Wonderfully offensive article in the Torygraph

[Flamingo]

Of course. Unfortunately that's the nature of customer service. I can't believe you have to ask! I'm genuinely shocked.

You need to get out more I see you didn't answer, though.

Absolutely. There's good and bad, and nobody (on these boards at least: I can't speak for newspapers) would disagree. That doesn't excuse the bad though, and the TOCs should do more to enforce the customer service ethos in all their staff.

FGW have recently put all their customer-facing staff through a two day course, at god-knows what cost. Whilst it raised some good points, and I think might have been an eye-opener to thise of my less customer-focused colleagues as to how being nice would make their day easier as well (in the long run), it gave lots of scenarios about how passengers would behave badly because they were having a bad day (a lot of them for reasons entirely unconnected with the railway), and that as staff we must accept this. This I disagreed with, as it
1. re-enforced the attitude that bad behaviour is acceptable, and your posts confirm this attitude - passengers can be "sarky" as you put it (rude, is how I'd put it) with impunity, staff must never be.
2. if somebody is having a bad day, they can take it out on whoever they encounter that happens to be in a uniform, and that person must take it from them, as to do otherwise is "poor customer service".

I've had scum being dragged down platforms in handcuffs by police after assaulting me, shouting that they were going to write to customer services and have my job. That is the logical extension of your argument - the customer can do ANYTHING they want, and it can be justified as staff reacting to it is "poor customer service".

 

[scotsman]

Some of the comments on that article scare me

"Wouldn't it be better if efficiency rather than safety were staff's motivation?"

 

[4SRKT]

You need to get out more I see you didn't answer, though.

FGW have recently put all their customer-facing staff through a two day course, at god-knows what cost. Whilst it raised some good points, and I think might have been an eye-opener to thise of my less customer-focused colleagues as to how being nice would make their day easier as well (in the long run), it gave lots of scenarios about how passengers would behave badly because they were having a bad day (a lot of them for reasons entirely unconnected with the railway), and that as staff we must accept this. This I disagreed with, as it
1. re-enforced the attitude that bad behaviour is acceptable, and your posts confirm this attitude - passengers can be "sarky" as you put it (rude, is how I'd put it) with impunity, staff must never be.
2. if somebody is having a bad day, they can take it out on whoever they encounter that happens to be in a uniform, and that person must take it from them, as to do otherwise is "poor customer service".



I've had scum being dragged down platforms in handcuffs by police after assaulting me, shouting that they were going to write to customer services and have my job. That is the logical extension of your argument - the customer can do ANYTHING they want, and it can be justified as staff reacting to it is "poor customer service".

Not at all. I wrote in an earlier post that if someone is threatening or assaults staff that is totally different as the law has then been broken and they deserve everything they get (except perhaps being shot on the spot as OldTimer appears to relish). Do please read everything people post. I am very sympathetic to railway staff (or indeed any staff in customer facing positions: I wouldn't want to work in A&E for all the tea in China), as I can see that violence is an ever present risk. However, if a customer is not assaulting you (and I would guess most of them don't), then unfortunately dealing with arseholes is just part of your job. One you doubtless don't like, but that that's just unfortunate. You simply may not react angrily to non-threatening arseholery as that's totally unprofessional and won't get you, your colleagues or your organisation anywhere. It is not up to you to disagree with FGW or whoever's policy on customer service, or launch a one-man campaign to stamp out bad behaviour in society by behaving like the rude people we all despise: you have to be better than them. I accept that you are probably sometimes in a no-win situation, but that's tough and is not unique to the railways.

Maybe you should think more on the probably large numbers of exemplary passengers you have on your trains. People like me for example

 

[sheff1]

On a Hull Trains service once, sitting in the middle of nowhere with the engine off, I asked a passing stewardess if she knew when we might be moving - as I had a connecting bus to get. The response was she didn't have a clue, and I'd need to ask the guard. When I pointed out the guard was conspicuous by his absence she told me that if I didn't like the delay I could always get out and walk!

Interesting. When some passengers got out and walked near Royston the other week they were berated on here as idiots with no consideration for others.

What if someone on this Hull Train had got out and walked. Would they be idiots for following the advice of staff, or is getting out an acceptable option if you are delayed on Hull Trains ?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Interesting. When some passengers got out and walked near Royston the other week they were berated on here as idiots with no consideration for others.

What if someone on this Hull Train had got out and walked. Would they be idiots for following the advice of staff, or is getting out an acceptable option if you are delayed on Hull Trains ?

Or they could probably recognise the (inappropriate in that situation) joke?

 

[Old Timer]

Not at all. I wrote in an earlier post that if someone is threatening or assaults staff that is totally different as the law has then been broken and they deserve everything they get (except perhaps being shot on the spot as OldTimer appears to relish). Do please read everything people post. I am very sympathetic to railway staff (or indeed any staff in customer facing positions: I wouldn't want to work in A&E for all the tea in China), as I can see that violence is an ever present risk. However, if a customer is not assaulting you (and I would guess most of them don't), then unfortunately dealing with arseholes is just part of your job. One you doubtless don't like, but that that's just unfortunate. You simply may not react angrily to non-threatening arseholery as that's totally unprofessional and won't get you, your colleagues or your organisation anywhere. It is not up to you to disagree with FGW or whoever's policy on customer service, or launch a one-man campaign to stamp out bad behaviour in society by behaving like the rude people we all despise: you have to be better than them. I accept that you are probably sometimes in a no-win situation, but that's tough and is not unique to the railways.

Maybe you should think more on the probably large numbers of exemplary passengers you have on your trains. People like me for example

Spoken like a true backroom "customer service warrior".

I suspect you would change your attitude rather more rapidly than most after a few weeks/months on the ground.

Quite easy to comment from the comfort of a desk job with "customers" on the end of a phone, rather harder to have some moronic passenger who is on the moral highground and is one of those many who take the view that Railway staff are provided for him to take out his anger by kicking, thumping, scratching, spitting, etc. Of course HE is always a good honest law abiding citizen whereas the member of staff is the one in the wrong.

By the way, you would be well advised to READ post before critically advising others to do so. I posted some facts on a situation, not sure how I suddenly come to "relish" the thought.

 

[Flamingo]

Not at all. I wrote in an earlier post that if someone is threatening or assaults staff that is totally different as the law has then been broken and they deserve everything they get (except perhaps being shot on the spot as OldTimer appears to relish). Do please read everything people post. I am very sympathetic to railway staff (or indeed any staff in customer facing positions: I wouldn't want to work in A&E for all the tea in China), as I can see that violence is an ever present risk. However, if a customer is not assaulting you (and I would guess most of them don't), then unfortunately dealing with arseholes is just part of your job. One you doubtless don't like, but that that's just unfortunate. You simply may not react angrily to non-threatening arseholery as that's totally unprofessional and won't get you, your colleagues or your organisation anywhere. It is not up to you to disagree with FGW or whoever's policy on customer service, or launch a one-man campaign to stamp out bad behaviour in society by behaving like the rude people we all despise: you have to be better than them. I accept that you are probably sometimes in a no-win situation, but that's tough and is not unique to the railways.

Maybe you should think more on the probably large numbers of exemplary passengers you have on your trains. People like me for example

I do think of the large number of exemplary passengers on my trains, which is the reason why, in times of disruption for example, I won't hide from the unreasonable ones in the rear cab - the unreasonable ones have a habit of behaving in an equally rude and unthinking way to their fellow passengers, and need someone to tell them their behaviour is unacceptable. I know they may not like this, as the complaints hit the mat, but are frequently backed up by comments by other passengers saying how well I dealt with a difficult situation.

The rest of your post does not live up to your professed sympathy for "customer facing staff", however.
1. You state that any behaviour short of assault is acceptable and goes with the job
2. According to you, reacting in any manner other than servile acquiescence to this behaviour is incorrect
3. Patronising me by saying it "is not up to me" to do so, is probably is letting the mask slip a bit too much in terms of your real attitude, as opposed to the expressed sympathy. I'm afraid I don't know my place - what is it? And what is yours?

By the way, as you brought it up, I have worked in A&E before now (for many years) in several different countries. There I was dealing with people who were sick, injured, in pain, frightened, ill, and their relatives, in an unfamiliar situation and environment (and the vast majority managed to behave in a civil manner). None of this applies to the majority of passengers who I deal with on the railway, and especially those whose behaviour you are trying to excuse.

I know I use anecdotes to illustrate situations, but many years ago, I was dealing with an old lady in hospital, who was a total bitch. Another patient in the ward commented what a nasty person she was, and I tried to make excuses for her behaviour, to be told "I'm just as old as her, and just as sick as her. A nasty person is a nasty person, full stop".

It was a valuable lesson.

 

[O L Leigh]

"The train will be leaving at 13.35 sir" (plucking a time out of the air).
"Why couldn't you have bloody well said that in the first place" and off he walks down the platform.

Indeed, why couldn't I?

Because the day you do pluck a time out of the air just to pacify a punter you will be proved wrong and he will only come back twice as angry once your imaginary departure time has come and gone.

This is one of the Golden Rules I use in times of disruption because I know what manner of aggravation it can cause. I have a fairly good idea that something like, say, a fatality will see a delay of at least one hour and perhaps significantly more but I would never give my passengers any indication that something will happen by x time or in y minutes.

It does annoy me when people say we should be more helpful and proactive, and have already outlined why this is a virtually impossible task. You can't make empty promises just so a passenger can be satisfied, because sometimes the RIGHT answer is to give NO answer.

O L Leigh

 

[mallard]

I don't work for the railways, but I have once or twice been mistaken for somebody who does. Now, clearly it's not my job to help customers find the lift or the train to Liverpool, etc, but if I can, I help anyway (while making it clear that I don't work for the railway and that what I say can't be relied upon 100%). If I, as a paying passenger, can do this, then anyone employed by the railway should at least do the same. It's simple common courtesy.

Now, if somebody is being unreasonable, then by all means step away from them ignore them and move on to the next customer, etc. Don't abandon all the passengers because of one bad apple. Don't make jokes ("get out and walk") or claim that the passenger is "lucky" there is a service at all. Neither of these are in any way helpful and are wholly unprofessional. If you have no information say so, but if you have anything at all, relay it - even if the passenger doesn't know what a "signal failure" is, knowing that the problem has been identified is reassuring. The more accurate and specific the information the better.

My personal pet-hate when it comes to railway customer service are the darned automated "Expected at" times that just add the delay at the last reporting point to the timetabled time. In the vast majority of cases, the "expected at" time keeps increasing with each report - how can a passenger put any confidence in a time that just keeps increasing? Surely these systems can be made a little more intelligent - taking information from other trains that have recently travelled the route would be helpful as would working out a worst-case arrival time and stating "Expected before nn:nn".

During the recent disruption I was waiting for a connection with exactly this issue, so I asked one of the staff on the platform. He was able to tell me the last station that the train had passed and give me an estimate of when it was likely to arrive, based on the performance of other trains that day. Both of these should be present on the screens when a train is delayed. At least knowing that the train is in fact moving would be helpful to stranded passengers. At unmanned stations these screens are all the passengers have, they should be as helpful as possible.

 

[Clip]

So to sum this thread up in a way you have

some people who think he is an arrogant tory toff,privately educated and therefore anything he says against the railways is wrong and what a ******* him and everyone who was privately educated is and people should only do the jobs they are paid for. I. E check tickets

Or you have the people who think, hold on he has a point - good customer service is what every employees on the railway should excel at as its the one thing that will bring people back to the rails and show us in good light.


And i do encourage all my staff from the cleaners to the RPIs to at least know what to do when someone asks them a question. And they do too because they understand

 

[Flamingo]

Because the day you do pluck a time out of the air just to pacify a punter you will be proved wrong and he will only come back twice as angry once your imaginary departure time has come and gone.

This is one of the Golden Rules I use in times of disruption because I know what manner of aggravation it can cause. I have a fairly good idea that something like, say, a fatality will see a delay of at least one hour and perhaps significantly more but I would never give my passengers any indication that something will happen by x time or in y minutes.

It does annoy me when people say we should be more helpful and proactive, and have already outlined why this is a virtually impossible task. You can't make empty promises just so a passenger can be satisfied, because sometimes the RIGHT answer is to give NO answer.

O L Leigh

Did you read the rest of the post?

The gentleman in question was not prepared to accept the answer he was given several times. Sometimes, some people are too stupid (and I use the word advisedly) to accept any answer other than the one they want to hear. They consider someone telling them anything other than what they want to hear to be "rude" and "thuggish" and "unhelpful" and "providing poor customer service".

Unfortunately, there are times when the best way of keeping the customer happy is to lie. It's what is done to a toddler having a tantrum, and works equally well on an adult behaving the same way.

 

[ph1985]

tory toff or not, he holds the same view as the majority of the paying public. every time the railways collapse around us the staff seem to be issued with the standard response of 'i dont know. look at the departure boards' etc.

it may be the backroom staff doing this, but if you're the one in the uniform on the station concourse noone cares whose fault it is, its you they want answers from. ive never understood the policy of sticking your head in the sand when things go badly but the railways and airlines are terrible for it.

 

[Striker]

Totally agree - didn't mention passengers as they didn't seem to appear in the posts to date - same as I didn't mention footballers, Strictly contestants and The Royal Family

([Dis]Like your use of "Inconvenient Truth" - that links me to those "deniers" who don't believe all they hear about man-made global warming. Of course we all know that "deniers" are those who sided with the Nazis)

It hasn't been proven that "climate change" (can't call it global warming any more as it's not actually getting warmer) is man made. It doesn't stop politicians using it as an excuse to increase taxes though does it? :roll:

 

[142094]

It hasn't been proven that "climate change" (can't call it global warming any more as it's not actually getting warmer) is man made. It doesn't stop politicians using it as an excuse to increase taxes though does it? :roll:

Who hasn't proven that "climate change" is happening, and also who says "it's not actually getting warmer"?

 

[ph1985]

Who hasn't proven that "climate change" is happening, and also who says "it's not actually getting warmer"?

NASA, for one. Their satellites have been seeing cooling in the area between the surface and about 5-10 miles up since they were first launched in the 70s, whilst surface measurements have been going slightly up. Google the TIROS satellites if you want to see for yourself.

 

[Metroland]

it may be the backroom staff doing this, but if you're the one in the uniform on the station concourse noone cares whose fault it is, its you they want answers from. ive never understood the policy of sticking your head in the sand when things go badly but the railways and airlines are terrible for it.

Possibly because in in the real world, at times, nobody knows what is going on. For example, during a points failure, is it possible to know how long it takes for the S&T to drive out to a remote location through busy traffic? Only to an exent. During a train failure, it can be impossible to know how long a fault takes to rectify.

When things get really out of course, it can be a juggling match between controllers and signallers as to the extent of how the timetable might run, based on trains having to be in certain places at certain time, fuel, train crew arrangements (taking into account breaks required by law), platform dispatch, general platforming, so on and so forth.

I dare say the airlines have similar problems with crews, slots, laws, weather and so on. Sometimes you cannot give answers to 'how long is a peice of string?'.

It's not that information cannot be improved, there is always room for improvement. But then you have to be careful what you tell passengers in any case.

For example, I was caught on a train near Leicester the other week. We stood for 15 minutes and there was an annoucement 'We have stopped due to a tresspass incident'. In the end, we stood there for over 1 hour. I sat and puzzled myself, what sort of a tresspass incident it was. Perhaps it involved a thrid party like the police, who for operational reasons are not always forthcoming with info? Perhaps it involved a thief or vandalism of railway equipment?

Either way we got no more information.

It was only when I got to Leciester it became apparent that it was an attempted suicide. I figured, the train crew were fairly coy as not to alarm passengers, the more politcally corrent thing is to say 'a tresspass'. Either way, it seemed out of the control of the railway authorities, and involved the police trying to talk someone down.

So there's a very good example of a real world incident, where nobody knows, possibly even the police, just how long something is going to go on for. And all you can do is tell passengers 'I don't know', rather than guess and cause problems later.

When you add several thousand passengers into the equation it gets impossibly complex. Believe me, I was just as frustrated as everyone else, and as it turned out it completely screwed my day up. But all you can do is try to understand, some passengers are less charitable and may take their frustrations out verbally and even physically on the first person they see in uniform even though it is completely outside their control and may result in them being late back home themselves and so on.

As it all things in life, it's never quite so easy as people think, and there is often a mismatch between our aspirations and what we think should happen, to what is *possible*, what we'd like to hear and what we are told.

 

[mallard]

Possibly because in in the real world, at times, nobody knows what is going on. For example, during a points failure, is it possible to know how long it takes for the S&T to drive out to a remote location through busy traffic? Only to an exent. During a train failure, it can be impossible to know how long a fault takes to rectify.

Then tell the passengers that you don't know what's going on! Most of us are reasonable and will understand that you're more-or-less in the same boat as us. The worst possible thing for the customer in a situation such as this is for all staff to disappear and abandon us.

If you have any information, not matter how technical or inconsequential, relay it. It's reasurring to at least know that somebody is dealing with the problem.

It's not that information cannot be improved, there is always room for improvement. But then you have to be careful what you tell passengers in any case.

For example, I was caught on a train near Leicester the other week. We stood for 15 minutes and there was an annoucement 'We have stopped due to a tresspass incident'. In the end, we stood there for over 1 hour. I sat and puzzled myself, what sort of a tresspass incident it was. Perhaps it involved a thrid party like the police, who for operational reasons are not always forthcoming with info? Perhaps it involved a thief or vandalism of railway equipment?

Either way we got no more information.

You did get some information - that it was a "trespass incident". This is good, however, the use of generic phrases is bad. A better announcement would be something like "We apologise for the delay to this service, this is due to a trespass incident. British Transport Police are in attendance and hopefully we will be on our way soon. I will update you with any further information when I receive it. Passengers with onward connections to catch should consult one of the on-board team.".

As a passenger, an announcement of this type would be much more helpful and reassuring than any automated or scripted announcement. Knowing that the BTP are involved tells me that something is being done.

Time estimates are useful, but if you explain things well passengers will understand that they can't always be given.

So there's a very good example of a real world incident, where nobody knows, possibly even the police, just how long something is going to go on for. And all you can do is tell passengers 'I don't know', rather than guess and cause problems later.

You seem to be under the impression that if you can't give a timescale the best thing to do is say nothing at all. This isn't true. Any information you can give is reassuring to passengers, no matter how technical or inconsequential.

 

[Clip]

So there's a very good example of a real world incident, where nobody knows, possibly even the police, just how long something is going to go on for. And all you can do is tell passengers 'I don't know', rather than guess and cause problems later.
.

Thats rubbish - by telling people you don't know you are clearly not doing your job. A simple way is to tell them that the situation has not changed and the Police are trying to deal with it as quickly as possible.

By doing that or something similar you are letting people know that you appear to know more then what is going on and that keeps them a little sweeter.

Yes it may be a bit of spin on the fact that you do not know anymore but it works.

 

[chuckles1066]

He has some valid points, and some of the responses on here don't seem to understand what customer service is about. The customer has paid for a service. If it can't be delivered, the railway should expain why, and what is being done about it.

The customer is NOT interested in the problems of the service provider. They just wan't what they paid for. That's called customer service.

For a crew to walk away from a train when there is no crew there to releive them, and the passengers to be told nothing but left to stew, is absolutely unforgivable.

Can you imageine going into a restaurant, the waiter takes your order and your money, then goes off shift. For some reason his replacement hasn't turned up. You are just left sitting there, with NO explanation as to where your food is, or when it might come. And no-one in the restaurant seems able to tell you or to do anything about it.


That is exactly the same as the situation the writer describes! It seems that despite privatisation, some workers on the railway still seem to think the system is there to serve them, not to provide a service for passengers.

Passengers don't expect everything to be 100% perfect any more than restaurant customers do; things fail, on railways and in kitchens (but staff should never walkm out leaving customers . But if things go wrong, they do expect the staff to do everything they can to sort it out, and most importantly - to keep them informed of what is happening!

A spot-on post, very well put.

I guess it depends a lot on what you *expect* when you hand over your hard-earned cash in exchange for that ticket.

Me? I'm philosophical. I can put up with cold carriages, I can put up with having to stand up for the duration of my journey, I can put up with trains running late.

What I can't put up with is one train an hour from Patchway and not being able to get on that train because it's short-formed.

That situation (not a one-off, either) isn't giving me a "viable alternative" to road transport, do we all agree? And do we all agree that the rail network needs to provide a "viable alternative" to road transport if it is to survive?

It really isn't that difficult, trust me. Most commuters are fairly realistic and open-minded in their expectations of what they are going to encounter when they get on a train.

But they have to be able to get on that train in the first place.

 

[Metroland]

Thats rubbish - by telling people you don't know you are clearly not doing your job. A simple way is to tell them that the situation has not changed and the Police are trying to deal with it as quickly as possible.

By doing that or something similar you are letting people know that you appear to know more then what is going on and that keeps them a little sweeter.

Yes it may be a bit of spin on the fact that you do not know anymore but it works.

I'm not saying hold information back, I'm saying at times, you may not, as a member of operating staff actually know the answer yourself, especially in terms of timescale. In the case above we were told that the police were in attendence, but it doesn't really put any more meat on the bones. Normally with tresspass you can caution by, but it depends again on many factors.

Because the reality is, real time operation of any transport system, especially the railways and airlines, is a team effort. It is influenced by third parties, and by lots of individuals making real time very complex decisions and lots of complex factors, which are dependent upon all sorts of values., some known, some not known.

Armchair operators may think they know better, but it's because they lack the experience and knowledge and think the answers are simplier than they really are.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Then tell the passengers that you don't know what's going on! Most of us are reasonable and will understand that you're more-or-less in the same boat as us. The worst possible thing for the customer in a situation such as this is for all staff to disappear and abandon us.

If you have any information, not matter how technical or inconsequential, relay it. It's reasurring to at least know that somebody is dealing with the problem.



You did get some information - that it was a "trespass incident". This is good, however, the use of generic phrases is bad. A better announcement would be something like "We apologise for the delay to this service, this is due to a trespass incident. British Transport Police are in attendance and hopefully we will be on our way soon. I will update you with any further information when I receive it. Passengers with onward connections to catch should consult one of the on-board team.".

As a passenger, an announcement of this type would be much more helpful and reassuring than any automated or scripted announcement. Knowing that the BTP are involved tells me that something is being done.

Time estimates are useful, but if you explain things well passengers will understand that they can't always be given.



You seem to be under the impression that if you can't give a timescale the best thing to do is say nothing at all. This isn't true. Any information you can give is reassuring to passengers, no matter how technical or inconsequential.

All that information WAS given, I shortened the tale because the point was (as former operating staff) even I couldn't undertstand why a tresspass incident was taking so long, until it became apparent it was a suicide attempt, and I only found this out from a passenger at Leicester later. I'm saying I can understand why passengers were not told this info.

Even so, technical information may not be of any use. Most rail enthusiats do not know how to deal with a track circuit failure or why non working phones at a crossing should be an issue, or why running a train off planned path can cause problems. For example.

With real time operations, the situation much be regarded as 'developing', and few if any know exactly how it will play out. The point is, as a passenger you will want to know:

1. How long the delay will be.

2. The reason for the delay, in non-technical understandable language.

3. What is being down to rectify the problem.

4. How will this affect my particular journey?

5. Do I need to change trains or go to another platform, or make other arrangements and have other arrangements being made for me?

Staff should be passing on what they know, but it is not always possible, because a situation is developing. Developing being the key word.

This can cause, understandably frustration and the accusation that people are not doing their job properly.

 

[Flamingo]

I make a generic announcement "The answer to any question beginning "What time..." is "I don't know". I'll be passing through the train to answer any other questions you may have shortly."

 

[sheff1]

All that information WAS given, I shortened the tale because the point was (as former operating staff) even I couldn't undertstand why a tresspass incident was taking so long, until it became apparent it was a suicide attempt, and I only found this out from a passenger at Leicester later. I'm saying I can understand why passengers were not told this info.

As you say, you did not understand why it was taking so long and only found out later. But the passenger at Leicester had obviously been told, so why weren't the people on the train told it was a suicide attempt which the BTP were attempting to deal with. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would then understand that resolution would likely take longer than if it was a chav being chased off the line.
Tell people the full story, no matter how unpalatable, and they will be happier than being left in the dark

 

[mallard]

Even so, technical information may not be of any use. Most rail enthusiats do not know how to deal with a track circuit failure or why non working phones at a crossing should be an issue, or why running a train off planned path can cause problems.

Even if the passengers don't understand the technical issue, the fact that it has been identified is a reassurance. This is why I believe that any and all information should be relayed. Even if it requires extra explanation. Just don't use technical information to "fob off" passengers!

When problems occur, passengers want reassurance that everything that can be done is being done and then, if possible, a timeframe for the delay.

And besides, you never know if there is an enthusiast or two among the delayed passengers who would both understand and appreciate the extra detail!

 

[ph1985]

Possibly because in in the real world, at times, nobody knows what is going on. For example, during a points failure, is it possible to know how long it takes for the S&T to drive out to a remote location through busy traffic? Only to an exent. During a train failure, it can be impossible to know how long a fault takes to rectify.

In the real world you tell people as much as you know. In my job for instance i have to draw on experience and give an estimate even if i dont have a clue. 'i dont know' would never be good enough. Other countries can manage to communicate with their passengers with the same problems we have, but then they dont treat their customers with the same disdain British TOCs do.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying 'there is an incident ahead that requires the BTP on scene. theres not a lot else we know but it may be worth looking at alternative transport as we could be here quite some time waiting for them to finish'. People respond to openness, rather than the rude attitude of the London Midland assistant at Euston last week whose answer for everything to everyone who asked was 'look at the departure boards'.

 

[Metroland]

We agree on all the above. Here is the but:

Say for example an incident, let's say a bridge bash, has taken place. Trains are trapped, and are held at protecting signals. Passengers are told a bridge examiner is on the way, but it's unknown exactly when he/she will arrive. As it turns out, the examiner gets stuck in traffic and takes longer. When he arrives, the bridge is in such a poor condition that it requires an engineer. So, there is more delay.

The police also get involved, as it turns out the lorry has many defects and the driver comes from outside the UK with insufficient paperwork.

In the meantime back workings are getting delayed because train crew are trapped on the trains. Controllers are weighing up, whether it is worth getting out replacement buses. Station areas become congested as trains begin to become trapped in stations, and train crew/signallers are working out whether to detrain and shunt the stock, but that depends on having enough drivers in place to do this, and others are trapped by the blockage. More trains arrive, and Drivers are leaving trains in platforms with no driver to replace them.

The engineer arrives at the line and considers whether to pass the line for 5mph. In the end, he clears it and replacement buses are cancelled.

The first train is cautioned through, but the bridge condition gets worse. Operating staff decide to put in single line working. In order to get the staff, 2 ground frame operators are required, a pilotman and several handsignalmen (some for the level crossings en-route).

After 30 minutes of frantic calls, sufficient passed staff are unable to be found, so diversions are set up, and bus replacement services are once again ordered for the intermediate stations. Due to the number of people trapped, buses are unlikely to be sufficient in any case, so passengers are directed to other line and passengers are asked not to travel or delay their journey.

The contract bus provider has by now, sent his coaches out on a schools contract. So even more need to be brought from outside the area, and taxis ordered. Already 20,000 people have been caught on standing trains, and another 15,000-20,000 people are at stations waiting for trains. They all want information, for their needs, and station staff are bombared with questions, each taking many minutes to deal with.

So what can we conclude:

1) the situation is ever changing, and what seemed like a good plan initially, changes. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

2) passengers have individual needs, and the logistics of dealing with them all can be challenging, especially if they are disabled, elderly, have specific travel needs (like advanced tickets or booked seats) or are aggressive.

3) usually the information comes from signallers and in some cases controllers, which is relayed back to passengers, but those staff are busy speaking to other staff, dealing with out of course working, and changing platforms to minmise delay and filling in necessary paperwork.

4) It is impossible to give accurate delay or platform information, insomuch it may change again.

5) It is not always possible to source qualified staff

6) It is not always possible to provide replacement transport, at least straight away

7) There might be information that could alarm passengers


That's just a really simple example of what can go wrong, the root cause being outside the railway's control. Usually everything is done to help passengers, but there are going to be people that will not be satisfied with the response, including management who very often call an inquiry to find out indivdual actions and try and learn from each incident, which tend to be dynamic, complex, different, and require extra resources, or involve third parties.

Some incidents are multilayered. For example, a bridge bash, a suicide and a track circuit or train failed. Sometimes incidents happen 20-50 miles alway, which then affect the resouces or delays of trains already caught up in trouble.

Most enthusiats have a very simplistic notion of the way the railway really works, for members of the general public their knowledge is minimal at best, the same as it would be for airlines, hospitals, councils, the police, so on and so forth.

It's very easy to conclude in newspaper articles people are not doing their job properly, when you have little knowledge of what you are talking about, or haven't experience the reality of the situation.

Again, it's not to say things cannot be improved, they always can.

The trouble with the railways, is people always think they know how to run them better than the people that do, based on many simplistic notions. And people are very quick to pass judgement. They simply do not understand the logistics for the most part.

Of course passengers should be given information and the railways should be customer focussed, we can all agree with that. We all agree staff hiding, unless there is a specific threat, is not acceptable.

But what many will never understand (or don't want to understand) is the reality and the multi-layered problem solving that needs to take place before any information is given, all with seconds or minutes to decide, involving many people with sometimes mind-boggling logistics.

 

[CosherB]

Just to show what can be done in difficult situations in terms of customer service, I'll give you an example that happened to my wife and me this summer.

We were at St Pancras on the last morning of a few days visit to London, as my wife wanted to see the refurbished Eurostar station. We were booked on the 11:30 Wrexham & Shopshire for a leasurly 1st class return to Cheshire, via Shewesbury so with plenty of time in hand we wandered down to the Circle line for a train to Marylebone via Baker St. There were obviously problems, as the platform was crowded and the train indicator showed no information.

Eventually a train came in and we boarded. The doors stayed open. After a couple of minutes the driver came on the PA "There is a broken down train 3 stations ahead. This train and all other trains that are in stations will not be moving until the breakdown is cleared, which could take some time. I'd advise anyone who can to get off here and make other transport arrangements".

So we got off, and walked to Marylebone.

Hats off to that driver. How much better to know the situation than to sit there expecting the doors to close and the train to go at any minute. Once we knew it'd be there for a while, it was easy to make the descision to get off while we could. And hats of to LUL for not moving the train down the tunnel and stopping it there, holding us all captive!

That's a situation where the railway failed, the staff didn't know how long it would take to clear the line, yet that driver displayed excellent customer service in simply telling what the situation was, and giving us an option to get off while we could.

So for good customer service you don't have to have a perfect railway where nothing fails, and you don't need to know how long a failure will last. Just tell the passengers what you DO know!

 

[Metroland]

All fine and dandy. But imagine if you a guard at a large station like Birmingham New Street. There are lots of delays because of an incident.

Person A asks the guard where the Crewe train is going from, but the guard doesn't know any more than the passenger and directs the person along the plaform to find the station staff.

The staff have a scrum of people around them, asking questions. The station staff, also do not know which platform some trains are going from, they might have a rough notion of delay from the CIS boards, but this is changing, and because of that do not know whether the train may even be cancelled. Other passengers have missed their connection with advanced tickets or needs help with luggage, and staff may have to direct passenger A to someone else. Some passengers are getting very angry and spit, verbally abuse or threaten staff, so some of them lock themselves away until other staff arrive or the police.

Now some people might regard that as poor customer service or staff witholding information, the point I am trying to make it is far to simplistic to state staff are ignoring passengers or witholding information, when they may not know themselves or they are overwelmed by the situation.

It is lazy journalism to state the obvious, and not actually investigate or give a fair hearing to the other side, or explain the other side, which is what I am trying to do to give a more rounded appreciation of why things are a little more complex than they might first seem.

To much of this goes on in the media, painting railway staff in bad light, or pushing the notion of trains are always late or unsafe without the full story.

Much of this is to sell newspapers, the airlines, the police, social services among many others get similar treatment. Yes, the railways are not 100% perfect, but few, if any organisations are. That is not an excuse, that is the reality that sometimes not everyone is 100% satisfied, despite everyone's best efforts on the day.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I will show my hand so to speak, and say that the London Midland person at Euston was right to point the people towards the departure boards. They will have the most up-to-date information, and get it quicker than the station staff will find out. Top marks to him for ingenuity.

 

[ph1985]

I will show my hand so to speak, and say that the London Midland person at Euston was right to point the people towards the departure boards. They will have the most up-to-date information, and get it quicker than the station staff will find out. Top marks to him for ingenuity.

Last week all departures were showing as cancelled or delayed and trains were leaving in some cases hours behind schedule. When someone asks you 'im booked on the 1800 service that is cancelled, what trains can i catch to my destination?' - 'look at the departure board' followed by looking away is not an acceptable response.

All fine and dandy. But imagine if you a guard at a large station like Birmingham New Street. There are lots of delays because of an incident.

Person A asks the guard where the Crewe train is going from, but the guard doesn't know any more than the passenger and directs the person along the plaform to find the station staff.

unfortunately a lot of it stems down the origin of that article...poor management in the back rooms. the guard should know more than the passenger. the TOC should have procedures in place to let him/her know the very latest information to relay to passengers. but because theyre so poorly run, they dont. as bad as airlines can be, they leave rail operators dead in the water on that front.

 

[Metroland]

Possibly it is bad management 'in the back rooms', but without a proper investigation this is speculative. That's my issue.

I think we can all agree a journalists job is to convey information to people. The problem with much of the British media is they are viewspapers, they grind axes and tell people half the story.

When pushing information on train accidents they don't tell people cars are less safe, when telling is all that trains are late, they don't tell us airlines and buses are worse. When things go wrong, they are quick to point fingers to sell newspapers, but very rarely give both sides of the story which leaves even reasonably knowledgable people with a distorted view. They push politics views and products, they sitch people and organisations they don't like.

Here is a article that rants about what we all want in life: Good service, fairness, good fortune, with half the tale. It's dead easy to push these notions, because it's what we all want. What is harder, is to give the full picture.

Now some people on this forum want to work for the railways, if they do, you will find just how demoralising and annoying this is. I know for fact the police, social services, airline workers, and many other people feel the same way. Many immigrant, and minority groups find the same thing. This is why I object so much to rags like the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Express and even the broadsheets. Yes even the Guardian at times.

Just look at the way enthusiats are regarded, do you seriously regard that as a fair picture?

Like it or not, the railways are are pet subject among many other pets.

Surprisingly, all railway companies, and most staff want to give a good service. Because without a good, safe, service the railways die.

Yes, I agree there are issues with striking workers at times, and possibly some staff forget the importance of who pay's their wages. Yes improvements can always be made. Yes, sometimes things go wrong and mistakes are made.

I don't dispute the importance of holding people to account, what I do dispute is the way it's done. The media in this country are are damn disgrace, while there is some good journalism, most of it is shoddy and pushes open doors. This article is a classic 'the railways are crap, let's have a rant', without actually even going to find out just why things went wrong on that day.