shocking lack of customer service- still in shock!

[whole diary]

[super tm]

Interestingly though a leopard can sometimes change its spots, though whether voluntarily or under duress from management I'm not sure. There is one particular Swansea guard I'm thinking of who a few years ago would never emerge from coach A or F (depending on the direction of travel, of course!). Something must have changed because I've seen him working a few trains recently (yes, I am sure it's the same person, I have a near perfect memory for names and faces which sometimes is more trouble than it's worth, quite honestly) and he's been very thorough with ticket checks as well as personable and helpful with the punters. Obviously something changed, although I don't know what!

Perhaps the fact they now get a little bit of commission for every ticket they sell might have made a difference.  But im just an old cynic 

Very interesting thought, as there a a few advertised Bus connections at EXD^» (Exeter St Davids - next trains), for (yes you've guessed it) First Buses.   Bude, Okehampton, Exeter Airport all advertised - next would be to try and buy a through ticket 
[/quote]

[inspector_blakey]

The bad eggs are usually the ones who never venture out of the rear cab.  How difficult would it be to catch these people out? Do managers never travel by train?

Most on train staff are great but a significant minority are not

I've heard it suggested before, although I don't know how true it is, that many of the worst offenders are ex-BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) staff who still have their original terms of employment protected. Go back far enough and it wasn't in the contract of employment for guard to examine or sell tickets, and if there are vestiges of these staff lingering on and they have protected terms and conditions then there's probably almost nothing the company can do to encourage them to get off their backsides and leave the rear cab.

Can anyone else advise whether that's correct or not? It certainly makes sense on one level, since at least from my experience the recalcitrant staff often appear older.

[Tim]

if there are vestiges of these staff lingering on and they have protected terms and conditions then there's probably almost nothing the company can do to encourage them to get off their backsides and leave the rear cab.

Surely they can terminate their contracts if the position (non-ticket checking guard) is no longer needed by the company. 

[inspector_blakey]

That might be true legally but I don't suppose that it would do much for industrial regulations - wouldn't it effectively set a precedent for sacking all staff working under protected Ts and Cs from their former employer?

[IndustryInsider]

I agree, but this is really a management problem.  Some of the bad eggs have been bad eggs for years and still the management hasn't taken them to task and made them change their ways or sacked them. 

It comes down to the old problem that if you are a large industry employing staff on a long-term contract then employment law means it can be quite difficult to sack somebody unless they can be done for gross negligence.  Certain individuals play the game well, be it the sick card or the lazy-when-they-can-get-away-with-it card.  Managers can only be in a certain number of places at any one time, and in recent years - you've guessed it - the numbers of middle management that could keep an eye on their staff have dwindled as it's one of the easiest areas to save money!

It also doesn't help having unions representing these staff.  Any kind of disciplinary action is still usually deemed an attack by management against the workforce, and make no mistake the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s are very mindful of them and the power they still wield - one aspect of unionism that annoys me!

[Tim]

one aspect of unionism that annoys me!

me too.  Unions can fight for decent pay and conditions for hard working staff but they bring themselves into ill-repute when they side with the feckless.

[Super Guard]

Making no attempt whatsoever to collect fares and check tickets on the last service of the evening and only appearing from the back cab to do the doors is just plain lazy and unprofessional.

OK, hold on a minute.  I agree with what you've said in the rest of the post, but depending on the service, perhaps take a trip on the last Paignton/Exmouth/Bristol-Exeter services some nights and you'll understand why some chose not to go through and collect fares.

In some cases you can accuse laziness, however I personally think I am a professional diligent guard, but will not put myself at the risk if I feel things are going to get heated doing a ticket check late at night.

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) will not thank any of us for taking a few ^4 fares, and end up having to pay sick pay for getting a smack from some drunk.

I don't condone the shocking customer service mentioned, but just think you are being a bit harsh in this situation.

[devon_metro]

I suppose that probably explains the grumpy late night bus driver theory, then again i'm yet to meet a bus driver who isn't rude!

[Phil]

I've yet to meet a bus driver who isn't rude!

My vote goes for a lovely bloke named Dave on the Barnstaple to Lynmouth run. We travelled with him several times a few months ago and he had a cheery word for everyone, constantly waved at people he knew as he passed through the villages, and even stopped at Blackmore Gate for no better reason than to allow a couple of passengers off the bus to have a cigarette break, and to continue once they'd finished! Now THAT is what I call customer service. Well done to Dave.

[JayMac]

Hiding in the rear cab because something might kick off is not a valid excuse in my opinion. I've worked behind countless bars in my time and if I'd decided I wouldn't do my job of serving drinks because of the risk that I might get thumped I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have kept the job for long. I'd tell you about the Gypsy wedding reception I once worked at..... but that would be going way off topic!

There are many jobs that require interaction with the public and to shy away from doing so because of a perceived risk of confrontation is not good customer service. It's reassuring to see the guard/conductor/TM^‡(resolve) on a late night service. Not collecting fares or not being a visible presence sends out the message that it's okay to bunk a ride and you may therefore attract more undesireables.

The vast majority of FGW^▸ (First Great Western) staff do a wonderful job, are a credit to their employer and show the railways in a positive light. As I said before, it's those few bad eggs that are a bad advertisement. And unfortunately, human nature being what it is, the bad experiences get more coverage.


Is there still conflict management training for FGW staff? Even when I did a few weeks agency work providing customer service at Temple Meads, part of the day long induction course I attended covered conflict management.

[JayMac]

i'm yet to meet a bus driver who isn't rude!

Recently caught a night bus in Bristol and the driver was one of the cheeriest I'd ever met. He started a Calypso singalong as we climbed Park Street, maybe annoying for some, but the contingent of students on board loved it, and it put a smile on my face.

[Super Guard]

Hiding in the rear cab because something might kick off is not a valid excuse in my opinion. I've worked behind countless bars in my time and if I'd decided I wouldn't do my job of serving drinks because of the risk that I might get thumped I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have kept the job for long. I'd tell you about the Gypsy wedding reception I once worked at..... but that would be going way off topic!

There are many jobs that require interaction with the public and to shy away from doing so because of a perceived risk of confrontation is not good customer service. It's reassuring to see the guard/conductor/TM^‡(resolve) on a late night service. Not collecting fares or not being a visible presence sends out the message that it's okay to bunk a ride and you may therefore attract more undesireables.

The vast majority of FGW^▸ (First Great Western) staff do a wonderful job, are a credit to their employer and show the railways in a positive light. As I said before, it's those few bad eggs that are a bad advertisement. And unfortunately, human nature being what it is, the bad experiences get more coverage.


Is there still conflict management training for FGW staff? Even when I did a few weeks agency work providing customer service at Temple Meads, part of the day long induction course I attended covered conflict management.

I'm pretty sure not many who asked to buy a drink off you then told you to F-off or call you other expletives when you asked for money did they ?

Having a presence on late night trains is different, and I don't condone "hiding away" at all, just that going through demanding money off some only leads to confrontation putting everyone at risk, and again I won't apologise for analysing a situation and not taking revenue late at night.  There are many high quality guards who also take this opinion too.  I know of a guard who will insists on revenue late at night, however it is also proven that this guard has been assaulted verbally (often) and physically, and as a result delays trains costing delay minutes that far outway any revenue taken at this time of night.

[JayMac]

I do appreciate where you are coming from Donkey Guard. You have a difficult enough job to do at the best of times and I'm not making excuses for some of the pond life that is out there. I just think that it is ultimately self defeating to 'hide away' because something might kick off.

And yes, I have been assaulted by a punter whilst I was working behind a bar. Ended up with a broken nose just for asking a hotel guest to sign off his bar tab before I posted the drinks to his room bill. He ended up in far worse accomodation that night!

[ReWind]

I'm sorry, but I would have to agree with Donkey Guard here.

I wouldn't collect fares if there was a high risk that the people I was going to collect fares from have no intention of paying and are capable of physical assault.
 
On a late night train, the guard is generally on his own, and the clientele of passenger generally degrades into Pondlife.  Not cast iron, I know, but this is the general trend.

I wouldn't go out, demanding a ^2, ^4 or maybe ^6 fare out of them when there is a high risk of confrontation.  Your alone and late night pondlife are generally in groups.

The priority is to get the train to wherever on time and safely.  Safety comes before revenue.

Say the guard went out, demanded a ^2.00 fare from 4 yobs that just boarded at Bridgwater, they refuse, guard then gets clobbered.  Yobs leg it at Highbridge, guard can't continue, it's late at night so there's no cover. Train cancelled. All over a small fare. Is it worth it? No!

Now I agree they shouldn't get away with it, and ticket checks should be done on all trains, but until guards have better protection, and FGW^▸ (First Great Western) seriously take action against faredodgers, then why should a guard put himself at risk?  Train safety is the guards priority.

Instead if looking to the guard as the fault of late night fare evasion and unacceptable behaviour, look at what FGW and BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) can improve on to assist the guard, and reduce any risk of assault.

As it currently stands, there is little point in a guard challenging late night yobs/drunks/fare dodgers as they still would not pay and it acheives nothing but a possible assault.

That's just my opinion anyway.

[JayMac]

Now, I'm not riding the last service on my local line anywhere near as often as the staff do. But in all the time I have done so I've never seen a sniff of a problem.

On a late night train, the guard is generally on his own, and the clientele of passenger generally degrades into Pondlife.  Not cast iron, I know, but this is the general trend.

I'm sorry but have you any evidence of this general trend? The problem is that, as I've said before, the bad incidents get coverage and this gives a skewed impression that everything is going to hell in a handcart (or Bridgwater in a 143!). It isn't, despite what the Daily Mail will have you believe, and the excuse that it is, is used by the lazy and unprofessional to justify their inaction.

The priority is to get the train to wherever on time and safely.  Safety comes before revenue.

If that were really the overriding concern then we may as well just have trains running around without picking up any passengers.

Instead if looking to the guard as the fault of late night fare evasion and unacceptable behaviour, look at what FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) can improve on to assist the guard, and reduce any risk of assault.

Agreed, that's why I asked the question about conflict management. It's not acceptable or fair to the vast majority of fare paying, law abiding passengers to see staff reduce the already small risk of assault by hiding away.