Contingency Plans for Disabled Travellers

[OneOffDave]

Based on the thread about 'bleak' platforms and a terminated train I was on the other night, with winter coming on made me ponder a bit as a disabled passenger.

I wondered what arrangements TOCs have should a train have to be terminated at a station/platform with no step free access. As there's no immediate life risk, the fire and rescue services wouldn't respond and as the passenger is uninjured, neither would the ambulance service. TOCs have suggested in the past that these would be used but working regularly with both services I think it's really unlikely. I've been told that 'something' would be sorted but that seems incredibly vague. I do dress for the weather but not normally to the extent that I'm prepared all the time to spend 2-3 hours outside in the winter. I've been told they'd never terminate a train in those circumstances but I doubt the control room making the decisions knows if there's a person like that on the train and I wouldn't expect them to. I know there are 'preferred' stations to terminate services at for wide scale disruption but as we all know, life sometimes gets in the way of these plans.

I accept that this is an edge case but it does fit in that low likelihood but high impact square of the risk diagram. This kind of planning is what I do for a living and the "it'll get sorted" approach does bother me a bit particularly when you see the lack of rapid decision making and communication you see in large disruption events away from the emergency focus, vide Lewisham

I'd love to do something constructive about this rather than just raise the issue but that seems very tricky to make the right engagement

 

[Qwerty133]

I imagine the level of detail the TOCs can communicate as to the general procedures for such events will be limited by the fact that different stations (and platforms) are likely to need completely different solutions and even within the same station different circumstances may dictate different requirements meaning that there simply isn't a one size fits all solution to the problem for them to be able to communicate.

 

[OneOffDave]

I imagine the level of detail the TOCs can communicate as to the general procedures for such events will be limited by the fact that different stations (and platforms) are likely to need completely different solutions and even within the same station different circumstances may dictate different requirements meaning that there simply isn't a one size fits all solution to the problem for them to be able to communicate.

But rather than "we'd sort something", saying there is a plan and they have staff who have practiced appropriate egress in a realistic training scenario is a start. They couldn't even tell me if there would be welfare arrangements to prevent disabled passengers from coming to harm due to weather conditions etc. These are multi-million pound companies, not the local ride on railway in the park and I'd expect some level of forward planning and risk management for a foreseeable event

 

[TUC]

I think egress is probably the least issue. If a train is terminated then, unless it is due to a fire or similar, I would have thought that the worst that would happen is that the passenger as a matter of practicality remains on the train until a solution is reached. The bigger concern is if a passenger is able to disembark, but no one realises that the station has limited access to wihere the replacement transport is located, or does not think to flag that appropriate transport is needed.

it is not possible to plan for every scenario, but a procedure which required staff to check accessibility at the new terminating station, and a checklist of what to do if an issue is identified, would be a start.

 

[philthetube]

I suspect that there are very few locations where this would be a problem, not to say that there are none. Usually a train would only be taken out of service at locations where connections are available and most of these locations have some facilities for wheelchair users.

It is worth bearing in mind that the railway does have a duty of care to all passengers and as such should not leave passengers stranded in these circumstances.

If passengers were required to leave a train away from a station then arrangements would be made depending on circumstances, the fire brigade would get involved if needed, possibly even mountain rescue if things are desperate.

One thing I would advise if it happens is don't allow yourself to be moved until you know what is to happen. Taking someone off on a chair is only as legal as picking them up and carrying them off.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Is there any possibility of an emergency detraining not being supervised by railway staff? If so, I can see a less than negligible risk of disabled passengers being stranded - definitely a problem. If not, then is it the case (and for the avoidance of doubt this is a real question, not a rhetorical device) that staff would be expected to identify disabled passengers and make necessary arrangements?

 

[philthetube]

Is there any possibility of an emergency detraining not being supervised by railway staff? If so, I can see a less than negligible risk of disabled passengers being stranded - definitely a problem. If not, then is it the case (and for the avoidance of doubt this is a real question, not a rhetorical device) that staff would be expected to identify disabled passengers and make necessary arrangements?

only in an everyman for himself situation.

Normally it will not happen until adequate staff are available, an emergency detrainment would normally involve the emergency services anyway.

I have been involved as a passenger in one while in Holland, where my mother was in a wheelchair, fortunately the train failed in a tunnel which has a concrete walkway and so it was possible to push her out, however there were a couple of other passengers not wheelchair users, who were unable to walk the distance, they were seated on a workers trolley and pushed out that way, supervised by the fire brigade, the only alternative for them would have been to place them on stretchers. It is a case of horses for courses and not everything can be arranged in advance.

 

[PeterC]

I think egress is probably the least issue. If a train is terminated then, unless it is due to a fire or similar, I would have thought that the worst that would happen is that the passenger as a matter of practicality remains on the train until a solution is reached. The bigger concern is if a passenger is able to disembark, but no one realises that the station has limited access to wihere the replacement transport is located, or does not think to flag that appropriate transport is needed.

it is not possible to plan for every scenario, but a procedure which required staff to check accessibility at the new terminating station, and a checklist of what to do if an issue is identified, would be a start.

If the termination is planned then I would expect the needs of disabled passengers to have been taken into account.

If it is unplanned (perhaps due to a fallen tree on the line ahead) then I assume that, in extremis, the station's fire escape plan would include provision for evacuating disabled passengers which would be actioned.

 

[185143]

I seem to recall on one of the many occasions where a Hull Trains 180 decided to self combust, the unit was evacuated and there was a wheelchair user onboard. They were kept on the train until the unit could be rescued and then detained at the next station (St. Neots IIRC) where alternative transport was provided.

 

[sportzbar]

Only had this happen once when a guard. The service was supposed to go through to Manchester airport but was terminating now at Manchester Oxford Road. I called the signaller directly to check which platform was planned and it turned out to be platform 1, the platform at MCO that can only be reached by steps. I had one wheelchair user on board.

This was at the height of the "Castlefield Corridor" problems. After a few mins delay (and a fair bit of juggling by the signaller) we were put into platform 5 with the terminating service from Liverpool Lime St that normally uses this platform placed on platform 1 instead. Happy days!

However it then transpired that the service now arriving on platform 1 had two wheel chair users onboard.

Never did find out how that was solved.....

 

[OneOffDave]

If the termination is planned then I would expect the needs of disabled passengers to have been taken into account.

If it is unplanned (perhaps due to a fallen tree on the line ahead) then I assume that, in extremis, the station's fire escape plan would include provision for evacuating disabled passengers which would be actioned.

In my experience the fire evacuation plans are weak at best. At MKC I was told that wheelchair users would be evacuated by train. If the station or something in it is on fire, I can't see the fire service being happy with the OLE being live while they are spraying water about

I do find it more than a bit concerning that there was a deliberate choice made to leave someone on a train that was on fire. Are trains compartmentalised like buildings with doors that are 30 and 60 minute fire resistant? Are there refuges that have the appropriate survival time and comms that meet the requirement of the British Standard?

In my question I'm not talking about an emergency detrainment away from a station but bringing a train to a stop in a controlled manner at a station that doesn't have step free access. While there may be no immediate harm in staying on the train, being effectively detained while provision has been made for everyone else is stressful at best. I've had guards forget I'm on the train in ordinary circumstances so not overly confident they'd remember in a situation where they are having extra demands placed on them. This isn't a criticism of the guards, just a recognition of human nature and how it behaves under pressure.

If the TOC does request the ambulance service to assist I reckon I'd be in for a 4-5 hour wait as it'd be classed as a very low category call and you'd need HART these days as well as a 'normal' crew. There's also the issue that they'd insist on using a spine board which isn't risk free.

Remaining on the train "until a solution is found" is only acceptable for a limited period of time. How long would you put up with being sat on a dark train? This is a predictable event and there should be a contingency plan for it rather than 'fingers crossed and we hope the emergency services will take care of our responsibilities for us'. It should be remembered that it's the TOC/Station operator that is legally responsible.

 

[LowLevel]

In immediate life or death situations the guard is trained to carry out a tandem lift with another person to remove a wheelchair user from a train to track or platform level. However this is obvious extremely risky and gives rise to significant risk of injury to the person involved as well as those undertaking the lift.

Otherwise there is an agreement I believe that the fire service will attend to help otherwise. That is what I've always been told in any case. Stations that are inaccessible generally still have designated refuge points but obviously they can't cover every eventuality.

 

[PupCuff]

In immediate life or death situations the guard is trained to carry out a tandem lift with another person to remove a wheelchair user from a train to track or platform level. However this is obvious extremely risky and gives rise to significant risk of injury to the person involved as well as those undertaking the lift.

There surely can't be many TOCs which advocate doing that. Conducting an unplanned lift of a wheelchair and wheelchair user from train to track level, and quite possibly to platform level too, is asking for trouble.

 

[OneOffDave]

It should be remembered that, under the legislation, refuges are temporary places to stop during the evacuation processes. They aren't for long term occupation and must be smoke protected for a minimum of 60 minutes, have resilient two-way communication and appropriate safety instructions. If it doesn't meet these requirements then it's not a refuge

There surely can't be many TOCs which advocate doing that. Conducting an unplanned lift of a wheelchair and wheelchair user from train to track level, and quite possibly to platform level too, is asking for trouble.

I'm fairly active as a wheelchair user and in a light manual chair. Lifting me down from train to track level in the chair would be massively risky for just two people and I wouldn't expect it. My expectations are much lower where the train is not at a station as the whole process is hazardous enough for physically able people. In the much more controlled environment of a station, where there are fewer variables, I do expect there to be some kind of plan in place that 's better than "we'll let the fire service sort it out". For inacccessible platforms, it's highly probable that the fire evacuation procedures don't account for people who need step free access as, in the normal fun of events, they won't be using that platform/station. My commute passes through a number of stations that have limited access either to the whole station or some of the platforms

 

[LowLevel]

There surely can't be many TOCs which advocate doing that. Conducting an unplanned lift of a wheelchair and wheelchair user from train to track level, and quite possibly to platform level too, is asking for trouble.

To be fair until recently I worked single car class 153s - if a fire starts above the solebar you don't have many options there but to get out and you only have so long if one starts underneath. We had to take it in turns in training in pairs to lift each other from the train to the track in a depot environment. Most of the fire training scenarios for class 153 involved stopping in as opportune a location as possible and then get out.

 

[philthetube]

It would be fire service rather than ambulance that would get involved with assisting passengers, and they are usually available much more quickly.

 

[OneOffDave]

It would be fire service rather than ambulance that would get involved with assisting passengers, and they are usually available much more quickly.

Of course this would be a billable service as it's not a rescue, just covering for the TOCs failure to plan

 

[SussexLad]

If the termination is planned then I would expect the needs of disabled passengers to have been taken into account.

If it is unplanned (perhaps due to a fallen tree on the line ahead) then I assume that, in extremis, the station's fire escape plan would include provision for evacuating disabled passengers which would be actioned.

I know at Aldershot station, Network rail deliberately removed the track level crossing. Meaning their is no evacuation route for PRMs (according to station staff, dont know what is more concerning - the lack of knowledge or the lack of safe routing)

I still find it amazingly worrying how many companies or organisations expect a wheelchair user to stay in potentially A BURNING BUILDING! Cant imagine that many people that would willingly sign up to that... (my partner is an electric wheelchair user, I wouldnt want her to do that)

I think it comes down to reasonable effort being shown as to weather it acceptable. At stations, an emergency track crossing is sensible. Trains all carry ramps so that's good. A high rise building should always have an evac chair (surprising how many places try and avoid it as "its not a regular occurrence")

 

[mark-h]

I still find it amazingly worrying how many companies or organisations expect a wheelchair user to stay in potentially A BURNING BUILDING! Cant imagine that many people that would willingly sign up to that...

It is a case of comparing risks- having the wheelchair user waiting in a refuge area until the fire service is able to evacuate them does increase the risk from the fire/smoke. Having inexperienced staff try to evacuate a wheelchair user using an evacuation chair also has substantial risks of injury (to the wheelchair user and those assisting them). Given that a lot of alarm activations are false then it makes a quick, risky, evacuation seem a bad idea.

UK government advice Fire safety risk assessment: means of escape for disabled people

 

[Tio Terry]

Unless things have changed since I retired, each station has to have an evacuation plan (not just for fire) that has to be approved by the Fire Service. I guess Aldershot must have one!

 

[OneOffDave]

It is a case of comparing risks- having the wheelchair user waiting in a refuge area until the fire service is able to evacuate them does increase the risk from the fire/smoke. Having inexperienced staff try to evacuate a wheelchair user using an evacuation chair also has substantial risks of injury (to the wheelchair user and those assisting them). Given that a lot of alarm activations are false then it makes a quick, risky, evacuation seem a bad idea.

UK government advice Fire safety risk assessment: means of escape for disabled people

It's the legal duty of the property owner/controller to ensure everyone can be evacuated from the building. Refuges are specifically NOT places to wait to be rescued by the fire service. Any evacuation instructions that specify that will be in breach of the appropriate Regulatory Reform Order

 

[greaterwest]

I know at Aldershot station, Network rail deliberately removed the track level crossing. Meaning their is no evacuation route for PRMs (according to station staff, dont know what is more concerning - the lack of knowledge or the lack of safe routing)

There is an accessible bridge at Aldershot station with a lift on platform 1, and platforms 2/3.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is an accessible bridge at Aldershot station with a lift on platform 1, and platforms 2/3.

A lift may not be safe to use for evacuation.

I still find it amazingly worrying how many companies or organisations expect a wheelchair user to stay in potentially A BURNING BUILDING! Cant imagine that many people that would willingly sign up to that... (my partner is an electric wheelchair user, I wouldnt want her to do that)

To be fair "shelter in place" (for everyone, not just those with disabilities) is the policy at most 1960s concrete tower blocks, because compartmentation contains the fire. And works admirably, unless, for instance, you've shoved petrol-soaked matchwood up the side to make it look nice.

 

[philthetube]

It's the legal duty of the property owner/controller to ensure everyone can be evacuated from the building. Refuges are specifically NOT places to wait to be rescued by the fire service. Any evacuation instructions that specify that will be in breach of the appropriate Regulatory Reform Order

If you visit an old folks home and ask about the evacuation procedures in case of fire you will be told that residents should shut doors and wait in their rooms for rescue, these rooms should be designed to be safe for a minimum of one hour.

There is no way that it would be possible to have enough staff there at night to move large numbers of elderly and the disabled and it is the same for the railway.

 

[OneOffDave]

If you visit an old folks home and ask about the evacuation procedures in case of fire you will be told that residents should shut doors and wait in their rooms for rescue, these rooms should be designed to be safe for a minimum of one hour.

There is no way that it would be possible to have enough staff there at night to move large numbers of elderly and the disabled and it is the same for the railway.

I've written evacuation procedures for 1.000 bed hospitals so I might just have an inkling of what I'm on about. When all is said and done it remains the responsibility of the owner/controller of the premises. Moving to another compartment is part of a progressive evacuation process. You won't have enough staff to get everyone out at once but it can be done in stages. Are you saying that the staff will get out then leave the residents there until the Fire service arrives? That would be a brave decision to defend to a coroner

From the guidance: 9446 DCLG Fire Risk Means of Escape

Under current fire safety legislation it is the responsibility of the person(s) having responsibility for the building to provide a fire safety risk assessment that includes an emergency evacuation plan for all people likely to be in the premises, including disabled people, and how that plan will be implemented. Such an evacuation plan should not rely upon the intervention of the Fire and Rescue Service to make it work.

 

[philthetube]

I've written evacuation procedures for 1.000 bed hospitals so I might just have an inkling of what I'm on about. When all is said and done it remains the responsibility of the owner/controller of the premises. Moving to another compartment is part of a progressive evacuation process. You won't have enough staff to get everyone out at once but it can be done in stages. Are you saying that the staff will get out then leave the residents there until the Fire service arrives? That would be a brave decision to defend to a coroner

From the guidance: 9446 DCLG Fire Risk Means of Escape

No I am not saying that, what I am saying is that the evacuation plan may be for people to remain in a safe place until rescued, I did not bring staff into it picture at all, however their main job would be to raise the alarm and then ensure meet the emergency services at the meeting point in the evacuation plan and pass on details of the number and location of people in the building In a case where you had 20 residents and 2 staff there would be little else the staff could do or be expected to do.

In the same way the evacuation plan at a station might be go the the end of the platform away from buildings and wait for the fire service.

 

[Tio Terry]

Can't comment on hospitals but I think it's BS5839-9 that covers Refuges in such things as offices and Stations.

 

[OneOffDave]

No I am not saying that, what I am saying is that the evacuation plan may be for people to remain in a safe place until rescued, I did not bring staff into it picture at all, however their main job would be to raise the alarm and then ensure meet the emergency services at the meeting point in the evacuation plan and pass on details of the number and location of people in the building In a case where you had 20 residents and 2 staff there would be little else the staff could do or be expected to do.

In the same way the evacuation plan at a station might be go the the end of the platform away from buildings and wait for the fire service.

Evacuation means to leave the building. As the guidance to the Regulatory Reform Order (RRO) states, the "evacuation plan should not rely upon the intervention of the Fire and Rescue Service to make it work" Just telling people to stay put and await the FRS is specifically NOT an evacuation plan. Blocks of flats are different as, from a legislative perspective, they are considered collections of different premises.

The British Standard sets a range of criteria for refuges but the operation of them as part of the evacuation strategy is covered by the RRO

 

[SussexLad]

There is an accessible bridge at Aldershot station with a lift on platform 1, and platforms 2/3.

Read any fire evacuation plan, they tell you specifically not to use the lifts because the power can get interrupted by the fire or cut off by the fire service.

To be fair "shelter in place" (for everyone, not just those with disabilities) is the policy at most 1960s concrete tower blocks, because compartmentation contains the fire. And works admirably, unless, for instance, you've shoved petrol-soaked matchwood up the side to make it look nice.

You have summed very nicely why no one ever wants to stay in a burning building. A refuge is a place to rest / stop, not to wait it out.

If you visit an old folks home and ask about the evacuation procedures in case of fire you will be told that residents should shut doors and wait in their rooms for rescue, these rooms should be designed to be safe for a minimum of one hour.

There is no way that it would be possible to have enough staff there at night to move large numbers of elderly and the disabled and it is the same for the railway.

Actually, you will be told if they are able to safely walk (or wheel) to the nearest fire exit they should do that where a member of staff will make a register of who is their. The fire wardens should then go around and help people out of the if possible (obviously if you go cheap on the staffing front this is really difficult). I know in maternity wards (my mum is a midwife at a hospital where a nearby building burnt to the ground about 10 years ago), as soon as the fire alarm goes off they start strapping people to their beds or getting them on their feet. The evacuation of compartments is highly controlled, once the order is given they are all out in 10 mins. Only exception to this is operating theatres who have their own backups and are rated to 6 hours so they can make the patient safe before moving them. A similar thing happens in care homes.

Evacuation means to leave the building. As the guidance to the Regulatory Reform Order (RRO) states, the "evacuation plan should not rely upon the intervention of the Fire and Rescue Service to make it work" Just telling people to stay put and await the FRS is specifically NOT an evacuation plan. Blocks of flats are different as, from a legislative perspective, they are considered collections of different premises.

The British Standard sets a range of criteria for refuges but the operation of them as part of the evacuation strategy is covered by the RRO

So why are the railways failing on this area? I hope it doesn't take a burning train / station where someone dies for action to be taken...

 

[philthetube]

Actually, you will be told if they are able to safely walk (or wheel) to the nearest fire exit they should do that where a member of staff will make a register of who is their. The fire wardens should then go around and help people out of the if possible (obviously if you go cheap on the staffing front this is really difficult). I know in maternity wards (my mum is a midwife at a hospital where a nearby building burnt to the ground about 10 years ago), as soon as the fire alarm goes off they start strapping people to their beds or getting them on their feet. The evacuation of compartments is highly controlled, once the order is given they are all out in 10 mins. Only exception to this is operating theatres who have their own backups and are rated to 6 hours so they can make the patient safe before moving them. A similar thing happens in care homes.

Agree with all you say, I probably did not make myself clear, I was referring specifically to people unable to evacuate, there can be many reasons for including being on upper floors and unable to use lifts.

Unless and station has either two entrances/exits, with step free access to both, and many don't, then an evacuation plan must take account of it being impossible for some people to exit a station safely