Arguably, if the individual is one who's known to be likely to turn violent, and there's no backup at hand, then letting them go *is* making the network safer than the alternative of challenging them - at least for the staff, and those passengers within striking distance.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Fare dodger getting away on Metrolink
- Thread starter beerswiller
- Start date
- Status
Arguably, if the individual is one who's known to be likely to turn violent, and there's no backup at hand, then letting them go *is* making the network safer than the alternative of challenging them - at least for the staff, and those passengers within striking distance.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Same problem everywhere, I'm not suggesting that revenue staff put themselves in danger but it does send out the message that the more nasty and aggressive fare dodgers are the more likely they are to get away with it.
This is always a difficult one. Not railway related but I remember a few years back a store manager being stabbed to death apprehending a shoplifter. We need to be very careful about what the expectation of staff is, especially if they're not equipped to deal with violent situations which a lone RPI or guard on a train won't be.
Quite. Perhaps we need to employ people in these positions that are good with their fists, and can use the right to self defense if the offender does get violent.
MG11
Member
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 638
It seems strange that the RPO didn't take further action, as they are trained in conflict avoidance and maintaining a calm environment.
Maybe Metrolink already have his details and the RPO just recorded him travelling ticketless on their bodycam to add to evidence in court? If I was the RPO,. I'd have interviewed him under caution and reported him for prosecution but I don't know what Metrolink's policies are for dealing with known fare evaders.
Maybe Metrolink already have his details and the RPO just recorded him travelling ticketless on their bodycam to add to evidence in court? If I was the RPO,. I'd have interviewed him under caution and reported him for prosecution but I don't know what Metrolink's policies are for dealing with known fare evaders.
Interviewed him under caution? You'd probably have got two words out of him and the second one would have been "off"!
Quite! I'm reminded of this incident on a Scotrail train from 2011. Not really the best way to handle the situation.
MG11
Member
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 638
It's exactly what a Revenue Protection Officer is there to do though, they are trained in dealing with situations where tensions run high and that's why many now wear stab proof vests and body cameras.
I think you need to be a bit more realistic about what they're able to achieve. Have you seen the Scotrail video I linked to in my previous post? Is that how you think things should be dealt with?
MG11
Member
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 638
Absolutely not, that is a case of assault, only police can use force to remove people although officers of the railway can use reasonable force to detain people under arrest if fare evasion/fraud is detected.
Assuming the member of staff in the video is a Train Manager and not and RPO, then the best thing to have done would have been to request his details to issue an Unpaid Fares Notice, then if he refused to give his details, the British Transport Police should have been called.
Back to this case though, I'm not sure if Metrolink employees have exactly the same power as railway ones, although they are covered by byelaws e.g. NET in Nottingham.
The fare evasion is not 6%, try doubling it! During evenings, there are lines with 25% ticketless travel and that is what is recorded/ discovered....
This coming from a man who wrote the revenue protection & security section for the recent tram bid for a bidder and got 100% score in both section!
And if the person is unwilling to be interviewed??
185
Established Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 5,473
The mean amount for fare evasion is 6%.
It is not obvious that during evenings it rises to perhaps 20%.
During the peak it falls to around 4%.
Many companies do try and massage the figure, but that 6% figure is what the PTE currently pay a scaled performance amount on.
That said my only concern is that moving figure is open to obvious and deliberate manipulation. Situation: TfGM staff collect data at Station A to measure ticketless travel. At station B, C, D, and E prior to that station, the operator sent it's staff to (co-incidentally) check tickets of those entering the trams. The 6% score is a perfectly valid one, despite your arguments. The morality of it though Simon, well...
cactustwirly
Established Member
Great, that's assault which is obviously more serious than fare evasion. The guard could have been prosecuted for that.
Dhassell
Member
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2015
- Messages
- 1,011
But the guard didn't touch anyone? Looks like a random passenger decided to take things into his own hands?
cactustwirly
Established Member
He didn't do anything to stop it, in fact it looks like he encouraged it.
He wasn't, because clearly it wouldn't have been in the public interest to do so. He was a bit heavy handed but everyone could see he was trying to do the right thing, just not quite executed correctly.
If you want to read more about it, here is the thread: Big man vs Sam Main incident-final decision no charges for either
Anyway this thread has run its course. But if any new information comes to light, please contact us.
- Status