Not PC on LM

[Starmill]

I seem to recall a thread started by you where you hadnt allowed the minimum connection time from a replacement bus, missed your booked train, were then (correctly) refused access to a Northern train (with your TPE only ticket) and got in a right hissy fit when your error was pointed out to you!

... yes, which sits firmly in the 'controversy about trains' category!

This thread has got nothing to do with ethics (isnt that over Cambridge way?) and everything to do with people tasking a light hearted joke way to seriously.

Ethics are "the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions" - which, frankly, is exactly what this thread is about.

 

[meridian2]

This thread has got nothing to do with ethics (isnt that over Cambridge way?) and everything to do with people tasking a light hearted joke way to seriously.

An excellent post and brilliantly summed up in that last suffix, (which is over Brighton way BTW) :roll:

 

[Tetchytyke]

How did I know they were gypsies? I think it is a little bit obvious to be quite honest

Is it? I live in London and don't know that the people begging are gypsies.

Is not the term gypsies describing a lifestyle rather than a race, particularly as there are English gypsies, Irish gypsies etc. etc. therefore I'm not sure it could be described as racism, a misuse of the word which seems to happen frequently in this country these days

This thread has got nothing to do with ethics (isnt that over Cambridge way?) and everything to do with people tasking a light hearted joke way to seriously.

Gypsies and Irish Travellers are recognised as a race of people under the Equality Act.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla...psies_and_travellers__race_discrimination.htm

So yes, it is racism.

Substitute any other racial description, lets say "black", for "gypsy" and the comment- regardless of the intent- would see the guard getting very familiar with his P45.

I'm not saying he should be sacked, when it is clearly ignorance not malice, but making racist comments on a PA system is not a "light hearted joke".

 

[TheKnightWho]

This thread has got nothing to do with ethics (isnt that over Cambridge way?) and everything to do with people tasking a light hearted joke way to seriously.

... do you know what ethics is? That's exactly what people's problems are with this.

And only one person said he should be sacked. That's a bit of a strawman you're putting up there against the many people who still had a problem with it.

 

[Greenback]

I had a problem with what was said, but I certainly don't want anyone sacked!

 

[Johnuk123]

According to what I've read on other sites people know this bloke, he's a guard who was off duty and is a Shrewsbury fan who was on his way back from the Wolves game.
He was slightly the worse for wear and travelled in the guards cabin where he made his announcement from.
It is official policy to make the pickpocket announcement but he added the gypsy bit himself.

His direct manager was going to slap his wrists but after the papers got hold of it it was escalated to the top

London Midland have only acted since the story made the papers, he's now suspended and faces likely dismissal.

So some on here will be pleased.

 

[TheKnightWho]

According to what I've read on other sites people know this bloke, he's a guard who was off duty and is a Shrewsbury fan who was on his way back from the Wolves game.
He was slightly the worse for wear and travelled in the guards cabin where he made his announcement from.
It is official policy to make the pickpocket announcement but he added the gypsy bit himself.

His direct manager was going to slap his wrists but after the papers got hold of it it was escalated to the top

London Midland have only acted since the story made the papers, he's now suspended and faces likely dismissal.

So some on here will be pleased.

Except not, as has been repeatedly stated. Arguing that he was in the right because it's wrong to dismiss him an incredibly stupid argument.

 

[Johnuk123]

I hope he is fired, and prosecuted. I'd also like for his name to be published, to obviate the risk of him ever getting another job that involves dealing with people.

Must have read this wrong then.

 

[Greenback]

There was more to this than we thought. If the guard was off duty and under the influence, he certainly had no business making an announcement. It's a bit different to a guard merely making an error of judgement.

 

[Oswyntail]

Why doesn't the announcer warn the normal passengers about the drunken, violent football supporters?.....

So. You don't think someone should generalise about the gypsy community but you are perfectly OK in generalising about football supporters. Right Oh

... a Shrewsbury fan who was on his way back from the Wolves game.
He was slightly the worse for wear and travelled in the guards cabin where he made his announcement from.....

I did find the above sequence somewhat ironic.
The lesson we should all be learning here is that we are all responsible for our own actions, and that they might have consequences beyond what we imagine. If we all bore that in mind, the world would be a lot better place.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Must have read this wrong then.

Which, as has been repeatedly stated, is not supported by anyone else in this thread. But yes, if it makes you feel better then you keep believing that anyone who is remotely annoyed about this sort of thing is just crazy and wants to ruin honest, hard-working people's lives.

 

[Johnuk123]

Which, as has been repeatedly stated, is not supported by anyone else in this thread. But yes, if it makes you feel better then you keep believing that anyone who is remotely annoyed about this sort of thing is just crazy and wants to ruin honest, hard-working people's lives.

I said some on here will be pleased and some will.

 

[Tetchytyke]

London Midland have only acted since the story made the papers, he's now suspended and faces likely dismissal.

So some on here will be pleased.

Pleased? Hardly. I'd rather that people didn't go around making racist comments on public address systems in the first place.

The fact that he was drunk and in the guard's cab only makes it worse, because now there are safety implications as well as the stupid announcement.

I assume THAT is the real reason why he may be sacked.

 

[LowLevel]

Must as I find I am quite indifferent to your sentiment regarding the actual comment, Arctic Troll, I'm inclined to agree that being in any train cab, front or rear, while under the influence is a very silly thing to be doing and would likely have these consequences in any case.

 

[meridian2]

Except not, as has been repeatedly stated. Arguing that he was in the right because it's wrong to dismiss him an incredibly stupid argument.

Except appeals are far from 'incredibly stupid', however I doubt one would be listened to. Saddened to here of the developments to this story though and there was clearly more to this than we thought,
I do think some people's recourse to hyperbole in this thread has dragged it on for far longer than it was necessary.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Except appeals are far from 'incredibly stupid', however I doubt one would be listened to. Saddened to here of the developments to this story though and there was clearly more to this than we thought,
I do think some people's recourse to hyperbole in this thread has dragged it on for far longer than it was necessary.

That isn't what I said, though. He's not right just because there's an overreaction to what he did.

 

[meridian2]

That isn't what I said, though. He's not right just because there's an overreaction to what he did.

Who perceived this as an 'overreaction' though? As I said before, it becomes subjective and glib when it comes to analysing what he meant and I'm not going to repeat myself. There are now other factors involved which have pushed this beyond a debate over semantics, possibly because of the unnecessary desire by our media to turn everything exceptional into public knowledge, which has no doubt left LM little choice but to resort to damage limitation.

 

[khib70]

I seem to recall a thread started by you where you hadnt allowed the minimum connection time from a replacement bus, missed your booked train, were then (correctly) refused access to a Northern train (with your TPE only ticket) and got in a right hissy fit when your error was pointed out to you!

People in glass houses etc!

This thread has got nothing to do with ethics (isnt that over Cambridge way?) and everything to do with people tasking a light hearted joke way to seriously.

...So a drunken off duty staff member commandeering the PA system on a busy train isn't a big problem, in your book. And that's totally disregarding what he actually said.

I'd have hoped that even you, as chief spokesman for the "rail staff, right or wrong" brigade, would accept that this guy was well out of order, regardless of the content of the announcement. I would think that most rail staff would see the safety issues attached to a drunk, unauthorised person making use of a safety-critical system.

And I know that, to their huge credit, off duty rail staff have unhesitatingly pitched in to help in emergencies. But I don't think that's what happened here, was it?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Who perceived this as an 'overreaction' though? As I said before, it becomes subjective and glib when it comes to analysing what he meant and I'm not going to repeat myself. There are now other factors involved which have pushed this beyond a debate over semantics, possibly because of the unnecessary desire by our media to turn everything exceptional into public knowledge, which has no doubt left LM little choice but to resort to damage limitation.

Quite a lot of people, judging by this thread. And there's quite a bit more to it than semantics, which is why people get so het up over the issue.

 

[Zoidberg]

...So a drunken off duty staff member commandeering the PA system on a busy train isn't a big problem, in your book. And that's totally disregarding what he actually said.

...

Cheap shot!

455's post which you quote was made at 0150 today.

The information about the announcer being an off-duty rail employee who'd enjoyed a refreshment or two was not introduced to this thread until 1404.

On that basis, how can you feel able to take 455 to task, in that manner, for his comments?

 

[47802]

Is it? I live in London and don't know that the people begging are gypsies.





Gypsies and Irish Travellers are recognised as a race of people under the Equality Act.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla...psies_and_travellers__race_discrimination.htm

So yes, it is racism.

Substitute any other racial description, lets say "black", for "gypsy" and the comment- regardless of the intent- would see the guard getting very familiar with his P45.

I'm not saying he should be sacked, when it is clearly ignorance not malice, but making racist comments on a PA system is not a "light hearted joke".

if that's the case the laws an ass then yes you could argue its a derogatory term against a minority but I do not regard that as racism and gypsy isn't a race, its a bit like someone who is anti a particular religion they are frequently described as racist.

Anyway I'm sorry to hear that the Guard may lose his Job.

 

[SPADTrap]

Cheap shot!

455's post which you quote was made at 0150 today.

The information about the announcer being an off-duty rail employee who'd enjoyed a refreshment or two was not introduced to this thread until 1404.

On that basis, how can you feel able to take 455 to task, in that manner, for his comments?

Because he didn't check that, tunnel vision.

 

[Oswyntail]

if that's the case the laws an ass then yes you could argue its a derogatory term against a minority but I do not regard that as racism and gypsy isn't a race, its a bit like someone who is anti a particular religion they are frequently described as racist.

So are you trying to imply that it is OK to use discriminatory language and abuse against a distinctive minority so long as it isn't distinctive because of race? Such as Emos? Far better, IMHO, not to pre-judge anyone, on any basis

Anyway I'm sorry to hear that the Guard may lose his Job.

As are we all. But

• He was drunk (or, if too squeamish to put it like that, he'd "enjoyed a refreshment or two":roll in contravention of the bylaws
• He had broken into a part of the train to which he was not authorised, which is barred to the public on safety grounds (I hope - otherwise he has got a colleague into trouble).
• He had used railway equipment that he was not authorised to use, equipment that is intended, at least in part, for safety-related use
• He had made an unauthorised announcement that was offensive, and potentially illegal, apparently (to passengers) as an authorised announcement on behalf of his employers
• In doing so he damaged the reputation of his employers.

Now I would not presume to suggest what level of sanction was appropriate. But all those actions were his own, undertaken as a responsible adult. It is not in any way a justification simply to point out that he was drunk. So please, if anyone is suggesting he is being harshly treated, could they indicate which of these actions does not amount to a serious disciplinary offence.

 

[Greenback]

if that's the case the laws an ass then yes you could argue its a derogatory term against a minority but I do not regard that as racism and gypsy isn't a race, its a bit like someone who is anti a particular religion they are frequently described as racist.

It doesn't matter whether you personally regard it as racism, the law says it is. There are some laws that I don't agree with too, but that doesn't mean my opinion is correct.

So are you trying to imply that it is OK to use discriminatory language and abuse against a distinctive minority so long as it isn't distinctive because of race? Such as Emos? Far better, IMHO, not to pre-judge anyone, on any basis

Absolutely. Don't judge people on stereotypes, judge them for who they are and what they do.

Now I would not presume to suggest what level of sanction was appropriate. But all those actions were his own, undertaken as a responsible adult. It is not in any way a justification simply to point out that he was drunk. So please, if anyone is suggesting he is being harshly treated, could they indicate which of these actions does not amount to a serious disciplinary offence.

I think that the fact that the guard was not on duty, and had been drinking, means that the matter is a different kettle of fish to initial reports.

It's quite possible that the TOC will be treating this as gross misconduct. I wouldn't be surprised or critical if they did.

 

[455driver]

Cheap shot!

455's post which you quote was made at 0150 today.

The information about the announcer being an off-duty rail employee who'd enjoyed a refreshment or two was not introduced to this thread until 1404.

On that basis, how can you feel able to take 455 to task, in that manner, for his comments?

Nothing more than I would expect from quite a few members on here at the moment, but I am not going to lose any sleep (or even take much notice) of some muppet trying to score points, I have give my crystal balla polish as it obviously isnt working right!

I am quite vocal on here so expect to be taken to task occasionally, thats what a debate is all about, but some people wont debate they just want to force everyone to share their opinion, which simply isnt possible.

Was this person in the right, no of course not, the comment was in bad taste at the least but as for it being newsworthy? its just a cheap shot at the railways.

Its like the old favourite-
An Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman walk into a Pub, the landlord looks at them and says "is this some kind of joke"!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Because he didn't check that, tunnel vision.

I looked in Buriton tunnel but it wasnt in there!

 

[Altnabreac]

So to sum this thread up:

Man makes racist comment - bad
Man makes racist comment publicly while at work - bad, disciplinary action likely
Posters (and possibly man) don't realise comment is racist as they are not aware of ethnic/racial aspect of gypsy heritage. - fair enough everyone knows now though.
Man makes racist comment publicly while drunk at workplace and in area he shouldn't be in - very bad - severe disciplinary action / dismissal likely

Is there anything else to say?

 

[BravoGolfMike]

Since LM were made aware of this incident some time after it took place, how can anyone say for sure "He was drunk"? He wasn't breathalysed therefore it seems a bit unfair if he is done for being intoxicated.

 

[Oswyntail]

Since LM were made aware of this incident some time after it took place, how can anyone say for sure "He was drunk"? He wasn't breathalysed therefore it seems a bit unfair if he is done for being intoxicated.

Fair enough - but doing all this while sober does not exactly sound acceptable either

 

[BravoGolfMike]

But the presence or otherwise of alcohol could be the difference between dismissal and retraining. I would suspect that had it just been a slightly misguided comment from an on duty guard then a slap on the wrists and maybe a diversity awareness course would be the outcome.

There is nothing wrong with being off duty and in the back cab per se, indeed it is useful if someone can do the announcements for the guard. Good customer service etc. However, if alcohol had indeed been consumed then it was an extraordinarily daft thing to do, indeed we often discuss whether off duty staff who have had a drink should assist in an incident or just quietly ignore it.

Since whoever it was will not have been properly examined or checked for alcohol then it would, in my view, be extremely unfair and probably good grounds for an appeal or tribunal should dismissal occur.

Fortunately todays news is tomorrows chip paper so once the faux outrage has died down then LM may be able to quietly deal with this in a sensible, non reactionary way.

 

[transmanche]

Fortunately todays news is tomorrows chip paper so once the faux outrage has died down then LM may be able to quietly deal with this in a sensible, non reactionary way.

^ This.