Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Well at least Gareth being fired, while not nice, is leading to plenty of debate (reflection & criticism) and publicity and Euston will be in the crosshairs now.
Isnt this sort of thing and what it may/has led to called the Streisand effect?
Yes and no. His employer didn’t have any problem with what he said until Hendy complained. One person, regardless of their position, should never be able to get someone at a different company sacked just because they didn’t like something that person said.
There’s nothing necessarily to say that Dennis hadn’t already approached the relevant safety bodies and got nowhere. When that happens, what else are you supposed to do? The Post Office scandal, whilst not directly comparable, is a good example of why whistleblowers should be able to go public if the relevant bodies fail to act accordingly.
Well at least Gareth being fired, while not nice, is leading to plenty of debate (reflection & criticism) and publicity and Euston will be in the crosshairs now.
Isnt this sort of thing and what it may/has led to called the Streisand effect?
Is Gareth Dennis speaking about Euston from a position of qualification? He’s a track engineer IIRC. Surely no more qualified to assess the actual safety of the Euston pedflows than I am.
I generally find him quite annoying as I noted above - he professes to have the only possible correct view on a load of things where he's no more or less qualified than me. However, he's absolutely right on this issue - Euston is, as it is presently operated, a massive risk of a crowd based injury or death.
Is Gareth Dennis speaking about Euston from a position of qualification? He’s a track engineer IIRC. Surely no more qualified to assess the actual safety of the Euston pedflows than I am.
Even as someone who tends to like and agree with the stuff that Gareth says and listens to his podcast, I'd agree with you on that. However I think even a layman like me or you can tell that at times of severe disruption when Euston gets very busy and overcrowded - that is dangerous. It doesn't take an expert to see that.
Unfortunately free speech (which we don’t entirely have anyway) doesn’t mean speech without consequences. If you take to the media (or to social media) to make allegations against your employer, or against their clients, you will likely find yourself unemployed in short order.
The correct approach (as protected by whistleblowing legislation AIUI) is to approach the relevant safety bodies.
Regarding safety bodies, would the CIRAS reporting scheme have been appropriate in this situation?
Had enough staff and employees fed back via CIRAS their concerns, might this have compelled NR to further investigate and have protected the engineer Dennis in the process?
I’ve been keeping up with the discussion surrounding Euston but used it for the first time earlier this Summer- it does not take any specific qualifications to notice how poorly the station is run, or to make the logical conclusion that an incident will happen some day if change does not occur.
Even as someone who tends to like and agree with the stuff that Gareth says and listens to his podcast, I'd agree with you on that. However I think even a layman like me or you can tell that at times of severe disruption when Euston gets very busy and overcrowded - that is dangerous. It doesn't take an expert to see that.
Not disagreeing with you. But I’d be interested to know what someone qualified as a crowd-management / H&S expert would say. Usually when something is genuinely dangerous there are a lot of precursor incidents and near misses, so for instance if there is a genuine trampling injury risk then you’d expect there to be instances where (say) people fall over or get caught in crowd movement without being injured, due to good chance etc. I’ve been in several situations such as stadium crowds where something can be perceived as unsafe but in reality it is just very uncomfortable.
Not disagreeing with you. But I’d be interested to know what someone qualified as a crowd-management / H&S expert would say. Usually when something is genuinely dangerous there are a lot of precursor incidents and near misses, so for instance if there is a genuine trampling injury risk then you’d expect there to be instances where (say) people fall over or get caught in crowd movement without being injured, due to good chance etc. I’ve been in several situations such as stadium crowds where something can be perceived as unsafe but in reality it is just very uncomfortable.
Not disagreeing with you. But I’d be interested to know what someone qualified as a crowd-management / H&S expert would say. Usually when something is genuinely dangerous there are a lot of precursor incidents and near misses, so for instance if there is a genuine trampling injury risk then you’d expect there to be instances where (say) people fall over or get caught in crowd movement without being injured, due to good chance etc. I’ve been in several situations such as stadium crowds where something can be perceived as unsafe but in reality it is just very uncomfortable.
ORR made a site visit to Euston in September 2023 after analysing CCTV footage of three incidents of concern in the summer, which showed crowding reaching unacceptable levels and a lack of crowd control in place. While there were reports of minor injuries, the incidents were assessed to have had the potential for more serious consequences.
During this site visit, the ORR team found there was no recorded, risk-assessed plan for two of the pinch points inside the station, where crowding is most concentrated. The control measures that were in place to manage crowds were inadequate in some areas and the signage and layout to help with the control of passenger flows was also not of an acceptable standard.
Not disagreeing with you. But I’d be interested to know what someone qualified as a crowd-management / H&S expert would say. Usually when something is genuinely dangerous there are a lot of precursor incidents and near misses, so for instance if there is a genuine trampling injury risk then you’d expect there to be instances where (say) people fall over or get caught in crowd movement without being injured, due to good chance etc. I’ve been in several situations such as stadium crowds where something can be perceived as unsafe but in reality it is just very uncomfortable.
1 - I'd imagine a H&S expert would probably say you should intervene before the precusor incidents and near misses, rather than wait for them to happen or even wait for more serious things to happen.
2 - Such precursor incidents and near misses have already happened at Euston.
3 - There have already been serious questions within the industry about the safety at Euston so much so that the ORR have called out the danger. Some are claiming remedies have been put in place but lots of other people aren't convinced.
Yes and no. His employer didn’t have any problem with what he said until Hendy complained. One person, regardless of their position, should never be able to get someone at a different company sacked just because they didn’t like something that person said.
Sometimes a company is not even aware that it is happening until raised by a 3rd party. I don’t think that’s what happened in this instance but technically “one person” complaining can open up a can of worms that, yes, ultimately leads to someone being fired.
Sometimes a company is not even aware that it is happening until raised by a 3rd party. I don’t think that’s what happened in this instance but technically “one person” complaining can open up a can of worms that, yes, ultimately leads to someone being fired.
I think you'd need your head in a bucket of sand (or never to have used the station) not to know that there's a massive problem at Euston.
All they did recently was add shouty men and put some hatching down at a few pinch points. Because they try to stop you waiting on the ramps (aside from 8-11) it has actually made the main problem - the rush when the platform comes up - worse, not better.
The only fix is to stop calling trains that late. There's no need to suppress at all for regional services. Until Network Rail took over operating the CIS from Virgin Trains in the mid 2000s they weren't, and it worked just fine.
No it's not legally questionable to say you won't do business with someone because their employees are causing PR harm to your business.
Exactly the same as when I returned in an off licence aeons ago. Someone came in who were said wasn't welcome (she was often drunk and/or abusive to other customers). We refused to serve her and asked her to leave. She called the police crying racism. Police attended, told her that it's a private business and she has no absolute right to shop there and that out reasons for refusal were nothing to do with her race. She was then invited to leave or be arrested. She took the sensible option.
Wow - just coming across a this news. I contribute to Gareth's Rail Natter. He was a Labour Party member but voted Green this last time. He is also a member of CEBR - Campaign to Electrify Britain's Railway.
I think you'd need your head in a bucket of sand (or never to have used the station) not to know that there's a massive problem at Euston.
All they did recently was add shouty men and put some hatching down at a few pinch points. Because they try to stop you waiting on the ramps (aside from 8-11) it has actually made the main problem - the rush when the platform comes up - worse, not better.
The only fix is to stop calling trains that late. There's no need to suppress at all for regional services. Until Network Rail took over operating the CIS from Virgin Trains in the mid 2000s they weren't, and it worked just fine.
passenger numbers are higher than they were in the mid 2000s, mind you, but it would be a good start that's relatively quick and easy to implement. I suspect more work would be needed in addition, but we should be taking quick wins.
The real story here seems to be is that Hendy went and had someone fired in an unethical manner for stating what is a fairly uncontroversial, with both the ORR, and anyone who has ever used the station at times of disruption, agreeing. Hendy's attitude makes it clear he's unsuitable to be a government minister, in my view.
I'm not well-versed in employment law, so couldn't comment on whether SYSTRA has broken any laws, but I don't think that's even the key point here. They certainly haven't handled it well for their own reputation, I'm assuming they offered the NDA and compensation option to avoid this exact situation. I'm not surprised Gareth didn't take it up though!
I personally really like Gareth's public-facing work, probably at least in part because my political opinions mostly line up with his.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I mean, this whole mess is political, so Gareth's decision to leave labour, and work with campaigning organisations, including the campaign for level boarding, and the the campaign to electrify Britain's railways is relevant
There are serious questions for Systra here also. Not only do they look like they've allowed themselves to be pressured by unethical behaviour, they have also been caught trying to cover up their collusion with Hendy's dishonest conduct. Hopefully they'll be facing a Tribunal over this because it's unacceptable for a large public sector supplier to have let Hendy pressure them unethically.
It’s not unethical at all. It’s pretty standard in employment contracts about not bringing your employer’s business into disrepute. So it is less than wise to spout off about your employer’s customer. Dennis has done that - and has a lengthy rap sheet - so it’s not a surprise the customer isn’t happy.
It’s another example of “biting the hand that feeds you”.
Did I ever say there wasn't? In fact on multiple occasions I've agreed.
I'm talking about being an employee and using social / traditional media - and having a profile to have an impact - to make a statement about a client which has active work there on an issue which is already well known. This is about HR, employment and client-relationship issues; ultimately it doesn't matter how "right" you are on the issue.
There was a comment upthread about him being a member of the Green Party. I was replying to that by way of editing my original post which is a way of bookmarking for me. The RailNatter bit was talking more about the fact that he is quite well regarded in some sources and hence the knock-on effects of the sacking. I am sorry if you feel my post was off topic or not relevant.
The real story here seems to be is that Hendy went and had someone fired in an unethical manner for stating what is a fairly uncontroversial, with both the ORR, and anyone who has ever used the station at times of disruption, agreeing. Hendy's attitude makes it clear he's unsuitable to be a government minister, in my view.
It's not unethical at all. A company I worked at didn't even suffer reputational damage due to the actions of a contractors employee, just the potential. It was made clear to the contractor that said employee was not to come to our site again. Contractor only worked on our site so had no option but to fire the employee.
It's just business.
Did I ever say there wasn't? In fact on multiple occasions I've agreed.
I'm talking about being an employee and using social / traditional media - and having a profile to have an impact - to make a statement about a client which has active work there on an issue which is already well known. This is about HR, employment and client-relationship issues; ultimately it doesn't matter how "right" you are on the issue.
And? You need really a qualification in transport planning to understand urban realm planning and pedestrian flows. Lots of people on these forums are "extremely knowledgable" on railways!
It's not unethical at all. A company I worked at didn't even suffer reputational damage due to the actions of a contractors employee, just the potential. It was made clear to the contractor that said employee was not to come to our site again. Contractor only worked on our site so had no option but to fire the employee.
It's just business.
It ks unethical for the rail industry who should be open about safety issues and encourage frank and open discussion about them . So that they can be improved
And? You need really a qualification in transport planning to understand urban realm planning and pedestrian flows. Lots of people on these forums are "extremely knowledgable" on railways!
It ks unethical for the rail industry who should be open about safety issues and encourage frank and open discussion about them . So that they can be improved
It's not unethical at all. A company I worked at didn't even suffer reputational damage due to the actions of a contractors employee, just the potential. It was made clear to the contractor that said employee was not to come to our site again. Contractor only worked on our site so had no option but to fire the employee.
It's just business.
I believe it to be an unethical way for a government agency, which is what network rail in effect is, to threaten a company (SYSTRA) over an employee making a pretty uncontroversial statement, without identifying themselves as being an employee. Not how I said unethical, not illegal. Lots of businesses do unethical things (I could list examples here, but that would be off-topic) that are legal.
Whether your company behaved in an unethical would depend on what the actions that could lead to reputational damage were. that, however is certainly off-topic, and something you probably couldn't and maybe shouldn't comment on.
Saying effectively the same thing as the regulator, and something that (almost) anyone who can see and has been at Euston at times of disruption would agree with, to a newspaper certainly is something that should fall in the acceptable behaviour bracket!
The key point to me is the message the current railway minister is sending out across the industry by doing this. That is unacceptable, and in my view makes Peter Hendy unsuitable for his job as railway minister
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
He says many fairly uncontrversial things, including that Euston is much busier than when it was designed, that it currently isn't working, and that ideally it would be twice as big
RailUK was launched on 6th June 2005 - so we've hit 20 years being the UK's most popular railway community! Read more and celebrate this milestone with us in this thread!
