Northern 'names and shames' schools with high numbers of fare dodging pupils

[Wolfie]

Some schools do exert influence over pupils out of school time.

Those schools are the ones with high standards which often feature each September when little Jimmy or Jemima get sent home for not conforming to uniform standards and teh sad face reports start appearing in the local rags and sometimes make to national newspapers as well.

During my 60/70s school days there were many things you could not do. It is all about discipline. No bad thing really helps children when they transition to the work place. There are many jobs that take note of what goes on outside of the workplace in terms of standards of behaviour and criminal records. Just think of the anxiety caused by someone who is caught fare dodging and doesn't want their employer to know.

Oh look, yet another the "good old days were better" post....

Do l think that children should fare dodge? Absolutely not. Do l think that parents should ideally get their children a ST? Of course. Do l want to go back to the 1960s? Like hell, as someone who went through school in the 1970s/early 1980s, l do.

 

[Typhoon]

Is it still using the caveat that you go to the catchment school for that area?

Well, sort of. My understanding is that it is the school you apply to, not the school you go to. If you apply to the nearest school and it is full so you are allocated to a school more than 3 miles away, then free transport
Near where I live there are pupils who can see the nearest secondary school from their bedroom window but cannot get in because others whose siblings attended the school, as well as those who live closer have filled the places.

... Do l want to go back to the 1960s? Like hell, as someone who went through school on the 1970s/early 1980s, l do.

I can only speak for the area I lived in at the time. We were not saints by any means but it was much more difficult to avoid paying; there would be at least one, maybe two, staff collecting tickets at peaks and they would partially close the metal gates to limit the flow through. It was also helpful that the destination on the ticket was pretty clear.

 

[Deafdoggie]

They just note the uniforms, surely?

And how does that tell them they're ticketless?

 

[nw1]

I thought it was disappointing that Honley High School was 'disappointed' with Northern, rather than with its own pupils who are, apparently, not buying tickets to travel on the train.

I don't think rail companies have the right to give bad publicity to the school. It's the pupils who did wrong, not the school. I'm not sure it's a school's responsibility to educate its pupils on the rights and wrongs of rail travel: rather it's the parents' or parent's job if the pupils cannot work it out themselves (and at 11, I could).

Maybe, instead, Northern should write to the school and offer to give an on-site talk on fare-dodging and its problems and consequences. That might actually achieve something. For example, at my school we had the local police come in and give us a talk on the dangers of illicit drugs.

 

[Ken H]

Since when are schools responsible for the behaviour of pupils outside of school time? How about Northern get their own house in order rather than smear other organisations which are almost certainly much better at performing their roles correctly (it wouldn't be hard!). Given the avariciousness and incompetence of TOCs generally l would suggest that they should collectively be ashamed and keep their mouths firmly closed.

Schools have always taken an interest of their kids going too and from school. I know some kids had a painful interview with the head about stuff happening involving them in school uniform when I was at school.

 

[AlterEgo]

And how does that tell them they're ticketless?

I would have thought it was obvious that, over the course of a school year, sometimes those children do get checked and don't have season tickets.

 

[Haywain]

I would have thought it was obvious that, over the course of a school year, sometimes those children do get checked and don't have season tickets.

Not only that but Northern will have very good knowledge of how many tickets (day or season) are purchased for children travelling to and from the station nearest to the school.

 

[WesternLancer]

Since when are schools responsible for the behaviour of pupils outside of school time? How about Northern get their own house in order rather than smear other organisations which are almost certainly much better at performing their roles correctly (it wouldn't be hard!). Given the avariciousness and incompetence of TOCs generally l would suggest that they should collectively be ashamed and keep their mouths firmly closed.

Not uncommon I would say - in response to local residents one school near me took action about kids dropping litter on their way to and from the school for an example.

Not school but my employment contract says I can be disciplined or worse for things I may do out of work time or even post on social media for example - so taking a wider responsibility is no bad thing IMHO.

Meanwhile school could help kids complain to northern about poor service / dirty trains etc if that is an issue - eg teach the kids how to do a delay repay claim for example - would make a useful life skill....

 

[urbophile]

Everyone appears to want everything for free or subsidised by the state. Someone has to pick up the tab.

If people do not want to make some contribution to their children's education the answer is simple avoid having children.

Children are a financial commitment and an expensive one at that it is no good going on about it being a burden.

Tory rubbish I'm afraid. Children are our future; not just an indulgence for feckless parents as the Daily Mail probably thinks. We rightly don't charge parents the cost of their children's education (if they want to buy privilege by sending them to elite not-so-public schools that is another issue outwith the scope of this thread); why should they have to pay for them to travel to whichever school the authorities deem reasonable? For example, in the Borough of Knowsley (in the whole borough!!!) there is currently no A-level provision. Why should students and their families be further penalised by having to pay to travel to suitable courses.

 

[yorkie]

Naming and shaming the schools without prior contact does seem to be a tactical error: wouldn't it be better to get the schools' support for paying the right fare (letters from the headteacher to all parents, a stall at the school selling seasons in the first week of term, etc.)

I agree, and if the school does not engage, then name and shame.

But this is Northern we're talking about, who are an absolute shambles of a company.

I think it is more aimed at the parents, who might start asking questions about whether the money they give their children is being spent on train fares or sweets.

Is this really the best way to contact parents?

If the school refuses to pass on the message, then fair enough.

That's bonkers, short-term, unprofessional (lack of) thinking on Northern's part.

Northern don't really do professional thinking!

From what I've heard Northern tried but never heard anything back. They do have people who liase with schools, and they do joint work with other schools so I'd find it a little odd that they didn't bother contacting this one at all.

Is the school lying? Also why didn't Northern say they had done this?

Is it still using the caveat that you go to the catchment school for that area? Even with my free bus pass to/from school, public transport operators, particularly First, often said that I could only use it on the dedicated school bus, even though I could use it to get any way I wanted.

In my opinion any free or discounted travel should only apply to a school that is the closest in distance or catchment area, unless there is an exceptional circumstance such as this:

.... If you apply to the nearest school and it is full so you are allocated to a school more than 3 miles away, then free transport

How exactly have Northern compiled the data to support their 'hit list'?

They are subject to FOI if anyone wants to give that a go

Here is the link:

Northern Trains Limited - view and make Freedom of Information requests

www.whatdotheyknow.com

They just note the uniforms, surely?

This is the most likely answer; it would be interesting to see the figures though.

I would think parents must be complicit in this, or am I misunderstanding things?

You are misunderstanding things; I've known cases where parents gave their children money for an activity and the child used the money for something else. It definitely happens!

Since when are schools responsible for the behaviour of pupils outside of school time?

They aren't but if Northern had engaged with the schools, any decent school would have passed on the message, both to parents and students directly.

And how does that tell them they're ticketless?

Presumably they only note the uniforms of those who are found engaging in wrongdoing (being ticketless by itself may not be doing anything wrong providing they are not engaging in activities such as running away from the conductor or refusing to pay etc..)

 

[43301]

I've had the misfortune to have to use this train in the past quite a lot (it's one of those 'school bus' trains which are best avoided if possible). Some get on at Huddersfield, but the majority pile on at Lockwood and Berry Brow, and off again at Honley. And the reverse in the evening. The stations are so close together that there's no way the conductor could do more than a few ticket sales in the time.

Honley has one exit, so surely the answer would be to send half a dozen ticket checkers there regularly on random days? If the kids don't have the money to buy the ticket, take their details (yes, some will give false ones but a lot won't). End result will be a load of kids being late for school. Keep this up and the school and parents will in many cases soon show more interest in making sure the kids have tickets!

 

[Horizon22]

I've supported revenue blocks before at known school hot spots at the beginning of the new school year. This was arranged and supported by the school in question. It was quite productive, but that level of resourcing of staff could never be managed all year around and I have no doubt that within months the children would have gone back to their old habits.

There's no easy way around it, especially if school children crowd a train for just a few stops / minutes and no guard is ever going to get through everyone. That said you can be strategic and get more with some simple revenue tactics and as with anything, it depends how self-motivated and customer-focussed the staff member is.

Ideally parents buy the tickets, but I wonder how many don't bother giving the money and know their child is never going to be checked? Or started giving it in the first term but not after.

 

[etr221]

Without knowing the line and stations, I'm wondering how Northern are expecting things to work? They have - as I understand from previous posts - 50 or 100 or more kids piling onto each relevant train, where the guard has only a few minutes to check and sell tickets; AIUI the stations are (normally) unmanned, and if they have ticket machines, do these take whatever payment means the kids have - cash or ??

Short of really pushing the take up of season tickets, and having a lot of ticket blocks (which means I would suggest 20 or 30 per term, per school), I would say that Northern are making things difficult for themselves, and are at least to some extent makers of their own misfortune...

 

[TUC]

I've supported revenue blocks before at known school hot spots at the beginning of the new school year. This was arranged and supported by the school in question. It was quite productive, but that level of resourcing of staff could never be managed all year around and I have no doubt that within months the children would have gone back to their old habits.

There's no easy way around it, especially if school children crowd a train for just a few stops / minutes and no guard is ever going to get through everyone. That said you can be strategic and get more with some simple revenue tactics and as with anything, it depends how self-motivated and customer-focussed the staff member is.

Ideally parents buy the tickets, but I wonder how many don't bother giving the money and know their child is never going to be checked? Or started giving it in the first term but not after.

Surely a revenue block once a month each, randomly at a number of key stations would be get the message across and potentally be profitable in terms of future additional ticket sales?

 

[E27007]

Schools have always taken an interest of their kids going too and from school. I know some kids had a painful interview with the head about stuff happening involving them in school uniform when I was at school.

"In Loco Parentis" Schools have authority over pupils as if they were the parents, rights to exert authority, discipline, follow rules about behaviour and give orders, does this still apply on the journey to and from the school? In my day, school uniform was mandatory to and from home, and pupils were not allowed to drive motorised transport for the journey, and such rules were strictly enforced. Fare dodging by pupils would certainly attract the wrath of the Headmaster

 

[jon0844]

I thought it was disappointing that Honley High School was 'disappointed' with Northern, rather than with its own pupils who are, apparently, not buying tickets to travel on the train.

Schools are very concerned with their reputation these days, and some do not like being informed about pupil behaviour outside of the school gates - even when in uniform and representing the school. I've heard of parents being told off for saying anything negative about the school, or other pupils, on Facebook/WhatsApp parent groups - being told to say nothing in public and let the school deal with it (or sweep it under the carpet, which is what a lot of parents are saying on the groups because they'd already gone to the school).

A few schools near me have been extremely dismissive and stated that what happens outside of school is nothing to do with them, and I suppose that's technically accurate - bar the fact that it paints a pretty poor picture of the school IMO (and therefore does more harm to their reputation than if they actually acknowledged it, stated disappointment, and did something proactive about it).

All said, I do think that children should perhaps get free travel to/from school (school days only) wherever they are or how far they need to go, which could help reduce the number of cars on the school run, which has a safety benefit given how chaotic most schools are with people parking dangerously and illegally outside school gates.

If they don't need to use a bus or train because it's easier to walk or cycle, that's fine. Kids are far more likely to take to cycling over adults, and then you work to make cycling safer and easier for when they get older and hopefully don't give up (but that's now off topic!).

 

[Ken H]

Dad used to give me bus money each day. While i would get the bus to school i often walked home and spent the 2d on sweets.
I am sure kids today are no different. but on the railway they have found they can ride for free and still spend the fare elsewhere.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Whilst TOCs are unbothered about negative publicity, so are many schools. At the end of the day many only attract pupils from their catchment area & they'll still get those regardless, so the school isn't overly bothered.

 

[jon0844]

Having been to most secondary schools ahead of selecting a school for my son, I can assure you they all (absolutely. every. single. one) care loads about their reputation, Ofsted rating, exam results (with loads of detailed charts of how they are beating rivals) and so on.

From the POV of the parent, knowing a school acknowledges and deals with issues (one school having tried to cover up rape allegations, another trying to keep quiet about some children turning up with knives) is perhaps more reassuring than being kept in blissful ignorance.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Having been to most secondary schools ahead of selecting a school for my son, I can assure you they all (absolutely. every. single. one) care loads about their reputation, Ofsted rating, exam results (with loads of detailed charts of how they are beating rivals) and so on.

From the POV of the parent, knowing a school acknowledges and deals with issues (one school having tried to cover up rape allegations, another trying to keep quiet about some children turning up with knives) is perhaps more reassuring than being kept in blissful ignorance.

Oh yes, they all tell parents that! In the same way TOCs pretend to have customer service. It's only afterwards you realise the reality.

 

[northwichcat]

Whilst TOCs are unbothered about negative publicity, so are many schools. At the end of the day many only attract pupils from their catchment area & they'll still get those regardless, so the school isn't overly bothered.

Knutsford High School (now Academy) used to have a lot of negative publicity. The result was local parents who could afford the travel costs of sending their pupils to an alternative did. That left spare places, which will filled due to a shortage of places in Trafford for those missing out on grammar school places. End result more pupils travelling by train and some of those being troublemakers causing problems for both station staff and guards.

Without knowing the line and stations, I'm wondering how Northern are expecting things to work? They have - as I understand from previous posts - 50 or 100 or more kids piling onto each relevant train, where the guard has only a few minutes to check and sell tickets; AIUI the stations are (normally) unmanned, and if they have ticket machines, do these take whatever payment means the kids have - cash or ??

Northern's ticket machines are card only. They used to have cash & card ones at staffed stations but they were replaced with card only ones.

While Scholar's season tickets have been mentioned and these are cheaper than on-the-day tickets, it's worth remembering that:
1. It requires the ticket to be purchased at the start of the term or academic year. For some parents paying the first term's fares in advance might not be possible, especially if they've just had to purchase a new uniform.
2. Some pupils will only use the train occasionally e.g. when staying with a friend or on days when they partake in after school activities.

 

[PaulJ]

I think it is more aimed at the parents, who might start asking questions about whether the money they give their children is being spent on train fares or sweets.

Sweets? That's so 20th century. Vapes are the order of the day these days!

 

[John Luxton]

"In Loco Parentis" Schools have authority over pupils as if they were the parents, rights to exert authority, discipline, follow rules about behaviour and give orders, does this still apply on the journey to and from the school? In my day, school uniform was mandatory to and from home, and pupils were not allowed to drive motorised transport for the journey, and such rules were strictly enforced. Fare dodging by pupils would certainly attract the wrath of the Headmaster

That was my experience at school generally only difference was there was no bar on VI form pupils driving to school if they had passed their test, a handful did.

Can't quite see why your old head frowned upon motorised transport as it wasn't much different to riding to school on bicycle.

 

[Vespa]

A regular revenue block BEFORE boarding would cut down on ticketless rides, no need to take names and addresses, no ticket no boarding, parents/guardians etc will have to drive to pick them up.

They would be forced to buy tickets before they can cross the block into the platform.

 

[Wtloild]

Saw this article on BBC earlier about Northern naming particular schools as having the worst offenders for fare dodging:

"Northern rail 'names and shames' schools over fare-dodging pupils
A train operator has "named and shamed" several schools for allegedly having large numbers of fare-dodging pupils.

Northern published a "top five" list, saying fare evasion mainly involved students travelling between rural and suburban stations without barriers."

Schools with fare-dodging pupils named and shamed - BBC News

Northern releases a list of five schools which it says has an issue with fare-evading students.

www.bbc.co.uk

Struck a chord with me, as my 20-something daughter's budget is predicated on her only paying for her daily rail commute c.20% of the time (not at all with my blessing) "why would I purchase a season ticket when I only pay once a week".

She does this by having an e-ticket purchase pending, but never actually clicking 'pay' unless she sees a ticket inspector, which more often than not she doesn't.

My niece who regularly visits her boyfriend via train brags about using the same tactic to hardly ever pay.

In both cases, and as in the BBC article the stations are barrier-less.

It seems bizarre to me that Northern leave such an obvious loophole open to be exploited.

Is there no check on the actual time of the ticket purchase vs the commencement of the journey?

Seems odd to me that Northern allow such an obvious loophole.

 

[yorkie]

A regular revenue block BEFORE boarding would cut down on ticketless rides, no need to take names and addresses, no ticket no boarding, parents/guardians etc will have to drive to pick them up.

They would be forced to buy tickets before they can cross the block into the platform.

How regular and how much do you think it would cost to do this at all stations near Honley?

She does this by having an e-ticket purchase pending, but never actually clicking 'pay' unless she sees a ticket inspector, which more often than not she doesn't.

The time of purchase would be visible to the inspector.

A conductor may let it slide, but a revenue protection officer would probably take details with a view to a possible prosecution.

 

[Wtloild]

The time of purchase would be visible to the inspector.

A conductor may let it slide, but a revenue protection officer would probably take details with a view to a possible prosecution.

They must never be looking for it, cos she's been doing it 5 days a week for the last 2 years.

In the previous 3 years that she was commuting to Manchester, she was purchasing tickets from stations much further down the line than she'd actually boarded, again without ever being caught.

Besides the revenue loss & dishonesty of it all, this must surely skew passenger figures? (e.g. actual paying passengers are on overcrowded trains that on paper are not overcrowded).

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Besides the revenue loss & dishonesty of it all, this must surely skew passenger figures? (e.g. actual paying passengers are on overcrowded trains that on paper are not overcrowded).

Believe the Mid Cheshire Rail Users Association are of the opinion that usage on a fair few trains between Chester and Manchester Piccadilly via Knutsford is often significantly under-recorded, for these very reasons.

 

[Andyh82]

A regular revenue block BEFORE boarding would cut down on ticketless rides, no need to take names and addresses, no ticket no boarding, parents/guardians etc will have to drive to pick them up.

They would be forced to buy tickets before they can cross the block into the platform.

You’d certainly get ‘sad face’ stories then, as the pupils would end up missing the train, as they’d no doubt have to queue up at the revenue block, and probably only arrive a few minutes before the train arrives.

The Penistone Line is only once an hour by the way

I used to travel on this line about 20 years ago, and it was happening then. Some conductors would start checking tickets from the front to catch them out, but even then they’d only do a handful of tickets before we’d be approaching Berry Brow and they’d have to walk back down to the back to do the doors

 

[Ken H]

How regular and how much do you think it would cost to do this at all stations near Honley?


The time of purchase would be visible to the inspector.

A conductor may let it slide, but a revenue protection officer would probably take details with a view to a possible prosecution.

At what age can you prosecute kids? I am assuming these are secondary school kids...