Thames Valley infrastructure problems causing disruption elsewhere - 2016

[whole diary]

[NickB]

Obviously I'm sad that someone felt the need to kill themselves this afternoon. I'm going to go back to an age old problem on this forum which is that people try hard but the response from gwr from a passenger perspective is lacking.

So here I am at Paddington waiting for a train that was apparently on time but ended up being 35 mins late. My gripe is that there were no/none/zero/nada/not one staff on the platform. 35mins I sat there and there was no one. Not least in the 'help points'

n.
 

[NickB]

[NickB]

[NickB]

Ps. The 'use position opposite' when you know that it is closed isn't a great move.

[grahame]

Whilst the majority of "person ht by train" are indeed suicides, can I please remind members that there are a number of other possibilities we have come across over the years, and sadly we may see others in the future.

My thoughts with the friends, family and colleagues of the deceased and also with the rail and other professional staff who have to deal with the situation, including the operational staff who have to look after / inform the public.  Yes - my thoughts are also with the members of the public effected by the resultant disruption.

Just because I / we are busy thinking of those deeply involved doesn't mean that serious consideration shouldn't be being given (not isn't given) to lessening the impact.   

First and foremost, the effect of such incidents should be reduced as much as practical by reducing the number of such incidents.  There's a huge amount of work been and being done on that - not always in the public domain as placing it there, regrettably, means it gives people ideas.

In terms of informing customers, there are limited number of customer facing staff on duty when incidents happen, and they can be considered in the same 'pool' of Network Rail / GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) employees who's job it is to 'sit upstairs' and feed information through to the people on the ground, and also to arrange alternative routes / make suggestions / arrange ticket acceptances.  The nature of it is that more people are needed on the concourse (dramatically more) if a personal staff presence is to be maintained, just at the same time that dramatically more staff are needed to make all the arrangements and get a modified show running, and the regular show back on the road as soon as possible.

Whether it's "person hit by train" or something else (and, goodness, there are also far too many 'something else's),  there will be blimps in information feed. They shouldn't happen, they're high profile - but there will be such blips and it's very wasteful to have extra resources sitting around, like vultures, waiting for such an incident.  Best learn from the incidents (and they do, but perhaps could learn more?) but best by far in parallel to reduce the incidents as well.

[Western Enterprise]

  there will be blimps in information feed.

Blimps indeed!.
The 18.18 was shewn as delayed, then cancelled and then it was back on again, leaving 20 mins late.

Meanwhile, the signal problem looks like it's going into its third day (delays expected until 09.00 10/09, per gwr.com !
W.E

[ellendune]

  there will be blimps in information feed.

Blimps indeed!.
The 18.18 was shewn as delayed, then cancelled and then it was back on again, leaving 20 mins late.

Meanwhile, the signal problem looks like it's going into its third day (delays expected until 09.00 10/09, per gwr.com !
W.E

That looks authentically like what happens when a group of people are trying to sort out the best solution in a difficult situation and are exploring different options.  They think of one idea then they find a better one.  OK for one train it looks like confusion, but in the overall pattern of provision it looks like they were trying to do the best they could in very difficult circumstances.   

[Tim]

Thanks to the Guard on the 1243 BTH^» (Bath Spa - next trains) to PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) which I was on yesterday.

We stopped (very quickly, but without emergency braking) just outside Hayes and Harlsden and then 10 minutes later pulled into the platform and waited more than an hour before passing though the next station, Southhall where the fatality had occurred.  We were on the Up Main line and from the hi-vis on the platform and the Turbo abandoned outside Southall (I avoided looking too closely) it looked as if the incident was on the Up Reflief, so I guess we got off lightly in terms of delays.

The Guard was very good and kept us informed well even when he didn't know much himself.  He got the balance between apologies, information and explanation just right and handled the issue of it being "a fatality" (which are the words he used) very well.

[TaplowGreen]

In terms of informing customers, there are limited number of customer facing staff on duty when incidents happen, and they can be considered in the same 'pool' of Network Rail / GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) employees who's job it is to 'sit upstairs' and feed information through to the people on the ground, and also to arrange alternative routes / make suggestions / arrange ticket acceptances.  The nature of it is that more people are needed on the concourse (dramatically more) if a personal staff presence is to be maintained, just at the same time that dramatically more staff are needed to make all the arrangements and get a modified show running, and the regular show back on the road as soon as possible.

Whether it's "person hit by train" or something else (and, goodness, there are also far too many 'something else's),  there will be blimps in information feed. They shouldn't happen, they're high profile - but there will be such blips and it's very wasteful to have extra resources sitting around, like vultures, waiting for such an incident.  Best learn from the incidents (and they do, but perhaps could learn more?) but best by far in parallel to reduce the incidents as well.

NickB - I hope you got home OK in the end, and it's a shame to note that despite the new branding and all the improved pride in serving customers etc that (allegedly) goes with it, it's the same old story when it comes to severe disruption - the one thing that customers really need, ie face to face help, advice and information, is sadly lacking.

Excuses can of course always be found/made, but this is sadly one lesson that has never been learned in my experience, for as long as I have been using the railway on the LTV^▸ (London [and] Thames Valley) route especially.

Taking a leaf out of BA^» (British Airways - about)'s book when it comes to customer communications would do First/GWR no harm at all.

[ChrisB]

Whether it's "person hit by train" or something else (and, goodness, there are also far too many 'something else's),  it's the same old story when it comes to severe disruption - the one thing that customers really need, ie face to face help, advice and information, is sadly lacking.

One question - where do you find all these extra staff you suddenly need/want? In like 10 minutes notice?

Answer that realistically, and you may answer your own gripe.

[Tim]

Taking a leaf out of BA^» (British Airways - about)'s book when it comes to customer communications would do First/GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) no harm at all.

I was with you until that bit, but have to say BA are MUCH superior to BA in that respect.  BA hold their customers and their staff in contempt (unless you have a gold card).  FGW^▸ (First Great Western) may at times be disorganised and incompetent, but they do not some close to BA in truly terrible customer service.

[TaplowGreen]

Whether it's "person hit by train" or something else (and, goodness, there are also far too many 'something else's),  it's the same old story when it comes to severe disruption - the one thing that customers really need, ie face to face help, advice and information, is sadly lacking.

One question - where do you find all these extra staff you suddenly need/want? In like 10 minutes notice?

Answer that realistically, and you may answer your own gripe.

.............the traditional response/rhetoric "what would you do about it then"........not overly helpful.

The fact that a customer's observation is considered a "gripe" speaks volumes.

It's rather futile having "Help points", customer ambassadors etc if when they are really needed, they simply aren't there, as per Nick B's observation. Surely they should be kept separate from those who "sit upstairs" - is there no distinction in GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) world between Operational and Customer Service staff?  It's not a case of flooding an area with hundreds of people, just ensuring that there are a level of people around who are capable of giving accurate advice and information on alternative forms of transport etc. If GWR are so keen on learning lessons, they have had enough practice by now in dealing with severe disruption to have a handle on the level of staffing required in these circumstances and resource it accordingly, not leave people with no help whatsoever.

Some joined up thinking wouldn't hurt either - why not get TfL^» (Transport for London - about) on board and get them to make announcements on the Tube about severe disruption at mainline stations? For example if this was done on the Bakerloo Line people could use services from Waterloo or Marylebone, rather than emerging into Paddington to find the usual chaos whenever there are problems and having to hang around for ages and/or turn around and go back again?

Time after time the railways are found wanting when it comes to contingency planning, whether it's one, solitary signaller failing to turn up for work last weekend which caused dozens of cancellations/alterations across the network, Bank Holidays/Christmas/Easter when we have the regular spectacle of chaotic and dangerous overcrowding, failure to plan for major sporting events, failure to ensure that enough staff are available on a Sunday to run the advertised service................it's just an endless charade.

The railway industry just collectively shrugs it shoulders and hopes for the best (and takes the money!)

[ellendune]

The railway industry just collectively shrugs it shoulders and hopes for the best (and takes the money!)

That's the point really, if you want lots of extra staff then some one has to pay for it. People can rant about large profits of train operating companies but they are very small percentage margins. So in truth if there are to be more staff its either going to be paid by the Government (through reduced premiums paid to DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)) or higher fares. 

[Adelante_CCT]

but have to say BA^» (British Airways - about) are MUCH superior to BA in that respect.

Who of course are far LESS superior than BA 

[ChrisB]

I'll ask again - Paddington being a Network Rail station - where are these people going to be employed when there's no disruption such that they are ready, at a drop of the hat (next fatality for example) to come bounding out on to the concourse with immediate answers?

Give it some thought, and you'll understand their problem.

Yes, it would be possible for TfL^» (Transport for London - about) to make announcements, but wouldn't they exprect the same of NR^» (Network Rail - home page) Paddington for them to do the same when the Bakerloo (plus the other lines there) is borked? So several more personnel required.

Anything's possible if you'll pay a high enough fare to produce the cash to pay for these staff!