|
|
Post by nexus6 on Mar 9, 2007 22:57:49 GMT
As a member of LU staff, I was having a discussion with some colleagues recently about giving up your seat for paying customers. Basically, as a member of uniformed staff travelling on the Tube during the peak, should you give up your seat for a paying customer? The general consensus in my group was that the customer can stand - most of my colleagues would happily remain seated.
Personally, under the circumstances I outlined above, I would give up my seat for a customer. I have a free pass so do not have to pay to travel, whereas other people pay a lot of money for a service that can be pretty dire. I just think it doesn't look good for me to remain seated when customers are standing. But that's just my opinion - I don't need a seat and will happily stand up for the duration of my journey if necessary. Don't get me wrong, if there are seats available during quieter periods, I will sit down. I just think paying customers should get priority to seats over staff. Having said that, I wouldn't dream of criticizing staff who choose to remain seated. It's just that I was getting some disbelieving stares and comments from my colleagues when I mentioned what I would do.
What does everyone think? It would be good to get some comments from non-staff forum members.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2007 23:59:07 GMT
Why are you in with the passengers in the first place? Much better up front in the cab (if the driver is happy with that, which most are).
|
|
|
|
Post by mandgc on Mar 10, 2007 5:44:12 GMT
I think Staff, certainly in Uniform , should give up their seat if fare paying passengers are standing. Staff not in uniform can hide in their 'civvies' if they wish!.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tubeboy on Mar 10, 2007 5:52:56 GMT
I remain seated at all times, unless there are no spare seats and an elderly/pregnant/disabled person gets on.
The fact we get free travel is completely irrelevant.
You are paying for the journey not the seat.
On the same basis, elderly people should stand, because they get free travel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2007 7:00:13 GMT
As many of you know, I'm now living in Brisbane. On the CityTrain network here, school kids and students on concession tickets have to give up their seats if there are no seats left for full fare paying adults.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 10, 2007 10:14:28 GMT
Who'd have thought a seat could cause such a controversy! There's still the age old problem of do you give a seat to a women. So here's my two pennys worth from various ethical perspectives (and it makes me feel what i'm learing in RE is worthwhile, yet i highly suspect they won't help anyone!);
Situation Ethics - Basic princepal is you should do the most loving thing and therefore give up your seat. However, as the name suggest each situation should be treated differently and therefore you should take each day at a time. I.e. if you've had a tiring day/feeling ill and really need a sit down (and ideally a nice cup of tea!) the best thing to do it remain seated.
Virtue Theory - Can't really be applied, but you must practise your virtues. Therefore you must practise givng up your seat until you have discovered the best way to approach the situation. Then it will come naturally to you.
Utilitarianism - if your pleasure of being seated will exceed the other persons pain of standing, you should remain seated and vice versa.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,440
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 10, 2007 11:32:05 GMT
Basically I'd just use the principal I always use - is there anybody who needs this seat more than I do?
The answer to this will obviously depend on who is standing (a fit young man will need it less than a heavily pregnant woman) and on how much you need the seat - if you've had a really long, tiring day at work and have a sore back, then you need the seat more than if you're travelling a few stops to visit a friend when you're not working. If the person needs it about the same as you, then keep the seat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2007 12:31:17 GMT
I was on the Associaton of Train Operating Companies website the other day and saw this in their staff travel section:
"PLEASE GIVE PRIORITY TO THE FARE-PAYING PUBLIC
Staff travellers are reminded that to ensure priority is given to fare-paying passengers, they should, whenever possible, seek to travel on lightly loaded services. When this is not possible and travel is undertaken on a crowded train, it is expected that they should stand back to allow fare-paying passengers to obtain seats.
Those entitled to travel in first class accommodation may, on former Inter-City services, be asked by on-train staff to vacate their first class seat in favour of a standing fare-paying passenger. Retired staff or widow(er)s will not be asked to vacate a first class seat in these circumstances."
My wife is currently about 7 months pregnant, and there have been a couple of occasions where I've had to politely ask if anybody would give up their seat for her. She always wears a Baby on Board badge and her bump is unmissable. Usually it's women who stand up for her.
As for me, whether I'm in uniform or not, Like Chris I try and assess if the person standing has a greater need than me. Pregnant and Elderly people get my seat without question, but a middle aged lady might not if I've had a tough day.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 10, 2007 12:36:57 GMT
You are paying for the journey not the seat To be precise (coz it matters here..) THEY are paying for the journey: YOU are not. When I was working there, I'd give up my seat to anyone (unless they were young and looked like they were begging  ) even when travelling to take up on my second half, i.e. clearly on duty. |
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Mar 10, 2007 14:36:30 GMT
Ok, first of all staff are most definately NOT travelling for free. Our travel concessions and privledge facilities have been hard fought for over the years and form part of our 'pay and conditions'. I also believe that our so called free travel facilities have some tax implications too, but I have never looked into that so don't qoute me! Either way, we are NOT travelling for free!
Now that I have got that off my chest, I think a uniformed member of staff who remained seated on a busy train would give a very poor impression of our customer care standards. We have worked very hard over the years to improve our staff image (the Evening Standard aside) and I think we should do everything we can to foster the goodwill of our customers. Lets face it, our staff face abuse every day for things that are really out of their control - so any opportunity to show the general public that we keep there little cotton socks close to our hearts should be grabbed with both hands. Surely this is in all our interests?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Mar 10, 2007 14:51:20 GMT
I will always give up a seat for an OAP who needs it more than I do - way I see it is there will be a time in 60 years or so when I might not be so agile and would like people to give their seats up for me.
What does bug me is when people with kids under 5 take up several seats on public transport whilst people with tickets stand, kids under 5 don't pay and don't need a seat so they shouldn't get one!
However as pointed out, tube staff can travel in the train cab, so if they elect to sit in the saloon at rush hour it's not the best image if there are more needy people standing.
|
|
|
|
Post by nexus6 on Mar 10, 2007 14:51:36 GMT
Ok, first of all staff are most definately NOT travelling for free. Our travel concessions and privledge facilities have been hard fought for over the years and form part of our 'pay and conditions'. I also believe that our so called free travel facilities have some tax implications too, but I have never looked into that so don't qoute me! Either way, we are NOT travelling for free!... That's a good point which never occurred to me. So you're saying if we didn't have staff passes and nominee passes we would all be paid more instead? Makes sense I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by nexus6 on Mar 10, 2007 14:54:48 GMT
Regarding sitting in the cab with the train operator: I have done this on numerous occasions over various lines, but it is not always possible as the driver sometimes already has someone in the cab with them. Besides, I don't have a cab permit so officially should not be in the cab. If the driver has an incident, e.g. one under or SPAD, I could get in trouble for being in the cab and the driver would be in even more trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by compsci on Mar 10, 2007 16:59:18 GMT
I've actually have a few people stare and complain that there is a seat that I could sit in when I'm standing on a 319 between KX Thameslink and City Thameslink. Sitting down is more bother than it's worth for such a short journey, especially when the pitiful layout of these station requires you to leap off the train and dash ahead of the crowds to have any hope of getting out in under a couple of minutes, sometimes more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2007 17:05:04 GMT
Times I have stood up to get off and within seconds have had someone jump in the vacant space...
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Mar 10, 2007 20:51:24 GMT
What does bug me is when people with kids under 5 take up several seats on public transport whilst people with tickets stand, kids under 5 don't pay and don't need a seat so they shouldn't get one! I see where your coming from, but it does make me wonder if you actually have kids? My son is four, and I prefer him seated for a number of reasons. Primarily he is easier to control and thus better behaved if he is seated, which has got to be good for everyone! Also, you have to remember that toddlers are not that agile on their feet (hence the term 'toddler') and they do tend to fall over at the drop of a hat so sitting is much safer. This is why priority seats are also available for people with children. Common sense should prevail here though; I tend to let him have his own seat if there is available space but when it's busy I put him on my lap in order to free up a seat. However as pointed out, tube staff can travel in the train cab, so if they elect to sit in the saloon at rush hour it's not the best image if there are more needy people standing. This is not strictly true, TC121 is quite clear on the circumstances on when you can enter the cab. I know we all do it, but you should be aware of the procedure before entering the cab. |
|
|
|
Post by District Dave on Mar 10, 2007 20:55:30 GMT
Quite agree prjb - 'been there, done that' as far as the 'nippers' are concerned. I think it's the application of common sense though (as we all know) too little of this seems to be issued these days!
Thanks for the TC121 reference; I knew there was something, somewhere!!
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Mar 10, 2007 20:57:34 GMT
Ok, first of all staff are most definately NOT travelling for free. Our travel concessions and privledge facilities have been hard fought for over the years and form part of our 'pay and conditions'. I also believe that our so called free travel facilities have some tax implications too, but I have never looked into that so don't qoute me! Either way, we are NOT travelling for free!... That's a good point which never occurred to me. So you're saying if we didn't have staff passes and nominee passes we would all be paid more instead? Makes sense I guess. That's exactly what I'm saying, we would have higher pay and different conditions if this facility were not available. In addition if you are travelling on the system and are involved in or witness an incident you are expected to intervene even if your off duty (provided you have not consumed alcohol). So it's in the companies interest to encourage you to travel on the system by making it free. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2007 10:47:49 GMT
As many of you know, I'm now living in Brisbane. On the CityTrain network here, school kids and students on concession tickets have to give up their seats if there are no seats left for full fare paying adults. I guess it's an Aussie thing as the same applies in Melbourne. Downside to rail travel there is that Connex run the trains with pretty much the same lack of interest they did in London. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2007 11:00:07 GMT
The bottom line with me is that I just cannot stand traveling on crowded Tube trains and avoid working anything like a 9 - 5 shift at all costs. If unwittingly caught on a full Central or Jubilee train as I trek across London, I try to get on the end cushions where available and don't give up the perch for love nor money. Additionally, I have a colleague who was once bullied out of her seat on a bus because she was in Underground uniform. It's 'us and them' at times!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Mar 29, 2007 17:43:41 GMT
How would it be policed, though, if there were no free travel for staff? How would they enforce when they were able / weren't able to be on the system?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2007 20:57:40 GMT
How would it be policed, though, if there were no free travel for staff? How would they enforce when they were able / weren't able to be on the system? A 'modern' equivalent is that contractors who work for the infraco's are not entitled to free travel (unless they're ex-LU). They are issued a contractors pass which enables them to travel whilst at work. However if off duty they should purchase a ticket. So if 'free travel' was withdrawn the member of staff would need to prove they were traveling as a part of their job. Personally going back to the original question, staff are like any other ticket holder and can occupy a seat just like anybody else, however on a train where space is limited I always stand (if in full uniform). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2007 21:33:31 GMT
What a lot of good points ! Agree especially PRJB about the travel perk being part of our pay package and thus "paid for" I belive the rules state toddlers travel free but may not occupy a seat to the detriment of a fare paying passenger. The bus rules certainly do anyway ! However I also take PRJB's comments that a contented seated toddler is far less a nuisance to the rest of the train than one upset ! If I am seated, then I remain seated. The fact i choose to travel in uniform I don't see as any reason to be standing. I agree with Chris however that I may make an individual assessment of others less able to stand - however i don't tend to examine the other commuters (unless they are good looking ;D ) so i tend not to notice them ! For those who give up their seat to a "fare paying customer" how do you establish that is in fact what they are  Do you ask to see their ticket ? How would you check an oyster has been "touched in" Do you class freedom passes as "fare paid", what about disabled freedom passes ? This disability may have no bareing upon ability to stand ? How do you avoid unintentional discrimination in making a selection of whom to get up for ? Do you in fact discriminate by definition ? All a minefield, best avoided by sitting in your own little world ! I take the rather harsh view that if someone wants a seat, they should wait for a train to come in with one available ! (Though i will still get up in limited circumstances) Some drivers won't even allow other drivers in the cab! I take a look at the driver and decide if i want to try for an up front ride depending upon how busy it is and how far i'm going. Personally I welcome all staff into the cab, I like having someone to chat to .... (just ocassionally you wish you'd said no though ! lol ;D) |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,317
|
Post by Colin on Mar 30, 2007 1:45:04 GMT
If I had a pound for every person I've felt could do with a bit of help - and had my offer thrown back in my face..........well I wouldn't need to work!  ;D ;D It's amazing how many people - some of whom are obviously physically disabled but not always - take the offer as though they're being discriminated against. If had to name one thing in this world that is vastly over used to the point of being ridiculous, it's the accusation of discrimination. |
|
) even when travelling to take up on my second half, i.e. clearly on duty. 
Do you ask to see their ticket ? How would you check an oyster has been "touched in" Do you class freedom passes as "fare paid", what about disabled freedom passes ? This disability may have no bareing upon ability to stand ? 
;D ;D
