How much discretion does a train manager have?

[Moonshot]

Why on earth would you think fares would come down overall if Advance tickets were abolished? The exact opposite would happen and fares would increase substantially.

Advance fares attract voluntary travellers, and if those substantially cheaper fares were removed and the only option was the full price ticket then quite simply a proportion of these people would not travel. So now you are taking less revenue and your full price fares go up, so even more of these travellers stop travelling (and some of your full price travellers). And so on, and so on.

Anyway, back to the issue, it seems to me the usual rail industry foul up.

Everyone saying one member of staff should or should not have done something, and meanwhile the poor customer who is only following the guidance they were given, is the one who suffers.

Agree with that, and if you also add on the spend at larger stations which have a decent retail offer, then the effect would be noticeable. Im not so sure I agree with your " usual rail industry foul up " comment though.

 

[AlterEgo]

Why would it be a lie? If something crops up which causes it to be more convenient for me to catch another train, that's unforeseen, and I expect to receive good customer service and see discretion shown to me...

Because you suggested merely "claiming" the situation was unforeseen, rather than actually saying what that situation was, which would provide the necessary context to enable someone to make a decision.

I have, elsewhere, in a different scenario, defended Virgin where they did not permit travel on an alternate service. In that scenario, I argued Virgin had no responsibility to accommodate the passenger and put forward a reason why it might even be operationally undesirable.

The key is that individuals on the ground should be permitted to use their discretion, which means occasionally (but not routinely!) deviating from the rules to ensure goodwill, or operational convenience, or even to come down harder on someone than they otherwise would.

It is not good customer service to waive ticket restrictions every single time it does not suit someone. It is good customer service to use one's discretion to judge every situation on its own merits. That inevitably means that there is scope for disagreement. I still think that's a better way to run a business than "computer says no".

 

[al78]

Okay, next time I make a journey, why should I not buy an advance ticket (at heavy discount) and then travel on a different train and claim the circumstances leading to that were "unforeseen"?

*groan* The strawman comes out again.

There is a difference between CHOOSING to travel on a different train because you feel like it and being FORCED to travel on a different train due to exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances, by their nature, tend to make themselves known widely, and so rail staff will likely be aware of them, and can use discretion if they feel it is appropriate. The OP's situation was about encountering such extreme circumstances, and some staff offering discretion but with some communication breakdown between station and train staff, not a case of he couldn't be bothered to leave home earlier. :roll:

 

[Bellbell]

The key is that individuals on the ground should be permitted to use their discretion, which means occasionally (but not routinely!) deviating from the rules to ensure goodwill, or operational convenience, or even to come down harder on someone than they otherwise would.

It is not good customer service to waive ticket restrictions every single time it does not suit someone. It is good customer service to use one's discretion to judge every situation on its own merits. That inevitably means that there is scope for disagreement. I still think that's a better way to run a business than "computer says no".

I agree with this and think it is one of the perks of being a guard, in that we are very often left to make our own decisions. Compared to front line customer facing roles in other industries we have much more discretion. The problem comes when people come to expect discretion on every occasion but that doesn't mean we should move to black and white for every decision.

Exceptional circumstances, by their nature, tend to make themselves known widely, and so rail staff will likely be aware of them, and can use discretion if they feel it is appropriate. The OP's situation was about encountering such extreme circumstances, and some staff offering discretion but with some communication breakdown between station and train staff, not a case of he couldn't be bothered to leave home earlier. :roll:

I don't agree with this though. OP's traffic light scenario is no different to someone else's car breaking down in the middle lane of the motorway in terms of being exceptional. Even in situations which are 'widely' known, I might not have access to the information. Control might not either. We do sometimes get emails about exceptional traffic conditions, but far less frequently than exceptional circumstances must happen, so that's not a reliable way of determining whether to exercise discretion.

 

[fowler9]

Last year I got a Virgin Return from Lime Street to Crewe just for a little blast through the Cheshire Plain. I dozed off just before Crewe and the TM did a ticket check just after Stafford at which point I was woken up. I was thinking "Hell this is going to be expensive". The train manager was incredible, endorsed my ticket and basically trusted me to make my own way to a train back up North. I think he could tell from the look of horror on my face that I had no intention of going to London, but still, I am guessing he was under no obligation not to charge me full wack. Eternally grateful to that man.

 

[bramling]

*groan* The strawman comes out again.

There is a difference between CHOOSING to travel on a different train because you feel like it and being FORCED to travel on a different train due to exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances, by their nature, tend to make themselves known widely, and so rail staff will likely be aware of them, and can use discretion if they feel it is appropriate. The OP's situation was about encountering such extreme circumstances, and some staff offering discretion but with some communication breakdown between station and train staff, not a case of he couldn't be bothered to leave home earlier. :roll:

No one is *FORCED* to travel on a different train without buying another ticket first. There is nothing stopping people buying a new ticket, except that they don't want to (or can't afford to) pay. So I don't see any difference at all.

And one person's definition of forced is not the same as someone else's. Something may crop up at home which I regard as important, which in my view means I am *FORCED* to change plans. The next person may see this as a choice.

Perhaps a fair policy is simply to charge the excess between the advance ticket and what the full-fare ticket would be.

In my view it's simply wrong for someone to buy a ticket with strings attached, breach those conditions for whatever reason, and then expect to receive the same flexibility as a full-fare ticket. It's simply not fair to those who have paid up.

 

[alastair]

Why is it anti-passenger?

As a passenger who tends to use full-price tickets (as I value flexibility), I object to others getting a hefty discount in return for accepting certain restrictions, but then claiming a situation is "unforeseen" and therefore that "discretion" should be shown to them, with the end result that they get the same conditions with the cheap ticket as someone else has paid a lot more for.

If one buys a cheap product with conditions attached, how about one actually abides by those conditions?

As I say, everyone's delay is unforeseen otherwise they'd have booked a different train in the first place!




This is a different issue, and one which I agree shouldn't have happened. The position should be simple - turn up on time for your advance journey, or pay again, or abort the journey.

Of course it's "anti passenger". The OP has already stated that a traffic light failure had led to an completely unprecedented gridlock meaning it took 90 mins to travel the last 2 miles to the station.

So how long do you think someone with an advance ticket should allow to make sure they "turn up on time". 2 hrs? Would that be reasonable? One-off situations will always require discretion to be shown as was the case here.

 

[bramling]

Of course it's "anti passenger". The OP has already stated that a traffic light failure had led to an completely unprecedented gridlock meaning it took 90 mins to travel the last 2 miles to the station.

So how long do you think someone with an advance ticket should allow to make sure they "turn up on time". 2 hrs? Would that be reasonable? One-off situations will always require discretion to be shown as was the case here.

No, the one-off situation should mean someone pays the extra that a flexible ticket would have cost them. That's the lottery one commits to if choosing to buy an inflexible ticket, making a hefty monetary saving in the process.

If my car won't start on the way to the station, does that count as a completely unprecedented situation?

I'm not calling for people to be hung drawn and quartered if they don't turn up on time for their advance journey, just that they then pay the appropriate fare for the flexibility that they've now required. I think that's more than generous - going back to the hotel example it's very rare to get even a partial refund on a non-refundable booking.

 

[joncombe]

They certainly can show discretion. I remember a case a few years ago where I was travelling on an Advance ticket but had nearly an hour to wait for a connection at Newark Northgate. I had started my journey travelling on the correct scheduled service. But when I got to Newark it turned out that the previous train to London was late so I could make that one. I showed my ticket to the train manager on the platform before getting on and explained the situation and he was happy for me to travel on that train even though it was (scheduled) an hour earlier than the time on my ticket. I was grateful because it saved me nearly an hour wait! But I was well aware he would be perfectly entitled to say no.

 

[fowler9]

Of course it's "anti passenger". The OP has already stated that a traffic light failure had led to an completely unprecedented gridlock meaning it took 90 mins to travel the last 2 miles to the station.

So how long do you think someone with an advance ticket should allow to make sure they "turn up on time". 2 hrs? Would that be reasonable? One-off situations will always require discretion to be shown as was the case here.

I don't know you know. It isn't the job of the TOC to effectively compensate the customer for a failure on the road infrastructure. Try it with an airline if you miss your flight because there was a nightmare on the roads.

 

[Mag_seven]

Discretion (especially in a case such as that outlined by the OP) is entirely sensible, but I've observed many instances where passengers who are clearly regular 'chancers' as regards Advance Tickets have quoted previous instances of being 'let off' - "the guard on this train last week said it was OK" etc etc.

So there can be cases where exercising 'too much discretion' can cause problems for 'less easily swayed' colleagues on the same route a few days later.

Maybe the answer is that if the booked train is missed then a new ticket must be bought but the buyer can then appeal the price of the new ticket (rather like delay/repay) later describing the circumstances that caused the booked train to be missed. That way the aforementioned "chancers" who do this as a habit could be weeded out.

 

[Essexman]

Two examples –

A while ago on South West Trains I missed my booked train as a bus had been cancelled. I got a telling off from the Train Manager but he reluctantly allowed me to stay on the train without buying another ticket. He told me I should have gone to see him before boarding and asked if he would allow me to travel.

Conscious of this, on Monday when I found that I was one ticket short (the machine hadn’t printed out the return) I went straight to the GWR Train Manager and explained the situation. He was very helpful, stamped the seat reservation and told me to explain to staff on the gate at Paddington that he’d allowed me to travel (as it was we arrived at an ungated platform).

So both Train Managers showed discretion but I’ve learned to approach them with a ticket issue rather than wait for them to come round (or not).

 

[Antman]

No, the one-off situation should mean someone pays the extra that a flexible ticket would have cost them. That's the lottery one commits to if choosing to buy an inflexible ticket, making a hefty monetary saving in the process.

Your 'single approach with no discretion' would drive up fares.

Many organisations have found if you are obnoxious to your customers they tend to find other ways of spending their money. You only have to look at Ryanair's sudden change from evil to smiley, and the massive increase in profits.

 

[tsr]

Two examples –

A while ago on South West Trains I missed my booked train as a bus had been cancelled. I got a telling off from the Train Manager but he reluctantly allowed me to stay on the train without buying another ticket. He told me I should have gone to see him before boarding and asked if he would allow me to travel.

Conscious of this, on Monday when I found that I was one ticket short (the machine hadn’t printed out the return) I went straight to the GWR Train Manager and explained the situation. He was very helpful, stamped the seat reservation and told me to explain to staff on the gate at Paddington that he’d allowed me to travel (as it was we arrived at an ungated platform).

So both Train Managers showed discretion but I’ve learned to approach them with a ticket issue rather than wait for them to come round (or not).

What you've learnt is absolutely correct in a lot of situations. If you're polite and ask for help proactively if you're in a sticky situation, guards/TMs/conductors etc. are almost always more likely to be helpful. As it so happens, possibly not by coincidence given your post, this is something I have particularly noticed with my SWT colleagues. It's also something I tend to point out if a passenger hasn't bothered to approach me and I take the "firm advice" strategy.

 

[sheff1]

No one is *FORCED* to travel on a different train without buying another ticket first. There is nothing stopping people buying a new ticket, except that they don't want to (or can't afford to) pay.

The OP went to the ticket office to buy another ticket, but was told there was no need for them to do so because of the exceptional circumstances.

 

[yorkie]

Why would it be a lie? If something crops up which causes it to be more convenient for me to catch another train, that's unforeseen, and I expect to receive good customer service and see discretion shown to me...

Something like major gridlock around the station? Yes you would then expect to see that. And that did happen in this case.

The problem with excessing is that there's no disincentive for the passenger....

The solution is not to charge a whole new ticket but to charge a reasonable admin fee.

I know it's not that simple, but I'd far rather advance tickets were abolished and fares brought down overall.

There is absolutely no prospect of affordable walk-up fares for immediate travel, for journeys such as Preston or York to London, for the foreseeable future. It just isn't going to happen.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Technically I suppose the TM might have been correct in respect of "discretion".

The NRCOT says : "Please note that neither a Train Company’s staff nor a Licenced Retailer’s staff have the authority to waive or change these Conditions unless they are specifically allowed to within these Conditions."

There is a condition about people with certain types of ticket, eg Advance, having to travel on their booked train, but I can't find anything which would allow staff to override that.

I am not saying they shouldn't, but technically, staff probably can't override the restrictions, if you follow the NRCOT to the letter.

 

[roversfan2001]

I've been allowed to travel an hour earlier than the train I was booked on before, on a VTWC service. There was no real reason for being allowed, very minor delays (10 minutes, if that) in the Birmingham area meant I wanted to get to where I was going ASAP in case it got worse.

I haven't encountered any VTWC TMs who have been anything other than accommodating to passengers' needs. I am aware of others who haven't been so lucky however.

 

[AlterEgo]

Technically I suppose the TM might have been correct in respect of "discretion".

The NRCOT says : "Please note that neither a Train Company’s staff nor a Licenced Retailer’s staff have the authority to waive or change these Conditions unless they are specifically allowed to within these Conditions."

There is a condition about people with certain types of ticket, eg Advance, having to travel on their booked train, but I can't find anything which would allow staff to override that.

I am not saying they shouldn't, but technically, staff probably can't override the restrictions, if you follow the NRCOT to the letter.

The NRCoT says:

If you believe that there are reasonable circumstances that led to you travelling without a valid Ticket or being able to present one, then you should explain these to the member of Train Company staff who has asked to inspect your Ticket.

If you are unable to present a valid Ticket when asked, we are permitted, in law, to take one of the following measures:

Note how it says you should approach staff and does not say "this will happen" - it merely outlines what the Railway is entitled to do in law.

Staff discretion on ticketing matters is fully enshrined within the NRCoT.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Something like major gridlock around the station? Yes you would then expect to see that. And that did happen in this case.
The solution is not to charge a whole new ticket but to charge a reasonable admin fee.

Yes, I do agree with this. Even a certain well known airline (well, both blue and orange teams I think) charge a fixed "rescue fee" if you miss your flight but arrive within a certain specified time.

£10 admin fee plus the difference in fare to a walk-up[1] if you arrive within, say, one hour of your booked time, is probably reasonable and would probably solve most arguments. Also including the option to wait for off peak if that makes it cheaper provided you do *arrive* at the station within the hour.

[1] Allowing the choice of any walk-up, so if you were on a First Advance you could choose a Standard Off Peak, for instance, if wishing to keep the cost down.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Staff discretion on ticketing matters is fully enshrined within the NRCoT.

Where?

All I can see is : "Please note that neither a Train Company’s staff nor a Licenced Retailer’s staff have the authority to waive or change these Conditions unless they are specifically allowed to within these Conditions."

I cannot see anywhere where it specifically allows staff to waive or change the conditions.

 

[plymothian]

Where?

All I can see is : "Please note that neither a Train Company’s staff nor a Licenced Retailer’s staff have the authority to waive or change these Conditions unless they are specifically allowed to within these Conditions."

I cannot see anywhere where it specifically allows staff to waive or change the conditions.

He's quoting section 9.1 of Travelling without a valid ticket, but missing out the rest of section 9.

The clincher is actually in the red box of section 9, which refers you to the code of practice (by the way that link doesn't exist!), it is in the code of practice that discretion is specifically mentioned.

Staff engaged in the checking of tickets and enforcement of revenue protection are able to exercise discretion in accordance with the duties that they are required to carry out.

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/static/documents/content/Ticket_Irregularities_Code_of_Practice.pdf

Note:

This document is not intended to create legally binding obligations between train operating companies and should
be binding in honour only.

 

[AlterEgo]

Where?

All I can see is : "Please note that neither a Train Company’s staff nor a Licenced Retailer’s staff have the authority to waive or change these Conditions unless they are specifically allowed to within these Conditions."

I cannot see anywhere where it specifically allows staff to waive or change the conditions.

I agree that staff cannot waive or change the Conditions.

But, read the Conditions first to see what they say! There is no Condition which says you MUST or WILL be charged for a new ticket/reported for prosecution. It simply outlines what the train companies are *entitled* to do under the law. The choice of language is quite deliberate. It is not a compunction for agents of a TOC to do anything. It simply says "the TOC has the right to do this".

When a TM decides to accept an invalid ticket they are not waiving or changing that Condition at all. Do you see?

(The red boxes are not Conditions but exist to provide context or guidance)

 

[Hellfire]

There is a difference between the discretion being at the control of the TM, and the TM denying they have any discretion -



Now that may just be the wording the OP has given to what they were told, but there is a HUGE difference between telling someone they have considered the circumstances and have decided not to exercise discretion and telling someone no matter what the circumstances they do not have the power to do anything else.

No, it's not the wording I have given to what I was told, I am quoting him virtually verbatim