Oxford 'not part of Chiltern network'

[Greenback]

It is for their management to properly oversee staff training issues, and if errors by frontline staff are being repeatedly raised & overlooked then it is management who should be the first to fall... only then the staff training issue can be tackled.

Exactly right. I always took the approach when I was in management outside the railway that a making an occasional mistake was only human, A gap in knowledge an be relatively easily rectified, provided that the systems to do so are in place.

It's a bit different if someone is making a lot of mistakes, has had their errors explained, has had refresher training and is either refusing to learn or is unable to. That is whne I starte dott hink about transferring a member of staff to a different role, or issuing warnings to them about their performance.

It does all require effective and interested management. My experienc einside GWr, although many years agoi now, suggested that quite a few managers were either not interested, not sufficiently competent at the job, or were too overloaded with responsibilities to be effective. Maybe little has changed?

 

[RT4038]

Indeed it is. All about the money GWR can extract from passengers through their lies, obfuscation and parsimoniousness. The front line staff are merely the tools used by management to extract (or attempt to extract) additional revenue when none is due.

That management then hides behind the excuse that the fares system is complex. Bull****. Any complexity is the fault of the operators, not the passenger.

The unwillingness to change, or to train front line staff properly, is deliberate. It's far easier to screw additional revenue out of passengers when it isn't due than to acknowledge the glaringly obvious shortcomings in the system.

I don't think this is quite right. The fares system is too complex. Everybody knows that. Clearly training staff on all its complexity is judged as too expensive The complexity is not necessarily the fault of an individual operator. I am sure that the operators would like a simplification, but on their terms. Until this happens, what incentive do operators have to get the ridiculous millions of details right? Very little!

 

[najaB]

The fares system is too complex. Everybody knows that.

The fares system is complex. However, "Is ticket A valid for boarding a train at place Y at time X heading to station Z?" is not a difficult question to find the answer to. The TOCs simply need to give their staff a way to access the answer with a penalty of some form for failing to do so.

 

[RT4038]

The fares system is complex. However, "Is ticket A valid for boarding a train at place Y at time X heading to station Z?" is not a difficult question to find the answer to. The TOCs simply need to give their staff a way to access the answer with a penalty of some form for failing to do so.

Judging by the numerous questions on this forum, 'not a difficult question' appears to be a gross understatement! When we accept this reality, and reform the fares system [inevitably with winners and losers] then there will be more likelihood of staff and passengers knowing the rules.

 

[Hadders]

Judging by the numerous questions on this forum, 'not a difficult question' appears to be a gross understatement! When we accept this reality, and reform the fares system [inevitably with winners and losers] then there will be more likelihood of staff and passengers knowing the rules.

Simplification will result in price increases. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[najaB]

Judging by the numerous questions on this forum, 'not a difficult question' appears to be a gross understatement!

It's not really. Every ticket carries a restriction code. These (in most cases) are quite simple to interpret. The problem is that too many staff are either unable or unwilling to look then up.

 

[bb21]

Simplification will result in price increases.

For some people, yes.

All depends on how much the resultant simplicity is judged to be worth.

 

[Polarbear]

The fares system is complex. However, "Is ticket A valid for boarding a train at place Y at time X heading to station Z?" is not a difficult question to find the answer to. The TOCs simply need to give their staff a way to access the answer with a penalty of some form for failing to do so.

I would have thought that supplying some smart phones, or small tablets (the computer type) so that restrictions can be looked up quickly would be a worthwhile investment.

I suspect the word "investment" is the dirty word in that sentence.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I suspect the problem is that there is little financial disincentive for TOCs to make them invest in preventing such "issues" - whether it be the definition of "off-peak" at Paddington (as discussed extensively elsewhere) or matters such as this.

Which is why I believe they should be actually penalised - financially - for such things. EVERY case where a customer is taken to task over something that is in fact valid and where that customer is disadvantaged - either by some financial penalty (from paying an unneeded fare differential or buying a fresh unnecessary ticket upwards) or by being forced to miss a valid train - ought to be met with a financial penalty on the TOC of sufficient size to make them sit up and pay attention - at least part of which should go to the customer so affected.

 

[Camden]

And yet the blurb they come out with and hoops some of these companies expect you to jump through in order to get a job with them, you'd think they were all "committed to delivering excellent customer service" with members of staff "who consistently meet our exceptionally high standards", "show a proactive and positive attitude" and "a commitment to learning and self-development".

It doesn't take any effort to be polite, and it takes minimal effort to double check you're right before declining a ticket. Compared to what we're led to believe are required competencies and behaviours for the jobs in question, there seems to be a gap between that and what is all too frequently on display to the passenger.

Could it be that less self-promotion and HR waffle (on the part of the companies) combined with finding better ways of selecting successful candidates might result in better customer service being delivered?

 

[Greenback]

I am not opposed to some sort of financial penalty system for when staff make mistakes and cause inconvenience and delay to passengers, as has been the case with bnm, for example. It will help to focus the minds of companies like GWR.

 

[bb21]

I would have thought that supplying some smart phones, or small tablets (the computer type) so that restrictions can be looked up quickly would be a worthwhile investment.

I suspect the word "investment" is the dirty word in that sentence.

To make that work, you need a full complement of staff who can understand these things themselves.

Many cannot, and no amount of training will help. I am dead serious.

 

[najaB]

To make that work, you need a full complement of staff who can understand these things themselves.

If you were going as far as issuing devices, then it would make sense to simplify the lookup process as well. I imagine a simple interface that has three fields: ticket restriction code, station and train ID. Green tick? Good to go. Red cross? Sorry, can't board. Yellow question mark? Let the passenger travel and/or refer to station manager/other senior person.

 

[causton]

If you were going as far as issuing devices, then it would make sense to simplify the lookup process as well. I imagine a simple interface that has three fields: ticket restriction code, station and train ID. Green tick? Good to go. Red cross? Sorry, can't board. Yellow question mark? Let the passenger travel and/or refer to station manager/other senior person.

The problem is the system does not have a "yellow question mark" - the computer does not know whether there are likely to be any issues and will just say Yes or No. But, for example, the Network Area Rule is not properly implemented in the systems we use and many people don't even know about it! So you have to read the whole restriction code...

 

[RT4038]

To make that work, you need a full complement of staff who can understand these things themselves.

Many cannot, and no amount of training will help. I am dead serious.

I think you are very perceptive! Most passengers travelling do so on simple tickets for which no or little dispute arises. Some posters expect TOCs to spend vast amounts of money (and yes it would be vast amounts) to train staff to cater for a relatively small percentage of passengers/revenue. This is unrealistic. No doubt the TOC view is to simplify by eliminating the anomalous and little used ticket products. The way of the world is not to attempt training to a high degree of complication, but to simplify [dumb down to some!] even if it reduces the range of products. Howls of protest on here of course.......

 

[Tetchytyke]

To make that work, you need a full complement of staff who can understand these things themselves.

Many cannot, and no amount of training will help. I am dead serious.

Then, without being unkind, one has to question whether they should be dismissed on competence grounds.

 

[TUC]

Nobody should be expected to have sufficient 'interest' in their job to spend their own time self-training beyond what their employer provides for and expects of them, in my view. It is up to the employer, always.

My point is that in many jobs one will encounter a query on an unfamiliar issue from time to time and a reasonable response by a decent member of staff is to make queries so as to answer that question well rather than just seeking to ignore it. Being able to chrck issues online is one readily available route for such a response to the type of query here.

 

[najaB]

The problem is the system does not have a "yellow question mark" - the computer does not know whether there are likely to be any issues and will just say Yes or No.

The vast majority of cases will fall into the simple yes/no category anyway.

But, for example, the Network Area Rule is not properly implemented in the systems we use and many people don't even know about it! So you have to read the whole restriction code...

If a human can read a restriction code and interpret it, then a computer should be able to as well. Could you provide an example of a restriction code/station/time/train combination that can't be boiled down to a sequence of yes/no questions?

 

[bb21]

Then, without being unkind, one has to question whether they should be dismissed on competence grounds.

Have a look at the wages some TOCs pay, and then think of a well known phrase.

 

[bb21]

I think you are very perceptive! Most passengers travelling do so on simple tickets for which no or little dispute arises. Some posters expect TOCs to spend vast amounts of money (and yes it would be vast amounts) to train staff to cater for a relatively small percentage of passengers/revenue. This is unrealistic. No doubt the TOC view is to simplify by eliminating the anomalous and little used ticket products. The way of the world is not to attempt training to a high degree of complication, but to simplify [dumb down to some!] even if it reduces the range of products. Howls of protest on here of course.......

It is a complete waste of money.

Much better to spend some real effort on really simplifying the current fares strcture.

(Yes I know people like me will lose out, but I believe it is the right thing to do.)

 

[causton]

The vast majority of cases will fall into the simple yes/no category anyway.
If a human can read a restriction code and interpret it, then a computer should be able to as well. Could you provide an example of a restriction code/station/time/train combination that can't be boiled down to a sequence of yes/no questions?

http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=WFJ&dest=YRK&ldn=1&tkt=SSR

This ticket would, as far as I am aware, be valid to take a train from Kings Cross to York at 0930 (showing anytime after 0905).

However, there is a restriction saying you are not allowed to leave Watford Junction until 0938, so the ticket will be shown "not valid" as leaving until the 0946/0959 so probably not leaving Kings Cross until 11am.

I obviously can tell them "you can go from here to London anytime" because I know the rule. The computer doesn't.

 

[najaB]

I obviously can tell them "you can go from here to London anytime" because I know the rule. The computer doesn't.

Are you throwing something else into the mix because it doesn't seem logical that a Super Off-Peak ticket would be valid from WFJ heading towards London before the morning peak is over. Where is 'the rule' that you mention documented?

 

[furlong]

Are you throwing something else into the mix because it doesn't seem logical that a Super Off-Peak ticket would be valid from WFJ heading towards London before the morning peak is over. Where is 'the rule' that you mention documented?

It's in the link already given - right-hand column - so any such long-distance journey is only subject to the "more important" of the two sets of restrictions.

Super Off-Peak tickets issued
for journeys commencing within
the Network Area to
destinations outside the
Network Area with travel via
London are valid by any train
to London to connect with
trains from London.

 

[BestWestern]

My point is that in many jobs one will encounter a query on an unfamiliar issue from time to time and a reasonable response by a decent member of staff is to make queries so as to answer that question well rather than just seeking to ignore it. Being able to chrck issues online is one readily available route for such a response to the type of query here.

Oh absolutely, i agree. The employer should be providing those means, and I agree with others that it shouldn't be difficult in this example. A quick look on an Avantix machine will tell you all that you need to know, it takes 30 seconds.

 

[najaB]

It's in the link already given - right-hand column - so any such long-distance journey is only subject to the "more important" of the two sets of restrictions.

Of course, the 'network area' rule. I never need to take advantage of it so never remember it.

So it is available to a computer and could be applied by our posited hand-held ticket verification device.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Staff only need to be "trained" to do one thing: where there is any conflict between the staff member's "knowledge" and the customer's claim - check! And the company needs to provide a means by which they can do so. There is no inherent need for every member of staff to know every applicable nuance of the fare/ticket system.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I obviously can tell them "you can go from here to London anytime" because I know the rule. The computer doesn't.

Of course it *could* if it wasn't implemented incompetently.

TBH, I think the railway (whichever TOC is responsible) should be prosecuted for fraud with regard to the wilfully incompetent sale of Anytime tickets for those services where Off Peak would be valid. That'd make them sort it.

Same for City Thameslink, where I was conned out of £1 by a wilfully[1] incompetent ticket clerk. However small the amount it is still in my eyes fraud - and Thameslink never ever bothered to reply. Shame I'm not more blessed with spare time or I'd haul them to court over it and attempt to ensure they got hit with costs as a lesson.

[1] As far as I am concerned a member of staff who, on being questioned politely by a passenger as to whether he is sure he is right, refuses point-blank to check using the materials available to him if he is or not, is wilfully incompetent.

 

[najaB]

TBH, I think the railway (whichever TOC is responsible) should be prosecuted for fraud with regard to the wilfully incompetent sale of Anytime tickets for those services where Off Peak would be valid. That'd make them sort it.

Is it fraud though? A car dealer wouldn't be committing fraud by selling an Aston Martin DB9 instead of a Ford Mondeo. (Thought I'd use a non-restaurant analogy for a change.)

 

[Tetchytyke]

Much better to spend some real effort on really simplifying the current fares strcture.

To be fair, "Is Oxford a railway station on the Chiltern Railways network" is not exactly a complicated question.

Have a look at the wages some TOCs pay, and then think of a well known phrase.

Northern Railways pay about £17,000 a year to a directly employed revenue assistant in Newcastle. That's about what a bus driver would get, and is only a few grand less than what my sister gets for managing a major high street fashion store. It's not a stellar wage but it's certainly nothing to be sniffed at.

 

[AlterEgo]

Then, without being unkind, one has to question whether they should be dismissed on competence grounds.

Agreed.

But management on the railway is so poor and risk averse. They'd rather let a crap staff member stay on, under the radar, than risk industrial action. The railway really sucks at management.