Special needs children denied free first class upgrades

[callum9999]

I agree, but then we don't know how much experience the group has of travelling by rail, or on that particular service. The organisers may simply have presumed that an intercity train would have some empty seats, as indeed do many other infrequent users. Or they may have previously travelled and found ample space available and so expected the same this time.

Then that's gross negligence on their part. If the "special needs" require the children to be in seats or they face significant discomfort then they should have ensured seats would be available instead of assuming. It doesn't matter if they are inexperienced with train travel, and surely this should have formed part of the risk assessment they need to do?

Without knowing what the special needs of each child was, id imagine that few of them, if any, couldn't cope with sitting on the floor. And those that couldn't presumably could have gotten seats in the disabled priority areas?

 

[reb0118]

But is there not a Bye-Law offence covering causing a nuisance to other users of the Railway which could (should) be used to limit the activities any and all bunches of screaming brats anywhere on the Railway.

Not if they are under 10.
https://www.gov.uk/age-of-criminal-responsibility

Just to remind everyone that as the offence happened in Scotland the age of criminal responsibility is in fact eight. As you are all no doubt aware we have a much better education system up here in Scotland and we expect our offspring to take responsibility for their own actions at an earlier age.

That said having learning difficulties is not an offence (but again it is not an excuse for bad behaviour)

 

[jon0844]

Surely any school (or theatre) group can't expect to get seats all together, or even to have enough seats full stop? If you could reserve seats, why wouldn't you? The adults have a duty of care over their group and should be a bit smarter.

I've never seen a school group manage to remain all together and it isn't a problem because there are sufficient adults to manage them. And some kids quite happy sit on the floor if that means they can all sit together rather than spread out.

Too often you see people who should simply admit misjudging something (like not reserving seats or even paying for FC upgrades if necessary) decide to shift blame to save face instead. Perhaps by making things up, like someone else being rude etc.

 

[34D]

I hate to say it, but if I was a first class passenger (as I often am) I wouldn't see a problem with a mum/dad and 2 children being let in, but I would have a problem with a group of 10 disabled children.

No prejudicial reason, just simply that they will make a lot of noise (random wailing, etc) and 2 adults can hardly supervise/discipline them all!

 

[DarloRich]

Some of the attitudes displayed on this thread are simply disgusting and boil down to i dont want to look on those horrible disabled kids what upset the ambiance - Lots of you should be ashamed.

What year is it again? 1813 or 2013?

 

[maniacmartin]

I think its more the fact that they are a large group of children with presumably a low ratio of supervising adults, than the fact they are disabled.

 

[DJ_K666]

How would you classify me? I am not a child but I am a young person and I go First Class all the time. And you should see some of the looks I get when I board the First Class carriages! Even though I'm wearing a suit or some sort of formal outfit most of the time I go by rail, I get plenty of 'looks' to say the least, and I see people shaking their heads, clearly thinking to themselves 'how dare he sit in these carriages, of course he hasn't paid the First Class fare!'

I agree with what you said in the rest of your post, just pointing this bit out.

Of course this situation would make it even more satisfying when the guard comes round and you show him/her a fully valid first class ticket.

 

[WSW]

I hate to say it, but if I was a first class passenger (as I often am) I wouldn't see a problem with a mum/dad and 2 children being let in, but I would have a problem with a group of 10 disabled children.

No prejudicial reason, just simply that they will make a lot of noise (random wailing, etc) and 2 adults can hardly supervise/discipline them all!

How do you know they'd be "wailing randomly"? What a pathetically ignorant thing to say. Looks like you have already made your mind up - and that's prejudice. 100%.

Steve

 

[tony_mac]

Just to remind everyone that as the offence happened in Scotland the age of criminal responsibility is in fact eight. As you are all no doubt aware we have a much better education system up here in Scotland and we expect our offspring to take responsibility for their own actions at an earlier age.

Although nobody under 12 can be prosecuted.

I think it was a general point, not specifically related to this case. I am sure there are many cases much more deserving of prosecution than loud children.

(but again it is not an excuse for bad behaviour)

It certainly can be, depending on the learning difficulty!

 

[trainophile]

I understand 34D's view, and agree to a certain extent. Some of these children are apparently 4 years old, and in my experience 4-year-olds are not known for being considerate of other people's wish for peace and quiet.

I'd feel the same if a large-ish party of raucous hen-nighters, or inebriated football fans, were allowed into 1st Class with standard class tickets. I wouldn't be over-happy if they had 1st Class tickets tbh.

Like it or not, there's an expectation of getting a more pleasant journey by virtue of paying the extra premium to travel in a 1st Class coach. The disabled (in what way, we do not know) children might be the most endearing kids on the planet, but 10 of them in one place isn't going to make for a peaceful experience, any more than 10 non-disabled children would.

 

[HST Power]

Of course this situation would make it even more satisfying when the guard comes round and you show him/her a fully valid first class ticket.

Indeed it does! They check on East Coast all the time, but East Coast is normally fine, it's FCC where I seem to get most of the 'looks.' And the so called 'First Class revenue protection' on FCC services is somewhere between paper thin and non-existent.

 

[DJ_K666]

Indeed it does! They check on East Coast all the time, but East Coast is normally fine, it's FCC where I seem to get most of the 'looks.' And the so called 'First Class revenue protection' on FCC services is somewhere between paper thin and non-existent.

Ah well, that's the best place to do it then lol. I can imagine the lemon-sucking looks on their faces now haha!

 

[Antman]

Some of the attitudes displayed on this thread are simply disgusting and boil down to i dont want to look on those horrible disabled kids what upset the ambiance - Lots of you should be ashamed.

What year is it again? 1813 or 2013?

Who said they are disabled?

I don't think anybody has said anything unreasonable, don't be such a drama queen
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I hate to say it, but if I was a first class passenger (as I often am) I wouldn't see a problem with a mum/dad and 2 children being let in, but I would have a problem with a group of 10 disabled children.

No prejudicial reason, just simply that they will make a lot of noise (random wailing, etc) and 2 adults can hardly supervise/discipline them all!

And I think most people would say the same thing if they're being honest

 

[FGW_DID]

How do you know they'd be "wailing randomly"? What a pathetically ignorant thing to say. Looks like you have already made your mind up - and that's prejudice. 100%.

Steve

Get off your high horse! You ever been to a Special needs school? My stepson went to a special needs school so have been to a few assemblies and such, yes lots of the kids will sit there quietly, some will just sit and dribble, others will run/ walk around and talk to themselves and believe it or not there are some who will make 'random wailing' noises.

Unless you know the group personally, how do you know how they would behave?

 

[WSW]

Get off your high horse! You ever been to a Special needs school? My stepson went to a special needs school so have been to a few assemblies and such, yes lots of the kids will sit there quietly, some will just sit and dribble, others will run/ walk around and talk to themselves and believe it or not there are some who will make 'random wailing' noises.

Unless you know the group personally, how do you know how they would behave?

In answer to your first question. Yes. I have 42 years first hand experience of special needs kids and adults.

In answer to your last question, I do not know this particular group. Neither do you or, as far as I can tell, any other person on this forum. But many posters to this thread are implying that this group would be noisy (even randomly "wailing") when there is no evidence whatsoever. Just assumption. And prejudice.

Steve

 

[Antman]

In answer to your first question. Yes. I have 42 years first hand experience of special needs kids and adults.

In answer to your last question, I do not know this particular group. Neither do you or, as far as I can tell, any other person on this forum. But many posters to this thread are implying that this group would be noisy (even randomly "wailing") when there is no evidence whatsoever. Just assumption. And prejudice.

Steve

Well no it isn't prejudice, lets stop throwing emotive words around, its just an assumption that may be right or wrong.

There are too many people playing the 'special needs card' to get what they want and this appears to be a prime example of that.

If these childrens needs really are that special perhaps a minibus should have been hired to transport them?

 

[MCW]

Well no it isn't prejudice, lets stop throwing emotive words around, its just an assumption that may be right or wrong.

There are too many people playing the 'special needs card' to get what they want and this appears to be a prime example of that.

If these childrens needs really are that special perhaps a minibus should have been hired to transport them?

depending on where they were going from and to the cost of a minibus plus fuel and maybe even a driver could have well meant that their trip may not have gone ahead.

As for the special needs label lark, yes I agree, you shouldn't use anything of the sort to get what you want but sometimes you have to throw it out there for people to try and understand the context of a situation. I have ended up in stressful and confusing situations before and I have gone to someone explained that I have autism and what the problem is and that any help would be appreciated, and alas most of the time people help me out, make sure in in the right place for the right train and just make sure I am fine when its really busy, especially matchdays.

Its not about getting what you want.

Some of the comments in this thread are shocking if I am quite honest. The bluntness and lack of understanding from a few individuals is enough to question why we are letting this discussion drag on....

 

[insidetrack77]

Whilst I appreciate there is an element of one-sidedness and perhaps exaggeration in the reporting, I am aware that a female conductor on these services is making a bit of a name for herself in the passenger-unfriendly stakes. I am certain, if this report refers to the same individual, that this is not the first complaint about her attitude and behaviour.

Unfortunately, Cross Country appear to have a flagrant disregard for customer service, particularly at times of service disruption, and her attitude is one that I expect filters down from a higher level.

 

[sarahj]

TBH. If i'm going to upgrade people into first class to create room, it will be the quiet older passenger, not the group of 10 kids.

In the last few weeks I've seen in first class:

An woman of about 60 who plonked herself in first class without asking, saying she was disabled. I pointed out I could have found her a seat if asked. She started to complain. My view, if she wanted the space (and the whole use of a table) she should have bought a first class ticket. But to just sit there and say I'm disabled, I've got a disabled pass, so I can sit here, is not on. Its not like our first class seats are any different to the rest. (there were seats available further down the train).
A pass with a first class season, who on a peak weekday service had brought his wife and 2 kids with him. Problem is, they had standard class tickets. I found them 2 mins before we arrived at their station. I told him that next time, if he wanted them to join him in first, they would need first class tickets.

The problem is, when your dealing with these situations, in the back of your mind is if they complain to customer services, they often get replies, of so, sorry, will investigate, here are some vouchers, or you get in the news for throwing a disabled grandmother out of her seat on a 'busy' train.


Anyway, on a lighter note. Passenger of the week.
Victoria to littlehampton/Eastbourne splitter. Coaches 1-4 for Lit, 5-8 for ebn
Passenger in coach 3.
Me, you have a ticket to plumpton. this train is not calling at plumpton, and this section is for the other way around.
Pass. I was told this coach went to plumpton
Me. No, however if you change at heaywards heath and wait 30 mins, there is a direct train to pumpton
Pass. i was told this coach went to plumpton
Me, sorry, that was incorect, this section goes via hove to littlehampton
Pass, well thats not what someone else said.
Me. Again, sorry, but if you want plumpton you will need to change and wait 30 mins, or you could join the rear 4 coaches and go to wivelsfield or lewes.(ie in the right direction for plumton)
Pass. i was told this coach is going to plumton.
Me....gives up and walks off.:roll:

 

[DarloRich]

Who said they are disabled?

the original article - I equate "special needs" with disabled children. Perhaps my experience is clouding my judgement.

Well no it isn't prejudice,

Yes it is - you and others have shown quite blatant prejudice towards one group of people.

lets stop throwing emotive words around, its just an assumption that may be right or wrong

What other words shall we use? You dont want to allow a disabled person to use the same train as you. What else shall i call it?

There are too many people playing the 'special needs card' to get what they want and this appears to be a prime example of that

I assume you have lots of experience of dealing with the disabled that makes you suitably qualified to comment on this. Or is it something you read in the paper?

If these childrens needs really are that special perhaps a minibus should have been hired to transport them?

What is that if not prejudice :roll:

What other group in society should not be allowed to travel by train?

What are you scared of? That they might touch you? Imagine that - A disabled touching you!!!!!!!!!!!!! You might catch whatever they have! :roll:

TBH this must be trolling which I am sure has just landed a big bite but what the hell. These attitudes are all wrong and should be challenged.

 

[Oswyntail]

So far on this thread we have had plenty of hot air about:-

• Whether it is fair to move people to First (surely up to the judgement of the TM)
• The place of children on trains and in society
• Special needs (with some pretty obnoxious views, but it's a free society)

To me, however, the only part of the story worth questioning is whether the TM in question actually used "Special needs" as a stated reason for not allowing them to sit in first. That sort of attitude is completely out of order in a public-facing role. The TOC need to investigate that and, if that reason was given, a certain amount of retraining is needed.

 

[Geezertronic]

To me, however, the only part of the story worth questioning is whether the TM in question actually used "Special needs" as a stated reason for not allowing them to sit in first. That sort of attitude is completely out of order in a public-facing role. The TOC need to investigate that and, if that reason was given, a certain amount of retraining is needed.

I think another aspect that needs to be looked at is whether there were enough staff to monitor the amount of children there was in this group regardless of whether they were disabled, special needs, or not

What is that if not prejudice :roll:

What other group in society should not be allowed to travel by train?

What are you scared of? That they might touch you? Imagine that - A disabled touching you!!!!!!!!!!!!! You might catch whatever they have! :roll:

TBH this must be trolling which I am sure has just landed a big bite but what the hell. These attitudes are all wrong and should be challenged.

I think that regardless of their needs or not, the preferred method to transport a group of kids of this age range would not be on a train (packed or not). I wouldn't let my youngest go in a group who were travelling by train, I would very much prefer coach/minibus travel. With the amount of kids to adults there would always be a risk that one could go missing and disabled, special needs or otherwise doesn't have anything to do with that.

It would only need one adult to take one child to the toilet, then the ratio of adults to children goes up massively and, in my opinion, unacceptably

 

[Antman]

the original article - I equate "special needs" with disabled children. Perhaps my experience is clouding my judgement.



Yes it is - you and others have shown quite blatant prejudice towards one group of people.



What other words shall we use? You dont want to allow a disabled person to use the same train as you. What else shall i call it?



I assume you have lots of experience of dealing with the disabled that makes you suitably qualified to comment on this. Or is it something you read in the paper?



What is that if not prejudice :roll:

What other group in society should not be allowed to travel by train?

What are you scared of? That they might touch you? Imagine that - A disabled touching you!!!!!!!!!!!!! You might catch whatever they have! :roll:

TBH this must be trolling which I am sure has just landed a big bite but what the hell. These attitudes are all wrong and should be challenged.

Oh for goodness sake, what utter rubbish. As I mentioned in a previous post I have a young grandson who is supposedly 'special needs' and I also have a nephew who is disabled.

I really think this thread has run its course now:roll:

 

[sarahj]

I'm glad i put, on a light note.

But I'm not sure of the attutude of, would not let my youngest travel by train.
We have school groups on our trains all the time, some quite young. There is always a very high adult to child ratio, often with parents involved. Many children are in high viz. Counts are made before and after. And I will hold a train at a station until all the children leaving are accounted for. All it takes is a quick word with the leader to let me know. These are on short hops. Large groups on long distance are another thing, and not one I would recommend for young children and are quite uncommon from what I see. (we are talking primary aged children here).

 

[Lampshade]

I think the whole 'Special Needs' thing is by the by, a piece of sensationalism by a media group notorious for it.

The real matter is whether or not the Guard was right to refuse these children (disabilities or not) free First Class upgrades and I believe he was right - people pay for FC to get away from noisy children. Upgrading other passengers to make room for them in Standard would have been a better course of action though.

 

[work-traveller]

The term 'special needs' is deliberately anodyne and so conveys nothing of an individuals condition. This in itself leads to much wild speculation in the absence of knowledge.

Anyway, some time ago I was sitting in first class on a Birmingham to Edinburgh weekday peak service. At Preston I was joined at the table by chap in his 50s and his carer. Based on what I observed this chap would, in another time, have been called 'simple'. Anyway, during the remainder of the journey there was a very occasional non-descript chuntering from Mr.Chap, but nothing that really disrupted my enjoyment of my book. To be honest, I was far more distracted by the carer who wanted to babble on at me about anything and everything - I managed to scotch that before too long however. The result was a perfectly decent journey to Edinburgh, at the end of which I wished my table companions a pleasant day in Edinburgh and gave a few recommendations for places to visit.

Accepting the fact that having a ticket (without a reservation) doesn't entitle you to a seat, rather to be conveyed from A to B, I suppose XC would be within their rights to say 'this is the cost of the supplement, otherwise I'm afraid not'. Having 'special needs' doesn't come with entitlement to free upgrades, but nor does it provide grounds for denying a paid upgrade. From a personal point of view I wouldn't want to sit in a carriage with a big group of 'non special needs' children, because - lets face it - all children have a propensity for being noisy, fidgety etc. Frankly I've had journeys in first class significantly disrupted by ordinary punters who are just plain rowdy, but I'm pretty sure the conditions of carriage don't say anything about not being able to talk loudly.

 

[DarloRich]

Oh for goodness sake, what utter rubbish.

Glad you agree - are you now prepared to retract your assertion that the disabled should not be allowed to travel on the train? Or perhaps you will just flounce off as you have been called out.

I will admit to a personal interest in this type of situation. I worked, while at university, as a carer for several profoundly disabled children. I have also worked in special schools.

The simple act of going for a ride on the train or a trip by train to the seaside or railway museum was a life enriching experience for them. I never once encountered any difficulty with members of railway staff who could not do enough to help and make the trips go well. The attitudes of members of the public however…………

 

[Deerfold]

Get off your high horse! You ever been to a Special needs school? My stepson went to a special needs school so have been to a few assemblies and such, yes lots of the kids will sit there quietly, some will just sit and dribble, others will run/ walk around and talk to themselves and believe it or not there are some who will make 'random wailing' noises.

Unless you know the group personally, how do you know how they would behave?

They're children. I don't think people are saying that "special needs" makes this more likely.

I've travelled on a few trips in the same carriage as large groups of school children (usually between Leeds and London).

No matter how well behaved they've been there's always been a higher than average level of background noise. On some occasions a lot more. A train manager is unlikely to be able to identify how well behaved a bunch of children will bein a short space of time.

 

[Antman]

Glad you agree - are you now prepared to retract your assertion that the disabled should not be allowed to travel on the train? Or perhaps you will just flounce off as you have been called out.

I will admit to a personal interest in this type of situation. I worked, while at university, as a carer for several profoundly disabled children. I have also worked in special schools.

The simple act of going for a ride on the train or a trip by train to the seaside or railway museum was a life enriching experience for them. I never once encountered any difficulty with members of railway staff who could not do enough to help and make the trips go well. The attitudes of members of the public however…………

Nowhere have I said that disabled people shouldn't be allowed on trains but clearly you don't let facts like that get in your way:roll:

Now if you don't mind I won't be commenting any further on the matter.

 

[DarloRich]

Nowhere have I said that disabled people shouldn't be allowed on trains but clearly you don't let facts like that get in your way:roll:

Now if you don't mind I won't be commenting any further on the matter.

What does this mean then because it looks to me like you are saying that those with special needs should be sent in a special mini bus rather than by train:

If these childrens needs really are that special perhaps a minibus should have been hired to transport them?

Perhaps you could clarify your point if I have misunderstood it?

My view is that public transport should be for all members of the public. Yours appears to be somewhat different.