Passengers ‘striking’

[pompeyfan]

I’ve heard of a couple of times recently where some passengers are refusing to show their tickets to guards on TOCs that have been affected by industrial action, as a form of retaliation. Am I correct in thinking this puts them in breach of section 5 of RoRa 1889?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

I’ve heard of a couple of times recently where some passengers are refusing to show their tickets to guards on TOCs that have been affected by industrial action, as a form of retaliation. Am I correct in thinking this puts them in breach of section 5 of RoRa 1889?

If, after refusing to show their ticket, they also refuse to pay their fare or provide their correct name and address, then yes - they are committing an offence under Section 5 of the Regulation of Railways Act 1889. So, if they wanted to avoid an accusation of being in breach of RoRA they could simply provide their name and address - upon which the TOC could write to the passenger and demand payment of the fare, or proof that is has already been paid. That being said, as per Corbyn v Saunders [1978] 1 W.L.R. 400, if the passenger is not contacted, and they do not proactively try to make arrangements to pay any outstanding fare(s), that may be considered as intent to avoid payment of the fare under Section 5(3)(a) of RoRA.

However, it is noteworthy that, as written, an offence under Byelaw 18(2) of the Railway Byelaws 2005 is committed if the passenger refuses to show their ticket. If none of the three defences in Byelaw 18(3) apply (i.e. verbal or written permission to board without a ticket, or no ticketing facilities at boarding station), the offence is complete regardless of whether the passenger subsequently pays their fare, or provides their correct name and address. I believe that Byelaw 18 is not lawful - see thread here - but that is how the law is written, and until such time as it is challenged, that is the way it will, unfortunately, be applied in Court!

 

[pompeyfan]

Interesting, thanks for that, so could I assume that bylaw 18 would be a better deterrent (even if it’s dubious in its legality), although finding someone who is willing and able to document the offence to process it, as well as getting the persons address without the help of a police officer would be nearly impossible.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Interesting, thanks for that, so could I assume that bylaw 18 would be a better deterrent (even if it’s dubious in its legality), although finding someone who is willing and able to document the offence to process it, as well as getting the persons address without the help of a police officer would be nearly impossible.

Well, quite. On all but the most rural routes the threat of calling the BTP would be a credible enough threat to elicit the name and address of most passengers, but of course there are those who simply don't care about the risk of being arrested, prosecuted, convicted etc. - especially if they already have an extensive criminal record.

And of course end-of-journey checks - e.g. at station barriers/exits - are generally easier to conduct than on-train checks, as it is far easier to elicit details, with the credible threat of not being allowed exit!

 

[pompeyfan]

Well, quite. On all but the most rural routes the threat of calling the BTP would be a credible enough threat to elicit the name and address of most passengers, but of course there are those who simply don't care about the risk of being arrested, prosecuted, convicted etc. - especially if they already have an extensive criminal record.

And of course end-of-journey checks - e.g. at station barriers/exits - are generally easier to conduct than on-train checks, as it is far easier to elicit details, with the credible threat of not being allowed exit!

From what I understand it’s regular season ticket holders who are trying to be difficult to show their displeasure at the ongoing industrial action. You would assume these people are otherwise law abiding citizens. I’m just trying to think of ways to disarm the situation.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

From what I understand it’s regular season ticket holders who are trying to be difficult to show their displeasure at the ongoing industrial action. You would assume these people are otherwise law abiding citizens. I’m just trying to think of ways to disarm the situation.

I have to say I can sympathise with their plight, but at the end of the day it is their loss if they do not show their season ticket: they are the ones who will experience a great deal of stress, time wastage and inconvenience, not to mention the potential for a criminal record or fine. If they want to express their displeasure then refusing to show the valid ticket they have is not the way to do it, quite clearly. Protests, letters to MPs, advertising - these are all the correct ways to do that.

 

[Bantamzen]

I have to say I can sympathise with their plight, but at the end of the day it is their loss if they do not show their season ticket: they are the ones who will experience a great deal of stress, time wastage and inconvenience, not to mention the potential for a criminal record or fine. If they want to express their displeasure then refusing to show the valid ticket they have is not the way to do it, quite clearly. Protests, letters to MPs, advertising - these are all the correct ways to do that.

Indeed, given that at the heart of at least some of the disputes is government policy, playing these kind of games isn't going to make a heck of a lot of difference apart from as you say possibly cause themselves stress & quite possibly delay other passengers. Nobody that uses the rail network on a regular basis is happy with the current Mexican stand-offs between rail unions, TOCs & DfT. But there are better channels to use than "striking" to protest about staff striking.

 

[pemma]

There was a protest done by FGW passengers a few years back. The protest group had special fake tickets printed, but according to FGW most passengers showed both the fake ticket and a real ticket.

 

[pemma]

I have to say I can sympathise with their plight, but at the end of the day it is their loss if they do not show their season ticket: they are the ones who will experience a great deal of stress, time wastage and inconvenience, not to mention the potential for a criminal record or fine. If they want to express their displeasure then refusing to show the valid ticket they have is not the way to do it, quite clearly. Protests, letters to MPs, advertising - these are all the correct ways to do that.

In the case of the Northern dispute when the RMT won't even take the advice of left wing pro-trade union politician Steve Rotheram, what chance do other politicians have of achieving something other than making it harder for workers to strike? (Rotheram asked the RMT to call off the strikes saying they were unfair on passengers but at the same time saying he supported having guards on all longer services and services calling at unstaffed stations. He also said he would work with the RMT and TfN to get a solution if they called off the strike - the RMT responded by announcing more strikes and thanked Rotheram for supporting 'keeping the guard on the train.')

 

[pompeyfan]

In the case of the Northern dispute when the RMT won't even take the advice of left wing pro-trade union politician Steve Rotheram, what chance do other politicians have of achieving something other than making it harder for workers to strike? (Rotheram asked the RMT to call off the strikes saying they were unfair on passengers but at the same time saying he supported having guards on all longer services and services calling at unstaffed stations. He also said he would work with the RMT and TfN to get a solution if they called off the strike - the RMT responded by announcing more strikes and thanked Rotheram for supporting 'keeping the guard on the train.')

Not really interested in another DOO/anti RMT debate, it’s boring. I’m more interested in the technicalities of the bylaws in regards to passengers intentionally refusing to show their valid ticket.

 

[Harlequin]

I'm more bothered as to why they wouldn't show a vaild ticket if they have one. Whilst I can understand begrudging the price of their travel at a time when the service is reduced, them making the guard's life a misery could quite possibly be stopping him or her finding somebody who's using the strike as an opportunity or "justification" for a free ride.

 

[47513 Severn]

I believe that Byelaw 18 is not lawful

We know.

 

[pemma]

I'm more bothered as to why they wouldn't show a vaild ticket if they have one. Whilst I can understand begrudging the price of their travel at a time when the service is reduced, them making the guard's life a misery could quite possibly be stopping him or her finding somebody who's using the strike as an opportunity or "justification" for a free ride.

Probably because not showing a ticket requires them doing nothing, look at the alternatives suggested by @ForTheLoveOf, they all require time and effort, in many cases time that you can't use while travelling.

 

[pompeyfan]

Surely though refusing to show a valid ticket even though you’re in possession of one isn’t going to achieve anything, it’s not going to stop the industrial dispute, it’s just going to make other passengers as well as the staff members in question think you’re a bit of an arse.

 

[Darandio]

Surely though refusing to show a valid ticket even though you’re in possession of one isn’t going to achieve anything, it’s not going to stop the industrial dispute, it’s just going to make other passengers as well as the staff members in question think you’re a bit of an arse.

The latter sums up my feelings as well. I'm also of the feeling that the thread doesn't warrant another discussion of whether Byelaw 18 is lawful or not.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The latter sums up my feelings as well. I'm also of the feeling that the thread doesn't warrant another discussion of whether Byelaw 18 is lawful or not.

Any discussion regarding that is well placed in the thread I linked to!

 

[MikeWh]

When I heard about similar tactics being discussed on a Southern train it was clear that it was a large group of season ticket holders who were all going to do the same thing at the same time.

 

[[.n]]

I’ve heard of a couple of times recently where some passengers are refusing to show their tickets to guards on TOCs that have been affected by industrial action, as a form of retaliation. Am I correct in thinking this puts them in breach of section 5 of RoRa 1889?

So presumably this is on a non-strike day, and is to "get back" at the guards for striking? Surely they'd to verify in this case if the guard was a member of the RMT first?

 

[[.n]]

Out of interest in relation to the RoRA1889, are guards officers or servants?

 

[sefton]

I’m just trying to think of ways to disarm the situation.

Disarm the situation! Threatening prosecution would be like throwing petrol on a bonfire, and utterly pointless as well. If you do actually manage to get BTP out, what do you think will happen when the person just shows BTP their season ticket. I suggest absolutely zilch.

If you want to disarm the situation then leave the person to it, since as you comment, they probably have a season ticket anyway.

 

[pompeyfan]

Disarm the situation! Threatening prosecution would be like throwing petrol on a bonfire, and utterly pointless as well. If you do actually manage to get BTP out, what do you think will happen when the person just shows BTP their season ticket. I suggest absolutely zilch.

If you want to disarm the situation then leave the person to it, since as you comment, they probably have a season ticket anyway.

So you’re saying behaviour like that should go unchallenged in front of other passengers just because they might have a season ticket?

 

[sefton]

So you’re saying behaviour like that should go unchallenged in front of other passengers just because they might have a season ticket?

Do you have a better suggestion which actually achieves something.

 

[pompeyfan]

My suggestion was to remind the passengers who do this that they are committing a bylaw offence, at no stage did I suggest the BTP or revenue inspectors would be interested or would be involved.

At the risk of sounding very utopian, if behaviour like that goes unchecked in front of other passengers then it’s much more likely to spread. The passengers who are doing it are fighting the wrong people. The majority of front line staff are on the passengers side whether they see it or not. Their gripe should be with the company, the DfT and the union, not front like staff who are (rightly or wrongly) trying to protect their job.

 

[sefton]

My suggestion was to remind the passengers who do this that they are committing a bylaw offence, at no stage did I suggest the BTP or revenue inspectors would be interested or would be involved.

Do you not think they do not know there are penalties for not producing a ticket? Of course they do, which is exactly why they are doing this in the hope of provoking the response you are advocating.

The passengers who are doing it are fighting the wrong people. The majority of front line staff are on the passengers side whether they see it or not. Their gripe should be with the company, the DfT and the union, not front like staff who are (rightly or wrongly) trying to protect their job.

Most people travelling by train are only concerned about getting from A to B and don't give a damn about the staff, and if the staff are making their more difficult by taking industrial action (for whatever reason) you expect them to have sympathy? That is a utopian view.

 

[najaB]

Interesting, thanks for that, so could I assume that bylaw 18 would be a better deterrent (even if it’s dubious in its legality)...

It's not that dubious.

 

[kristiang85]

The majority of front line staff are on the passengers side whether they see it or not. Their gripe should be with the company, the DfT and the union, not front like staff who are (rightly or wrongly) trying to protect their job.

Whilst I believe you, the Unions really could do with communicating this better, especially in the social media exchanges with passengers.

 

[sefton]

Whilst I believe you, the Unions really could do with communicating this better, especially in the social media exchanges with passengers.

The rail unions appear to have no interest in how they appear to the public, and come across as a throwback to the 1970s (Red Robbo lives - All out Brother). Presumably they put on this exaggerated caricature act because that is what they believe their membership wants, rather than thinking it enhances the view the public have (nobody really talks like that).

The reason why they don't communicate with the public is it would become immediately obvious how disingenuous they are when speaking about safety being their primary concern.

Although they might have the public interest at heart with some of their actions, other strikes have occurred to get drivers reinstated who have been drunk or gone through red lights; actions which definitely would not gain public sympathy.

 

[najaB]

Although they might have the public interest at heart with some of their actions, other strikes have occurred to get drivers reinstated who have been drunk or gone through red lights....

Could you provide some details, please?

 

[radamfi]

Probably because not showing a ticket requires them doing nothing, look at the alternatives suggested by @ForTheLoveOf, they all require time and effort, in many cases time that you can't use while travelling.

And they don't work.

 

[sefton]

Could you provide some details, please?

I am sure Google will assist, but funnily enough the unions try to keep the details in these cases quiet.