Health and Safety? (Lymington sacking)

[Oliver]

Whatever the exact circumstances, this has been a PR disaster for SWT and Stagecoach. Their ultimate boss, Brian Souter, is no fool. Forget on-line petitions, etc, if you want to see action on this case write to:

Mr Brian Souter
Chief Executive
Stagecoach Group plc
10 Dunkeld Road
Perth
PH1 5TW

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I think when (if) the full details of this case come out then it will make the reverend, the community, the people who have signed the petition and the media very stupid.

 

[nedchester]

http://zelo-street.blogspot.com/2011/05/herding-refugees-cats-moves-to-new.html


Seems to be a bit more to the story than the good hearted station master doing his professional duty.

A lot of 'what ifs' in that blog. The thing is that as a society we have become paranoid about what if this happens or what if that happens. We have become frightened of taking initiative for fear of going against some kind of policy.

 

[kennethw]

Here are some FACTS, Ian was not sacked for removing this shopping trolley that he ALLEDGED was on the track, he has been sacked for SERIOUS breaches of safety.

He has appealled and lost, his solicitor did him a favour by keeping him quiet in court, trust me on that one.
When the facts are made clear, they are slowly working their way out, most of the sympathy for this "poor hard done too man" will disappear.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


They already tried that when Ian was at Sway.

Now Ian takes HIS job very serious and HIS station is always immaculate, that is not in doubt, but Ian views HIS station as HIS empire to do with as he sees fit and that IS an issue, you may want to look into the time Ian should have signed on for work and what time this incident took place.

Some of the stories have picked up on Ian "clearing some litter" from the track after removing the trolley, this has a lot of bearing on the sacking!

ok so what are these facts and why the delay in their "coming out". I appreciate there are 3 sides to any argument - the two parties and the truth which usually is somewhere in the middle, but one has to decide on the basis of avaliable information. As this case has already been heard in court and a verdict passed I see no reason to withold facts

The Argos incident was started by one woman who no longer trades in Lymington, you should read the replies to her suggestion that the Argos store should be in neighbouring Pennington

 

[passmore]

I think when (if) the full details of this case come out then it will make the reverend, the community, the people who have signed the petition and the media very stupid.

Why? What makes you think the whole, full details will be disclosed? As far as SWT are concerned, this is an internal incident and has nothing to do with the public. Everyone seems to be jumping on the media bandwagon because it appears an 'innocent' person has been hung out to dry.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Why? What makes you think the whole, full details will be disclosed? As far as SWT are concerned, this is an internal incident and has nothing to do with the public. Everyone seems to be jumping on the media bandwagon because it appears an 'innocent' person has been hung out to dry.

Read my post, I said 'if'. Personally, I wouldn't blame SWT if they did publish the details since Faletto evidently isn't being truthful.

 

[plymothian]

I think when (if) the full details of this case come out then it will make the reverend, the community, the people who have signed the petition and the media very stupid.

Er, no. As far as they're concerned as they, like the general public at large, do not know what SWT are thinking. As far as they're concerned someone they like has lost their job and they want to do something about it.

 

[passmore]

Er, no. As far as they're concerned as they, like the general public at large, do not know what SWT are thinking. As far as they're concerned someone they like has lost their job and they want to do something about it.

If someone I liked had been found guilty and then was fired of breaching safety rules, I wouldn't start a campaign and jump on any bandwagon. That does no-one any favours at all.

I used to work for a haulier firm transporting pallettes across the country. We have a rigorous safety code that all drivers must adhere to. As others have said, we don't know the full facts here but if I was found to breach this safety code, I would expect a pretty harsh disciplinary. If my misconduct means a sacking, then who am I to argue with my employers?

I agree it must seem that H & S red tape has completely gone out of control, but a) we don't know the whole story and b) safety rules are there to protect passengers as they are to protect employees. They are not as bureaucratic as the media/others like to make out they are.

 

[thefab444]

I don't think SWT releasing the details would be a very good idea, far better for them just to let the case blow over as it will.

It could be quite a good move for them as well - if as a result of Borlotti going, passengers are actually allowed to use the TVMs, there will be no need for Lymington Town station to be staffed.

 

[HugePilchard]

I don't think SWT releasing the details would be a very good idea, far better for them just to let the case blow over as it will.

There are certain rules that are worth blindly enforcing, and not releasing confidential information about employees is one of those; if I was an SWT employee, the sort who does their job, goes home at the end of the day, and keeps their head down and out of trouble, I'd actually be quite worried if my employer went to the press with details of what should be a private matter between them and Mr Faletto.

Some might say that SWT have every right to release all the details they have on Mr Faletto, given that he seems to have opted for trial by media. Frankly, I don't think it would be in their interests - the judge and jury that are the red-top tabloids have already found SWT guilty and any release of the full facts disproving this will be relegated to a couple of column inches in the bottom corner of a page somewhere deep inside the paper. It'll gain little or nothing, but possibly results in the people who trust SWT to keep their details private developing distrust in the company's ability to do so.

What details SWT have on the gent in question is between them, their respective legal advisors and the members of any tribunal that eventually hears their case if he decides to go down the conventional route.

I have no idea whether SWT were right or wrong in their sacking, but fair play to them for not sinking to his level, and keeping private information private.

 

[Greenback]

I too am glad that SWT has kept the details of the sacking private. There are proper procedures in place should an employee wish to challenge a dismissal. I will be interested to see if he goes down that route. If he does, we will get some more information, until then it is best to avoid speculation.

 

[deanparkr]

Even if facts come out relating to more safety issues than are being let on its still absolutely disgusting that someone who put in so much time above the call of duty all the time and now has lost everything after 27 years.

As this case is in the public interest I dont believe SWT should be holding facts back. If Ian permits the case going public then reasons should be scrutinised by all.

 

[Hydro]

Even if facts come out relating to more safety issues than are being let on its still absolutely disgusting that someone who put in so much time above the call of duty all the time and now has lost everything after 27 years.

How is it "disgusting"? If it comes to light he has been acting inappropriately, he threw those 27 years away.

 

[HugePilchard]

Even if facts come out relating to more safety issues than are being let on its still absolutely disgusting that someone who put in so much time above the call of duty all the time and now has lost everything after 27 years.

So it's unthinkable to get rid of someone with long service? What if he'd had several warnings about dangerous behaviour in the past to no avail? Or warnings about any other sort of behaviour? Still unacceptable? What if, after 27 years of flawless service he were to suddenly leap over the ticket office counter and start beating up a little old lady? Can he be sacked then? To condemn the sacking of someone based on anything other than the full facts is silly; to steadfastly maintain that opinion "Even if facts come out relating to more safety issues" is beyond comprehension.

As this case is in the public interest I dont believe SWT should be holding facts back. If Ian permits the case going public then reasons should be scrutinised by all.

Two wrongs don't make a right. If I have a boundary dispute with my neighbour, should I take legal advice and maybe take it to court? Or should I go straight to the media?

 

[seagull]

What if, after 27 years of flawless service he were to suddenly leap over the ticket office counter and start beating up a little old lady?

Funnily enough... this from the comments on: http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9019438.Stationmaster_fired__for_removing_trolley_from_railway_/

""You guys really are only hearing one side of the story here, Mr Faletto and his supporters have gone to the press and presented their side, there is another side to this story which South West Trains are not at liberty to discuss in public about an individual.
There is a history of misconduct and rule breaking regarding health and safety matters regarding this man. This man is firstly not a Station Master, he is ticket office staff, Mr Faletto has taken it upon himself to think he is a Station Master, This man has physically grabbed assaulted and stopped passengers boarding trains when they have every intention of buying from the Guard, C'mon...we have all been a little late and intended to buy on board at some stage.
I believe Mr Faletto was originally moved from Sway station in the past for breaking safety rules. He is obsessed with his job, passion is good but his obsession and his own stupidity has cost this man his job. There are rules in place to protect him and others, he has been warned SEVERAL times by management, only for him to continually break those rules.
South West Trains have repeatedly given Mr Faletto warnings about his conduct only for his obsession to get the better of him. This one incident is just one of many! but South West Trains have respected this mans privacy by not mentioning a lot of these past incidents. You are only hearing what Mr Faletto and his supporters want you to hear..."


And:


"At last, someone who appreciates there are two sides to each story. Being a regular commuter with SWT I can advise that I have no affection for them at all however as 'yawn' points out Mr Faletto has not been entirely blameless has he.

Below is a bit more of a balanced view (my opinion)

Mr Faletto:

Provides sweets for the passengers paid for by himself - Fact.

Provides puzzles and magazines that the passengers can read when waiting at the station - Fact.

Provides good assistance when trying to get the cheapest tickets for longer journeys - Fact.

Keeps the station spotless and actually works tirelessly (and on days off) for the cause - Fact.

Ensures that the ticket machine outside the station is always 'empty' of change - Fact.

Gives students and young persons verbal when not purchasing their ticket from him personally behind the counter - Fact.

Almost abused one young girl trying to stop her boarding the train where she would have purchased a ticket - Fact (she was running late)

Told people they couldn't board the train without a ticket therefore whilst purchasing from himself the train subsequently pulled out without them - Fact (guards are happy on that line to sell tickets without fining)

During inclement weather arranged taxis for passengers to get to Brock - Fact.

Any (young) person who purchased their ticket from the machine on the day of the inclement weather was subsequently told they had no right to get in the taxi as there ticket was not valid (apparently so if you buy a ticket from the machine!!) - Fact

Most importantly (like it or not) the guy broke the procedure/protocol regarding the removal of the shopping trolley - cannot state if fact or not as i (like most on here) are not aware of the S.O.P SWT have in place"

 

[Clip]

Yew - yes they do. Basic training for everyone, and it's always in safety briefs too.

Don't know where you get that from. None of my station staff have been trained into how to walk on the tracks. Because there is no need for them to do so.

What they have been trained and are constantly retrained on is how to stop a train in an emergency.

 

[OxtedL]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9019438.Stationmaster_fired__for_removing_trolley_from_railway_/

Most interestingly in my opinion:

There was no trolly on the tracks - FACT.
Mr Faletto was walking on the track litter picking - FACT.
Breaking all H&S rules - FACT

To which someone has replied:

Trying to think of which SWT manager/staff lives in Bitterne ? Best to shut up 'til the tribunal if you got to see the CCTV...No ?

EDIT: Yes, thanks ralphchadkirk, have made that clearer! Do you think he's on this forum too?!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

To put OxtedL's first quote into context, it was posted by someone called 'SWTbitternepark'.

 

[313103]

Another two page article in today's Daily Fail. I dont know but what is a Staion Master doing on £17,000?

 

[Greenback]

He was not a station master at all - he had nothing to be master of as he was the only member of staff!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Here's the latest DM article (as mentioned by 313103):
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...I-sacked-saving-lives-Now-life-destroyed.html

What a load of garbage.

 

[Hydro]

No one with a top hat and buttonhole can do anything wrong.

EDIT: "arming himself with a wooden broom in case of a sudden surge in electricity"?! Plainly he knew exactly what he was doing.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Ian Faletto:

Obviously, I couldn’t just leave the trolley there — all it takes is for something to get caught underneath a train and it could be derailed, seriously injuring passengers

Erm, obviously you could leave it there as the trains could have easily been stopped (he knew this as he rung Brockenhurst) and as he says later, there was a NR MOM at Eastleigh.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No one with a top hat and buttonhole can do anything wrong.

I thought the SWT uniform was alright until I saw it with a top-hat.

 

[deanparkr]

The top hat is just for special occasions

As Ian indicates, having someone come down all the way from Eastleigh would take at least an hour or more, delaying a number of passengers for what is a 5 minute job.

 

[313103]

He was not a station master at all - he had nothing to be master of as he was the only member of staff!

Lol Greenback i was being ironic!

 

[Hydro]

As Ian indicates, having someone come down all the way from Eastleigh would take at least an hour or more, delaying a number of passengers for what is a 5 minute job.

Would it balls, I've done the trip from Eastleigh to Brock and Lymo dozens of times. Of course, assuming no one at Brock PWay was available!

 

[Matt Taylor]

Yew - yes they do. Basic training for everyone, and it's always in safety briefs too.

My TOC only does this sort of training as part of the PTS course, any other staff have no business being on or near the line and giving them training will only serve to encourage such behaviour, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

 

[kennethw]

I understand the trolley was at Lymington Pier, so how likely a train crash would have resulted. Apparently there was an incident at Salisbury where the tannoy was left on while a few choice words were uttered by him. SWT have apparently had him in their sights for the past two years.

Incidentally, I've experienced a guard refusing to sell me a ticket on the train, hoping the the revenue would be waiting on the basis that "this is your first attempt to buy a ticket" (how did he know?) On the last day of the Lymington CIG's a guard pointed out that my ticket was three hours old, implying that I had spent the time riding to and fro on the branch, when in fact I walked from Brock to Setley to take photographs

 

[Greenback]

Lol Greenback i was being ironic!

Having seen him in the top hat, and with him being described as eccentric, I can see why he might no thave been popular with everybody. He could be one of thos epeople that you either love or loathe - no middle ground!

It's speculation, but having styled himself as an old fashioned station master, he may had his own way of doing things which did not sit well with management. If true, then insisting customers don't use the ticket machines is not good behaviour

 

[OxtedL]

EDIT: "arming himself with a wooden broom in case of a sudden surge in electricity"?! Plainly he knew exactly what he was doing.

Now obviously I have no clue about what has happened at all, but from the scraps of information I am picking up here and there, I get the impression that this guy may not be telling the whole truth... It certainly feels a little variable.