Staff down tools at Manchester Victoria following assault 19/12/2019

[156420]

I think that the word "assault" should be dropped here. No one is alleging that any longer, not even the union is saying that happened.

Verbally abused? Maybe. "Verbally abused" in the same sense that wouldn't risk an ordinary member of the public getting accused of wasting police time if was they who called the cops about it? If only we could feel certain of that. We should be able to feel certain of that.

We really are in trouble then, if this incident is being is downplayed like you are talking about.

If we now work in an industry were it is should be seen as acceptable and “brushed off” for someone shouting in your face, then that is scary.

Haven’t got a problem at all with people complaining and being assertive when it comes to complaints about the train service, you only have to look around at the UK rail network to see that’s its definitely justified.

But what happened last night, just isn’t normal behaviour from the member of the public. And the member of staff was rightly justified in their actions.

 

[Mathew S]

I think that the word "assault" should be dropped here. No one is alleging that any longer, not even the union is saying that happened.

Verbally abused? Maybe. "Verbally abused" in the same sense that wouldn't risk an ordinary member of the public getting accused of wasting police time if was they who called the cops about it? If only we could feel certain of that. We should be able to feel certain of that.

Verbal abuse is assault, plain and simple.

If it's true about BTP 'declining' to respond to an incident of threatening behaviour against a staff member which, it seems, caused staff to feel unsafe, then the reason for that decision needs to be investigated. There may have been reasons why officers weren't able to immediately be there - e.g. dealing with another, more serious, incident. But, whatever the reason, if that's what happened then changes are needed to make sure it doesn't happen again.

 

[Ianno87]

With the wonder of hindsight, the 1992 rebuild was undoubtedly a bad idea.

The pre-rebuild atation was a huge, sprawling, uncoordinated mess, no doubt more exposed to the weather in parts, dingy subways and probably lots of remote hidden away corners. Would be a personal safety nightmare.

I think the real problem was the 92-94 rebuild being sized right for passenger use at the time, but inadequate for Victoria's current usage. Thinks like a secondary footbridge would be useful now. It copes just about OK when the train service is moving, but doesn't take much for passengers to start backing up.

 

[gazzaa2]

Train travel in and out of Manchester is horrific at the moment. TPE and Northern are completely unfit for purpose at the moment. The timetables are screwed, the staffing levels are screwed, the rail infrastructure is screwed. The Castlefield corridor is a nightmare.

Whoever is responsible for the 2018 time table changes with the Ordsall changes as well as scrapping the electrification of Manchester-Leeds and kicking 15 and 16 at Piccaddilly into the long grass has caused the bulk of the problems.

The other reality is Manchester has grown massively as a city. Manchester and Salford Quays are huge commercial hubs, there's high rise flats popping up on every corner and you've got a 19th century rail infrastructure. You've got people travelling from all over the north west to get to Manchester for work every day and the infrastructure can't cope. The current problems are the result of a stagnant railway amidst massive passenger growth.

 

[gazzaa2]

There is a line between a justifiably angry complaint and abuse, though. Violence is never acceptable, nor is personal abuse nor swearing. But in some quarters an assertive complaint is seen as abuse, particularly if the person making it is perhaps large and threatening looking.

I had a member of staff at Luton Airport accuse me of abusing them when making a complaint about how lost luggage was being dealt with - they threatened to call security and everything. However, one of the managers nearby had listened to the whole thing and near enough told them not to be stupid (I forget the wording but that was strongly implied), sent them into the back to calm down and dealt with the complaint (which wasn't aggressive, though I was annoyed) to my satisfaction, which is what that member of staff should have done in the first place.

The railways are an absolute mess at the moment, particularly around this region, and customers are increasingly irate.

There's no defence for abusive customers, they should be removed from the station or arrested, but part of the problem is passengers often aren't treated like customers. It's a bit like going to a football match, you can be treated like a problem rather than a paying customer.

More problems could be quickly resolved with better customer service skills. A lot of staff either aren't customer service trained or are hung out to dry by such a dreadful service from the rail companies. The way staff speak to passengers is terrible at times.

 

[Pro-rata]

A couple of nuggets from the MEN follow up piece.

First, it would be easy to take away the impression that what happened was some kind of wildcat protest. RMT saying that was not the case, and that what was done was in line with Worksafe procedures, i.e. in line with what those staff correctly should have done in the circumstances.

Secondly, that as well as the main altercation with the injured baby carrying passenger, a witness claims "he did shout but so did the majority of us..." - was it all down to the specific altercation or was there a feeling that a wider loss of passenger control was imminent.

I wasn't there, so don't know. I've seen plenty of platform staff dealing with frustrated customers at MCV, so clearly something felt different to the staff this time and a judgement call was taken.

 

[randyrippley]

Its worth restating the only eyewitness report we have of the incident

Witness on moment she saw man 'shout' at staff in Manchester Victoria
A witness has spoken of what she saw happen at Manchester Victoria this evening that led to the staff walkout.

She said all trains were suspended after a man shouted at a member of staff.

“The man had just recently had an operation on his foot and he had a 10 week old baby.

“He was placed on three wrong trains and then when the right one came, he was on the wrong platform, so when he asked a member of staff to help him they said get a job.

“He went up to one of the workers and told them what had happened and what the delay was.

“All he said was he wasn’t happy, he has a newborn baby and has been passed from pillar to post.

“He did shout but so did the majority of us who have been waiting to get out of the station.”

She said staff then decided to stop working and British Transport Police were called to the incident.

No assault
No claims of threats
No suggestion that BTP declined to attend

And to be honest, I think most people in his position would have resorted to shouting in an attempt to get help

 

[Monkeyhead]

A lad I work with was out in Leeds with us on our Christmas party, lives in Rochdale I think. Left the party at 9.30, and arrived home at 1.17am. I'm not surprised tempers are getting frayed on all sides.

 

[cuccir]

It's worth reminding ourselves of the law here. The CPS's guidelines on assault prosecution state:

An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force

Note here that there need not be intention to use unlawful force, or indeed actual use of it: a person can be guilty of assault if they recklessly cause another to apprehend the use of force. In other words, shouting and screaming in someone's face can still be assault. Whether or not a crime has been committed would therefore depend as to whether or not it could be deemed in court that the accuser was reasonable in feeling threatened, and that the behaviour of the accused could be described as reckless, among other factors.

In some ways, though, I'm not sure it matters whether or not a crime was actually committed here. The incident reveals an underlying frustration and anger felt by both staff and passengers at the failures to provide anything like a reliable service on much of the Northern and TPE networks around Manchester and the north-west in particular (noting that both oeprators have issues elsewhere on their network, as well (Northern in particular) less badly affected areas). Ultimately, blame has to be put jointly at the feet of Northern, TPE, the DfT and Network Rail, and it is up to them to fix this.

The mistake would be to chalk this up to either unreasonably frustrated commuters, or militant staff. Neither are the problem here.

 

[Spartacus]

Its worth restating the only eyewitness report we have of the incident


No assault
No claims of threats
No suggestion that BTP declined to attend

And to be honest, I think most people in his position would have resorted to shouting in an attempt to get help

Because one witness and things in the paper are ALWAYS the most reliable source of info on the railways...... The official stuff I'm looking at and info from people working at the time of the incident contradicts all your statements.

Any threats to the safety of anyone need to be taken very seriously when made in the vicinity of sometimes hundreds of tonnes of moving machinery. Elsewhere last night someone ended up on the tracks and lost a couple of fingers, very very lucky it wasn't worse.

 

[AlterEgo]

We really are in trouble then, if this incident is being is downplayed like you are talking about.

If we now work in an industry were it is should be seen as acceptable and “brushed off” for someone shouting in your face, then that is scary.

Haven’t got a problem at all with people complaining and being assertive when it comes to complaints about the train service, you only have to look around at the UK rail network to see that’s its definitely justified.

But what happened last night, just isn’t normal behaviour from the member of the public. And the member of staff was rightly justified in their actions.

If someone was shouted out then it isn’t downplaying things to say, you know, they got shouted at. Or, at a stretch, verbally abused.

The common definition of assault is someone actually making physical contact. The tendency for unions to class someone being mean or rude or loud to a member of staff as an assault is an internal practice which doesn’t land with most people.

 

[randyrippley]

Because one witness and things in the paper are ALWAYS the most reliable source of info on the railways...... The official stuff I'm looking at and info from people working at the time of the incident contradicts all your statements.

Any threats to the safety of anyone need to be taken very seriously when made in the vicinity of sometimes hundreds of tonnes of moving machinery. Elsewhere last night someone ended up on the tracks and lost a couple of fingers, very very lucky it wasn't worse.

As we're not privy to your "official stuff" we only have the press report to inform us, if you know better then please enlighten us. Or is it being hidden from us?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Verbal abuse is classed as assault on the railway, and it can depend upon the severity. I was once called a "dirty queer" amongst other unpleasant names and said chap was met in by BTP, put up against a wall and arrested, charged, and prosecuted in court less than 4 weeks later.

Just because something is verbal doesn't mean it won't affect staff and their safe ability to work.

Though it depends what it is. The above example is homophobic abuse and certainly justifies Police attendance (though I can see them prioritising it down over an immediate physical threat if they are busy, as indeed they should). But often these cases aren't actually abuse, they are simply someone making an angry complaint.

"You're an F idiot" = abuse
"This service is F unacceptable" = a bit raw, but to be expected given that that statement is completely accurate

Dealing with the latter all day every day must be demoralising, but really the only way to stop that is going to be to improve the service, not to start arresting passengers for it. As I've said I would be in support of a strike against Northern demanding a workable emergency timetable to be implemented, but that doesn't seem to be the tone of what went on.

 

[Mathew S]

If someone was shouted out then it isn’t downplaying things to say, you know, they got shouted at. Or, at a stretch, verbally abused.

The common definition of assault is someone actually making physical contact. The tendency for unions to class someone being mean or rude or loud to a member of staff as an assault is an internal practice which doesn’t land with most people.

Legally, "An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force." That is what it says in the CPS charging guidelines. The clear implication of that is that no physical contact is required for the offence of assault to have been committed, merely a reasonable belief on the part of the victim that they were about to be subjected to 'unlawful force'.

I agree that being rude or loud isn't assault (subject to the above), and I agree that the language used by certain trade unions is often unhelpful (because it's so hyperbolic when dealing with even the smallest of issues that when something big really does happen it's a 'boy who cried wolf' situation), but if staff genuinely felt unsafe then is getting out of the situation not the sensible thing to do?

 

[Bletchleyite]

With the wonder of hindsight, the 1992 rebuild was undoubtedly a bad idea.

Certainly - though it was fine in 1992 on the background of a declining railway that people genuinely thought would be half closed by now, not one which would experience unprecedented growth as car use becomes increasingly deprecated.

Of course, that means the plan needs to change. The refurb put a posh roof on, but apart from that it didn't do anything significant to improve the operation of the station, and indeed in some ways (the barriers in their present position) made it much, much worse.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But, whatever the reason, if that's what happened then changes are needed to make sure it doesn't happen again.

There is one, and only one, thing that will achieve that - fix the service.

 

[jumble]

Places where people are often in considerable pain and anguish. I also don't like them in those places; they show poor handling of the mental health of ill people who have often received very bad news. The NHS is clueless at mental health and it shows.


They are certainly (other than the latter) places that have considerable problems that could quite understandably lead to people being upset, and where those places generally handle that matter very poorly. The NHS is woeful at it in particular and the lack of prioritisation of mental health calls it out as one of the worst.

?

Going a bit off topic I suspect neither of you have any real world experience of what actually happens in the Doctors' surgeries
I will pass on your kind observations to my close relative who went to work last week, is trying her best with a big workload and was on her own and was threatened by a patient who clearly had mental health issues.

She said she felt like walking out and never coming back and frankly with the general lack of appreciation I don't blame her.

 

[mike57]

Physical assaults can never be tolerated, but when does verbal communication expressing dis-satisfaction at a failure to provide basic information that they need to complete their journey become verbal assault? It's a fine line which ultimately will have to be decided in court no doubt. My personal view is the line is when it is 'off topic' e.g. calling names.

I travel through Manchester Victoria once or twice a week and it's a shambles. Last minute platform changes, departure boards keep going offline, overcrowded platforms, cancellations and late running meaning people needing advice on completing journey, no toilets without going through the barriers, lack of seating for waiting passengers. No doubt a few more could be added to the list. Given these deficiencies tempers will fray. On my journies the staff look harassed. Not a nice working environment. My solution, go back to running all TPE service bar Newcastle - Liverpool service into Manchester Piccadilly via Guide Bridge, forget the Ordsal chord or use it for local services until the Csstlefield corridor is sorted. It would also ease the Platform 13/14 problems at Manchester Piccadilly, and Manchester Piccadilly is better able to cope with the volume of passengers that the TPE services generate. Probably politically unacceptable, but it's the only obvious short to medium term solution to my mind. It worked reasonably well for many years up until the changes last year.

 

[Mathew S]

As we're not privy to your "official stuff" we only have the press report to inform us, if you know better then please enlighten us. Or is it being hidden from us?

Oh dear, some people see conspiracy everywhere don't they. I don't believe there's any reason to think that anything is being hidden from anyone - those who need to know the details will know, and that's the way it should be. The people who work on the railway who come on this forum do so in their own spare time, and it's not fair to expect them to share confidential, internal information.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Going a bit off topic I suspect neither of you have any real world experience of what actually happens in the Doctors' surgeries
I will pass on your kind observations to my close relative who went to work last week, is trying her best with a big workload and was on her own and was threatened by a patient who clearly had mental health issues.

She said she felt like walking out and never coming back and frankly with the general lack of appreciation I don't blame her.

Can I ask that, before making passive-aggressive replies like the above, that you re-read what I said which criticises the NHS for poor mental health provision (i.e. there should be staff present trained to deal properly with such situations) and does not criticise surgeries as they are?

 

[Mathew S]

There is one, and only one, thing that will achieve that - fix the service.

Yep, agreed - even if you and I wouldn't see eye to eye, I suspect, about the best way to achieve that.

What I was getting at, though, was the allegation of BTP failing to attend the incident last night and that, if that is indeed what happened, there's a need to investigate and try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Physical assaults can never be tolerated, but when does verbal communication expressing dis-satisfaction at a failure to provide basic information that they need to complete their journey become verbal assault? It's a fine line which ultimately will have to be decided in court no doubt. My personal view is the line is when it is 'off topic' e.g. calling names.

That's how I see it, too. It becomes abuse when it becomes personal[1]. Swearing about the service is not personal and staff really should not take it personally - call centre staff manage to handle this just fine. Where staff can and should withdraw is if they feel physically threatened (which is where call centre staff have it easy as they can just hang up). But it seems that a good many staff are either poorly trained in de-escalation of this kind, or are simply in the wrong job and should instead be doing something non-customer-facing.

[1] I do not accept the term "verbal assault" - "verbal abuse" is a better term. It is not helpful to dilute the term "assault" by changing its conventional meaning. These other offences have perfectly acceptable existing terms for them.

 

[randyrippley]

Oh dear, some people see conspiracy everywhere don't they. I don't believe there's any reason to think that anything is being hidden from anyone - those who need to know the details will know, and that's the way it should be. The people who work on the railway who come on this forum do so in their own spare time, and it's not fair to expect them to share confidential, internal information.

So the victims of this removal of labour / wildcat strike aren't allowed to know the cause of last nights problem? How many tens of thousands of people looking for an answer and they aren't to be trusted with it? Where's the conspiracy?

 

[Camden]

Secondly, that as well as the main altercation with the injured baby carrying passenger, a witness claims "he did shout but so did the majority of us..." - was it all down to the specific altercation or was there a feeling that a wider loss of passenger control was imminent.

The train companies are putting on derisory services which are even worse for passengers than the rubbish they've had to put up with for well over a year, passengers who were only hanging on by a thread in the first place by the promise and hope that eventually new trains will make it all better.

Two major cities which together account for half of all rail travel in the north, with most of that lopsided to the west, are having to cope with even shorter and fewer trains than were already insufficient, plus hours of gaps between services as additional cancellations are thrown in.

And then the companies dress up a handful of people in the company logo, and put them out there to meet those passengers...

I'm pro-passenger, as you can tell, but I can well understand anyone logo'd up in that position simply thinking "f*** this" and walking off when surrounded by collective upset and anger, regardless of whether they really felt unsafe.

Additionally I do worry, based on some of the accounts, that a culture dynamic may now have emerged, where passengers and staff are growingly contemptuous of each other as a cause and effect result of the past year. When that dynamic emerges, it doesn't take much provocation on either side to result in cumulative and misdirected unreasonableness.

It's been my concern for some time that something that started getting better with such promise risked turning very sour with disruption, strikes, etc.

How things come back from that is out of the hands of the passengers, I know that much.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Additionally I do worry, based on some of the accounts, that a culture dynamic may now have emerged, where passengers and staff are equally contemptuous of each other as a cause and effect result of the past year. When that dynamic emerges, it doesn't take much provocation on either side to result in cumulative and misdirected unreasonableness.

I am on one of the anti-LNR FB groups and am generally defensive of the staff who do seem to be handling the mess rather better than the Northern staff, probably because the issues have not been going on quite as long so they haven't got quite as demoralised yet. However, quite a number on there do seem to be scapegoating them, so it should not be surprising that this is occurring.

 

[gazzaa2]

Additionally I do worry, based on some of the accounts, that a culture dynamic may now have emerged, where passengers and staff are growingly contemptuous of each other as a cause and effect result of the past year. When that dynamic emerges, it doesn't take much provocation on either side to result in cumulative and misdirected unreasonableness.

It's a perfect storm. You've also got passengers who are annoyed from early in their morning when their trains are cancelled/delayed/overcrowded and they're late for work and either get bollocked or have to stay later to make up the time. Then after finishing late they get to the platform to find their trains been cancelled. Commuters by nature are disgruntled because they've either got a day's work ahead of them, or they've just finished a day's work. Then you've got staff who've had to deal with the fall out of a shambolic rail service all day and everyone's fed up and angry.

I work 7-3's purposely to avoid the rush hour chaos.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a perfect storm. You've also got passengers who are annoyed from early in their morning when their trains are cancelled/delayed/overcrowded and they're late for work and either get bollocked or have to stay later to make up the time. Then after finishing late they get to the platform to find their trains been cancelled. Commuters by nature are disgruntled because they've either got a day's work ahead of them, or they've just finished a day's work. Then you've got staff who've had to deal with the fall out of a shambolic rail service all day and everyone's fed up and angry.

Commuters will never be happy (other than the odd one none of them want to be doing it), but they can be pragmatic about odd one-off major disruption if the basic service is decent - that is, punctual and they get a seat. LM by and large achieved that, and so they were not so much of a target for ongoing bile. Northern do not - not even close.

 

[Camden]

Nor TPE

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nor TPE

Nor LNR. Nor I hear ScotRail. It does seem we have a particularly bad bunch at the moment, and at least three of those failures (Northern, TPE, LNR) have the same root cause - overoptimistic timetabling and diagramming.

 

[Spartacus]

So the victims of this removal of labour / wildcat strike aren't allowed to know the cause of last nights problem? How many tens of thousands of people looking for an answer and they aren't to be trusted with it? Where's the conspiracy?

Want someone to post a screenshot of the control logs and lose their job? You've been told the cause numerous times by numerous people, but you don't want to believe it, you want to believe your conspiracy theory that staff walked out because they couldn't be bothered any more. Just like any conspiracy theorist no amount of evidence will be enough to convince you otherwise, as all evidence contrary to your view is considered part of the conspiracy.

If you want people to engage with you, you have to be willing to listen.