Passengers locked inside Hartlepool station

[GordonT]

Assuming that the story is correct two members of one of the passenger's family were on the platform, awaiting her arrival, and they told the contractor who ignored them (twice?) and told them to get off the platform so that he could lock up.

I made the point earlier that something didn't ring true about what allegedly went on, but that didn't gain any traction. I still think it weird that the family member allegedly didn't ring the passenger and just meekly left the station and allowed the premises to be locked up without engaging the contractor further.

There's a definite need for caution with news stories of this type where folk are locked in, locked out, left behind on a platform or whatever and appear in the process to have been treated inexplicably abominably by a member or members of staff. It may well be that everything transpired exactly as dutifully reported by the local paper with the injured parties who attempted to engage with the agency staff member being justified in their outrage and the local paper gratefully garnering something sufficiently newsworthy to put into print. On the other hand there have been instances in the past where aggrieved parties with the tacit approval of a local paper have been selective or "over-egging" in their version of what actually took place. Recognising this won't necessarily exonerate staff from a measure of culpability but it may justifiably serve to turn attention to failings at a more senior level and/or within the system or lack of system in place.

 

[Cell2025]

There's a definite need for caution with news stories of this type where folk are locked in, locked out, left behind on a platform or whatever and appear in the process to have been treated inexplicably abominably by a member or members of staff. It may well be that everything transpired exactly as dutifully reported by the local paper with the injured parties who attempted to engage with the agency staff member being justified in their outrage and the local paper gratefully garnering something sufficiently newsworthy to put into print. On the other hand there have been instances in the past where aggrieved parties with the tacit approval of a local paper have been selective or "over-egging" in their version of what actually took place. Recognising this won't necessarily exonerate staff from a measure of culpability but it may justifiably serve to turn attention to failings at a more senior level and/or within the system or lack of system in place.

As I said a few pages back any decent journalist would have asked these very simple and logical questions, but apparently this didn't happen.

I know I'm adding to the size of this thread, but it really has somewhat got out of proportion based on a major information deficit.

 

[Bantamzen]

We seem to be at risk of entering a period of almost denial of the facts, that is that passengers arrived on a late running service to find the exit gates locked, in this thread. Northern have apologised for this, so I think we can safely say it happened. Why it happened is something the railway industry has to deal with (because it has happened before), and make sure it never happens again. Backside covering is not acceptable in this situation, nor is passing the buck. Passengers should never be put in a situation like this, and that is the bottom line & it is up to the rail industry to make sure it does not because there is simply no good excuse for it.

 

[andy33gmail]

What would have happened if they had refused to leave? Surely the worst that would happen is that the security man would call the police

He could have used reasonable force to eject them?

 

[Bantamzen]

He could have used reasonable force to eject them?

"Security guard throws teenage daughters out of station waiting for their mother's late running train to arrive, in order to lock the station up leaving them and the train's passengers stranded."

Ooof, the media would have had a field day with that one! Not content knowingly locking yet to arrive passengers in, the guard should also be dragging someone's daughters onto the street instead of, oh I don't maybe using common sense and doing one of two things:

• Waiting for said late running train to arrive, and perhaps checking to see that it was indeed running late to verify what he's been told by the passenger's daughters
• If they did have to leave, firstly contact their company to advise that there was a late running train and ask what they should do (e.g. leave the station unlocked for another colleague to lock up later)

 

[davp]

He could have used reasonable force to eject them?

Would be surprised if this was the action recommended by their company's safeguarding procedure. Informing someone, for example the police, Northern or their company, would be a better option.

 

[mpthomson]

He could have used reasonable force to eject them?

it’s not clear what age the teenage daughters were but if they’re under 18 that would have been an extremely unwise thing to do from a legal and safeguarding point of view.

 

[andy33gmail]

What would have happened if they had refused to leave? Surely the worst that would happen is that the security man would call the police

He could have used reasonable force to eject them?

I think the tone got lost in translation. It’s conceivable they would have physically removed them, especially if there’s [allegedly] a lack of common sense being exercised.

I’m not recommending that he should have!

 

[norbitonflyer]

He could have used reasonable force to eject them?

Might have worked with one (but risky legally) but it would be two against one. And if the security person was male (do we actually know that?) he could lay himself open to awkward allegations

He would be more likely to call for backup (police, or possibly a colleague) - and unless they arrived very quickly* the train would have probably come anyway.

(At most 30 minutes, even if he was due to lock up immediately after the train was due, and allowing no time for any interaction before he calls for backup)

 

[nanstallon]

In what other industry (except the police) is the customer the enemy?

 

[Haywain]

In what other industry (except the police) is the customer the enemy?

In most industries the customer will be the enemy if they are somewhere that they shouldn't be.

 

[nanstallon]

In most industries the customer will be the enemy if they are somewhere that they shouldn't be.

Even though they don't want to be there?

 

[Horizon22]

In what other industry (except the police) is the customer the enemy?

The "enemy" would be in any industry where you have an entitled customer trying to circumvent policies, procedures or generally hassling staff and overall making the lives of fellow customers difficult. 99% of people are not like that.

Just like the customer / passenger is not the enemy here - nor is the metaphore really useful - and nor would 99% of staff treat them as such.

Lots of the commentary here is getting quite hypothetical.

 

[Cowley]

I think everyone has probably had their say now so we’ll call it a day.

Thanks all