• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Level crossing Phone to cross but can't speak!

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,167
Location
UK
miklcct said:
It's definitely in public interest to eliminate level crossings even in rural areas because, if the railway is obstructed, millions of people will be cut off from their jobs and societies!
Click to expand...

There are about 6,200 level crossings in the UK, many of which would require the closure of a road and associated knockons to emergency services.


6Gman said:
I live a few miles from the market town of Nantwich which has four vehicular crossings and one foot crossing
Click to expand...

Nantwich CP has just two crossings - both public vehicle crossings (full barrier at station and half barrier at Shrewbridge Road). The Newcastle Road crossing is in Stapeley. If you include neighbouring parishes, from the Bypass to the canal - a distance of under 2.5 miles, you're looking at 9 crossings - about one every 400 metres.

Public footpath: 5
Public bridleway + farm crossing: 1
Half barrier vehicle: 2
Full barrier vehicle: 1

I have a feeling there is a pedestrian signal at at least one of the two footpath Stapeley crossings (Cronkinsons?)

There were plans to close Fields Farm crossing - the farmer has been selling land recently to build a large housing estate, and has outline plans to replace what's left of the farm with 20 more houses. Network rail comments recommend that the public footpath be diverted from the current pedestrian crossing to an existing under-line crossing.

However that outline was in 2019 and nothing has progressed.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

XAM2175

XAM2175

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2016
Messages
3,469
Location
Glasgow
miklcct said:
I'm comparing the UK and the other parts of the Commonwealth because, in many aspects, elsewhere in the Commonwealth is more technically advanced than the UK!
Click to expand...

You will find thousands upon thousands of level crossings in use across across Australia and Canada, let alone the rest of the Commonwealth, with levels of protection lower than most of those found in the UK.

Indeed the UK is anomalous among many developed nations not in retaining level crossings but rather in being so fanatical about their safety. Go to Melbourne or Brisbane, for example, and you'll see road crossings on busy commuter lines protected by automatic half-barriers with magnetically-latched gates for pedestrians - no CCTV supervision, no obstacle detection, just the barriers and a protecting signal that clears automatically when the barriers are down. Pedestrian-only crossings are, for the most part, unprotected.
 
Dr Hoo

Dr Hoo

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2015
Messages
3,975
Location
Hope Valley
Annetts key said:
The ORR has been concerned about level crossings and the accidents and near misses that occur at them for some time now.

The railways are moving on the issue of improving level crossings. But without external funding, progress will be slow.
Click to expand...
I know that it's a few years ago but the ORR's Periodic Review for Control Period 5 (PR13, for 2014-19) included £75,000,000 of funding from the Westminster and Scottish governments for level crossing safety and there was an expectation that 500 would be eliminated during the Control Period.

(This is just to give a bit of background. Obviously the 500 closures would tend to be the cheapest/easiest/quickest to deal with and not directly related to the OP's point about the challenges of telephone communication. Some of the money would go on upgrades to crossings being retained rather than full closures.)
 
O

Okowsc

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2018
Messages
13
61653 HTAFC said:
I do find it somewhat interesting that as the OP describes themself as "mostly non-verbal", several honourable members have assumed that they were not (or indeed could not be) using a motor vehicle. The OP has been able to communicate adequately to ask this question in the forum, so it's not a great leap to suggest that they would also be capable of safely using a motor vehicle and understanding the rules and responsibilities that go along with that.

Whilst that may not be relevant to the OPs query (the description of the crossing appears to be pedestrian only) it does raise the wider question of accessibility at crossings. There are many conditions that affect communication, which make user-worked crossings and the like a significant barrier to those individuals.
Click to expand...
Whilst I personally don't drive (nor do I think it's a good idea), it is an fairly common trend what you noticed, if you don't speak people treat you as incompetent either knowingly or not, it is something I've had a few times even by some rail staff.

On the latter point yes, I'm very interested in if the railway has anything in place for those unable to use the normal crossing phones (car Vs pedestrian not really relevant to that question).
 
Annetts key

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
2,657
Location
West is best
Okowsc said:
Whilst I personally don't drive (nor do I think it's a good idea), it is an fairly common trend what you noticed, if you don't speak people treat you as incompetent either knowingly or not, it is something I've had a few times even by some rail staff.

On the latter point yes, I'm very interested in if the railway has anything in place for those unable to use the normal crossing phones (car Vs pedestrian not really relevant to that question).
Click to expand...
Personally, I’m always happy to help if asked. Although, I may ask why, as unfortunately there are also a surprising number of fully able people who also ask and once I point out the answer they no longer need my help with what they are doing.

In terms of level crossings, I’m only aware of the limited (as in the number of sites) installation of red/green crossing systems which are fitted to crossings where previously there were only telephones.
 
D

Davester50

Member
Joined
22 Feb 2021
Messages
707
Location
UK
lachlan said:
I don't know what point you're trying to make here. We should be reducing reliance on spoken language both for nonverbal people and for those who don't speak English
Click to expand...
Which is the very point I'm making.
I don't know why AlterEgo dragged up a thread when in the OPs case, there is a reasonable alternative, and has been well and truely thrashed out.
If the Ego needs to start a new discussion on alternatives to verbal communication, perhaps start a new thread dedicated to alternatives?
 
AlterEgo

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,244
Location
No longer here
Davester50 said:
Which is the very point I'm making.
I don't know why AlterEgo dragged up a thread when in the OPs case, there is a reasonable alternative, and has been well and truely thrashed out.
If the Ego needs to start a new discussion on alternatives to verbal communication, perhaps start a new thread dedicated to alternatives?
Click to expand...
That’s what this thread is about.

It’s already been explained that the difference between the two scenarios is that where disability is concerned, the company is compelled by law to implement a reasonable adjustment, if it can.

That’s entirely different from the example of say, a native Spanish speaker being unable to read a sign.
 
AlterEgo

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,244
Location
No longer here
Davester50 said:
You've ignored the protected characteristics of the Welsh language again, I see!
Click to expand...
I think you need to elaborate on exactly which protection you think applies to the Welsh language in this specific scenario, where a user has to speak to a single operator in English in order to use a facility safely. The protections are not the same as those for disabled people under the Equality Act, for whom there is absolutely no alternative provided.

There is no legal requirement whatsoever for NR to supply a Welsh language signaller, or an ad-hoc translation service in this scenario, but there is a legal requirement for them to accommodate reasonable adjustments for disabled users if they can.

I am sure you don’t need it spelling out why the two protections aren’t the same in law.
 
alxndr

alxndr

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2015
Messages
1,477
There is a legislative difference between the two scenarios, but the functional effects—the person wishing to cross cannot use the means provided to determine whether it is safe to do so—is the same.

There may always be cases where it's impossible to cater to all scenarios, say, someone who is colour-blind, non-verbal, non-english speaking person without a smartphone who uses a wheelchair, but that doesn't mean we can't try to make things as accessible as is reasonably practical.
 
N

noddingdonkey

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2012
Messages
774
It's the classic thing where an adjustment made because it's legally required for people with a disability makes things easier for a wider range of users. Think wheelchair ramps on buildings being used by parents with prams, subtitles on TV being helpful for people with English as a second language.
 
W

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,159
noddingdonkey said:
It's the classic thing where an adjustment made because it's legally required for people with a disability makes things easier for a wider range of users. Think wheelchair ramps on buildings being used by parents with prams, subtitles on TV being helpful for people with English as a second language.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.

Davester50 said:
You've ignored the protected characteristics of the Welsh language again, I see!
Click to expand...
Protected characteristics has a legal meaning. Speaking Welsh does not fall within that.

Protected characteristics | Equality and Human Rights Commission

Brief descriptive overview of the nine Protected Characteristics
www.equalityhumanrights.com www.equalityhumanrights.com
 
M

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
3,744
AlterEgo said:
I think you need to elaborate on exactly which protection you think applies to the Welsh language in this specific scenario, where a user has to speak to a single operator in English in order to use a facility safely. The protections are not the same as those for disabled people under the Equality Act, for whom there is absolutely no alternative provided.

There is no legal requirement whatsoever for NR to supply a Welsh language signaller, or an ad-hoc translation service in this scenario, but there is a legal requirement for them to accommodate reasonable adjustments for disabled users if they can.

I am sure you don’t need it spelling out why the two protections aren’t the same in law.
Click to expand...

Public sector bodies providing services in Wales have been obliged to detail how they provide those services in Welsh for nearly 30 years! The Welsh Language Act 1993.

 
AlterEgo

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,244
Location
No longer here
mmh said:
Public sector bodies providing services in Wales have been obliged to detail how they provide those services in Welsh for nearly 30 years! The Welsh Language Act 1993.

Click to expand...
I know what the Welsh Language Act 1993 is, but its provisions would not extend to this exact circumstance, a single caller speaking to a single monoglot signaller about a safety critical matter.

The Equality Act does extend to this and the railway must implement a reasonable adjustment if it can.
 
S

steve_wills

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2021
Messages
41
Location
Birmingham
AlterEgo said:
I know what the Welsh Language Act 1993 is, but its provisions would not extend to this exact circumstance, a single caller speaking to a single monoglot signaller about a safety critical matter.

The Equality Act does extend to this and the railway must implement a reasonable adjustment if it can.
Click to expand...
the railway can't. There not going to change for one person
 
M

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,167
Location
UK
Do pilots flying in Wales get to speak to ATC in Welsh?
 
N

noddingdonkey

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2012
Messages
774
steve_wills said:
the railway can't. There not going to change for one person
Click to expand...
The Railway is legally obliged to. And the whole point of the Equality Act is that you make things accessible by default as far as is practicable, not just adapting when somebody with a particular requirement turns up.
 
N

noddingdonkey

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2012
Messages
774
It's a bit of both. Generally accessible by default and be prepared to make specific reasonable adjustments if somebody has very particular requirements.
 
S

steve_wills

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2021
Messages
41
Location
Birmingham
noddingdonkey said:
The Railway is legally obliged to. And the whole point of the Equality Act is that you make things accessible by default as far as is practicable, not just adapting when somebody with a particular requirement turns up.
Click to expand...

noddingdonkey said:
It's a bit of both. Generally accessible by default and be prepared to make specific reasonable adjustments if somebody has very particular requirements.
Click to expand...
Crack on taking NR to court
 
W

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,159
Annetts key

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
2,657
Location
West is best
Just turning this around, what would you think if Network Rail refused to appoint a candidate to a job as a signaller in a signal box or signalling centre in Wales because they did not speak Welsh? And what about a signaller that was transferred to a signal box or signalling centre in Wales as a result of redundancies in England?

Would that be reasonable or would it be discrimination?

And if you think it’s reasonable, how far do we take this? Not allowing anyone in Wales that has any form of a customer facing job to be employed unless they speak Welsh?

I have no problem with dual language signs in Wales. And I have no problem with trying to encourage more people to speak Welsh. In the same way that I would have no problem if similar things were done with the Cornish language.

But the official language of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is English. And this is unlikely to change anytime soon.

A signaller must therefore be able to speak English and be able to communicate clearly and lead and control any verbal communication to ensure that any safety related element is understood by both parties.

Trying to do this in Welsh for all the signallers in Wales would not be a reasonable adjustment IMHO.
 
M

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,167
Location
UK
steve_wills said:
No !! international ATC is English and thats throughout the world.

GB is only a little island
Click to expand...

Not quite. ICAO only decrees that on international flights. Chinese domestic pilots flying in China will speak Mandarin to ATC. Same as Russian speaking pilots in Russia.

A flight from Valley to Haverfordwest would be entirely in Wales. I assume UK pilot requirements demand English, do they also demand Welsh for such a flight (I doubt it but it's possible)

Google does reveal this though


A Notice to Airmen (Notam), due to last until the end of the month, directs pilots to make a 143-word announcement about Covid in English, Welsh and an officially recognised language of the departure country before landing in Wales.
Click to expand...
 
O

Okowsc

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2018
Messages
13
steve_wills said:
the railway can't. There not going to change for one person
Click to expand...
Whilst my particular reasons for likely being unable to use a crossing phone aren't exactly common there's a fair few disabilities where someone wouldn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top