Disabled scooter user humiliated by Train Manager for using disabled space on GWR service.

[Bromley boy]

From those you would learn two things. First, it's quite clear that she talked to Jeremy Vine by phone. Second, her tweets for the past two days have been from The Netherlands.

Pretty mobile then, isn’t she.

 

[bnm]

Trust me, if I was spoken to in the way they were speaking to that guard I’d have had them slung off, declared myself unfit to continue, train cancelled, everyone else also booted off.

And I'd read the employment tribunal decision with interest.

I'd never have believed you were that thin skinned to be that upset to be 'talked to' in the way the TM was talked to by Tanyalee Davis and her partner. Where exactly did they go so far as to warrant completely stopping the job?

 

[Esker-pades]

Pretty mobile then, isn’t she.

Almost like she has a mobility scooter that allows her to move around.

 

[bnm]

Pretty mobile then, isn’t she.

Clutching at straws now. She is pretty mobile. Has a handy mobility aid to help her live as normal a life as possible.

 

[farleigh]

If her scooter was in the way, why did her friend not just move it?

 

[Esker-pades]

Clutching at straws now. She is pretty mobile. Has a handy mobility aid to help her live as normal a life as possible.

And there we go. I agree with you entirely.

 

[Bromley boy]

And I'd read the employment tribunal decision with interest.

I'd never have believed you were that thin skinned to be that upset to be 'talked to' in the way the TM was talked to by Tanyalee Davis and her partner. Where exactly did they go so far as to warrant completely stopping the job?

Funnily enough I’m still gainfully employed.

If I’m given lip/abuse like that by chippy passengers I’m heading back to the messroom, I’m certainly not undertaking a safety critical role in a state of anger/distress. My employer fully supports that.

 

[pt_mad]

On a wider note, and this may have already been mentioned, but it seems to be actual policy for some tocs that mobility scooters shouldn't be parked in wheelchair spaces and should always be folded.

I believe it to be the case for XC for example that their policy that mobility scooters must never be parked in wheelchair spaces and should be folded and stored.

However, in reality, if staff were to uphold this strictly at all times they'd end up opening themselves up to all sorts of complaints and accusations that can be avoided by using discretion. Strictly speaking some of the TOCs policies do not tell the train crew to use discretion, they say mobility scooters should never be parked in wheelchair spaces. Which is opening the guard up to potential complaints should they insist someone genuinely disabled must move when requested and makes a point of it. They'd be upholding the rules technically. Whether their press office would explain this to any media should a complaint be made is anyone's guess. By rights if their policy is only for certain types of scooter to travel under certain circumstances then they should say scooters aren't permitted under certain circumstances to the complainant, bit sincerely apologise if they were badly treated or spoken to rudely or other such wrong doing.

I do think maybe it's time for tocs to address mobility scooters themselves and decide their actual stance. I mean there's a good chance many people who use mobility scooters are actually disabled. Yet current policy for certain tocs regarding scooters seems to take the stance that they wouldn't be, as they are requesting that they are folded and stored. Bit whos to say the person would even be able to do that? Or could even walk? This kind of policy seems to assume someone in a scooter is always able to walk. Seems questionable policy really when operators should be sensitive with their disabled policies and generally are when it comes to the front line.

As staff, there'd be no point at all in taking issue over someone in a wheelchair space who is disabled or who has informed you they are disabled. You just wouldn't have the support of the public or the company on making a challenge regardless of their policy if it hits the social media and it's best to just offer good customer service and let be as long as it's not a dangerous obstruction.

 

[bb21]

I hate to have to close a thread that actually discusses some quite important, and often overlooked, issues, so we will give this one final try despite the shenanigans from earlier today.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pretty mobile then, isn’t she.

While the provision for wheelchair users on planes is utterly awful and degrading compared to trains (no accessible toilet for a start) I don't think getting to Amsterdam would pose a *massive* challenge. She might even have gone by train.

 

[johnnychips]

While the provision for wheelchair users on planes is utterly awful and degrading compared to trains (no accessible toilet for a start) I don't think getting to Amsterdam would pose a *massive* challenge. She might even have gone by train.

If she lives in Norwich it’s a very short hop by KLM.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

On a wider note, and this may have already been mentioned, but it seems to be actual policy for some tocs that mobility scooters shouldn't be parked in wheelchair spaces and should always be folded.

What about folding wheelchairs? If you are transporting someone in an ordinary unmodified hatchback who needs a wheelchair , you use a slider board to get them into the passenger seat, then fold the wheelchair and pop it in the boot. I'd imagine that with the presence of an assistant, you could do the same on a train, so the wheelchair user sits in a normal seat and the wheelchair travels as luggage. It's going to be about the same size as a folding bike.

 

[Norwichbcfc]

I’m a first time poster to this site but maybe I will be shot down here. I’m the father of a new born too. If the train was full and standing as suggested and the mother was going to have to hold the baby on a fast moving jerky train... Was the guard not actually safeguarding the baby’s safety by having it put in its pram in the disabled area if the lady was not using the mobility scooter... surely a worse story for GWR would be new born suffers serious injury as result of mother being forced to stand on packed train... no winners but maybe that was what the guard was thinking.

 

[maire23]

I’ve just watched the video- she seems to be sat in the scooter so what’s going on?
I noted a previous post about XC and their ‘policies’ I’ve had terrible rows with them about this. They do move disabled people from disabled spaces- they’ve done it to me. They said they don’t accept any form of mobility aids on their trains (they even tried to claim I couldn’t take my crutches on a train as they assumed they’re bariatric ones- they aren’t and even if they were there are people with suitcases bigger than my crutches- they were very shamefaced when I challenged them and they told me that wasn’t true and I shouldn’t have been told that) and ‘‘twas them who told me to fold my wheelchair (I was sat in it at the time I might add)
She’s right about feeling she’s had enough of the treatment she’s getting- I’m right with her there as I seem to get it every time I travel! I’ve only travelled short distances on GWR trains and touch wood I’ve never had an issue- yet. But I’ve had enough problems on trains to know right where she’s coming from.

 

[Clarence Yard]

I have avoided commenting on this as it is one of the TOCs I am strongly involved with but pt mad and low level have made some valid comments from a policy and practical level that I feel need to be looked into.

With any new statute, case law has to be established and you always hope it’s not you that has to test it by someone taking you to court. But that’s where we are heading unless TOCs sort out their policy on all the relevant issues. It is unreasonable to expect on board staff to interpret the law and put themselves at risk because their TOC hasn’t thought through the issues properly and is still clinging to interpretations and practises that no longer either meet the requirements or passenger expectations.

I’m not going to get into the individual case but GWR should really look at what seats around a wheelchair space are able to be reserved by ordinary punters. Disabled customers transferring to a table seat directly opposite the wheelchair space is not uncommon and has, in my experience, led to passenger (and passenger luggage) conflicts before. My advice, always make them priority booking only.

A mobility scooter is classed as a wheelchair, period. It’s well known to operators so TOCs need to update their policies to reflect that and the distinct possibility that it cannot be folded, either by design or because the user can’t actually manage to do it. It may also be needed for limited internal moves within the train.

I once had to tell a Guard not to go into huge detail on the PA about a passenger who had delayed a train by going into a diabetic coma and an ambulance had to be called to meet the train. The Guard was one who liked to give a full explanation on everything (he loved using the PA!) but I said “please just say the delay was due to a Passenger issue and give out the ETA’s”. The PA is not anyones personal platform, it’s there to give out concise advice.

The outcome of this incident should include a through review of the TOC policies, practises and staff training in every TOC, not just GWR, because it appears we are not up to speed on this, passengers are being affected and front line staff are getting exposed. In my view, not a sustainable position for the industry to be in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not allowing crutches on a train? I've never heard anything quite so ridiculous. But then it is XC, who are hardly a beacon of wonderfulness as a TOC.

 

[theageofthetra]

On a wider note, and this may have already been mentioned, but it seems to be actual policy for some tocs that mobility scooters shouldn't be parked in wheelchair spaces and should always be folded.

I believe it to be the case for XC for example that their policy that mobility scooters must never be parked in wheelchair spaces and should be folded and stored.

However, in reality, if staff were to uphold this strictly at all times they'd end up opening themselves up to all sorts of complaints and accusations that can be avoided by using discretion. Strictly speaking some of the TOCs policies do not tell the train crew to use discretion, they say mobility scooters should never be parked in wheelchair spaces. Which is opening the guard up to potential complaints should they insist someone genuinely disabled must move when requested and makes a point of it. They'd be upholding the rules technically. Whether their press office would explain this to any media should a complaint be made is anyone's guess. By rights if their policy is only for certain types of scooter to travel under certain circumstances then they should say scooters aren't permitted under certain circumstances to the complainant, bit sincerely apologise if they were badly treated or spoken to rudely or other such wrong doing.

I do think maybe it's time for tocs to address mobility scooters themselves and decide their actual stance. I mean there's a good chance many people who use mobility scooters are actually disabled. Yet current policy for certain tocs regarding scooters seems to take the stance that they wouldn't be, as they are requesting that they are folded and stored. Bit whos to say the person would even be able to do that? Or could even walk? This kind of policy seems to assume someone in a scooter is always able to walk. Seems questionable policy really when operators should be sensitive with their disabled policies and generally are when it comes to the front line.

As staff, there'd be no point at all in taking issue over someone in a wheelchair space who is disabled or who has informed you they are disabled. You just wouldn't have the support of the public or the company on making a challenge regardless of their policy if it hits the social media and it's best to just offer good customer service and let be as long as it's not a dangerous obstruction.

There are plenty who use those scooters who aren't disabled. They have drink/drug driving bans and use them to get home, particularly in rural areas.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not allowing crutches on a train? I've never heard anything quite so ridiculous. But then it is XC, who are hardly a beacon of wonderfulness as a TOC.

I don’t believe we have heard the full story there, to put it as politely as I can.

 

[bnm]

If she lives in Norwich it’s a very short hop by KLM.

Hopping distance depends how long your legs are.

(Please don't be offended on behalf of Tanyalee Davis at that little joke. Having watch loads of her material today I think she'd appreciate the humour)

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are plenty who use those scooters who aren't disabled. They have drink/drug driving bans and use them to get home, particularly in rural areas.

This kind of issue - where do you draw the line - is one of the issues we have in the UK by not having an equivalent of the German "Schwerbehindertenausweis" - basically a proof of disability not dissimilar to the Blue Badge but for general use. How someone with a scooter should be treated on a train would be determined very well by this kind of thing - if you're disabled, get on, have assistance and put it in the wheelchair space. If not, there's really no reason it should be treated any more favourably than a bicycle, which, in law, is similarly classed as something like an "aid to pedestrianism".

 

[pt_mad]

What about folding wheelchairs? If you are transporting someone in an ordinary unmodified hatchback who needs a wheelchair , you use a slider board to get them into the passenger seat, then fold the wheelchair and pop it in the boot. I'd imagine that with the presence of an assistant, you could do the same on a train, so the wheelchair user sits in a normal seat and the wheelchair travels as luggage. It's going to be about the same size as a folding bike.

It's obviously fine for someone else to sit in a seat where they wish to. That's fine if they prefer that. Bit realistically if the person wishes to remain on their scooter for the journey or leave it unfolded and sit on a folding chair next to it then common sense says it's going to be best for the staff to accommodate this.

If the staff were to insist the person folds the scooter and takes a seat, and the person doesn't want to or doesn't feel comfortable with this, then I suppose the question is would the TOC want the staff to insist and say you're not allowed to travel then based on the TOC rules? Realistically probably not. So we have to wonder why it's in the TOC policy to begin with? It would be better saying where possible or the passenger is comfortable they should fold up scooters and store as luggage. However if this is not possible the person may accommodate the wheelchair space.

You'd only need any one passenger to whip out a camera phone and film you insisting someone vacates their scooter and the wheelchair space otherwise they are t permitted to travel and you could end up all over social media and in serious trouble at work.

It does open up a further point as to what would happen if a person on a mobility scooter without a reservation for the wheelchair space was in the wheelchair space and at the next station there was a wheelchair user wanting to board and use the space.
Would the wheelchair user have to await the next service? Or would the scooter user need to be told to vacate. Total can of worms to say the least.

 

[bnm]

I’m a first time poster to this site but maybe I will be shot down here. I’m the father of a new born too. If the train was full and standing as suggested and the mother was going to have to hold the baby on a fast moving jerky train... Was the guard not actually safeguarding the baby’s safety by having it put in its pram in the disabled area if the lady was not using the mobility scooter... surely a worse story for GWR would be new born suffers serious injury as result of mother being forced to stand on packed train... no winners but maybe that was what the guard was thinking.

The Train Manager is reported as saying there were other seats on the train. He could have assisted Mum and baby to those. He chose instead to move a disabled person and their mobility aid from a disabled space.

 

[bnm]

There are plenty who use those scooters who aren't disabled. They have drink/drug driving bans and use them to get home, particularly in rural areas.

Relevance to this incident?

 

[bnm]

It does open up a further point as to what would happen if a person on a mobility scooter without a reservation for the wheelchair space was in the wheelchair space and at the next station there was a wheelchair user wanting to board and use the space.
Would the wheelchair user have to await the next service? Or would the scooter user need to be told to vacate. Total can of worms to say the least.

Not really. The RSSB, ORR and DfT have covered that scenario in their guidance.

The Department for Transport (DfT) and Office of Rail and Road (ORR) have indicated that there is no clear basis for differentiating between wheelchair and mobility scooter devices, provided they meet the ‘reference wheelchair’ specification (Length: 1200mm, Width: 700mm, Height: 1350mm, Laden weight: 300kg, and have similar manoeuvrability characteristics).

The ORR and DfT consider that wheelchair users do not take precedence over people travelling on mobility scooters

 

[BMoiz]

If the staff were to insist the person folds the scooter and takes a seat, and the person doesn't want to or doesn't feel comfortable with this, then I suppose the question is would the TOC want the staff to insist and say you're not allowed to travel then based on the TOC rules? Realistically probably not. So we have to wonder why it's in the TOC policy to begin with? It would be better saying where possible or the passenger is comfortable they should fold up scooters and store as luggage. However if this is not possible the person may accommodate the wheelchair space.

Policies are written by people who work on theory rather than practice and are only amended when issues are raised. I imagine GWR will be reworking their policy and staff training to avoid another incident like this and other TOCs will probably be doing the same. Social media is pretty effective at getting companies to make useful changes

 

[pt_mad]

This kind of issue - where do you draw the line - is one of the issues we have in the UK by not having an equivalent of the German "Schwerbehindertenausweis" - basically a proof of disability not dissimilar to the Blue Badge but for general use. How someone with a scooter should be treated on a train would be determined very well by this kind of thing - if you're disabled, get on, have assistance and put it in the wheelchair space. If not, there's really no reason it should be treated any more favourably than a bicycle, which, in law, is similarly classed as something like an "aid to pedestrianism".

And this seems to be the current stance for some of the tocs .Their official policy points to they are treating the mobility scooters as a bicycle. Like a form of transport that is not absolutely essential to the person being able to move around. Yet today, they have no grounds to assume that, and nobody really knows why they are taking that stance. Other than the fact that some people hire them from the shop mobility to go around town and then take them back .Or have them to drive to the town centre and back as it's a little too far to walk. But that's just one group who use them and there are others who use them as a more convenient or perhaps more ajgile type of wheelchair which they may feel suits their needs. And this doesn't seem to be addressed by some of the current TOCs' policies. And it's only the tocs who are still saying that 'mobility scotters must always be folded and stored and should never be parked in the dedicated wheelchair space' we are talking about. Or a policy which states that only folding scooters are permitted and they must not exceed 1.2m in length. How staff are supposed to know how long the scooter is I don't know. If they actually tried to measure it and that made it onto social media or the person went to the papers again I could see a similar situation to this where the staff's neck is on the line. Yet they'd be following the rules the management have set.

The Train Manager is reported as saying there were other seats on the train. He could have assisted Mum and baby to those. He chose instead to move a disabled person and their mobility aid from a disabled space.

Although if it turns out (and I have no idea) that the GWR policy on scooters is not to park them in the wheelchair space then technically the guard wouldnt be doing anything wrong by insisting the person leave the space. Yes I know this is unfair, and I'm not agreeing whatsoever, but what I am saying is if this is the rule the TOC (not the guard) has set as policy then the guard would technically be following the rules as they are trained to do and presumably the company wants them to do. If they don't want the guard to attempt to enforce such things then the tocs must make sure their policy reflects that and doesn't brief the staff that scooters or this type of scooter or that type of scooter aren't permitted if X y z. And if enforcing the set rule does bring about a complaint about the guard, the company needs to make their policy clear to the complainant and the press as otherwise the press or social media may assume the guard set the rule themselves or was discriminating.

It's the same sort of thing when customers in a premises ask to use the disabled loo and don't visually appear disabled. It's awkward for the staff because once they've asked do you have a radar key and the answer might be no, should they then ask 'do you have a disability?' or just open the disabled loo without question in which cause the toilet could be open to abuse if people without disabilities clocked on that all you have to do is ask and staff open it for every customer. There'd be no point having the radar lock on it, and that goes for all disabled toilets with radar locks acroas all public places.

Are staff supposed to ask a person on a scooter are you disabled? They shouldn't have to. 'Will you stay on your scooter or move into a seat or fold once onboard?' should be more than sufficient and if the answer is "I'll stay on my scooter" then that's it the person goes in the wheelchair space and the TOC shouldn't be having any problems with this nor should their policy.

Not really. The RSSB, ORR and DfT have covered that scenario in their guidance.

See that is great info you quoted. Is it available to download in its original form? But this is where there is a huge contradiction. You've just quoted a DFT ORR text which states that DFT dont differentiate between a m/scooter and a wheelchair. Yet there are still tocs which set policy that insists scooters must fold and be stored. So surely they are going against DFT guidelines going by this?


One last point. It further complicates things that different Tocs have different policies re mobility scooters. We have an integrated network and the policy should be uniform throughout. Same as it is for wheelchair users throughout the network.
If someone lived in Kent and on Southeastern scooters are permitted in the wheelchair space, and one day in August that customer travels to Weymouth, why on earth would they assume their scooter might have to be folded up on SWR when they've been parking it in the wheelchair space for years on their home TOC? Total examples there.

 

[matt_world2004]

There are plenty who use those scooters who aren't disabled. They have drink/drug driving bans and use them to get home, particularly in rural areas.

Pretty difficult to mistake dwarfism with alchoholism.

 

[pt_mad]

Pretty difficult to mistake dwarfism with alchoholism.

But some disabilities are invisible. And nobody should have to visually or verbally assess whether the person on the scooter is disabled or not. It needs to simply be a case of uniform TOC policy: a person using a mobility scooter is entitled to occupy the onboard wheelchair space if they prefer. Otherwise there's too many different policies and openings for staff to cause offence or to be judged as being discriminate.


One thing which occured to me about that news story. I haven't read the full story or watched the video, but I'm quite surprised the TOC said they watched in horror and said they got it wrong. If they are referring to the guard's manner or potential rudeness then I totally get that. There's no defence for that whatsoever. But if they are referring to the fact the guard asked the customer to vacate the wheelchair space, are they aware that some of their fellow TOCs' policies are that passengers with scooters must never use the wheelchair space and must always fold and store their scooters?
If this had been XC would they have said they watched with horror and got it wrong? Or would they back up the fact that the guard was trying to uphold their rules with regards to mobility scooters not being allowed to occupy dedicated wheelchair spaces? Obviously they couldn't back up any rudeness, bad behaviour or unfair treatment etc that's the other part of it and must be investigated either way.

It's no good any TOC setting certain rules but then later potentially letting an individual member of staff take the blame for upholding the TOCs' set rules because it hits the social media and it's bad publicity because the public don't agree.
That may well not apply to GWR as they may allow scooters in W/C spaces for all I know but certainly some other tocs don't and this could end up causing someone great offence if this happens on one of those tocs.

 

[bnm]

See that is great info you quoted. Is it available to download in its original form? But this is where there is a huge contradiction. You've just quoted a DFT ORR text which states that DFT dont differentiate between a m/scooter and a wheelchair. Yet there are still tocs which set policy that insists scooters must fold and be stored. So surely they are going against DFT guidelines going by this?

I did attach the full document that extract came from earlier in this thread. I appreciate there's been a fair few posts since then so I've attached it again.

HTH

 

[Gareth Marston]

I’m a first time poster to this site but maybe I will be shot down here. I’m the father of a new born too. If the train was full and standing as suggested and the mother was going to have to hold the baby on a fast moving jerky train... Was the guard not actually safeguarding the baby’s safety by having it put in its pram in the disabled area if the lady was not using the mobility scooter... surely a worse story for GWR would be new born suffers serious injury as result of mother being forced to stand on packed train... no winners but maybe that was what the guard was thinking.

Welcome to the Forum - I'm sure if we heard from the mother involved in the incident we would have a completely different perspective on her experience of a member of staff trying to assist her and her baby and the reaction of other passengers to that. I'm sure shes absolutely mortified at whats happened and has perhaps been put off you using public transport.

As some of the more sensible posters have hinted what we have here now is that any attempt by staff to sort things out/help vulnerable people/ help people reach sensible compromises on crowded services will have to be tempered by fear of the reaction of a certain sections of the disabled community and their traveling companions who perceive their needs to be more equal than others.....