Opening that can of worms: Station Staffing

[Chris W]

Gents

Some of you may be aware of our favourite toilet paper’s recent campaign which it refers to as “Make our rail stations safe”. Having read several articles published last week, it is claimed that there is no guarantee of ticket/platform staff at 229 stations, 30 of which according to this newspaper are NEVER manned. This same newspaper claims that stations in notoriously high crime areas, albeit mostly on Silverlink lines rather than LU ones, are often unmanned at night (i.e. when it is dark).

One report, published last Tuesday (14th February) claims that several stations have been blacklisted with ticket inspectors not operating without police presence – I have to say that I only tend to see en-masse ticket inspectors operating when police/community support officers are also present in recent months at several stations in the London area. One published claim suggests that inspectors are only checking the tickets of those passengers that choose to present them voluntarily due to aggression & in some cases actual violent incidents.

Please also be aware that according to the same newspaper, an 8-strong ‘steaming’ gang has been active on Jubilee, Bakerloo, Metropolitan & Northern line trains. It would appear that there have been more than 30 such incidents in the past couple of months and according to reports at least 3 people have been injured to date.

In light of all this & given that some of us may be cynical of this publication’s motivations, I’m interested in the opinions of forum members regarding the accuracy of these reports and the actions/response that LU/TfL should be taking given that there is the backdrop of new contracts for station staff and station manning hours that I am sure has prompted this investigation in the first place?

Regards

Christoperer

[setttt]

My local station's ticket office is rarely open now - it was open pretty much all hours in the past. Mind you, there's normally a CSA wandering around. Can't speak for other stations though.

[Colin]

To be fair, the said newspaper has actually got it's facts right for a change

In this day and age, the cost of everything has to be justified - especially the wages of staff. In the evening, a station such as Embankment will have a lot more customers on it compared to say, Hornchurch - therefore, staffing levels are decided according to their usefulness.

Whilst it is very true to say that many national rail stations are indeed unmanned either permanently or after dark, the situation on LUL managed stations is different. With the exception of maybe four or five stations (that I know of), all LUL managed stations are scheduled to have at least one member of staff (supervisor) on them 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Some areas of London can be very intimidating, even for members of staff - especially when challenging people that seem to think buying a ticket is a liberty.

My opinion as a member of staff?
Realistically, there will never be enough British Transport Police or LUL staff to deal with todays climate of crime and disorder, so.....................there are still many stations without CCTV - getting this in place would be my priority.

[Deleted]

But, Colin, CCTV in reality has limited effect when compared to a member of staff being present.

People still get assaulted (and in some cases end up dead) despite the presence of CCTV, and then no-one can catch the bastards who done it because they're 99% likely to be wearing hoods.

No, CCTV is a cheap and reactive solution to a problem that needs a proactive response. CCTV is not going to jump in and save my life when I'm assaulted on a station premises, why can't the Government see that?

[CSLR]

While CCTV is not a complete solution, it is a contribution towards preventing assaults.
Although some attackers will not be deterred by CCTV, others will be reluctant to perform in front of cameras. Attackers who ignore the presence of CCTV run the risk of not knowing who is looking at them or how fast there might be a reaction.
OK, there may be a number of cameras that are not continually monitored or from which there will be a delayed response, but that relates to the separate matter of CCTV staffing levels, the location of CCTV staff and their ability to initiate a reaction to an incident.
CCTV is not the answer, it is simply a contribution that helps in the prevention and detection of some crimes.
While someone in a vulnerable situation will not eliminate that danger by being near to a CCTV camera, they do gain a small degree of extra protection - and every percentage point gained adds to overall safety.
It therefore follows that CCTV should be used to enhance public protection, not as a replacement for other measures.
The matter of station and train staffing levels (including the type of staff that are employed and the use to which they are put) must be looked at in a similar way. A uniformed presence of any sort will offer a further level of protection, but the level of effectiveness will be enhanced or diminished depending on the level of that presence and the ability of the individuals to deal with security issues. To place a few young or vulnerable staff at a known danger spot may decrease the risk to the public slightly but could add to the personal safety of the staff. In addition, the criminals that are dissuaded by the presence of these staff will simply take the problem elsewhere.
The solution should be an interlocking framework that includes the use of railway staff, police, CCTV and other safety/security measures (the latter of which are probably best not discussed in detail here). These must all work with each other - not independently.
The indiscriminate installation of CCTV cameras (even at specially chosen locations) will not solve the problem if the cameras are not used properly. Likewise, the employment of extra staff is not a complete solution. What is needed is an integrated approach that includes all of these elements and more. Achieving that objective is a different matter.

[Deleted]

Nice tale from a young female SA from the Acton group. Has to be on a station with booking office closed and with an "Excess" fares sheet. Not a supervisor in sight either. Now this is why we get upset. Also drivers tip out their own trains at Northfields as the roster there has been halved and we used to get lots of assist from staff. Only a matter of time before we go the way of Network Rail and have a remote control room for a bunch of stations.

[Deleted]

CCTv is certainly not an infallible answer. My wife's workplace has a CCTV camera in its lobby, monitoring people coming and going. One day, they noticed that the display screen was blank. On investigation, the camera was missing. The tape had a series of pictures showing a young man placing a chair below the camera, climbing on the chair, and using a screwdriver to remove the camera. Despite the excellent photos, he was never found.

[Colin]

I think some of you have mistaken what I meant regarding my comment on greater use of CCTV. I never said it was the answer, I said it would be my top priority - ie a step in the right direction. I do not view CCTV as the bees knees, just a more permanent presence keeping an eye on things.
Used in the right way, they can monitor more of a station for a greater length of time at a cheaper cost compared with providing staff. This is the way those incharge of the purse strings will view it.

As far as society in general goes, things have got out of control. LUL cannot guarantee anyones safety - customer or staff, it is a sad, but true fact. The only way the network can be as safe as we would all like, is to shut the whole lot down.

[Deleted]

colin said:

I think some of you have mistaken what I meant regarding my comment on greater use of CCTV. I never said it was the answer, I said it would be my top priority - ie a step in the right direction. I do not view CCTV as the bees knees, just a more permanent presence keeping an eye on things.
Used in the right way, they can monitor more of a station for a greater length of time at a cheaper cost compared with providing staff. This is the way those incharge of the purse strings will view it.

As far as society in general goes, things have got out of control. LUL cannot guarantee anyones safety - customer or staff, it is a sad, but true fact. The only way the network can be as safe as we would all like, is to shut the whole lot down.

Ah, my apologies Colin. But I do agree that it's a step in the right direction, just that it's usually the only step that's ever taken in terms of public safety.

[CSLR]

colin said:

I think some of you have mistaken what I meant regarding my comment on greater use of CCTV. I never said it was the answer.

To clarify; my post was most certainly intended to reinforce some of the points that Colin made and to expand on the topic.
I think the real mistake that individuals and organisations make is to try to find a catch-all solution to a given problem. The real solution is often the amalgamation of different ideas.
Anyone who takes the time to read back through this topic will see that this is a point that Colin made very clearly in his post.