Rude staff member at Manchester station

[Edsmith]

Appalling and I would certainly make a complaint about it, all he had to say was "sorry but I don't know anymore than that at the moment". On my travels I've found the vast majority of railway staff very good but it's not the nine good ones people remember, it's the one bad one.

 

[Howardh]

From the OP:

Me: "Excuse me, do you know if the train has been cancelled?"
Him: "Its been delayed due to emergency services dealing with an incident"
Me: "Oh Ok, So do you think it might be cancelled?"
Him: "It means its been delayed due to emergency services dealing with an incident"

If that's verbatim, then it's a very poor response by the railway employee. The OP asked if the train had been cancelled. The first response by the staff member was fair enough, saying that due to emergency services it was delayed. But when the OP asked again if it was CANCELLED, for the staff member to continually repeat the same thing is unacceptable.

If they'd just said "Sorry, I don't know if it's been cancelled; all I know at the moment is that it's currently delayed" would've been much better. What was so difficult in saying that? For bonus points, the employee could've said that they'd try to find out.

Really does sound like they have been watching too many politicians on TV!

Frankly, if I were in that situation and couldn't get an answer I'd be writing on this forum to see if anyone knew what was going on!

Realtime Trains is excellent at what it does, but can't help if a train is stuck and going nowhere for the timebeing. TOC's twitter feeds are OK when there's someone at the other end, but someone like Northern shut up shop around 7pm. Sometimes an actual station (eg Euston) has immediate information on their twitter feed, so sometimes it's worth searching twitter for your local large station.

Every sympathy for staff that don't know what's going on, but a simple "sorry, I'm in the dark too" will suffice.

 

[skyhigh]

someone like Northern shut up shop around 7pm

10pm

 

[Howardh]

10pm

They've been doing it earlier than that I'm sure.

Edit - it does say "10pm" apologies I'm wrong!

 

[skyhigh]

They've been doing it earlier than that I'm sure.

Could do with being a bit later than 10pm in my opinion but yes 0600-2200 is the current operating hours

 

[Mawkie]

Every sympathy for staff that don't know what's going on, but a simple "sorry, I'm in the dark too" will suffice.

In my experience, as soon as you put on the uniform, the passengers expect you to know absolutely everything from when the toilet will be fixed, to where the 0935 to Timbuktu is currently.

As soon as you say "I don't know I'm afraid", the response can be anything from just walking off, to "Well, you work here don't you", to "What do they pay you for?", to "Thanks", and anything in between.

Repeating the official party line is often the path of least resistance - especially as people will often ask the same question 5 different ways and expect a different answer!

 

[Skiddaw]

I can understand that, but it does seem to vary so much. For example, I've always found the staff at Penrith (my local station) and Carlisle to be informative, helpful and genuinely friendly whereas I've encountered some really obnoxious behaviour from some staff at Euston and Paddington (not often I hasten to add, but certainly more than very occasionally). On the other hand, I can well imagine that staff in larger, city stations face the brunt of abuse from passengers so I suppose it is understandable. I think perhaps some people are just better at public facing roles than others.

 

[nathanclass323]

In my experience, as soon as you put on the uniform, the passengers expect you to know absolutely everything from when the toilet will be fixed, to where the 0935 to Timbuktu is currently.

As soon as you say "I don't know I'm afraid", the response can be anything from just walking off, to "Well, you work here don't you", to "What do they pay you for?", to "Thanks", and anything in between.

Repeating the official party line is often the path of least resistance - especially as people will often ask the same question 5 different ways and expect a different answer!

I appreciate that it's a different beast to the railways, but at my airline we're very much encouraged to tell passengers in times of disruption if we don't have an answer for something but to give them an estimate on when we will have an answer. We are however dealing with much smaller numbers of passengers than the railways per flight and I imagine that it's much easier for us to be in contact with the right people to find an answer out in many cases.

 

[Bertie the bus]

There are plenty of excuses and blaming passengers for the bad attitude of staff on this thread but it really isn’t a couple of bad apples. Generally the information provided when there are problems with the service, the very time passengers want information, it is either non-existent, poor or just made up. It isn’t just platform staff either. About 2 or 3 years ago when a service from Lancaster – Barrow was delayed at Lancaster station I asked the guard what the problem was and how long the delay might be. The response was a patronising there is a red signal and we can’t pass red signals. When I pointed out I was aware of that but wanted to know what was causing the signal to remain at red well past departure time I was told to go and find out for myself if I was that bothered because providing information to passengers was not her job.

It is also extremely variable around the network. Manchester Piccadilly is a particularly bad example and not just platform staff but at Leeds any time I’ve asked for information regarding delays at any of the information points they have always made an effort to find information, beyond just looking at the PIS and repeating what is on there.

 

[yorkie]

I can understand that, but it does seem to vary so much. For example, I've always found the staff at Penrith (my local station) and Carlisle to be informative, helpful and genuinely friendly whereas I've encountered some really obnoxious behaviour from some staff at Euston and Paddington (not often I hasten to add, but certainly more than very occasionally). On the other hand, I can well imagine that staff in larger, city stations face the brunt of abuse from passengers so I suppose it is understandable. I think perhaps some people are just better at public facing roles than others.

I don't think that makes it understandable; I can be spoken to very rudely and/or defiantly at times at work as I do roles that can involve dealing with challenging individuals, but that doesn't mean I am rude towards others!

Also if someone is being demanding and/or repeating the same question and/or being rude, there are ways to handle that which wouldn't involve simply repeating the same thing over and over again. For example I could say "I am sorry I cannot answer your question; based on the information available, it is expected that ....., however that could be subject to change".

I think the reality is that some people just aren't good communicators and training for such staff isn't always adequate in this regard.

 

[Horizon22]

Real Time Trains is of absolutely no use whatsoever in trying to establish whether a train might get cancelled or whether the driver who is scheduled to take over at Oxford Road is in position or on a delayed train.

It is totally depressing that people are advising passengers who are on a station and speaking to a member of staff to use information systems that are not even official railway systems to obtain information instead. That is the job of the railway and its employees. RTT has many uses but it certainly shouldn't be a replacement for the railway providing information to passengers on trains or at stations.

Sometimes the decision is not known. Even in control centres, decisions have to be made very quickly and suddenly after a long wait. In some incidents, predicting is a fool's game.

The best response here would have been something like "Trains are delayed due to emergency services dealing with an incident". When asked subsequent questions from someone who might ask "When will it be resolved?" or "Is the train going to be cancelled", then reply "I'm afraid I don't know right now, this is a live situation and we'll try to update you as soon as possible". The staff should update with alternatives (if any) if they are able to.

I've certainly had people ask repetitive questions over and over again and then get themselves frustrated - normally this is handled with "As I said, I'm sorry but we don't know just yet and I've shared all I know at the present time and I need to speak to other passengers / handle other tasks". It can get confrontational, so I understand that in severe disruption some staff don't want to deal with the hassle, but many have long forgotten their conflict management training and there's no direct management there to encourge them to be visible.

I would avoid the "in the dark" comments as it makes you / the company appear incompetent - best to just say that things are subject to change as the incident unfolds and changes might be made at short-notice, but we'll try and give as much time as possible.

 

[northwichcat]

Before I retired (in 2016 !) it was recognised that it was far better to tell passengers as much as possible, so it was deemed acceptable to say 'a person struck by a train', the only proviso being that the exact location should not be stated (to prevent ghouls having a look)

I think that's recommended against for mental health reasons. If there could be someone with suicidal thoughts listening don't say people are taking their lives by jumping in front of trains.

Likewise, saying an announcement saying a delay due to a cable theft, might make potential criminals think there's value in cables.

Although, saying that 'emergency services dealing with an incident' is vague. If it relates to a train crashing at a level crossing and air ambulance rescuing passengers, it's going to take a lot longer to resolve than if it's a bonfire in a garden near the railway line that's got out of control.

A minor obstruction on the line, might be more appropriate?

If they'd just said "Sorry, I don't know if it's been cancelled; all I know at the moment is that it's currently delayed" would've been much better. What was so difficult in saying that? For bonus points, the employee could've said that they'd try to find out.

Agreed. Although, perhaps I would say something like "The information we have at the moment indicates the train will run but will be delayed. We're currently unable to say exactly how long it the delay will be. There should be an announcement when we have further information."

 

[nanstallon]

Back in the 60s and 70s, too many (not all) railway staff were casually rude to the paying customer, and the industry had got a bad name for it by the 80s. Then, in later BR days, they sent staff on retraining in customer relations and matters improved a great deal. As a customer, I felt appreciated a lot more. Sadly, and perhaps because railways have little incentive now to encourage custom, the old attitudes seem to be coming back.

 

[Edsmith]

Back in the 60s and 70s, too many (not all) railway staff were casually rude to the paying customer, and the industry had got a bad name for it by the 80s. Then, in later BR days, they sent staff on retraining in customer relations and matters improved a great deal. As a customer, I felt appreciated a lot more. Sadly, and perhaps because railways have little incentive now to encourage custom, the old attitudes seem to be coming back.

I can only speak from my own experiences but I think rudeness like that is very much like exception to the norm and I've seen staff who have gone well beyond the call of duty to assist people.

 

[Falcon1200]

I think that's recommended against for mental health reasons. If there could be someone with suicidal thoughts listening don't say people are taking their lives by jumping in front of trains.

To the best of my knowledge the opposite is true, ie the standard format for such unfortunate incidents was changed to give passengers more information, because that is the least they should expect (and because it should make life a little easier for the staff dealing with delayed passengers). It is not possible to shield everyone from the sometimes tragic realities of life.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To the best of my knowledge the opposite is true, ie the standard format for such unfortunate incidents was changed to give passengers more information, because that is the least they should expect (and because it should make life a little easier for the staff dealing with delayed passengers). It is not possible to shield everyone from the sometimes tragic realities of life.

The usual approach now seems to be to be honest about it but be quite sensitive as well, e.g. start the message with "Sadly", or "We are saddened to report" or similar.

 

[Falcon1200]

The usual approach now seems to be to be honest about it but be quite sensitive as well, e.g. start the message with "Sadly", or "We are saddened to report" or similar.

Yes, that is I think the best way of providing the information.

Sadly another such incident between Glasgow Central and Motherwell this morning. The National Rail Enquiries page for the incident includes the following;

If you’ve been affected by what happened on the network today, there is always someone to talk to. You can contact the Samaritans on 116 123 from any phone for a confidential chat.

Scotrail's website does not (but should), but does use the word 'unfortunately'.

 

[maniacmartin]

If you give the most vague explanations and answers possible, don't be surprised if customers feel like you're fobbing them off and demand more information. Phrases like "emergency services dealing with an incident" should never be used ever, as they are so vague they don't give any indication as to how servere the incident is, thus making it hard to have estimate the length of disruption and which (if any) alternative transport arrangements should be arranged.

Frontline staff should have enough information to be empowered to make an estimate as to when things might be moving again, or if a train is likely to be cancelled. Yes, the estimates might turn out to be wrong in hindsight, but to refuse to engage with passengers is bad customer service and disrespectful to passengers too.

 

[Falcon1200]

Yes, the estimates might turn out to be wrong in hindsight, but to refuse to engage with passengers is bad customer service and disrespectful to passengers too.

The problem is that no-one knows how long such an incident will last; It can be affected for example by whether the Police deem it suspicious or not, and, sorry to be brutal, but the complications of the clean-up process. Plus other factors such as how long staff take to get to and access the site; As well as response staff, and a relief Driver for the train involved, this includes non-railway personnel such as the Police and undertakers. I'm not sure that giving estimates which turn out to be wrong really helps, far better to be open and honest with people, and giving reasonable detail of what has occurred is part of that.

 

[FenMan]

The problem is that no-one knows how long such an incident will last; It can be affected for example by whether the Police deem it suspicious or not, and, sorry to be brutal, but the complications of the clean-up process. Plus other factors such as how long staff take to get to and access the site; As well as response staff, and a relief Driver for the train involved, this includes non-railway personnel such as the Police and undertakers. I'm not sure that giving estimates which turn out to be wrong really helps, far better to be open and honest with people, and giving reasonable detail of what has occurred is part of that.

Well yes. But people paying for a service that isn't being delivered as advertised deserve something better than robotic responses from staff.

Staff being human makes a big difference. Basic psychology 1-0-1.

 

[AlterEgo]

If you give the most vague explanations and answers possible, don't be surprised if customers feel like you're fobbing them off and demand more information. Phrases like "emergency services dealing with an incident" should never be used ever, as they are so vague they don't give any indication as to how servere the incident is, thus making it hard to have estimate the length of disruption and which (if any) alternative transport arrangements should be arranged.

This is the big downside to the railway’s modern aversion to explaining that a person has been hit by a train. “Emergency services dealing with an incident” is a euphemism that can cover anything from someone getting arrested for a fight to a two hour closure and it being better for everyone waiting for a train to head to the pub instead.

See also “operational incident”.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Well yes. But people paying for a service that isn't being delivered as advertised deserve something better than robotic responses from staff.

Staff being human makes a big difference. Basic psychology 1-0-1.

Some staff find situations like suicide quite harrowing and will find it easier to separate themselves from the incident by not wishing to know any details. Nobody really needs to know what has happened and to whom.

Politeness and regular updates is what should be expected. If passengers ask me, I rarely give them more than a vague initial message and updates on timings where possible. And when I've had serious incidents on trains due to delays such as these, I've got BTP onboard to assist.

People react in different ways to such situations, just because you want to know doesn't mean you have the right to any more information that the person giving it has

 

[43066]

What was worse was there was a very unpleasant traveller who was clearly upset about being delayed and looking for someone to take his frustration on, rudley kept interrupting me as I was asking the staff the question by half-yelling "IT MEANS THE TRAINS DELAYED, IVE BEEN HERE FOR AN HOUR WAITING"....I tried to ignore him but his attitude made it hard to talk to the staff so I turned to him and said firmly "excuse me" and then went back to trying to to the staff but then the traveller started swearing at me and the situation was in danger of escalating. The staff member could see this happening and he knew his attitude of repeating himself was unhelpful and contributing to the escalation but the staff carried on doing it.

I would say it probably isn’t worth complaining about. The staff member wasn’t overly rude by the sound of things and it sounds as though something might have simply been lost in communication.

I suppose it was a little strange to repeat the same phrase, but they might have found it odd for you to keep repeating a question about the train being cancelled when they’d already told you it had been delayed. If he’d known it had been cancelled, he would simply have told you.

With all due respect the fact another passenger was irritated to the point of swearing by your questioning might, in the nicest possible way, call into question whether your approach to this interaction was handled as well as it could be.

This is the big downside to the railway’s modern aversion to explaining that a person has been hit by a train. “Emergency services dealing with an incident” is a euphemism that can cover anything from someone getting arrested for a fight to a two hour closure and it being better for everyone waiting for a train to head to the pub instead.

See also “operational incident”.

This has swung back the other way somewhat. IME “person struck by a train” is generally used in preference to “operational incident” when explaining delays caused by a fatality. That’s all to the better in my opinion as people are far more understanding when they know a fatality has happened than when they’re told something that, rightly or wrongly, sounds like an excuse/fob off.