaviours of the staff. Policies can be implemented without lying or being abusive. I've worked in public facing roles and been screamed and spat at, I've been threatened verbally and with weapons. I never resorted to abuse as a response as I knew as soon as I did, any chance of maintaining the high ground has gone

 

[Bletchleyite]

My emphasis. So individuals aren't responsible for their own actions?

If you take a job you agree to follow the employer's policy. You have no choice in the matter. Short of a strike on this (which I think would be more justified than many things that there are strikes about) there's not a lot the individual guard can do.

 

[Journeyman]

Let me give you a counter scenario. Guard announces that an individual disabled passenger is the reason for the delay. Aggrieved passenger throws disabled person off the train resulting in fatal injuries. Just as likely as your scenario.

Look, I'm not saying disabled people have it easy. I know they don't. With all due respect, I think you've decided we've all got it in for you, therefore I don't think it's helpful for me to engage further. Just think about what I've said, and whether it's a fair outcome. I didn't even mention disability in the scenario I presented, which was deliberate.

 

[alxndr]

Having a standardised policy would make things a lot simpler, but it would mean going with the safest option (not allowing scooters at all) which isn't ideal.

The information on whether or not they're allowed it out there though, and I personally find it surprising that someone wouldn't check first.

National Rail:

Powered scooters

Because scooters come in a wide variety of shapes and sizes, many have problems on trains, including: tipping backwards on ramps; being heavier than the ramp's safe working load; or being the wrong shape to manoeuvre safely inside a carriage.

These problems mean that some companies have trains that cannot carry scooters so if you are a scooter-user who wants to travel by rail, you should contact the Train Company to check they can safely accommodate your scooter.

Please remember to contact the Train Company to confirm that all the stations and trains you want to use are accessible. If you require assistance please let them know at least 24 hours in advance.

Useful information from the Government on Mobility scooters and powered wheelchairs is available here.

Below is a summary of Train Operators and their Policy, along with contact details.

...

Northern
Telephone: 08456 008 008, 08456 045 608
Policy: Only scooters that are folded down and carried on as luggage can travel on our trains.

The Northern website says similar:

Can I take my mobility scooter on the train?

For safety reasons we can't take any mobility scooters on our trains unless they are able to be folded down before you board, and carried on like luggage. Please ask platform staff for assistance if you need help when boarding the train with your mobility scooter.

I don't think it's possible to make much of a judgement on this case without further information. We don't hear the guard's side of the story, we don't know what he said, and we don't know how he said it. Saying that they'd not allowed on "any train" is incorrect, but is it possible that he really said or meant "any [of our] trains"?

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Google Jerry Groody and read the newspaper report and in particular the comments posted by people after the news "story" first came out. It is evident the guard concerned was subject to a hate campaign on social media for doing their job correctly. As a result the individual was cauitoned by BTP for misuse of communications act offences, namely inciting bullying and harassment on social media against an individual.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are two issues, one is the policy and the other is the behaviours of the staff. Policies can be implemented without lying or being abusive. I've worked in public facing roles and been screamed and spat at, I've been threatened verbally and with weapons. I never resorted to abuse as a response as I knew as soon as I did, any chance of maintaining the high ground has gone

In none of these videos so far have I seen a member of staff being abusive (though one was somewhat out of order with his PA announcement). Which is quite impressive given the approach the passengers have taken to their complaint in quite a number of cases.

If the complaint is with the TOC's policy, which it mostly is, winding up the individual member of staff is not going to help. They are probably just as frustrated at being stuck in the middle.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think it's possible to make much of a judgement on this case without further information. We don't hear the guard's side of the story, we don't know what he said, and we don't know how he said it. Saying that they'd not allowed on "any train" is incorrect, but is it possible that he really said or meant "any [of our] trains"?

That policy is poorly written - it implies there is scope to load one on unfolded. It should omit "able to be" if the policy as it actually is is to be properly expressed.

 

[OneOffDave]

If I was a disabled user I would make myself aware of them.

That's not the question I asked. Are you aware of ALL the polices that affect you as a passenger when you travel?

It’s a hypothetical example roughly equivalent to the scenario in the OP. In any case You’ve seen my whataboutery and raised me a straw man! Nobody has said disabled people shouldn’t have access - quite the opposite many staff bend over backwards to accommodate them.

Seriously though, why do you think the filming was justified in this case? And would it be justified in my hypothetical example?

Yes I do think it was as otherwise the TOC will say "we've investigated and the account of the incident given to us by our staff does not tally with your account so we are going to take no further action". In your example, the consequences of it being posted on social media are too far fetched. Just being dismissed for gross misconduct would have the negative impact on future employment in the same industry whether it had made social media or not. If both sides are ranting then they both would come off badly if the video was posted on social media

 

[farleigh]

So to get this correct - it was the disabled person who was in the wrong, and the guard was following correct procedure??

Have I missed something here?

 

[Bromley boy]

So to get this correct - it was the disabled person who was in the wrong, and the guard was following correct procedure??

Have I missed something here?

Nope!

 

[farleigh]

Nope!

Thanks BB - I was starting to wonder.

 

[Bromley boy]

That's not the question I asked. Are you aware of ALL the polices that affect you as a passenger when you travel?

I don’t understand what point you are trying to make.

If I had some special requirement, such as using a mobility scooter, I would make it my business to check whether that could be accommodated before travelling.

I would have thought that was just common sense.

Yes I do think it was as otherwise the TOC will say "we've investigated and the account of the incident given to us by our staff does not tally with your account so we are going to take no further action". In your example, the consequences of it being posted on social media are too far fetched. Just being dismissed for gross misconduct would have the negative impact on future employment in the same industry whether it had made social media or not. If both sides are ranting then they both would come off badly if the video was posted on social media

But the incident in question (both in the OP - and my example) are simply front line staff doing what they are required to do. Why the hell should they be splashed all over social media for doing their (often difficult and demanding) jobs?

If you aren’t happy with a TOC’s policy on a particular matter raise it with the TOC, don’t victimise the staff who have no control over it.

EDIT: And you should consider @gimmea50anyday ’s point - there can be serious consequences for social media bullying.

 

[AlterEgo]

1. Filming people in public is okay, even staff providing customer service.

2. Widely disseminating, in video, an argument or bad service by a member staff is not okay.

3. It's okay to slag off companies on social media or the press but not individual and identifiable staff members.

That's about the sum of my thoughts on the matter.

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. Filming people in public is okay, even staff providing customer service.

2. Widely disseminating, in video, an argument or bad service by a member staff is not okay.

3. It's okay to slag off companies on social media or the press but not individual and identifiable staff members.

That's about the sum of my thoughts on the matter.

I would be inclined to agree.

 

[OneOffDave]

I don’t understand what point you are trying to make.

If I had some special requirement, such as using a mobility scooter, I would make it my business to check whether that could be accommodated before travelling.

I would have thought that was just common sense.



But the incident in question (both in the OP - and my example) are simply front line staff doing what they are required to do. Why the hell should they be splashed all over social media for doing their (often difficult and demanding) jobs?

If you aren’t happy with a TOC’s policy on a particular matter raise it with the TOC, don’t victimise the staff who have no control over it.

If the policy varies from TOC to TOC and you aren't sure which TOC or which rolling stock would be used, how would you make yourself aware? Especially if you aren't aware of how the modern railway is structured.

So when would it be appropriate to film staff? Or is everything they do TOC policy?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the policy varies from TOC to TOC and you aren't sure which TOC or which rolling stock would be used, how would you make yourself aware? Especially if you aren't aware of how the modern railway is structured.

You open your mouth and ask?

So when would it be appropriate to film staff? Or is everything they do TOC policy?

If it is OK for a TOC to film me using its CCTV, it is also OK for me to film it and what it does.

 

[Bromley boy]

If the policy varies from TOC to TOC and you aren't sure which TOC or which rolling stock would be used, how would you make yourself aware? Especially if you aren't aware of how the modern railway is structured.

You check the relevant websites for the policies and if necessary call for clarification. It isn’t rocket science.

I would have thought most disabled travellers would be well used to doing this.

So when would it be appropriate to film staff? Or is everything they do TOC policy?

If you stick a camera into somebody’s face you aren’t going to get the best out them. It’s totally out of order to then upload the video to social media and single out that member of staff - if you must film, why not just send the footage to the TOC?

Keep in mind also that, if you are told to stop filming by a member of staff then you must do so.

 

[Bromley boy]

If it is OK for a TOC to film me using its CCTV, it is also OK for me to film it and what it does.

Hmm. I can’t really agree with this (although I kind of understand the sentiment).

When on railway (ie private) property TOC staff can ask you to stop filming, and require you to do so. On the other hand you have no ability to require that the TOC switches off its CCTV.

This is reasonable enough: you have the choice to submit to being filmed, or not use the railway. That’s no different to any other private establishment using CCTV.

A camera shoved into someone’s face with videos uploaded to YouTube is very different to CCTV which I believe is subject to data protection in some circumstances.

CCTV also works both ways and is regularly used when allegations are made against staff (although generally no sound is recorded).

 

[northwichcat]

You check the relevant websites for the policies and if necessary call for clarification. It isn’t rocket science.

I would have thought most disabled travellers would be well used to doing this.

Depending on the disability they might not find accessing a website as you might. The Northern website doesn't pass an accessibility check with flying colours: http://wave.webaim.org/report#/www.northernrailway.co.uk

 

[Bromley boy]

Depending on the disability they might not find accessing a website as you might. The Northern website doesn't pass an accessibility check with flying colours: http://wave.webaim.org/report#/www.northernrailway.co.uk

An online website accessibility assessor. Wow - where do you find this stuff?!

That’s a fair point and TOCs should certainly ensure their websites are suitable for all.

On the other hand there’s still the option to pick up the phone (or ask an able bodied carer/partner to do the necessary online research).

 

[northwichcat]

An online website accessibility assessor. Wow - where do you find this stuff?!

By being a web developer with a degree in multimedia technology. If I didn't know where to find one I'd be like a train driver who doesn't know their way around the cab.

 

[bnm]

This strikes me as something requiring a national policy.

There is one. TOCs are just being slow in adopting it.

https://www.rssb.co.uk/Library/rese...lchair-and-Scooter-Guidance-passengers-v2.pdf

 

[CeeJ]

I think in this instance she was justified in recording and publishing the video of the guard - ultimately she felt terrified and used Facebook Live (a livestream) to broadcast what was going on. In many instances, such as the case where a parking attendant gave an on-duty ambulance a parking ticket, it is important that individuals - not just the company - are held to account when acting unprofessionally, discriminatory, or is just otherwise being a knob.

 

[Darandio]

I think in this instance she was justified in recording and publishing the video of the guard - ultimately she felt terrified and used Facebook Live (a livestream) to broadcast what was going on. In many instances, such as the case where a parking attendant gave an on-duty ambulance a parking ticket, it is important that individuals - not just the company - are held to account when acting unprofessionally, discriminatory, or is just otherwise being a knob.

Yet the guard wasn't discriminatory or being a knob, they were just following procedure. Still justifiable? Nope.

 

[Ih8earlies]

To add further to the point mentioned previously about a national policy:

As has already been pointed out in a quote: There are too many variations in design of mobility scooter for a blanket risk and safety assesment to be made.

As someone who has actually loaded and unloaded an empty scooter onboard a train - many of them have not been designed with easy portability and storage in mind. Thos that do fold down are rare. More commonly you come across models that can be disassembled into a number of components - but users are justifiably nervous about allowing that as it can take time to reassemble at the other end. Indeed If they even know how to take it apart/together.

Further more, I have witnessed (and had to fill in the accident report forms) passengers in mobility scooters tipping over and falling out. Both onboard a train and whilst getting on/off.

They just aren't safe on a train.

To answer the question I know someone will chime in with: No. I do not* allow people to board my trains on a mobility scooter. Most of the time they have been put on by someone else earlier in the journey (Platform Staff. Previous Conductor. Trolley Host etc) or they might board at the front of the train before I can get down there to intervene. But once they're on I have to figure out how to get them safely off at the other end (and indeed warn them about the return journey)

*Transpennine still operates a Scooter Pass system - I have yet to ever actually see a pass that has been issued. If they have a pass - the it's all cool with me.

 

[AlterEgo]

I think in this instance she was justified in recording and publishing the video of the guard - ultimately she felt terrified and used Facebook Live (a livestream) to broadcast what was going on. In many instances, such as the case where a parking attendant gave an on-duty ambulance a parking ticket, it is important that individuals - not just the company - are held to account when acting unprofessionally, discriminatory, or is just otherwise being a knob.

It’s still not okay to live stream a conflict with a member of customer service staff. That’s not on and can destroy someone’s career, because a film doesn’t usually give the whole context of the conflict.

Anyone who publishes a video like this this loses respect in my eyes.

 

[CeeJ]

Yet the guard wasn't discriminatory or being a knob, they were just following procedure. Still justifiable? Nope.

He was causing significant distress to someone clearly in a vulnerable position, who had been boarded by other members of staff. She was within her rights to record and publish what occurred. It is the responsibility of the employer to fully investigate the matter and take any relevant disciplinary matters, training or compensation in to account.