GWR experience

[Bookd]

There are some very valid points made here - it may be that the driver thought the Op to be suspicious but if concerned about safety that would be a good thing. I am a white old codger - a few years ago I made my way to the extreme end of the platform at Feltham. My reason was to look at the banners outside the then new flats opposite; the dispatcher came along to me for a friendly chat, when we talked about the price of said flats, but he may well have been trained to look out for potential incidents and I thought that he did this very well.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Thanks to everyone for their comments.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Marvellous.

Said driver could well have been involved in a near miss earlier. Said driver could possibly have been involved in a fatality at sometime in the past. But he is a jobsworth and should be reported?

With regards to being 'perfectly allowed' to stand on platforms and take pictures, if you are asked to leave, you leave. You have no divine right to be there.

Not true. Just because I am standing up, I can be asked to leave? So if I was sitting down, or standing in a 'normal' area or in the toilet, it would be ok for a member of staff to come and tell me to go away? I don't think so!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I have spoken to quite a few people and they have told me to report him so I might go ahead and take this to GWR and see what they say!

 

[Darandio]

Not true. Just because I am standing up, I can be asked to leave? So if I was sitting down, or standing in a 'normal' area or in the toilet, it would be ok for a member of staff to come and tell me to go away? I don't think so!
[!

What isn't true? It's private property, you can be asked to leave that property.

 

[6Gman]

Hi. I was at Reading Station today and I was going to Slough and only about every 3rd or 4th fast train stops at Slough so I was just waiting at the front of the platform where it says 'HST car stop 7/8' so I can have a nice view of the HSTs as I am a big fan of trains- I have had free train travel (BR pass and SWT pass) all my life and I particularly love the HSTs so I thought I would get a nice view by standing at the front. But today when I did this, the driver got out of his cab and says I should go away and that 'I was acting suspicious'- I am Muslim and it probably is not hard to guess from my skin colour that I am Middle-Eastern so I was not sure if I should be offended. And for those of you who know Reading Train station, it is an extremely long platform. Was I doing anything wrong bearing in mind I was standing well behind the yellow line and so atleast 4-5 metres away from the cab door- I understand if I was right next to the cab door, he might think I might hijack the train or something but I was standing very far back. And also I do this regularly because I travel to and from University pretty much every Monday-Friday; some drivers are actually very friendly and they will smile, wave and one or two have even come out of their cab to say hello but today's experience was, sadly, a bit different. Sorry if it seems like I'm writing a story but I just want to know did I do anything wrong? Legally, could I get arrested or anything like that? Have I just taken this too personal?
Oh and I would just like to add that there are usually some other people standing/sitting there to. And also, there is plenty of platform staff and not once has anyone said anything to me.

I find this all rather weird - speaking as someone who has spent many, many hours on the ends of platforms watching trains; had a father who was a train driver; and worked on the railway myself.

You are perfectly entitled to stand on the platform waiting for your train (assuming you are behind any safety lines, not beyond the 'No passengers beyond this sign' notices etc.)

Railway staff are entitled to approach you and ask (reasonable) questions. You're probably not legally obliged to answer but common sense and common courtesy would suggest you should to avoid the situation escalating.

What puzzles me is a driver leaving the cab to question a passenger on the platform. I'm not familiar with Reading these days, but would assume HSTs don't stop there for long? [Are drivers even allowed to leave the cab under such circumstances?]

I think you just encountered a grumpy driver - the same way photographing buses can provoke responses ranging from smiles and thumbs-up to scowls, rude gestures or even drivers leaving vehicles to tell you you're not allowed to photograph them.

You were clearly upset - which I can understand - so personally I would contact GWR, outline what happened (without identifying the train involved), and ask whether GWR considers the behaviour to be reasonable or acceptable.

You might even get some RTVs!

 

[bramling]

Railway staff don't have the authority to make up their own rules, so there has to be a valid reason for someone being asked to leave. It goes without saying that a member of staff can't instruct someone to leave because, for example, they don't like their face.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can vouch for that. In some degree of desperation with someone that had climbed a bridge parapet, a long time ago a colleague said 'get down from there or I'm going to smack you one'. The person in question was so taken aback by the two completely incompatible concepts of jumping to their death and being punched in the face by a burly cleaner that they climbed down as the police arrived.

Not something I'd exactly recommend but it did work on this occasion.

I must admit I *hate* the term "can I help you?" being used when someone is suspicious about another person's activities -- especially if it's delivered in an unfriendly tone.

In such situations the deserved reply can often be simply "no".

 

[Darandio]

Railway staff don't have the authority to make up their own rules, so there has to be a valid reason for someone being asked to leave. It goes without saying that a member of staff can't instruct someone to leave because, for example, they don't like their face.

And in this case it may be that they believed the OP was suspicious.

Regardless of whether they were right or wrong, I believe they would see that as valid grounds for ejection and wouldn't receive any comeback for doing so. That said, I agree completely that this is a tricky situation but none of us were there, it's all speculation on the part of what the driver was thinking, or indeed what he had dealt with beforehand.

 

[bramling]

And in this case it may be that they believed the OP was suspicious.

Regardless of whether they were right or wrong, I believe they would see that as valid grounds for ejection and wouldn't receive any comeback for doing so. That said, I agree completely that this is a tricky situation but none of us were there, it's all speculation on the part of what the driver was thinking, or indeed what he had dealt with beforehand.

Being "suspicious" is certainly not a valid grounds for asking someone to leave. It may be grounds for other forms of follow-up, for example arranging for BTP to pay a visit.

I can absolutely 100% guarantee that, where I am, if a member of staff asked someone to leave simply on the grounds that they regarded them "suspicious", there would be some form of comeback if the passenger subsequently took the matter further -- and quite rightly so in my view.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

And in this case it may be that they believed the OP was suspicious.

Regardless of whether they were right or wrong, I believe they would see that as valid grounds for ejection and wouldn't receive any comeback for doing so. That said, I agree completely that this is a tricky situation but none of us were there, it's all speculation on the part of what the driver was thinking, or indeed what he had dealt with beforehand.

You don't the law at all I was actually a police cadet for 2 years and I was strongly encouraged to become a Special constable (Volunteer police officer) which I plan to do in the next few months. I am only mentioning this because I learnt a lot about law and the rules and regulations in regard to detaining and searching people and the conditions of which this can be done is extremely strict. You must have a 'reasonable grounds' to suspect someone which the driver clearly did NOT. I do apologise if this sounds patronising but we are not in 50's anymore where the police and staff can do whatever they want. The laws have now been put in place to protect people like myself and other minorities and in particular Afro-Carribean because what used to happen was Black people were stopped for no reason. The train station in all intents and purposes is regarded as a 'public place.' Your ideas are very outdated 'You are LOOKING suspicious' is clearly OUT OF ORDER and are absolutely NOT grounds to stop someone or remove someone from the station!!!

In fact, I know there was a Afro-American who complained to South West Trains for racism and got £250. So racism is taken extremely seriously

 

[Darandio]

Your ideas are very outdated 'You are LOOKING suspicious' is clearly OUT OF ORDER!!!

In fact, I know there was a Afro-American who complained to South West Trains for racism and got £250. So racism is taken extremely seriously

I'm racist now?

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Being "suspicious" is certainly not a valid grounds for asking someone to leave. It may be grounds for other forms of follow-up, for example arranging for BTP to pay a visit.

I can absolutely 100% guarantee that, where I am, if a member of staff asked someone to leave simply on the grounds that they regarded them "suspicious", there would be some form of comeback if the passenger subsequently took the matter further -- and quite rightly so in my view.

Yes completely agree! Even the BTP, who are actually nearly always at Reading station, could not have done much because there was no 'reasonable grounds.' There is this acronym that the police use called GO WISELY which is basically used when wanting to detain and search someone. I would be completely entitled to say when the police to come and question me, "I refuse to answer questions" and "Am I being detained" in which case the police officer would say no, and we would be all on our merry way! The conditions under which you can stop and search someone is EXTREMELY STRICT and there has been a lot of evidence before they can even think about searching and detaining me!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm racist now?

I never said you were racist but your ideas seem to be very outdated and going back to the days where Brown and Black people could be searched if the Police felt like it even though no reasonable grounds!
I gave that example because I just want you to understand racism and discrimination is taken extremely serious!
But anyhow, I'll write into GWR and see what they say. I'll let you all now when I get a response

 

[J-2739]

You don't the law at all I was actually a police cadet for 2 years and I was strongly encouraged to become a Special constable (Volunteer police officer) which I plan to do in the next few months. I am only mentioning this because I learnt a lot about law and the rules and regulations in regard to detaining and searching people and the conditions of which this can be done is extremely strict. You must have a 'reasonable grounds' to suspect someone which the driver clearly did NOT. I do apologise if this sounds patronising but we are not in 50's anymore where the police and staff can do whatever they want. The laws have now been put in place to protect people like myself and other minorities and in particular Afro-Carribean because what used to happen was Black people were stopped for no reason. The train station in all intents and purposes is regarded as a 'public place.' Your ideas are very outdated 'You are LOOKING suspicious' is clearly OUT OF ORDER and are absolutely NOT grounds to stop someone or remove someone from the station!!!

In fact, I know there was a Afro-American who complained to South West Trains for racism and got £250. So racism is taken extremely seriously

I'm racist now?

I'd take race out of this. I'm also a minority but if a similar incident happened to me, pulling the race card will be my last resort as it may cause more trouble. Who knows, maybe the staff actually looked past the skin colour.

Whilst I understand the fact you was sent out without reasoning. In these cases, I'd leave race out until you find out more of the story.

Darandio, you're definitely not racist.

 

[najaB]

Whilst I understand the fact you was sent out without reasoning. In these cases, I'd leave race out until you find out more of the story.

In order of likelihood I would say: he was having a bad day and wanted to shout at someone, he thought you were a potential suicide, he hates spotters, he was a racist twitt.

 

[Darandio]

I never said you were racist but your ideas seem to be very outdated and going back to the days where Brown and Black people could be searched if the Police felt like it even though no reasonable grounds!
I gave that example because I just want you to understand racism and discrimination is taken extremely serious!
But anyhow, I'll write into GWR and see what they say. I'll let you all now when I get a response

But my responses were not based on the colour of anyone's skin, if you can find otherwise, please enlighten me.

When referencing the point that the driver could have believed you are 'suspicious', this applies to anyone, regardless of colour, creed or religion, but we have no idea why he did it.

Trying to get someone (you don't know me or my background) to 'understand' racism and discrimination is patronising beyond belief!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In order of likelihood I would say: he was having a bad day and wanted to shout at someone, he thought you were a potential suicide, he hates spotters, he was a racist twitt.

The way the thread seems to be going, and the mindset of the OP, I think that they have already settled on the latter. Otherwise we wouldnt have talk of the fifties, outdated ideas and references to other staff that have presumably been disciplined for racism. I'm not sure how we can even come to that conclusion so quick.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

But my responses were not based on the colour of anyone's skin, if you can find otherwise, please enlighten me.

When referencing the point that the driver could have believed you are 'suspicious', this applies to anyone, regardless of colour, creed or religion, but we have no idea why he did it.

Trying to get someone (you don't know me or my background) to 'understand' racism and discrimination is patronising beyond belief!

Ok I do apologise because I never meant it that way. I never said you were racist nor do I think you are. I am just saying that the laws have changed over the last few decades to protect minorities.

 

[Darandio]

Ok I do apologise because I never meant it that way. I never said you were racist nor do I think you are. I am just saying that the laws have changed over the last few decades to protect minorities.

No need to apologise, but I'm a bit concerned where the thread is going. I think certain things need to be established first, please let us know what happens.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Incorrect, they are not public property. If you are asked to leave, you leave. It's not really something that should be up for debate.

Even on private property the reason for being asked to leave matters. Network Rail is certainly covered by the Equality Act.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Of course. I'll let you all know what happens!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But my responses were not based on the colour of anyone's skin, if you can find otherwise, please enlighten me.

When referencing the point that the driver could have believed you are 'suspicious', this applies to anyone, regardless of colour, creed or religion, but we have no idea why he did it.

Trying to get someone (you don't know me or my background) to 'understand' racism and discrimination is patronising beyond belief!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The way the thread seems to be going, and the mindset of the OP, I think that they have already settled on the latter. Otherwise we wouldnt have talk of the fifties, outdated ideas and references to other staff that have presumably been disciplined for racism. I'm not sure how we can even come to that conclusion so quick.

I only mentioned the racism because you were saying that he is allowed to ask me to leave which is complete rubbish!

 

[Darandio]

I only mentioned the racism because you were saying that he is allowed to ask me to leave which is complete rubbish!

And I still believe he could, or get another member of staff to do so, others disagree. However, that could happen no matter what colour your skin is, so I don't see how racism suddenly came into it.

 

[Sprinter153]

Yes completely agree! Even the BTP, who are actually nearly always at Reading station, could not have done much because there was no 'reasonable grounds.' There is this acronym that the police use called GO WISELY which is basically used when wanting to detain and search someone. I would be completely entitled to say when the police to come and question me, "I refuse to answer questions" and "Am I being detained" in which case the police officer would say no, and we would be all on our merry way! The conditions under which you can stop and search someone is EXTREMELY STRICT and there has been a lot of evidence before they can even think about searching and detaining me!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I never said you were racist but your ideas seem to be very outdated and going back to the days where Brown and Black people could be searched if the Police felt like it even though no reasonable grounds!
I gave that example because I just want you to understand racism and discrimination is taken extremely serious!
But anyhow, I'll write into GWR and see what they say. I'll let you all now when I get a response

Seeing as you know it all already with regards to whether you can be challenged or detained, why did you need to ask whether it was reasonable or not?

You basically just said 'I'm not saying you're racist, but you're racist'.

 

[319321]

Having read the OP three times, I am 90% sure that the train driver was not being racist in saying 'you are acting suspiciously'. I am 99.9% sure that the train driver meant that comment as 'acting in a manner that means I suspect you may harm yourself'.

The OP felt these words were racist because of his middle-eastern appearance and past terrorist acts by persons of a similar appearance. He was standing on the end of a platform to get a good view of a HST. I am going to make an assumption, but it is likely the platform the OP was standing at was a fast through platform.

The driver probably should not have used the words 'you are acting suspiciously', even if it was someone with a mental health problem evaluating the options for ending their life. The way these words will feel to someone contemplating killing themselves will not do anything to make them think of themselves as anyone of value, and anything but a low-life criminal for even having these thoughts.

I think the OP would be justified in making a 'comment' about the driver, so that his manager could speak to him, get the drivers side, and if necessary, offer words of advice. I don't think the driver meant to be racist or to criminalise the mentally ill, even if that was the effect of his words.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Having read the OP three times, I am 90% sure that the train driver was not being racist in saying 'you are acting suspiciously'. I am 99.9% sure that the train driver meant that comment as 'acting in a manner that means I suspect you may harm yourself'.

The OP felt these words were racist because of his middle-eastern appearance and past terrorist acts by persons of a similar appearance. He was standing on the end of a platform to get a good view of a HST. I am going to make an assumption, but it is likely the platform the OP was standing at was a fast through platform.

The driver probably should not have used the words 'you are acting suspiciously', even if it was someone with a mental health problem evaluating the options for ending their life. The way these words will feel to someone contemplating killing themselves will not do anything to make them think of themselves as anyone of value, and anything but a low-life criminal for even having these thoughts.

I think the OP would be justified in making a 'comment' about the driver, so that his manager could speak to him, get the drivers side, and if necessary, offer words of advice. I don't think the driver meant to be racist or to criminalise the mentally ill, even if that was the effect of his words.

I thats a good summary. Maybe he did not intentionally mean it that way, but the driver needs to understand that what he said and the way he behaved could be construed as being racist or at the very least harassment.

 

[najaB]

I thats a good summary. Maybe he did not intentionally mean it that way, but the driver needs to understand that what he said and the way he behaved could be construed as being racist or at the very least harassment.

Could I ask that if you feel you were spoken to rudely enough that it merits a complaint, please could you leave the potential racist aspects out of your complaint.

First off because if a complaint of racism lands on the desk of a customer service advisor, all sorts of alarm bells go off and it will likely get blown all out of proportion.

Secondly, it's the old story of the boy who cried wolf - if you raise an issue as racist when you aren't sure that it is, then it makes it just that little bit less likely that the next report will be believed.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Could I ask that if you feel you were spoken to rudely enough that it merits a complaint, please could you leave the potential racist aspects out of your complaint.

First off because if a complaint of racism lands on the desk of a customer service advisor, all sorts of alarm bells go off and it will likely get blown all out of proportion.

Secondly, it's the old story of the boy who cried wolf - if you raise an issue as racist when you aren't sure that it is, then it makes it just that little bit less likely that the next report will be believed.

Sure. I think this thread has gone in so many directions that I never even expected. But anyway, I'll tell you lot the response when I get one.

 

[221129]

Just going to leave this here seeing as no one has mentioned it...

13. Unauthorised access and loitering
(1) No person shall enter or remain on any part of the railway where there is a
notice:
(i) prohibiting access; or
(ii) indicating that it is reserved or provided for a specified
category of person only, except where he belongs to that
specified category.
(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised
person.

From the Railway bylaws...

 

[3141]

A clause such as
(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised
person
has to be in the byelaws to enable such action to be taken when necessary. But it doesn't mean that every member of staff can unreasonably ask people to leave at any time. If they do, a complaint may be justified.

 

[221129]

A clause such as
(2) No person shall loiter on the railway if asked to leave by an authorised
person
has to be in the byelaws to enable such action to be taken when necessary. But it doesn't mean that every member of staff can unreasonably ask people to leave at any time. If they do, a complaint may be justified.

A complaint may well be justified, but I was just posting the legal position, that some people appeared to be forgetting.

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Just going to leave this here seeing as no one has mentioned it...



From the Railway bylaws...

Thanks for your comment. You make a very interesting point. However, ''loitering' is extremely, extremely subjective. The definition of loitering is the following according to google: "stand or wait around without apparent purpose."
In my opinion, I don't believe I was loitering because I did have a purpose for being there. I was waiting for my train (which was the 3rd train departing on that platform) and I had a valid ticket. Usually, loitering is more referring to homeless people or drunken people or other people causing disturbance in which case the police will be called to remove them from the station which does happen and I have witnessed this before. As someone else suggested, there has to be reasonable grounds to remove someone from the station. But as I say, 'loitering' is extremely subjective so people will have different opinions. And that would be a case for the platform staff (there were at least 3 despatch staff on this platform alone) to deal with me not the driver.

 

[ComUtoR]

I thats a good summary. Maybe he did not intentionally mean it that way, but the driver needs to understand that what he said and the way he behaved could be construed as being racist or at the very least harassment.

Not in the slightest.

Was the Driver white ? Did you see racism because the Driver was of a specific ethnic origin ?

Have you had previous racist experiences ? Are they causing you to see something that is most likely not there ?

 

[PudseyBearHST]

Lol like telling someone to "go away" is going to stop them from committing suicide. Would you really go up to a suicidal person and say you are "looking suspicious." I'm not sure; is it suppose to make them feel better? I don't know how even this debate about mental health came into this.

 

[Deepgreen]

Is it any wonder that some staff have no time for enthusiasts? Good grief.

However, the OP has already said he was waiting for a train, not just 'spotting' and therefore presumably did not have notebooks, cameras, etc., around. This being the case, what made the driver assume the OP was an enthusiast? In any case, the argument about the benefits of enthusiasts on stations has been very well rehearsed. If a person is waiting on the public part of a platform and not interfering with the railway's operation, it is unreasonable to challenge them, especially if the excuse is a supposed concern for their well-being, when "go away" or similar/worse, will not be of any help to the suicidal (and may well strengthen their resolve)! When the driver in question told the OP to "go away", were those the exact words used, I wonder, or were they more 'outdoor' and aggressive?

Unfortunately, "some staff", along with some people in the rest of society, apparently have no time for anyone who isn't exactly like them, so there's little point in trying to accommodate/excuse their behaviour. There's also no legislating for bad days.