Perhaps that depends on our rail philosophy in this country. After all, one way to fit more passengers into a train of a given length would be to use commuter-style seating even on Intercity services, but would people put up with the resulting discomfort and lack of tables etc.? I'd argue that, on longer-distance services in particular, the emphasis should be more towards quality than quantity, including provision for luggage and wheelchair spaces, thereby making the experience more enjoyable.
-
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!
Disabled man 'humiliated' after refused train access, he claims
- Thread starter bradders1983
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps that depends on our rail philosophy in this country. After all, one way to fit more passengers into a train of a given length would be to use commuter-style seating even on Intercity services, but would people put up with the resulting discomfort and lack of tables etc.? I'd argue that, on longer-distance services in particular, the emphasis should be more towards quality than quantity, including provision for luggage and wheelchair spaces, thereby making the experience more enjoyable.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Where less people travelling in the 1920s and 30s when I think train usage was high. They had luggage vans then.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
The laws on access are the same whether its a public building or a private business except that, if anything, the disability equality duties are stronger on public bodies. I recognise the issues raised in the article you linked to. What is puzzling about it is the approach adopted appears to assume that, if a building has upper floors, then the only escape during a fire is for those who can use stairs. Plenty of buildings, including the one I work in, use the approach of both having a fire-protected area around the lift so that it is safe to use in the event of a fire (although I recognise this may not be possible design-wise in every case) and also having equipment to transport wheelchair users out via stairs if necessary in an emergency.
Last edited:
Do you think ATOS not allowing lots of people to receive disability benefit is a surprise to the government that appointed them to the role?
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
We already do this. It's called First Class.
Last edited:
That's all well and good, but I doubt a disabled would-be traveller who cannot get onto a train due to the wheelchair area being full of luggage cares whether it's from First Class or not.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Not really! I suspect, given some of the cases of terminally-ill people being forced to work rather than be allowed to spend their last few weeks or months with their families, that ATOS were under instructions to keep the numbers eligible as low as possible.
Rail operation is a compromise. Seating size against seating capacity (i.e. 3+2 or 2+2). Seating capacity against luggage capacity. First Class against Standard Class, where the appropriate balance varies by time, route and day of the week.
And - ultimately - capacity against cost.
And - ultimately - capacity against cost.
The actual answer is, as always, somewhere in between. The regulations on fire safety do not make any distinction between, to use your terms, a "public building" and a "private business"; it applies to any building to which members of the public have access as of right or by licence. It does not have to be all members of the public; a category of people would do (so office blocks, say, are captured). There needs to be a way to evacuate people who cannot use stairs when lifts are unavailable, and there are several options. The most common is to have fire-resistant refuges near the stairs complete with an "evac chair", which is a complicated contrivance that someone can be strapped into and allows another person to assist them down the stairs. (Fire doors take at least 30 minutes for a fire to burn through, which is why it's so important they be kept closed.) Another option in very high rise buildings is a special fire-rated lift.
Why exactly the building in question has not been deemed to be compliant is not clear from the available information. It may be that they have nowhere to put the evac chairs due to the configuration of the building, or that the stairs have sharp turns, or there is no fire-safe refuge. The media don't normally care about such details when there's a good story or a chance to slam "elf n safety".
I'm a former fire marshal and we got training on how to use the evac chairs. Luckily I did not get rolled down in them; reports are that it is a bumpy ride! I would qualify all the above by saying it was several years ago so I may have misremembered a few things; apologies in advance if that's the case.
Thanks for the info. I have also heard that the evac chairs are distinctly uncomfortable.
In the circumstances they are going to be put to use compared to the alternative....
As a reasonably well built chap I was a buddy for a disabled colleague for evacuation purposes in a previous job - we always had a gentleman's agreement that in the case of a genuine emergency I would sling him over my shoulder rather than strap him into one of those god awful chairs!
plymothian
Member
Following the recent court rulings, if the train was a bus then the wheelchair would have had priority, meaning anyone on board who was in the way would have been kicked off.
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
That is not equality, that's preferential treatment. If the train is full, it's full, if passengers have to wait for the next train it's unfortunate and they have pathways to make their annoyance felt, but unless a reservation was made AND the TOC was honouring reservations (which may not happen in disruption), then the disabled have the right to be left behind as well as the able-bodied.
But I'm sure Customer Services and my managers would not agree with me (in public, anyway).
But I'm sure Customer Services and my managers would not agree with me (in public, anyway).
Last edited:
If an asked bodied passenger can't make a train that they didn't have reservations for and miss their connecting train then I guess they can travel on any reasonable service by the company whose train they missed. The SMB would apply to disabled people.
Of course if they miss the train, how do they go about informing the later booked service assistants that they will be arriving later, especially if the person boarding them would have been the guard?
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Of course if they miss the train, how do they go about informing the later booked service assistants that they will be arriving later, especially if the person boarding them would have been the guard?
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
plymothian
Member
That was my and others' argument; however it seems that equality now = preferential treatment.
Several bus companies have been fined for adhering to a first come first served policy because it discriminated against disabled people. So Equality Act = Preferential Treatment Act according to the judges.
However, an abled bodied person is in a better position to make alternative arrangements than a person with a disability.
Last edited:
If an able-bodied person is kicked off a bus or train in preference then it's obviously wrong. I'm pretty sure that isn't what the legislation says, though, and I'm concerned that continued reference to disabled people wanting preferential treatment is going to lead to resentment and obstructionism towards those of us who are disabled by hardly militant.
The reason the bus companies were fined was not because the bus was full and they did not let the wheelchair on. They were fined because there was a pushchair in the wheelchair space.
The bus company should have told the pushchair user to fold their pushchair and allow the wheelchair to board. They did not do this and just said tough you can not get on. Thats why the court fined them because they made no attempt to accommodate the wheelchair.
In London I have seen on a number of occasions pushchair user being told to move. Indeed there is a notice saying pushchairs need to be folded if the space is required by a wheelchair. Also if the bus if totally full then the wheelchair person has to wait for the next one (Same as an able bodied person)
Don't forget the space is only there for wheelchairs. If there was no requirement to take a wheelchair then there would be no space and pushchairs would have to be folded each time.
That's the key issue. Not only is an able bodied person in a better position to use other trains that may need extra changes, find a bus for the same journey etc., they're also in a much easier position to do things like go to a coffee lounge and get back for the next train. Moreover, there's a much a better chance that an able-bodied person will be able to at least squash into the next train if its equally full than a wheelchair user would be able to.
If someone wanted to take a case to court, one of the key things that the court would look at is what constituted reasonable adjustment and its hard to see that a court would view ensuring that a booked passenger has a designed wheelchair space kept available for them as anything but areasonable adjustment that should be provided.
We've been on a London bus where the driver saw a wheelchair ahead and triggered an automated announcement to say the wheelchair area needed to be cleared.
We had our unfolded buggy in the area and opted to get off and walk the last bit rather than fold it. I have to say I was impressed, and it was made very clear to us. Likewise the bus stopped to enable the ramp to be deployed effectively and allow the wheelchair easy access.
But the bus was pretty much empty.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
I don't understand where all this talk of "preferential treatment" comes from. I can only presume that anyone who truly believes this has never had the joy of trying to use public transport with someone with a physical disability.
Disabled people understand that there are only certain places in a bus or train that they can sit/park their wheelchair. Able-bodied people have the choice of the full bus or train. In London, especially, things have got worse since the Citraro bendy-buses were replaced with deckers. Able-bodied people won't go upstairs, so the people who need the level access are left at the kerbside.
Disabled people also understand that public transport is not "turn up and go" for them. Even for short journeys, they know they have to pre-book to make sure that they will be able to get where they want to go.
What disabled people don't understand is why, when they've gone to the trouble of pre-booking their space on a train, that in one-third of occasions they are not able to get on the train. What disabled people don't understand is why railway staff will let thirty people board a train ahead of them before claiming that there is "no room on board".
Most tube stations do not have step-free access, even on the sub-surface lines where it would be reasonably simple to install stair-lifts, if nothing else. So disabled people have to use buses in London, and then they're told that there is "no room" because of pushchair users, or people with huge suitcases, or people who stand in the wheelchair bay because they're only going two stops and don't want to go upstairs.
Disabled people are being left at train stations across the country, and all because someone thinks their suitcase (which doesn't have a ticket) is more important. If that's "preferential treatment" of disabled people, I'd dread to think what discrimination would look like.
Disabled people understand that there are only certain places in a bus or train that they can sit/park their wheelchair. Able-bodied people have the choice of the full bus or train. In London, especially, things have got worse since the Citraro bendy-buses were replaced with deckers. Able-bodied people won't go upstairs, so the people who need the level access are left at the kerbside.
Disabled people also understand that public transport is not "turn up and go" for them. Even for short journeys, they know they have to pre-book to make sure that they will be able to get where they want to go.
What disabled people don't understand is why, when they've gone to the trouble of pre-booking their space on a train, that in one-third of occasions they are not able to get on the train. What disabled people don't understand is why railway staff will let thirty people board a train ahead of them before claiming that there is "no room on board".
Most tube stations do not have step-free access, even on the sub-surface lines where it would be reasonably simple to install stair-lifts, if nothing else. So disabled people have to use buses in London, and then they're told that there is "no room" because of pushchair users, or people with huge suitcases, or people who stand in the wheelchair bay because they're only going two stops and don't want to go upstairs.
Disabled people are being left at train stations across the country, and all because someone thinks their suitcase (which doesn't have a ticket) is more important. If that's "preferential treatment" of disabled people, I'd dread to think what discrimination would look like.
On our 377's in the wheelchair area there is a wheelchair sign, with the words 'priority by law'. Has helped, pointing out that sign on one or two occasions.
I remember once, I had a booked wheelchair (they mark them on our digramme). It's sometimes 50/50 as to if they turn up. Some might just get an earlier train, or something else. Anyway, i pionted out to the folks sitting in the space that in a couple of stations time they would have to move. There were other seats available. They staid put. Two stations down, there was the pass and their chair. I go to get the ramp out saying you will have to move. some huffing, but no movement. Get the ramp down, chair on. Slight movement. I said ' I did warn you, and you WILL need to move'. They did, in the end, but not before loads of huffing and puffing. But at the same time, most punters will move, no problem.
I've never left one behind before, and if i spot one, I never intend to. Even if I have to delay the train. There has never been any comeback to anyone who explains this correctly on a 'please explain'. I've even got one on, on a Brighton pride day. Trains packed, poor soul had, had 3 trains stop and go without him. A stern 'we are not going until you clear some space' to the other punters, soon gets a space. I've also known some start placing bikes off the train to create space.
Now, on the other hand mobiltiy scooters. We do our best, but some are just too large. I've had some on (put on before I got on) that took up almost the whole vestibule. I've had them crash into doors, take 2 mins to board. some stations are worse than others. Hampden Park to Eastbourne. You pull up and 3 are waiting. We used to have some turn up with trailers.
I remember once, I had a booked wheelchair (they mark them on our digramme). It's sometimes 50/50 as to if they turn up. Some might just get an earlier train, or something else. Anyway, i pionted out to the folks sitting in the space that in a couple of stations time they would have to move. There were other seats available. They staid put. Two stations down, there was the pass and their chair. I go to get the ramp out saying you will have to move. some huffing, but no movement. Get the ramp down, chair on. Slight movement. I said ' I did warn you, and you WILL need to move'. They did, in the end, but not before loads of huffing and puffing. But at the same time, most punters will move, no problem.
I've never left one behind before, and if i spot one, I never intend to. Even if I have to delay the train. There has never been any comeback to anyone who explains this correctly on a 'please explain'. I've even got one on, on a Brighton pride day. Trains packed, poor soul had, had 3 trains stop and go without him. A stern 'we are not going until you clear some space' to the other punters, soon gets a space. I've also known some start placing bikes off the train to create space.
Now, on the other hand mobiltiy scooters. We do our best, but some are just too large. I've had some on (put on before I got on) that took up almost the whole vestibule. I've had them crash into doors, take 2 mins to board. some stations are worse than others. Hampden Park to Eastbourne. You pull up and 3 are waiting. We used to have some turn up with trailers.
Last edited:
Mobility scooters are a pain in the backside. If you can get any but the smallest lightweight ones into a class 158 wheelchair space you're a better guard than me 
On a HST I used to require them to be loaded into the powercar or TGS, on Sprinter units it was pretty much an instant refusal.
On a HST I used to require them to be loaded into the powercar or TGS, on Sprinter units it was pretty much an instant refusal.
It is only equality if nobody could get on the train. If some able bodied passengers can squeeze on, but disabled passengers are refused, that is not equality.
The little lightweight mobilty scooters are fine, but they have been getting larger and larger. Some are just too big, and heavy for the ramps. You can get them on a 377 and our 313's, but we dont allow them on our 442's. Even getting more than a bog standard wheelchair onto a 442 is not easy. Narrow door, tight turns.
And always a sight when one has not enough juice to get up the ramp, so the punter jumps off and pushes it up. Hey ho!
And always a sight when one has not enough juice to get up the ramp, so the punter jumps off and pushes it up. Hey ho!
GatwickDepress
Established Member
That's a profoundly ridiculous statement to make, since to me it smacks of "if one person can't, nobody can".
No it isn't. Its making the point that able-bodied passengers can squeeze onto trains themselves. A disabled passenger, especially one in a wheelchair, needs someone to make the space for them. That is what staff need to do.
ExRes
Established Member
Three passengers are waiting for a packed rush hour train, two able bodied and one wheelchair user, there's room for the able bodied pair to squeeze into the little space available but not enough for a bulky wheelchair, what are the staff supposed to do then ?
Unfortunately bus drivers have no legal way of ensuring someone leaves the bus (or even just the wheelchair space) - they certainly can't use force to move anyone. I've seen a driver in London say he's not moving the bus until a pushchair is moved (having previously offered a transfer ticket for the next bus if the pushchair owner did not want to fold their pushchair). Eventually they got off the bus with much huffing and puffing and no sympathy from anyone else. However this is not official procedure and the driver could be asked why he had delayed the bus.
GatwickDepress
Established Member
That's not what I gleaned from drbdrb's post.
I was travelling with a disabled friend who uses a wheelchair and a service was short-formed - being 4 instead of the usual 8 coaches. The train was so packed, we agreed to wait for the next one. There are times when staff are simply going to be unable to make space, for example the majority of services around and immediately after peak times.
I agree that staff do need to make space, but if the train is so busy that there's nowhere for passengers to physically fit into if they vacate the disabled area, it's unrealistic for staff to do so.
SpacePhoenix
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 5,492
What unit types would Arriva use on the line concerned? It doesn't give any clue in the article as to what class of train was involved
- Status