Neil Williams wrote:

On Apr 5, 11:44*am, Chris Tolley (ukonline
really) wrote:

And reassurance. *The human factor is very important, but often
neglected.

That may be a by-product of compensation culture. In the past, I reckon
there was much more of a "we're all in this together" attitude, whereas
nowadays, there's a prevalent, "whose fault is this and how much can I
screw them for?"

I disagree. It may well be that the railway used to leave people
stranded or ignore them through its own self importance. That doesn't
mean to say they should now. Airlines are atrocious at this, I find,
the railway is rather better. Is that not a good thing?

I wasn't talking about what the railway was up to. I was talking about
the collective attitude of the public. People used to be more patient
than they are now, and because there was "some such thing as society"
they were probably more sympathetic.

As to the railways, I am sure that corporately the view has always been
that the customers should be treated well, but at the sharp end it is
all very much dependent on the person on the spot, and also on the mood
of the member of the public involved in the interaction. Some people can
become very irate very quickly when there is nothing realistic that the
railway servant could offer to ameliorate the situation.

FWIW, I do not claim Delay Repay money from the railway in an event
causing delay that is beyond its control, such as the one this thread
is discussing; that would seem unreasonable to me. But it does seem
reasonable to me that regardless of the cause of the delay the railway
should assist the passengers and provide them information, even if
that information is "we haven't forgotten you, but by the way there is
no information". It might similarly mean that the railway isn't in a
position to pay for hotel accommodation, but will assist you in
finding it, for instance, or might even pay for it out of goodwill, or
park a train in the platform to let people kip on there (as I believe
Eurostar have done once or twice). It's not about who is strictly
liable, it's about a company's moral responsibility to its customers.

It's an interesting area of discussion where the moral responsibility of
the railway lies in a situation where control has been wrested from it
by some external contingency. Clearly enough, when the railway itself
goes pear-shaped, that's where responsibility lies, but otherwise?


--
..sig down for maintenance