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

[yorkie]

My children's schools don't accept cash. Pupils aren't allowed to being cash into school.
In theory, all the pupils need to do is get a "promise to pay" from the ticket machine each morning.

What would happen if the conductor didn't take payment and the child inadvertently brought cash in to school?

 

[northwichcat]

It’s hardly unreasonable to expect would-be parents to consider the financial implications of having children before they take the plunge, not to mention the fact that the state gives generous amounts of cash out to support the cost of parenting. Yes, travelling to school is a cost but it’s a cost that is supported through child benefit. No excuse for not having a season ticket if you know your offspring uses the train everyday to get to school.

I'm not a parent but I can understand that parents are unable to make an accurate 18 year economic forecast before having children. Did you know in 2005 that in 2020 1/3 of the working population would be impacted negatively due to the COVID pandemic and then in 2022 a war started by Russia would cause huge price increases?

I'm pretty sure the child support element of working tax credits (for those eligible) is not paid termly, in advance. This means some may not be able to afford the scholar's season tickets and rely on the guard to sell weekly seasons, if paying by cash. If the guard doesn't come through or can't get to everyone then RPIs claim to have spotted ticketless travel.

 

[jon0844]

This would be much more effective. You can probably legitimately prevent a child from boarding if they say they've no ticket and no money. However depending on what else they may say it's not necessarily a wise course.

I would check all tickets in the morning as part of a block, and not let kids travel without a ticket. If the TVMs are card only and they can use that as an excuse to pay on the train or at their destination (and likely not at all as they'll figure they have little chance of being checked), do the block at the other end and get details.

In either case, you're delaying them so they'll likely have to explain their late arrival to the school.

From a safeguarding point of view, you may have to tell them you'll need to contact their parents or police to assist, which might just focus their mind a little in the future.

Carry out more blocks on a random basis and maybe you'll deal with the problem, and if people get these (as it appears) super cheap seasons, the problem won't simply reoccur in a few weeks/months because everyone will now have a pass.

Repeat for every new school year.

 

[Deafdoggie]

What would happen if the conductor didn't take payment and the child inadvertently brought cash in to school?

They must hand it in to the school office on arrival

 

[WesternLancer]

In terms of resources for the suggested revenue block - maybe the staff that hang about near the Leeds 'Fares to Pay' ticket office issuing penalty fares etc to people trying to buy a ticket could be redeployed at end of the school day to this location occasionally?

Given the short distance of many trips however maybe it's not a lucrative enough use of their time

 

[SCDR_WMR]

How utterly unprofessional and counterproductive on Northern's part. What do they hope to achieve by "naming and shaming" certain schools, rather than working with them? They're certainly not going to be building up any sort of good relationship through this sort of nonsense.

Funnily enough this has worked in the West mids. Engagement with the schools involved, RPIs speaking in assembly etc and finally having school staff on platforms at the end of school day. Hade a remarkable improvement at Hagley

 

[jfollows]

On reflection, I still find Wilmslow High School's inclusion in the list surprising, nothing to do with the honesty of children in my locality, but because I thought there was always a ticket check on arrival in the mornings at Wilmslow station. This certainly used to be my experience, because I noticed it when I used the station in the mornings. Maybe Northern did away with this? Wilmslow doesn't have barriers, and later in the day it very rarely has a person checking tickets of arriving passengers, but the Northern staff were always present in the mornings to check tickets and to sell tickets to departing passengers to reduce the queues for the ticket office and the (incomprehensible, in the main) ticket machines.
Maybe people only bought singles for the morning journey and didn't bother for their return journeys, that may have saved some pennies? However this probably doesn't make sense if two singles are more expensive than a peak day return, which I'm sure they are .....

 

[LowLevel]

Funnily enough this has worked in the West mids. Engagement with the schools involved, RPIs speaking in assembly etc and finally having school staff on platforms at the end of school day. Hade a remarkable improvement at Hagley

We had a problem a few years ago with a certain school's little darlings refusing to pay and generally being unpleasant.

In the end, one day, at home time *not* the start of the day, BTP, RPIs and the school's headteacher and some staff attended the station and any offenders were refused travel and returned to school to be sorted out by their parents.

This resolved the issue.

The only problem is it runs in cycles and each year there are always some who think they're trying something new and clever. Breaking them usually only takes a few weeks of work but sometimes they're more persistent and more drastic measures are required.

 

[northwichcat]

They must hand it in to the school office on arrival

And collect it again before getting the train home?

 

[WesternLancer]

And collect it again before getting the train home?

with interest?

 

[Deafdoggie]

And collect it again before getting the train home?

They can choose to collect it or have it credited to their school account. Most collect it!

 

[northwichcat]

On reflection, I still find Wilmslow High School's inclusion in the list surprising, nothing to do with the honesty of children in my locality, but because I thought there was always a ticket check on arrival in the mornings at Wilmslow station.

Pre-penalty fares at Northern stations in Cheshire it was normal for stations to have 2 RPIs every day. Now they go around in larger teams (6+) and vary where they are a lot more.

On evening there was a squad of RPIs at Northwich. As Northwich's ticket office was morning only before the building collapsed, RPIs only used to be there during staffed hours. Presumably that meant they could access staff facilities at the station like toilets and drink making facilities, rather than having to go in to Tesco. I think if the RPIs were union members that wouldn't be allowed.

They can choose to collect it or have it credited to their school account. Most collect it!

If it's money for a train fare and they were unable to purchase a ticket before boarding then surely they must collect it, otherwise they are boarding a train without a ticket or means to pay.

 

[jfollows]

Pre-penalty fares at Northern stations in Cheshire it was normal for stations to have 2 RPIs every day. Now they go around in larger teams (6+) and vary where they are a lot more.

Thank you, for Wilmslow that means the end of August 2018, so if there's no longer a regular 2xRPI presence at Wilmslow after that it would explain things. It's hardly surprising that fare evasion on short journeys to school has increased significantly as a result, especially by people too young to be prosecuted under normal circumstances.

 

[BingMan]

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

Not enough parking at my Grammar School was why we were not allowed to drive.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

We had a problem a few years ago with a certain school's little darlings refusing to pay and generally being unpleasant.

In the end, one day, at home time *not* the start of the day, BTP, RPIs and the school's headteacher and some staff attended the station and any offenders were refused travel and returned to school to be sorted out by their parents.

This resolved the issue.

The only problem is it runs in cycles and each year there are always some who think they're trying something new and clever. Breaking them usually only takes a few weeks of work but sometimes they're more persistent and more drastic measures are required.

Absolutely, I know our TOC has done the same to major employers that we've had issues with. Funny how people's attitude changes when their employers remind them of their terms of contract. Amazon and Virgin Media we're the worst I've had, school kids at Hagley not far behind but due to antisocial behaviour onboard as ticketless travel has been reduced.

 

[northwichcat]

Funny how people's attitude changes when their employers remind them of their terms of contract.

Are you taking about employees who are wearing a uniform at the time? I've never had an employment contract term that's mentioned anything about using public transport or about what I do outside of the workplace, with the exception of not taking up additional work on top of a full time role without permission.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Are you taking about employees who are wearing a uniform at the time? I've never had an employment contract term that's mentioned anything about using public transport or about what I do outside of the workplace, with the exception of not taking up additional work on top of a full time role without permission.

I'd hope it would be explicit, but I wouldn't find it unreasonable if it was implicit in the terms of employment that an employee could be disciplined for bringing their employer into disrepute. This would be easiest for an employer to prove if the employee was misbehaving in uniform - but if there's only one big employer at a site (maybe Amazon or Virgin Media as above) then it wouldn't be too far a stretch for an onlooker to assume that the misbehaving person was an employee of BigCo - and so for BigCo to wish to discipline the employee.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Do schools still accept cash?

One of my last projects before retiring six years ago was implementing a system allowing patents to pay online for school dinners, trips, after school activities and so on. The aim was to have a cashless school and parents who couldn't/wouldn't pay online had to use a Paypoint or similar in local shops to pay cash.

In my last year of high school (1997/98) my school implemented an early version of this. However you still needed to bring cash to school, you just had to queue at one of four machines in the dining hall to load up the card before getting your lunch or visiting the tuck-shop. Those pupils on free school meals had the money automatically loaded onto the cards, which removed the stigma of the old system where they had to show a pink slip.

Apologies for going off topic. I think at Honley the idea of occasional revenue blocks could work, but some co-operation with the school would help. For example if a couple of senior teachers from the school are there to observe and identify which pupils are dodging the fare. This would also solve any safeguarding issues there might be with a revenue block targeted at minors.

 

[WesternLancer]

Are you taking about employees who are wearing a uniform at the time? I've never had an employment contract term that's mentioned anything about using public transport or about what I do outside of the workplace, with the exception of not taking up additional work on top of a full time role without permission.

as @Fawkes Cat mentions

employee could be disciplined for bringing their employer into disrepute.

Quite common in my experience.

I suspect in modern media age (eg where people can be linked from eg social media to their work and their personal life - albeit due to their own lack of care in setting their profiles up for example, or mentioning the former in posts) employers want to be able to take action / be seen to take action in cases that could be reputationally damaging to them. OK - that may be designed to happen in extreme cases, but in reality those clauses are still in the contract - and can be used quite wide rangingly should an employer see fit to do so.

 

[northwichcat]

but if there's only one big employer at a site (maybe Amazon or Virgin Media as above) then it wouldn't be too far a stretch for an onlooker to assume that the misbehaving person was an employee of BigCo - and so for BigCo to wish to discipline the employee.

Or it could be someone who attended an interview and is travelling home, already being told they've been unsuccessful?

Amazon's Airport City facility is right next to DHL.

I suspect in modern media age (eg where people can be linked from eg social media to their work and their personal life - albeit due to their own lack of care in setting their profiles up for example, or mentioning the former in posts) employers want to be able to take action / be seen to take action in cases that could be reputationally damaging to them. OK - that may be designed to happen in extreme cases, but in reality those clauses are still in the contract - and can be used quite wide rangingly should an employer see fit to do so.

Some employers have specific social media policies. The majority of journalists say in their social bios that views expressed represent their personal views and not those of their employer.

If you use an explicit to describe your boss or post that you hate your job in a public social post, then it will probably be taken in to account by your employer.

 

[Haywain]

The majority of journalists say in their social bios that views expressed represent their personal views and not those of their employer.

The only difference that makes is that their employers are less likely to be sued for libel on account of what the journalist posts. The journalist could still be disciplined if the employer felt there were grounds to do so.

 

[WesternLancer]

Some employers have specific social media policies. The majority of journalists say in their social bios that views expressed represent their personal views and not those of their employer.

If you use an explicit to describe your boss or post that you hate your job in a public social post, then it will probably be taken in to account by your employer.

Yeah - got a social media policy too.

The discipline re personal social media posts comes in when the sort of views expressed are employees doing things like slagging off their employer / boss / saying c**p place to work / incompetent company posting rude or inconsiderate stuff about other employees etc etc - more of all that and not so much like journalists posting 'differing views' too the corporate line...

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Or it could be someone who attended an interview and is travelling home, already being told they've been unsuccessful?

Indeed, there are an infinite number of reasons why someone at the station near BigCo might not be working for them - but for the someone to be disciplined by BigCo for bringing the business into disrepute, the first condition would be that they work for BigCo. So disgruntled unsuccessful interviewees (or indeed misbehaving archbishops of Canterbury) would have nothing to fear from BigCo's disciplinary process.

 

[northwichcat]

Indeed, there are an infinite number of reasons why someone at the station near BigCo might not be working for them - but for the someone to be disciplined by BigCo for bringing the business into disrepute, the first condition would be that they work for BigCo. So disgruntled unsuccessful interviewees (or indeed misbehaving archbishops of Canterbury) would have nothing to fear from BigCo's disciplinary process.

Yep but does the rail worker who initiates the compliant know that?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Yep but does the rail worker who initiates the compliant know that?

1) What complaint? I was of the impression we were discussing whether behaviour likely to bring the employer into disrepute needed to be a specific contractual term.
2) OK. Let's assume a complaint from the railway to BigCo. The railway will in short order get a letter from HR at BigCo denying all knowledge of the disgruntled failed interviewee/misbehaving archbishop of Canterbury, and that will be the end of the matter.

 

[northwichcat]

1) What complaint? I was of the impression we were discussing whether behaviour likely to bring the employer into disrepute needed to be a specific contractual term.

The thread is about Northern naming and shaming schools and @SCDR_WMR mentioned one TOC doing it for employees as well. Someone at the train operator needs to raise a concern internally for the TOC to take any form of action, whether you call it a compliant or not.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The thread is about Northern naming and shaming schools and @SCDR_WMR mentioned one TOC doing it for employees as well. Someone at the train operator needs to raise a concern internally for the TOC to take any form of action, whether you call it a compliant or not.

We appear to be at cross purposes.

Nothing further to add m'lud.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

How did we get from kids skipping fares to spend on sweets or vapes, to a fictitious unsuccessful interviewee who takes his frustration out on platform furniture?

 

[jumble]

The member of school staff the BBC spoke to said Northern had not contacted them regarding any issues.

If a passenger has an issue with a guard or driver should that member of staff be named and shamed on the BBC News site, without Northern being asked to address the concern first?

In the words of Mandy Rice Davies "Well they would, wouldn't they?

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Are you taking about employees who are wearing a uniform at the time? I've never had an employment contract term that's mentioned anything about using public transport or about what I do outside of the workplace, with the exception of not taking up additional work on top of a full time role without permission.

It falls under bringing the company into disrepute, or even terms covering company image. Certainly I've had terms explained as such at previous employers. The examples I've given, both were for ticketless travel and having staff stupid/naïve enough to wear lanyards or branded clothing. Companies don't take lack of moral/trust.

Even now, my terms state I cannot enter a licensed premises in uniform, doing so would be classed as gross misconduct.