Train pulls away with children left on platform

[SteveP29]

No railway company would be that stupid.

Although it might be considered the guard did nothing wrong, even though the guard would have clearly seen three young children standing on their own when they gave the signal for the train to move off, and would have then seen the reaction of the children as the train departed (did the children head towards the moving train?). I am sure the train company's management would not want the guard's decision exposed to the scrutiny of court proceedings.

The article in the Mirror and another unnamed source had said that the children were sat on bench seats on the platform that are against the station building, therefore the guard had no need to look out for them.

 

[bramling]

GTR has been actively seeking to reduce the problems you suffer at weekends though!

Lol!

Other weekend favourites are:

1) People on platform not letting people off the train first (especially upon arrival at King's Cross - I really wish they would not advertise the train's next service until people have had the chance to alight, especially on the narrow Platform 10/11).

2) Squabbles over windows being open or closed, where some weekend passengers seem to think the railway exists for their personal requirements and have a hissy-fit if things aren't arranged for their own way.

3) Squabbles over table seats, where a family turns up at the last minute and seem to think they have a God-given right to a table seat (not an issue on 317/321, but certainly an issue on 365s after the refresh, and I imagine on the 387s too).

 

[341o2]

Whilst your point is valid, surely the concept that a train which is about to leave is going leave, is crossing well into common sense territory, rather than seasoned railway knowledge?!

Exactly. Typically approx. 1 1/2 minutes stop, so if the doors open at 9.29.30, this gives 90 seconds before the train is due to depart, and doors will automatically close after 30 secs if the sensors detect no movement which is almost certainly what happened So seeing nothing amiss, the guard gave the driver the two bells

If you wade through the (largely) stupid comments by Bournemouth Echo readers, one has been quoted by the Daily Fail that this incident shows guards are unnecessary and her sister blames SWT for this incident

And following on from that, people are saying "couldn't the guard see the children?" I thought priority for train crews is to provide a safe and punctual service, not act as social workers

 

[Tim R-T-C]

No sure what the guard was supposed to do in this case?

There are many reason for children to be on the platform, could have been waving someone off then walking home, or have a parent waiting in the car or station building, or they could just be trainspotting. Was the guard supposed to accost them and ask their reason for being there?

Alternative headline: "SWT Guards harass children at rural stations, bring in DOO today"

Although it might be considered the guard did nothing wrong, even though the guard would have clearly seen three young children standing on their own when they gave the signal for the train to move off, and would have then seen the reaction of the children as the train departed (did the children head towards the moving train?).

Alternative Headline: "Passengers horrified as guard makes emergency stop because children on the platform 'looked at him funny'".

 

[jon0844]

Alternative Headline: "Passengers horrified as guard makes emergency stop because children on the platform 'looked at him funny'".

And then a sad-face photo of a family who had their child fall in the aisle because of the emergency stop....

 

[TUC]

Whilst I can see that this could happen without it being the fault of any staff, I am concerned at the lack of concern expressed by some of this thread. Too many comments seem to be of the 'It happens. Tough luck' approach, without any concern of how it must have felt for the parents.

As all too often on this forum, any notion of customer care seems to be absent.

 

[najaB]

Too many comments seem to be of the 'It happens. Tough luck' approach, without any concern of how it must have felt for the parents.

The children were safe in the care of station staff, which is what really matters. The parents will hopefully remember the feeling and not do it again.

 

[TUC]

The children were safe in the care of station staff, which is what really matters. The parents will hopefully remember the feeling and not do it again.

See what I mean? Your attitude is one of punishment-almost speaking of the parents in the way you would punish a child-rather than one of customer care.

 

[bramling]

See what I mean? Your attitude is one of punishment-almost speaking of the parents in the way you would punish a child-rather than one of customer care.

Sometimes bad things happen in life. Move on and be wiser.

I hate the attitude that when something bad happens it's someone else's fault.

 

[najaB]

See what I mean? Your attitude is one of punishment-almost speaking of the parents in the way you would punish a child-rather than one of customer care.

What, exactly, would 'customer care' sound like in this situation?

 

[TUC]

Sometimes bad things happen in life. Move on and be wiser.

I hate the attitude that when something bad happens it's someone else's fault.

Read my first phrase. I said it could happen without it being the fault of any staff. The issue isn't whether staff have been at fault. The issue for any business is whether customers have had a distressing experience, how they can be helped in order to have a more positive view of using the business in the future and how similar situations can be avoided.

 

[najaB]

...and how similar situations can be avoided.

Don't get on a train if you don't intend to travel.

 

[TUC]

Don't get on a train if you don't intend to travel.

And this addresses my point about having a good customer care attitude in what way?

 

[Llanigraham]

See what I mean? Your attitude is one of punishment-almost speaking of the parents in the way you would punish a child-rather than one of customer care.

Perhaps you would explain where there is any "punishment" here?
What failure of "customer care" has there been?

 

[TUC]

Perhaps you would explain where there is any "punishment" here?
What failure of "customer care" has there been?

In terms of 'punishment' I was referring to NajaB's comment of 'The parents will hopefully remember the feeling and not do it again'. Frankly, that it ho you would speak about a child after you have punished them.

My initial customer care point was about the attitude of several posters that seemed to just take a 'They broke the rules. Tough luck' response, rather than seeing that, whatever the technical rights or wrongs it would have been a distressing experience for most parents.

 

[XC90]

Pull the chord, train stops end of story. In fact, no story.

 

[najaB]

My initial customer care point was about the attitude of several posters that seemed to just take a 'They broke the rules. Tough luck' response, rather than seeing that, whatever the technical rights or wrongs it would have been a distressing experience for most parents.

Would you prefer it if we offered to go round to their house and give them a hug? I really am struggling to understand what you expect in a 'customer care' response. Yes, no doubt it was distressing but what - exactly - do you expect posters on a forum to say when discussing the event after the fact?

 

[Llanigraham]

In terms of 'punishment' I was referring to NajaB's comment of 'The parents will hopefully remember the feeling and not do it again'. Frankly, that it ho you would speak about a child after you have punished them.

And speaking as a parent I would totally agree with NajaB's comments. They appear to have not considered their children in this case. They will in the future. Sometimes you have to treat "adults" like children.

My initial customer care point was about the attitude of several posters that seemed to just take a 'They broke the rules. Tough luck' response, rather than seeing that, whatever the technical rights or wrongs it would have been a distressing experience for most parents.

See above.
I'm sure the father could have quite easily contacted the train crew or the station staff and informed them of his proposed actions, but he didn't.

And to be honest, one of the children is reported to have been 10 years old and I bet he/she takes themselves to school. And they appear to have been quickly cared for by the station staff as soon as it was realised what had happened.

People are making a mountain out of a molehill!

 

[AlterEgo]

Read my first phrase. I said it could happen without it being the fault of any staff. The issue isn't whether staff have been at fault. The issue for any business is whether customers have had a distressing experience, how they can be helped in order to have a more positive view of using the business in the future and how similar situations can be avoided.

Well, how does the business do that, when the family's first thoughts were to go to the paper?

If they'd have rung me in a customer relations call centre I'd have sympathised, told them why it happened, and given advice on how to avoid it in future. (Book assistance, it's great and it's free, etc)

The family did a silly thing at the outset and compounded it by doing a further silly thing by moaning to the paper. Sympathy evaporated.

 

[SteveP29]

Well, how does the business do that, when the family's first thoughts were to go to the paper?

If they'd have rung me in a customer relations call centre I'd have sympathised, told them why it happened, and given advice on how to avoid it in future. (Book assistance, it's great and it's free, etc)

The family did a silly thing at the outset and compounded it by doing a further silly thing by moaning to the paper. Sympathy evaporated.

Correct.
As I said in my post, a lot of people seem to think that they don't need to make any sort of preparation when anything crops up that makes a journey or task different from what it would be in a normal situation, then they always seem to take the worst possible decision on what action to take

 

[rebmcr]

Pull the chord

Mark Whitby tried that, it doesn't work.

 

[bramling]

Correct.
As I said in my post, a lot of people seem to think that they don't need to make any sort of preparation when anything crops up that makes a journey or task different from what it would be in a normal situation, then they always seem to take the worst possible decision on what action to take

Yep, and some people are so self-centred that they expect everything and everyone to revolve around their needs and wants. Then, when something naturally doesn't go the way they expect, it's someone else's fault.

If, as it seems, this family have been quick to go to the media, then I'd suggest it's highly likely they're in this category. Attention-seeking as well as self-centred.

 

[43096]

Yep, and some people are so self-centred that they expect everything and everyone to revolve around their needs and wants. Then, when something naturally doesn't go the way they expect, it's someone else's fault.

If, as it seems, this family have been quick to go to the media, then I'd suggest it's highly likely they're in this category. Attention-seeking as well as self-centred.

TOC should charge him for travelling without a ticket. Call it a tax on stupidity.

 

[SamYeager]

Exactly. Typically approx. 1 1/2 minutes stop, so if the doors open at 9.29.30, this gives 90 seconds before the train is due to depart, and doors will automatically close after 30 secs if the sensors detect no movement which is almost certainly what happened So seeing nothing amiss, the guard gave the driver the two bells

This is a great example of the "everyone should know that" attitude expressed by many on this thread. How does the railway industry ensure that occasional rail users are not only aware of such timing but also aware of how strictly it's enforced? FWIW I suspect they thought it would be similar to helping someone on board buses/coaches but of course in that case the driver will know about it which is obviously not the case here.

Equally as pointed out above, if people generally were more aware that passenger assistance could have been booked to help the passenger on board and seat them then this issue would not have arisen. I appreciate that many are annoyed with how this was publicised but isn't that what happens nowadays in many other industries?

To pick up on a comment made earlier - "Don't want to be pilloried in the press? Ensure all your users understand how the railways work nowadays." If it's not obvious to some then I would like to make it clear that the last sentence is somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

 

[najaB]

FWIW I suspect they thought it would be similar to helping someone on board buses/coaches but of course in that case the driver will know about it which is obviously not the case here.

If you were helping someone into a bus you would tell the driver or conductor. Did they tell the guard? It would appear not.

 

[philthetube]

This is a great example of the "everyone should know that" attitude expressed by many on this thread. How does the railway industry ensure that occasional rail users are not only aware of such timing but also aware of how strictly it's enforced? FWIW I suspect they thought it would be similar to helping someone on board buses/coaches but of course in that case the driver will know about it which is obviously not the case here.

Equally as pointed out above, if people generally were more aware that passenger assistance could have been booked to help the passenger on board and seat them then this issue would not have arisen. I appreciate that many are annoyed with how this was publicised but isn't that what happens nowadays in many other industries?

To pick up on a comment made earlier - "Don't want to be pilloried in the press? Ensure all your users understand how the railways work nowadays." If it's not obvious to some then I would like to make it clear that the last sentence is somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

If you get in a box with a door that someone might close and leave you trapped away from your children, do you consider that before getting in it.

 

[bramling]

This is a great example of the "everyone should know that" attitude expressed by many on this thread. How does the railway industry ensure that occasional rail users are not only aware of such timing but also aware of how strictly it's enforced? FWIW I suspect they thought it would be similar to helping someone on board buses/coaches but of course in that case the driver will know about it which is obviously not the case here.

Equally as pointed out above, if people generally were more aware that passenger assistance could have been booked to help the passenger on board and seat them then this issue would not have arisen. I appreciate that many are annoyed with how this was publicised but isn't that what happens nowadays in many other industries?

To pick up on a comment made earlier - "Don't want to be pilloried in the press? Ensure all your users understand how the railways work nowadays." If it's not obvious to some then I would like to make it clear that the last sentence is somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

If this is the mentality, I'm amazed some people even manage to find their way out of bed in the morning without something awful happening and it being the fault of someone else.

 

[Parham Wood]

This is a great example of the "everyone should know that" attitude expressed by many on this thread. How does the railway industry ensure that occasional rail users are not only aware of such timing but also aware of how strictly it's enforced? FWIW I suspect they thought it would be similar to helping someone on board buses/coaches but of course in that case the driver will know about it which is obviously not the case here.

Equally as pointed out above, if people generally were more aware that passenger assistance could have been booked to help the passenger on board and seat them then this issue would not have arisen. I appreciate that many are annoyed with how this was publicised but isn't that what happens nowadays in many other industries?

To pick up on a comment made earlier - "Don't want to be pilloried in the press? Ensure all your users understand how the railways work nowadays." If it's not obvious to some then I would like to make it clear that the last sentence is somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

I totally agree and was tempted to say something along these lines some time ago. Many on this thread take the attitude that the people involved should have known better, should not have been so stupid, etc. I see a lot in many threads here of people gleefully supporting each other in their smugness and holier than thou attitudes.

Remember firstly that these passengers are your customers and pay your wages. Not everyone is as well versed as you in railway rules, regulations, procedures etc.. Having a disabled person to look after and move around is a stressful situation. It can affect peoples' state of mind and cause them to behave in slightly illogical ways at times. I do agree it was not the best idea in the world to do what he did but there is no need to gloat as I detect in some posts whether intended or not. As has been said they may not have been aware of the options open to them and also not all people show the same level of survival skills.

Not much if anything has been said about the young children left standing on the platform at the time the train left. If the platform was mainly deserted apart from them I question why the train crew did not see them and think why are they alone? Of course there could be adults around or there could be passengers from the train either obstructing a view of the children. So I do not blame the crew and on a busy station such children would be hard to see. I only raise it because I would have thought the station would have been quiet and perhaps someone should have noticed but in these days of time penalties the emphasis is of course on keeping to time.

I know this is a forum with many railway members and I know we all like to gloat a bit within our own industries in private, it is only natural, but this is a public forum and I feel the rush to criticise is too much at times. We are all human and we all make mistakes. I know that many members here do try and help people when working and who have fallen foul of the ticket regulations and my gripe is not directed at them. The railways have made it very complicated now for the occassional traveller particularly to understand what to do. There are multiple ticket choices, multiple train companies covering the same stations, not having a ticket is an offence even if in error and with no intention to defraud, railway staff give the wrong advice at times etc.. Let's try and remember this and that travellers are the customers before we rush to criticise.

 

[bramling]

I totally agree and was tempted to say something along these lines some time ago. Many on this thread take the attitude that the people involved should have known better, should not have been so stupid, etc. I see a lot in many threads here of people gleefully supporting each other in their smugness and holier than thou attitudes.

Remember firstly that these passengers are your customers and pay your wages. Not everyone is as well versed as you in railway rules, regulations, procedures etc.. Having a disabled person to look after and move around is a stressful situation. It can affect peoples' state of mind and cause them to behave in slightly illogical ways at times. I do agree it was not the best idea in the world to do what he did but there is no need to gloat as I detect in some posts whether intended or not. As has been said they may not have been aware of the options open to them and also not all people show the same level of survival skills.

Not much if anything has been said about the young children left standing on the platform at the time the train left. If the platform was mainly deserted apart from them I question why the train crew did not see them and think why are they alone? Of course there could be adults around or there could be passengers from the train either obstructing a view of the children. So I do not blame the crew and on a busy station such children would be hard to see. I only raise it because I would have thought the station would have been quiet and perhaps someone should have noticed but in these days of time penalties the emphasis is of course on keeping to time.

I know this is a forum with many railway members and I know we all like to gloat a bit within our own industries in private, it is only natural, but this is a public forum and I feel the rush to criticise is too much at times. We are all human and we all make mistakes. I know that many members here do try and help people when working and who have fallen foul of the ticket regulations and my gripe is not directed at them. The railways have made it very complicated now for the occassional traveller particularly to understand what to do. There are multiple ticket choices, multiple train companies covering the same stations, not having a ticket is an offence even if in error and with no intention to defraud, railway staff give the wrong advice at times etc.. Let's try and remember this and that travellers are the customers before we rush to criticise.

First of all, I've already made the point that it can be very hard for staff to infer anything from the behaviour of people on a platform.

I don't think anyone is gloating about the incident. Sure, things happen. What I find distasteful is the way it has found its way to the media. Why the family couldn't just move on and put it down to one of life's little lessons is beyond me.

 

[Parham Wood]

Yes I agree it would be difficult to deduce anything from seeing people on platforms. Only if there were no other adults around would it possibly cross a person's mind to check, even then I can see that the children could be attributed to an adult perhaps some way away out of immediate sight, but it is a small station so I can see that the parents may have had a point.

I think alerting the press can all boil down to how you see the situation which may be seen differently as an occassional traveller to a frequent traveller.