sem34090
Member
I will admit that this has probably come up here several times before, that I don't work in the railway industry and that I probably have some pretty outdated ideas on this subject. Just thought I'd put that first.
Anyway, onward to my probably-slightly-rant-based post; Why does the British rail network of today seem to generally lack a decent (which to me tends towards 'smart') uniform for customer-facing staff (I'm excluding other staff here as their clothing does, above all, need to be as practical as possible.)? There are, of course, exceptions - Since it appeared a few years ago I have quite liked the look -but obviously cannot comment on the practicality- of the full GWR Guards' uniform (Shirt, Tie, Waistcoat, Jacket in corporate dark green with metal buttons). To me it looks suitably smart and presentable, in most cases where I've seen it. It is readily apparent that the wearer is a member of staff which can be essential. It also seems to mirror European practice, where smarter uniforms (for customer-facing roles) seem to have persisted long after they have generally seem to have vanished from the UK.
In my -obviously- limited experience of travelling in a heritage uniform to and from volunteering at my local preserved line I have also, sometimes, found myself being asked questions in preference to the actual staff. I have noticed a tendency for this amongst tourists, but certainly not only from them. Twice I have been mistaken for a TOC's inspector, once by a cleaner at a station and once by a rail replacement bus driver. I do not wear hi-vis when travelling on the rail network to try and avoid this. It seems that there is something that at least some passengers see in a smart uniform that suggests authority and professionalism - I have sometimes been asked these questions when a member of proper railway staff has been easily visible and close at hand.
Obviously times change and progress cannot be stopped in all circumstances, but I do wonder if there is a case to be made for the revival of smarter uniforms. I have heard others suggest that in past times when these uniforms also tended to give a clear guide as to what grade a person was employed at that it had practical benefits in unusual and emergency situations in that senior members of staff were easily identifiable by their uniform.
Oh and another thing - Decent materials! They would probably help a smarter uniform be more comfortable, last longer, be more practical, durable and maybe even more ethically sound than cheap polyester equivalents. A uniform can be smart and practical concurrently, but cheap materials do not tend to lend themselves well to either or both. Some of my uniform pieces are originals of pre-1964 vintage and are still able to be made presentable, and still fit for purpose too.
Others will vehemently disagree with me, I will likely vehemently disagree with others but that's generally the sign of a decent discussion! I am unlikely to be able to be convinced that polo and t-shirts are able to pass as 'smart' -personally I cannot stand either on aesthetic grounds- but I can see how in some situations they might be more practical.
Anyway, onward to my probably-slightly-rant-based post; Why does the British rail network of today seem to generally lack a decent (which to me tends towards 'smart') uniform for customer-facing staff (I'm excluding other staff here as their clothing does, above all, need to be as practical as possible.)? There are, of course, exceptions - Since it appeared a few years ago I have quite liked the look -but obviously cannot comment on the practicality- of the full GWR Guards' uniform (Shirt, Tie, Waistcoat, Jacket in corporate dark green with metal buttons). To me it looks suitably smart and presentable, in most cases where I've seen it. It is readily apparent that the wearer is a member of staff which can be essential. It also seems to mirror European practice, where smarter uniforms (for customer-facing roles) seem to have persisted long after they have generally seem to have vanished from the UK.
In my -obviously- limited experience of travelling in a heritage uniform to and from volunteering at my local preserved line I have also, sometimes, found myself being asked questions in preference to the actual staff. I have noticed a tendency for this amongst tourists, but certainly not only from them. Twice I have been mistaken for a TOC's inspector, once by a cleaner at a station and once by a rail replacement bus driver. I do not wear hi-vis when travelling on the rail network to try and avoid this. It seems that there is something that at least some passengers see in a smart uniform that suggests authority and professionalism - I have sometimes been asked these questions when a member of proper railway staff has been easily visible and close at hand.
Obviously times change and progress cannot be stopped in all circumstances, but I do wonder if there is a case to be made for the revival of smarter uniforms. I have heard others suggest that in past times when these uniforms also tended to give a clear guide as to what grade a person was employed at that it had practical benefits in unusual and emergency situations in that senior members of staff were easily identifiable by their uniform.
Oh and another thing - Decent materials! They would probably help a smarter uniform be more comfortable, last longer, be more practical, durable and maybe even more ethically sound than cheap polyester equivalents. A uniform can be smart and practical concurrently, but cheap materials do not tend to lend themselves well to either or both. Some of my uniform pieces are originals of pre-1964 vintage and are still able to be made presentable, and still fit for purpose too.
Others will vehemently disagree with me, I will likely vehemently disagree with others but that's generally the sign of a decent discussion! I am unlikely to be able to be convinced that polo and t-shirts are able to pass as 'smart' -personally I cannot stand either on aesthetic grounds- but I can see how in some situations they might be more practical.
...ours was 3 months late after the first boat from the far east sank.
.