When is passenger assistance acceptable to be booked

[bussnapperwm]

Following on from the "Disabled Tanyalee Davis - more rail travel woes." Thread, it got me thinking about scenarios that could come up, and when passenger assistance is and isn't acceptable to be booked.

These cases were all created for the purpose of this thread

Case 1 - Family of two adults, two children. Travelling Worcester Foregate Street to Liverpool via Stourbridge.

Platform 1 is the allocated platform. They are taking three suitcases and one of the children is in a pushchair. It is known that there is a height difference between the train and platform edge.

Stock is 170+153 to Galton Bridge then 350/2 to Liverpool LS

Would they be eligible for passenger assistance?

Case 2 - two adults travelling Swansea to University via Hereford with 2 large cases.

One has problems with getting off certain rail stock due to balance problems and has Aspergers. He also has back problems meaning he can only walk the length of a 4×23m train without stopping.

The other suffers from asthma.

Whilst at Hereford, a platform alteration is announced because of the University service being late inbound.

Stock is 175/0 between Swansea and Hereford and 170/6 between Hereford and University.

Would they be eligible for passenger assistance.

Case 3 - lone female, mid 20s, wishing to travel Euston to Stockport.

Arm in sling after having broken shoulder. She is also in a wheelchair following being unable to use her legs.

Hypothetical stock is 390.
Would she be eligible for passenger assistance.

Final case - 54 year old couple travelling Birmingham to Walsall during rush hour.

One suffers from angina and diabetes, and uses a walking stick. The other suffers from arthritis and also uses a walking stick.

Trains end up being delayed at New Street due to electrical fault on the Wolverhampton to Birmingham line.

Stock is 323.

Would they be eligible for passenger assistance?

 

[EM2]

Yes to all of them.

 

[Bromley boy]

1 should have to pay extra for it.

Yes to the rest.

 

[causton]

1 - they could surely manage the luggage and pushchair between them, so I think it is borderline. The other ones definitely.

Working at a station that is staffed 24/7 with available staff to assist, I think better safe than sorry.

At stations where it might just be one clerk dealing with a peak time ticket office queue and an assist that really the customer could have coped with themselves, they may have a different opinion!

 

[Bletchleyite]

1. Perhaps should be available but chargeable, certainly not free[1]. It's perfectly possible for a family in that position to plan their packing to manage themselves, e.g. by one adult pulling a large family sized trolley case and perhaps a teenage child with another smaller one, or by using a combination of rucksacks and trolley cases.

Others yes.

[1] I have no issues with the provision of chargeable porterage service to anyone who wants it provided it covers its costs.

 

[LAX54]

Of course once upon a time stations had what were called 'Porters' for just that provision !

 

[pt_mad]

Following on from the "Disabled Tanyalee Davis - more rail travel woes." Thread, it got me thinking about scenarios that could come up, and when passenger assistance is and isn't acceptable to be booked.

These cases were all created for the purpose of this thread

Case 1 - Family of two adults, two children. Travelling Worcester Foregate Street to Liverpool via Stourbridge.

Platform 1 is the allocated platform. They are taking three suitcases and one of the children is in a pushchair. It is known that there is a height difference between the train and platform edge.

Stock is 170+153 to Galton Bridge then 350/2 to Liverpool LS

Would they be eligible for passenger assistance?

Case 2 - two adults travelling Swansea to University via Hereford with 2 large cases.

One has problems with getting off certain rail stock due to balance problems and has Aspergers. He also has back problems meaning he can only walk the length of a 4×23m train without stopping.

The other suffers from asthma.

Whilst at Hereford, a platform alteration is announced because of the University service being late inbound.

Stock is 175/0 between Swansea and Hereford and 170/6 between Hereford and University.

Would they be eligible for passenger assistance.

Case 3 - lone female, mid 20s, wishing to travel Euston to Stockport.

Arm in sling after having broken shoulder. She is also in a wheelchair following being unable to use her legs.

Hypothetical stock is 390.
Would she be eligible for passenger assistance.

Final case - 54 year old couple travelling Birmingham to Walsall during rush hour.

One suffers from angina and diabetes, and uses a walking stick. The other suffers from arthritis and also uses a walking stick.

Trains end up being delayed at New Street due to electrical fault on the Wolverhampton to Birmingham line.

Stock is 323.

Would they be eligible for passenger assistance?

All expect case 1.

Reason being, family traveling with luggage and a pushchair does not fulfill any of the categories available under the passenger assistance system.

I have known it to be offered in cases like this when phoning, but rarely and the customer has usually said the call centre were reluctant but did it as a one off.


As said in the other thread, categories available when booking passenger assistance over the phone include:

• Own permanent wheelchair user
• Own wheelchair user, XFER to seat
• Elderly
• Mobility impaired
  (and or/ walks with a stick/crutches)
• Ramp required
• Station wheelchair
• Visually Impaired
  
• Hearing Impaired
  
• Learning disability
• Mobility scooter/ramp
• Other disability
• Non disabled/other (usually says something like guidance as passenger very nervous), could say broken arm, or asthma etc etc
  'Luggage' which can usually only be booked as a combination with one of the above.

Family with cases and a pushchair does not fulfil any of the categories so wouldn't likely be able to be booked through the passenger assistance call centre.

 

[Via Bank]

Yes.

Better still - eliminate the gaps between the trains and the platform, then (1) becomes less of a problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes.

Better still - eliminate the gaps between the trains and the platform, then (1) becomes less of a problem.

The gaps aren't a great problem for this (much as I agree, and I think low floor should have become mandatory for new stock with PRM-TSI's UK implementation), it's more about being able to shift that quantity of stuff at once between whatever drops you off (taxi?) and the train. Once you reach the train you can stand by the door and load it in a bit at a time. But as I said it can be managed - you can carry a large rucksack and push a pram, for instance.

 

[underbank]

The gaps aren't a great problem for this (much as I agree, and I think low floor should have become mandatory for new stock with PRM-TSI's UK implementation), it's more about being able to shift that quantity of stuff at once between whatever drops you off (taxi?) and the train. Once you reach the train you can stand by the door and load it in a bit at a time. But as I said it can be managed - you can carry a large rucksack and push a pram, for instance.

Railways stations could always do what airports/hotels do and provide trolleys! Surely a lot cheaper than employing more staff just to carry stuff around the station.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes.

Better still - eliminate the gaps between the trains and the platform, then (1) becomes less of a problem.

Unfortunately that isn't always going to be possible at many stations, especially those on curves. For example a station I frequent a lot, Shipley, has two platforms (2 & 5) with quite severe gaps due to the angle of the curve of the platforms. And its far from alone in this respect.

Railways stations could always do what airports/hotels do and provide trolleys! Surely a lot cheaper than employing more staff just to carry stuff around the station.

So you are suggesting some form of wheeled device, capable of carrying a number of large, possibly heavy items whilst generally being relatively easy to move along, perhaps available via a small deposit from the platforms to other platforms and/or entrances & exits? Nah, it'll never catch on......

 

[Bletchleyite]

Railways stations could always do what airports/hotels do and provide trolleys! Surely a lot cheaper than employing more staff just to carry stuff around the station.

Many of them do, but by and large with trolley cases they spend most of their time sitting unused.

 

[Aictos]

All should receive help if asked, it doesn't take much and it's all about good customer service at the end of the day.

 

[AlterEgo]

All should receive help if asked, it doesn't take much and it's all about good customer service at the end of the day.

The last three examples aren't about good customer service but actually complying with the law.

The first example is not covered by the law and there isn't a limitless supply of manpower to assist capable and able bodied people who choose to travel with more than they can manage - and as others have pointed out, they can manage it themselves if they put their mind to it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The last three examples aren't about good customer service but actually complying with the law.

The first example is not covered by the law and there isn't a limitless supply of manpower to assist capable and able bodied people who choose to travel with more than they can manage - and as others have pointed out, they can manage it themselves if they put their mind to it.

Or, if profitable (or as a bare minimum covering costs) it can be offered as a paid-for service.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

I have noticed that sixpence just causes the porter to be even more surly, but half a crown usually produces a reluctant “Thanks mate” if never a smile - it takes a guinea for that to happen.

 

[Esker-pades]

Or, create a system whereby one parent hands bags from the platform to the other parent who is already on the train. I can't believe that my family is the only one to do this.

 

[Aictos]

The last three examples aren't about good customer service but actually complying with the law.

The first example is not covered by the law and there isn't a limitless supply of manpower to assist capable and able bodied people who choose to travel with more than they can manage - and as others have pointed out, they can manage it themselves if they put their mind to it.

And you fall for the oldest trick in the book and that's assuming there's nothing wrong with them healthwise, how do you know they're perfectly able to board without assistance?

One might have a bad back so can't do any lifting, it's not easy to notice as it's not like sufferers have a sign saying bad back on them as I said all ought to have assistance as end of the day it's down to common sense but at the same time you don't know if they have any medical condition that prevents them from helping themselves.

 

[DarloRich]

Surely the answer is whenever the passenger feels it is needed.

 

[Aictos]

Surely the answer is whenever the passenger feels it is needed.

Exactly, everyone's needs is different.

 

[al78]

Surely the answer is whenever the passenger feels it is needed.

That is fine, until the number of staff available to accommodate the number of passengers that feels it is needed is insufficient.

 

[AlterEgo]

And you fall for the oldest trick in the book and that's assuming there's nothing wrong with them healthwise, how do you know they're perfectly able to board without assistance?

One might have a bad back so can't do any lifting, it's not easy to notice as it's not like sufferers have a sign saying bad back on them as I said all ought to have assistance as end of the day it's down to common sense but at the same time you don't know if they have any medical condition that prevents them from helping themselves.

What are you on about?

They were hypothetical examples. If they had a medical need it would have been outlined in the example.

 

[Aictos]

What are you on about?

They were hypothetical examples. If they had a medical need it would have been outlined in the example.

I'm pointing out that example or not, you can't self judge people's needs to the extend you assume you know best, assistance if requested should be made available regardless.

 

[Robsignals]

A presumption of 'guilt' so commonly made is what gets public transport and public service in general a bad reputation. Everyone has to make a first journey and some need to take lots of luggage (don't want some left unattended while the rest is moved) so there may be supressed demand by people who would like assistance. Why not promote assistance at large stations on the basis that extra passengers will more than cover the cost of more assistance staff to everyone's benefit?

 

[AlterEgo]

I'm pointing out that example or not, you can't self judge people's needs to the extend you assume you know best, assistance if requested should be made available regardless.

Under the current regime I agree.

In reality, people who are not disabled - hidden or otherwise, elderly, frail or otherwise in medical need have no business booking it. Some able bodied people who book assistance need to understand they shouldn't be bringing more than they can manage.

There are already far too few resources to cope with people in genuine need. I've spent a long time booking thousands of assists and even longer in dealing with complaints from the fallout.

 

[EM2]

Some able bodied people who book assistance need to understand they shouldn't be bringing more than they can manage.

And some people don't have a choice
I remember dealing with a young lady who had three kids, all under four, one in a pushchair, two big suitcases and two holdalls.
While I was helping, she apologised for 'putting you to all this trouble', and when I asked how come she had so much with her, she told me that she was fleeing an abusive relationship. She'd packed everything that she could while her partner was out, and her Mum had booked tickets for them to go to her.
No disability, not elderly, not infirm, but in need of assistance.

 

[AlterEgo]

And some people don't have a choice
I remember dealing with a young lady who had three kids, all under four, one in a pushchair, two big suitcases and two holdalls.
While I was helping, she apologised for 'putting you to all this trouble', and when I asked how come she had so much with her, she told me that she was fleeing an abusive relationship. She'd packed everything that she could while her partner was out, and her Mum had booked tickets for them to go to her.
No disability, not elderly, not infirm, but in need of assistance.

...hence my use of the word "some".

 

[EM2]

...hence my use of the word "some".

But this is my point. It is not up to us to judge, because we don't know what is going on in people's lives, what hidden conditions they suffer from and what needs they might have.
I would rather people book assistance and maybe have 2% pulling a fast one, than have arbitrary criteria that say 'you can, but they can't' and have people excluded when they may need it.

 

[Aictos]

And some people don't have a choice
I remember dealing with a young lady who had three kids, all under four, one in a pushchair, two big suitcases and two holdalls.
While I was helping, she apologised for 'putting you to all this trouble', and when I asked how come she had so much with her, she told me that she was fleeing an abusive relationship. She'd packed everything that she could while her partner was out, and her Mum had booked tickets for them to go to her.
No disability, not elderly, not infirm, but in need of assistance.

Indeed, I've had a similar experience, people who need assistance ought to get it regardless.

 

[AlterEgo]

But this is my point. It is not up to us to judge, because we don't know what is going on in people's lives, what hidden conditions they suffer from and what needs they might have.
I would rather people book assistance and maybe have 2% pulling a fast one, than have arbitrary criteria that say 'you can, but they can't' and have people excluded when they may need it.

I don't object to people receiving assistance but the scheme is there to assist people with a protected characteristic. Anything else should be chargeable, because there isn't the resource to keep on the way things are.

Did the railway give the fleeing woman a free ticket or did they make money off it?