Disabled Tanyalee Davis - more rail travel woes.

[pt_mad]

As for the last point, it's not too difficult with one case, but with more than one you'll need another pair of hands.

Ok. But that proves the point, staff end up having to push a passenger in a wheelchair and pull a case at the same time, when many Tocs if not the majority state that staff should never push a wheelchair and pull a case at the same time. But in practice the job requires them to do it, so they (the staff) take the liability. If there was ever an accident the company would probably say we briefed you not to do that and you chose to do it and you are to blame.

 

[Mojo]

The other side of the coin is that any future work or new opening must be fully complaint. As an example, footbridge which has two working lifts can cost £600,000 to install, whereas a utilitarian footbridge with only steps costs around £25,000. Making a new station fully accessible comes with extraordinary expense, and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that some station business cases have failed precisely because of the costs of installing and maintaining heavily engineered fixtures.

I do however ask if the money is perhaps well spent. My old local station was fully accessible as a (staff worked) Barrow crossing was situated at the end of the platforms; for the majority of the day the station was staffed with customer facing staff but even out of hours staff were on hand because the station housed a train crew depot, so access was available throughout operating hours. In the past 5 years the footbridge was modified, at great expense, to install two lifts. I have to say I feel the money may have been better spent on providing access to an inaccessible location.

On a similar note, a lot of money is being spent in London to increase the number of accessible stations on the Underground network; however some of this money is being spent on what would make a number of consecutive stations accessible, meanwhile other areas of London are totally inaccessible. Whilst I’m sure the long term aim is for everywhere to be accessible it just looks to me like they have a budget and are working to achieve a target of having x% of stations accessible rather than looking to spend that money on perhaps one or two stations in areas with no accessible stations, but at which the cost would be substantially more to achieve.

 

[EM2]

If there was ever an accident the company would probably say we briefed you not to do that and you chose to do it and you are to blame.

All I can say is that was never briefed to me or my colleagues.

 

[Bromley boy]

It doesn't wash. There are training and implementation issues with the interaction between disabled travellers and the railways. If it takes money to fix, then so be it. The legislation has to be complied with. None of us, whether individual or body corporate, can pick and chose which laws we will or won't comply with. No ifs, no buts, no "but fares will rise". If nothing is done to improve the situation then there will be more train delays. More necessity to compensate passengers. More necessity to book taxis. More court cases. More bad publicity. More reputational damage. Who ultimately pays for those I wonder? Doing the right thing and complying with legislation and DPPPs is a zero-sum game.

But money is a huge factor, as with everything else on the railway. Saying that “won’t wash” doesn’t change that. That is where there are many hundreds of stations which remain inaccessible. In a perfect world they would all be remodelled and made fully accessible but the money simply isn’t there.

Disability legislation is being complied with. Unless you’re saying it isn’t? Have there been any cases brought against TOCs in the recent past (the case we discussed earlier related to a bus company)? Unfortunately the fact measures are put in place doesn’t prevent mistakes from happening.

I’d suggest these are best dealt with through the appropriate complaints channel than social media posts and online rants.

I’m unsure what it is you are expecting to gain from statements like the above - nobody has said the situation is perfect, you’ve also had some explanations as to how and why mistakes happen - but dismissing the financial factor limiting accessibility measures is a little naive.

 

[pt_mad]

In which case, assisting disabled passengers is a perfectly valid mitigation for delaying a train by a minute or so and no fines or other sanctions would be incurred by the TOC.

True. But if theres a ramp to go down on one end of the train, and a visually impaired passenger at the other end, and both passengers are alighting, then what's to stop the wheelchair user and companion from assuming their assistance hasn't showed up because the staff member is at the other coach helping the visually impaired passenger off first?

It's been known to happen. And the wheelchair user and companion assumes the assistance isn't there and then lift the wheelchair off themselves in a panic, only to find the assistance staff are walking towards them a minute later. If there's three assists it's even more complicated.

 

[DackandBlecker]

There's nothing new and extraordinarily expensive to implement. The system is in place. The booking system works well. Users are satisfied with that. It's only when the system gets to the frontline do problems arise. More training. A few more staff who's role is assistance first, other duties after.

I agree, there should be more staff for all customers.
A few more staff per station, at £25/30k salary, plus pension, plus other costs, at 50 staff across the country, it’s easily £3 Million. Peanuts to the industry, I agree, ain’t happening though.

And with the greatest respect, your earlier statements re: it’s the law so it must happen, that may well lead to unintended consequences, so be careful what you wish for. See accessible toilets, vs no toilets on 153s as an example.

Plus it’s also reasonable, not definitive.

 

[Mojo]

Is there any correlation between the current trend for reducing staffing levels to a bare minimum and booked assistance not being provided? Perhaps instead of enacting the McNulty report to save money, TOCs should be doing the exact opposite and increasing front line staffing to comply with the relevant legislation? This would require a complete culture change from the Department for Transport downwards.

The McNulty report is a red herring. Much of what was said in it has been ignored and not implemented. Having looked at matters on the ground most Tocs already seem to be employing more customer facing station staff (or plan to) within the lifetime of their franchise.

It's been known to happen. And the wheelchair user and companion assumes the assistance isn't there and then lift the wheelchair off themselves in a panic, only to find the assistance staff are walking towards them a minute later. If there's three assists it's even more complicated

On the other hand, if the deployment of wheelchair ramps wasn’t so patchy then perhaps customers might not get themselves in such a panic and try to take matters into their own hands.

 

[pt_mad]

All I can say is that was never briefed to me or my colleagues.

At some tocs it's been published in either the winter brief, spring brief, summer brief or autumn brief booklets from time to time but then may not be published for another two or three years again after that .But the rule would still stand I should imagine.

 

[Right Away]

The McNulty report is a red herring. Much of what was said in it has been ignored and not implemented. Having looked at matters on the ground most Tocs already seem to be employing more customer facing station staff (or plan to) within the lifetime of their franchise.

The last two GTR Southern services that I have travelled on that previously had a guard didn't even have an OBS. It may be a 'red herring' with regards to station staff but not on-train staffing.

 

[Mojo]

The last two GTR Southern services that I have travelled on that previously had a guard didn't even have an OBS. It may be a 'red herring' with regards to station staff but not on-train staffing.

Station staff are better placed to provide mobility assistance though than train crews.

 

[Right Away]

Station staff are better placed to provide mobility assistance though than train crews.

Not at unstaffed stations they are not!

 

[pt_mad]

It works ok with only one train at the station. Two at the same time (both with passengers requiring assistance) and the system doesn't work.

This. Or one train with multiple assistances on it. Or additional turn up and go assists when there were already booked assists at that time and there's only one member of staff.

I agree, there should be more staff for all customers.
A few more staff per station, at £25/30k salary, plus pension, plus other costs, at 50 staff across the country, it’s easily £3 Million. Peanuts to the industry, I agree, ain’t happening though.

And with the greatest respect, your earlier statements re: it’s the law so it must happen, that may well lead to unintended consequences, so be careful what you wish for. See accessible toilets, vs no toilets on 153s as an example.

Plus it’s also reasonable, not definitive.

It wouldn't be 50 staff needed. More likely into the hundreds of extra staff. To be able to provide a full end to end chaperone service at all points with one member of staff to each one assist would need about another ten staff at Doncaster nevermind 50 to cover the whole country.

And single staffed locations with anymore than one platform would need staff doubling to at least two per shift all the time to avoid any possible clashes or multiple assists. There must be hundreds of stations in that bracket so you'd literally be taking hundreds of staff maybe more to eliminate nearly all possible chance whatsoever of a failing due to staff unable to cover clashing duties at the same time.

 

[Mojo]

Not at unstaffed stations they are not!

That line of argument doesn’t make sense in relation to what I said!

 

[Right Away]

That line of argument doesn’t make sense in relation to what I said!

Yes, station staff are better equipped from an assistance provision point of view as they can provide care from entrance to the station to the train and vice versa, but there are unstaffed stations (including stations that are scheduled to be staffed but aren't for a variety of reasons).

To avoid this thread drifting away from the initial topic, I will cease this line of debate.

 

[Master29]

No such thing as bad publicity. This hasn`t harmed her career at all.

 

[pt_mad]

Another thought. Would it be realistic to assume that the Tocs agreed their staffing levels with the DFT per station and per time of day within the franchise agreement? I would assume so. So it's potentially the DFT who have agreed to the staffing levels and hours at the stations as part of the franchise. If the DFT decided that the assistance system must be provided with more staff resource, surely that could stipulate during the franchise process that 'York must be well staffed between the hours of x and x and extra staff need to be on duty to prepare for possible increases in the request for booked assistance'?

The assistance system does not limit the amount of bookings which can be made even if say 10 were all to alight from the same train at the same time at a single staffed station. The system wouldn't limit this and the customers would be told on the phone when booking that your assistance is booked and assistance will be waiting for you. There can't be an endless supply of assistance staff where resourse is limited by the TOC or the DFT logic tells us that whether we agree with it or not.

 

[sefton]

Some assists are booked under elderly luggage help on the list, sons and daughters will turn up at the booking office and say their mum and dad's etc are here for assistance. The staff may have to fetch the luggage from the car boot and then the relatives leave the station and the staff then take care of everything from there at all points. It's no way possible this could be accommodated for all elderly passengers or even medium stations would have hundreds a day. But booked assist does allow this and no priority is given to disabled bookings over elderly luggage bookings. And staff only have two hands each.

The last time my parents travelled by train I did try to help out by not booking assistance where I could help out, but I was told I should not have done.

The journey started badly. I had booked them on the direct train from Cheltenham to Paddington with assistance to meet them there to cross London for the final let of the journey. The train from Cheltenham to Paddington was cancelled. Unknown to me they were put on the full and standing service to Plymouth to change at Bristol Parkway. 85 year old's with booked assistance. My father asked the guard if my mother could sit in the empty first class for the half hour on a train they hadn't planned on being on - "no" was their answer.

When I realised the Cheltenham to Paddington was cancelled I phoned the passenger assist team to find out what they had done with them - nobody had any idea. So guessing from the timetables I went around to Paddington to see if I could find them. I asked at the information desk what the system was for tracking assisted passengers when there was disruption - "there is no system, who would pay for it" was the response. Well funny, but I didn't think the tickets I had bought them were free.

Eventually I found them on off to Kings Cross. Now I hadn't booked passenger assistance as I would be with them. I wish I had as GTR were playing the usual silly games of no platform until 2 minutes before departure.

And then we arrive at our destination only to find the lift had been turned off - according to the staff they were not expecting any more assistance passengers to arrive this evening so who would need it. Really? It was two days before Christmas and it was 6.30 in the evening; not even people with luggage.

Shall we say rather more than 100% of the ticket was paid back, and now assistance gets booked irrespective of whether I am there or not.

 

[DackandBlecker]

This. Or one train with multiple assistances on it. Or additional turn up and go assists when there were already booked assists at that time and there's only one member of staff.



It wouldn't be 50 staff needed. More likely into the hundreds of extra staff. To be able to provide a full end to end chaperone service at all points with one member of staff to each one assist would need about another ten staff at Doncaster nevermind 50 to cover the whole country.

And single staffed locations with anymore than one platform would need staff doubling to at least two per shift all the time to avoid any possible clashes or multiple assists. There must be hundreds of stations in that bracket so you'd literally be taking hundreds of staff maybe more to eliminate nearly all possible chance whatsoever of a failing due to staff unable to cover clashing duties at the same time.

Absolutely. 50 was just a number to show how much the labour costs alone would be astronomical.
I wouldn’t even dare to think how many staff would be required for the money is no hindrance option, that goes way beyond any reasonableness test.

 

[PeterC]

True. But if theres a ramp to go down on one end of the train, and a visually impaired passenger at the other end, and both passengers are alighting, then what's to stop the wheelchair user and companion from assuming their assistance hasn't showed up because the staff member is at the other coach helping the visually impaired passenger off first?

It's been known to happen. And the wheelchair user and companion assumes the assistance isn't there and then lift the wheelchair off themselves in a panic, only to find the assistance staff are walking towards them a minute later. If there's three assists it's even more complicated.

Add in an unbooked disabled passenger and it is easy to see that staff may make a mistake and assume that all passengers requring assistance are off the train.

 

[pt_mad]

The last time my parents travelled by train I did try to help out by not booking assistance where I could help out, but I was told I should not have done.

The journey started badly. I had booked them on the direct train from Cheltenham to Paddington with assistance to meet them there to cross London for the final let of the journey. The train from Cheltenham to Paddington was cancelled. Unknown to me they were put on the full and standing service to Plymouth to change at Bristol Parkway. 85 year old's with booked assistance. My father asked the guard if my mother could sit in the empty first class for the half hour on a train they hadn't planned on being on - "no" was their answer.

When I realised the Cheltenham to Paddington was cancelled I phoned the passenger assist team to find out what they had done with them - nobody had any idea. So guessing from the timetables I went around to Paddington to see if I could find them. I asked at the information desk what the system was for tracking assisted passengers when there was disruption - "there is no system, who would pay for it" was the response. Well funny, but I didn't think the tickets I had bought them were free.

Eventually I found them on off to Kings Cross. Now I hadn't booked passenger assistance as I would be with them. I wish I had as GTR were playing the usual silly games of no platform until 2 minutes before departure.

And then we arrive at our destination only to find the lift had been turned off - according to the staff they were not expecting any more assistance passengers to arrive this evening so who would need it. Really? It was two days before Christmas and it was 6.30 in the evening; not even people with luggage.

Shall we say rather more than 100% of the ticket was paid back, and now assistance gets booked irrespective of whether I am there or not.

Interesting and eye opening story. Not wishing to pry too much, would you be comfortable disclosing whether one or both of your parents have a disability? Without needing to name the disability of course.

Only reason I ask is to determine whether this would come under the disabled assist heading or elderly heading when the assistance is booked.

If they didn't have a disability it could possibly explain why they ended up on the full and standing service. Because the elderly category wouldn't automatically mean someone wouldn't be able to travel on a full train. It may mean they are entitled to a seat, priority seat if needed. But if there were others standing in the aisles and gangways around them then although far from ideal it's just the nature of the demand sometimes.
If one or both of them have a disability and booked as such then it couldn't really be explained, unless they were happy to board the full train when it arrived rather than face a delay for a later one. Certainly you'd expect staff to ask the passengers if they are comfortable travelling on such a busy train and give them the option to either go ahead or await the next or a later service if they'd prefer or the passengers thought they might feel uncomfortable.

Ultimately though the decision would lie with the passengers themselves and presumably if they wanted to object on health or comfort grounds they would have done? It may be that the next train or the next two or three over the next few hours may be expected to be equally as busy making a busy train unavoidable, which is definitely the case on some routes.

For example, if elderly passengers wished to travel anywhere from St Pancras low level between 1600 and 1900 they'd pretty much have to board a full train otherwise they wouldn't be able to travel.

 

[Bromley boy]

I'm intrigued as to why you would contact the signaller in these situations, when it isn't in our remit to sort out problems like this. Surley you should be ringing your Control to rectify the problem? All the signaller can do is report it to his Control who "should" then contact the TOC.

That’s an interesting question.

I’ve been in a few situations where I’ve been kept “on hold” while the signaller confirms things with the TOC - I’m not exactly how this is done and I imagine varies by signalling centre. Do ROCs have TOC representatives working in them or “hotlines” to control?

In the example I gave above the signaller agreed to do it when I asked - possibly to get me back on the move quicker than if I’d had to ring off, ring the TOC myself, then call him back when ready to proceed?

 

[noddingdonkey]

There is a PDF on the LNER website which states that if there are problems then, upon being made aware of it, an investigation will be made and appropriate compensation paid. I don't see any specific reference to a full reimbursement being on offer.

In this case the overcarry and return will have taken over an hour so delay repay would give a 100% refund.

 

[bnm]

In this case the overcarry and return will have taken over an hour so delay repay would give a 100% refund.

Not forgetting the two bottles of wine Tanyalee Davis received from LNER staff when she arrived back at York! Excellent immediate compensation for being over carried.

 

[sefton]

Interesting and eye opening story. Not wishing to pry too much, would you be comfortable disclosing whether one or both of your parents have a disability? Without needing to name the disability of course.

Only reason I ask is to determine whether this would come under the disabled assist heading or elderly heading when the assistance is booked.

If they didn't have a disability it could possibly explain why they ended up on the full and standing service. Because the elderly category wouldn't automatically mean someone wouldn't be able to travel on a full train. It may mean they are entitled to a seat, priority seat if needed. But if there were others standing in the aisles and gangways around them then although far from ideal it's just the nature of the demand sometimes.
If one or both of them have a disability and booked as such then it couldn't really be explained, unless they were happy to board the full train when it arrived rather than face a delay for a later one. Certainly you'd expect staff to ask the passengers if they are comfortable travelling on such a busy train and give them the option to either go ahead or await the next or a later service if they'd prefer or the passengers thought they might feel uncomfortable.

Ultimately though the decision would lie with the passengers themselves and presumably if they wanted to object on health or comfort grounds they would have done? It may be that the next train or the next two or three over the next few hours may be expected to be equally as busy making a busy train unavoidable, which is definitely the case on some routes.

For example, if elderly passengers wished to travel anywhere from St Pancras low level between 1600 and 1900 they'd pretty much have to board a full train otherwise they wouldn't be able to travel.

My mother is 84 and a Blue Badge holder and my father is registered partially sighted - Would you define that as elderly or disabled. I would go with the latter but they come from a generation which unless you are in a wheelchair you are not.

It was December, just before Christmas, snow on the ground and below freezing. As very infrequent rail travellers they are not best placed to make any decisions, but relied on the advice provided to them by the rail staff.

As before, when they travel now assistance is booked even if they are being taken or picked up from the station, simply because the train companies have no consideration for anyone other than the fit and healthy (e.g.late notification of platforms).

 

[AlterEgo]

I’m not saying this to judge anyone in the thread who has used the service, but there is no way in hell I would send elderly or infirm parents on a train on their own if they couldn’t manage. I’d drive them or travel with them. Just my 2p.

 

[whhistle]

Yet another shameful indictment of the way the UK's railways treat disabled passengers.

Get off your pedestal!
The railway treats everyone the same. It might not be that great but I don't think I can honestly say any business I have encountered in life has treated me well... or rather, as I want.

You say it like "the railway" has a particular grudge against people with disabilities. Individuals might; the industry doesn't.

 

[sefton]

I’m not saying this to judge anyone in the thread who has used the service, but there is no way in hell I would send elderly or infirm parents on a train on their own if they couldn’t manage. I’d drive them or travel with them. Just my 2p.

Nice in theory but not always practical.

In the situation my parents found themselves in all the issues could have been avoided if the rail staff had just taken a moment to consider the impact of their actions on ALL their customers.

 

[LAX54]

Get off your pedestal!
The railway treats everyone the same. It might not be that great but I don't think I can honestly say any business I have encountered in life has treated me well... or rather, as I want.

You say it like "the railway" has a particular grudge against people with disabilities. Individuals might; the industry doesn't.

Its not just the Railways, it most modes of transport, be it rail / a bus or Air, none are perfect, and never will be, many times they are treated as second class citizens, the staff that do the work are invariably brilliant, but when you arrive on a plane after an 11 hour flight, then told it will be at least 40 mins before assistance will arrive is not good, and then that section will only take you to immigration, you have wait for someone else then to take you onwards, anything from 10 mins to half an hour.
It seems a UK thing, on the times I have managed to persuade my wife to come away with me on holiday to the USA for example, there maybe a 10 to 15 min wait after check-in for someone to arrive, but then they are excellent from there to the gate, ensuring she is OK all the way, At,and beyond the gate, that can vary a lot depending on the Airline and their staff !

 

[bnm]

Get off your pedestal!
The railway treats everyone the same. It might not be that great but I don't think I can honestly say any business I have encountered in life has treated me well... or rather, as I want.

You say it like "the railway" has a particular grudge against people with disabilities. Individuals might; the industry doesn't.

I don't say it like that. If you chose to read it like that there's not much I can do.

 

[farleigh]

Not forgetting the two bottles of wine Tanyalee Davis received from LNER staff when she arrived back at York! Excellent immediate compensation for being over carried.

Yes - I would have been delighted in that situation.