Steve Dulieu wrote:
"Steve Fitzgerald" ] wrote in message
...
In message om,
" writes

This morning's painfully slow journey between Fulham Broadway and Earl'
Court at about 7.45a.m. must surely have broken the record.

Delays of several minutes at Fulham Broadway, repeated on the approach
to West Brompton. Then further minutes' delays on leaving West Brompton
and then on the approach to Earl's Court.

Here's a list of the excsues provided by the driver (in the order in
which they were announced):-

Which all sound quite plausible to me. As drivers we're expected to pass
as much information onto the customers as possible to reassure them. We
don't always receive an awful lot though.

1. Engineering works at Earl's Court which meant a delaysed engineering
possession this morning.

Often happens - more so these days since the management of the maintenance
passed to private companies under the PPP.

2. Signalling problems at Earl's Court meant that trains were "passing
through Earl's Court, but very slowly".

Which might or might not be related to the above. In any case,
'signalling problems' are so common (especially at EC) as to not cause
much reaction.

3. A train ahead of us at Earl's Court had to be "reformed" (whatever
that means - the thought of shunting maneouvres at Earl's Court
intrigues me!).

Ah, now.... jargon (which is frowned upon). What it means is that train 4
which was, maybe, going to Upminster has now been renamed to be called
train 12 which is going to Tower Hill and the driver who is booked to
drive train 12 needs to take it over. It's actually a very common
procedure on LU but is really of no concern to the customers.

4. The train ahead of us was in the platform at Earl's Court and was
awating a driver.

The aforementioned reform failed as the new driver was still having his
(late) meal relief and nobody (mainly the managers who should be managing
these things) realised?

Do readers think this info (or misinfo) was being provided to the
driver by the Department for Lame Excuses or was he told "make it up as
you go along"?

(As a driver!) I think the driver did his best to keep you all informed
with the limited information he had at his disposal. We're wrong if we
say nothing, and wrong if the information isn't 100% accurate, but we can
only pass on what we're told.

Steve, I've told you before about telling the punters the truth. In future
give 'em the mushroom treatment as per company standard and there's a
tenners worth of thanks to you in it for you..;-)
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.

Steve,

I certainly did not mean to criticise the driver per se - at least he
was giving some information, which is precisely what, in my experience,
90% do not.

But as several hundred of us were crammed together in the stifling heat
for 7 or 8 minutes without movement, can you imagine the sighs of
contemptuous derision that met the news that the train ahead of us was
waiting for a driver?! It beggars belief that in the morning rush hour
a situation can arise where a train is effectively left abandoned at a
station, thus holding up the entire line, either because the outgoing
driver has left the train or because the incoming driver is not there -
FOR WHATEVER REASON? It's all very well to talk of meal reliefs and
the like, but in a properly managed railway the driver should be
waiting there to take over the train - even if it means he has to be
standing there for 10 minutes in case the train is early. Surely it is
within capabilities to have this arranged so that when, for example,
the train leaves West Brompton, the new driver is told to be on the
platform?

Marc.