In my opinion, the train should always wait, for as long as necessary, in order to allow people who were in good time on the previously advertised platform (or main concourse if no platform was advertised, e.g. London Marylebone) to cross to the correct platform when there is a late notice platform alteration. Some people will take slightly longer than others to cross bridges, and some passengers may need to wait for lifts. It should be checked that everybody has made it over before the train can depart.
I’m afraid this is a rather blinkered viewpoint, especially in the context of extremely busy “turn up and go” type operations like Thameslink.
If a train waits for even a few minutes you will immediately end up with a queue of full and standing trains in no man’s land, with all the attendant risk of egresses being pulled etc. Safety has to come before convenience and there are very definite safety implications of holding trains outside stations unnecessarily.
If I was a passenger on a train which was on time I’d be pretty peeved if my journey was then delayed for the sake of a few stragglers. If you start holding TL trains in or near the core you will have delayed literally *thousands* of people in next to no time.
The priority always has to be to try to maintain the service for the benefit of the majority, even if this means inconveniencing a minority. Dynamic decisions like platform alterations are a means of doing this, no different to terminating trains early and skipping stops to make up time.
Arguments about DOO or platform staff are moot - this is a necessary minimum level of service. The company must take responsibility to provide whatever staff and communication systems are needed to fulfil it.
Not moot at all, there are good operational reasons underlining why it’s virtually impossible to get trains to wait in some circumstances. The fact you and others on this board are unwilling or unable to accept those facts doesn’t change them.
It’s not just you of course - but I’m always surprised by threads like this where people who are supposedly rail enthusiasts seem unable to accept matters of operational reality, when when the explanations come from people who have first hand experience.
Just look at some of the suggestions on this thread - signals being thrown back in drivers’ faces, signallers calling drivers and instructing them to wait?! The mind boggles - totally unrealistic on the modern railway.
If the platform is altered but there is no step-free access as required between the platforms, or if there is an error or miscommunication which causes the train to depart without all of its waiting passengers, ideally this should be rectified by transporting those passengers in a taxi as provided by the company, unless the next available train will get them to their final destination there more quickly than a taxi could drive. If a delay cannot be avoided, the company must pay compensation in the normal way.
Again - this is OTT - in most cases they will simply be able to wait for the next trains. Are you happy for your fares to increase to pay for taxis to ferry passengers about?!