Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 13:09:40 GMT
I think you’re the one whose unhinged. I think the point here is that this kind of intervention by the driver could very easily have gone wrong. In confronting the passenger so aggressively, and becoming physically threatening to that individual, the driver did nothing positive to minimise the risk to himself and other passengers. From the short video, at least - which shows no threatening or aggressive behaviour from the passenger - it may be suggested that the driver's own actions could have escalated the situation in leaving his cab and confronting the passenger directly. Let's say, for a moment, that things had played out differently, and that we're now reading a hypothetical news article on the incident: "After repeatedly telling the man to get off the bus, the driver left his cab to confront the man directly, and began to throw his shopping off the bus and into the street. At that point, eyewitnesses reported that the man became agitated and pulled out a knife. After stabbing the driver in the chest, he attacked two more passengers as they ran towards the door..."If things had turned out that way, would the driver's actions still seem reasonable and measured? Would his decision to physically confront the man, despite the potential risk to himself and passengers, still be considered sensible and professional? It's very easy to praise such actions when everything turns out fine. But the next time a driver chooses to intervene in the same way, things might not go so well. And that's the point: the driver in this latest incident was very fortunate that things didn't go wrong. The next driver who decides to do the same thing might not be so lucky. That's precisely the reason that there are staff rules and guidelines for dealing with problem passengers. Those rules are there to protect drivers and ensure their safety, as well as that of their passengers. I don't personally see anything commendable about the driver's actions in that video. Ok, so let’s say he intervened in a robbery and prevented someone getting robbed, or gave cpr, or on his routine check of the bus, found someone asleep and helped him/her off the bus. Anyone of these situations *could* have played out against the drivers favour. And he would have had to leave the cab. I find it really odd, and frankly disappointing, that some people play the “he wasn’t following the rules” card. And then add utter nonsense to this bizarre train of thought, and chuck in “he wasn’t wearing uniform” “brings shame onto the company, which proves the whole company is a shambles as well. 😂😂 Blimey, if we all adopted these risk averse, pedantic lives, then we really would be in a sorry state. Perhaps his uniform hadn’t arrived ...shock....outrage ...horror.... And can you imagine , should that driver be told off, how he would feel ? He probably got a lot of thanks (even if his passengers didn’t actually say thank you) ..... Managerial skills , or rather lack of them, are displayed in abundance here. By all means tell him he shouldn’t perhaps have done it as per the red book , he should have stopped the bus, turned the engine off, let the drug user spark up, or blowing smoke around his bus or snorting the powder, meanwhile his passengers aren’t afforded the protection of a safety screen, probably felt on edge , absolutely would have waited ages for the police.... he solved this issue within seconds, brilliant ! people are allowed to do to do their own risk assessments , precisely to avoid being governed by overly risk averse and unnecessarily pedantic people who pass any responsibility to someone else. I would also add, just by looking at the size and build of the two parties, there was little risk in this driver being hurt. You don’t have to intervene, but we mustn’t live in a society where everyone is frightened to.
|
|
|
Post by JUNIOR26 on Sept 2, 2022 13:22:07 GMT
340 is coming to BT confirmed by manager this morning. Also currently buses for the 303 are also going to be parked overnight at the Golf Course. The 340 was already confirmed to be running from BT by deppy42 when he posted the results yesterday (Just for the RATP routes).
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 2, 2022 13:29:43 GMT
340 is coming to BT confirmed by manager this morning. Also currently buses for the 303 are also going to be parked overnight at the Golf Course. The 340 was already confirmed to be running from BT by deppy42 when he posted the results yesterday (Just for the RATP routes). I don't think it hurts for something to doubly officially comfirmed - no one right minded doubts either individual anyway and it just helps to reaffirm how useful both sources are
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 2, 2022 13:31:23 GMT
I think the point here is that this kind of intervention by the driver could very easily have gone wrong. In confronting the passenger so aggressively, and becoming physically threatening to that individual, the driver did nothing positive to minimise the risk to himself and other passengers. From the short video, at least - which shows no threatening or aggressive behaviour from the passenger - it may be suggested that the driver's own actions could have escalated the situation in leaving his cab and confronting the passenger directly. Let's say, for a moment, that things had played out differently, and that we're now reading a hypothetical news article on the incident: "After repeatedly telling the man to get off the bus, the driver left his cab to confront the man directly, and began to throw his shopping off the bus and into the street. At that point, eyewitnesses reported that the man became agitated and pulled out a knife. After stabbing the driver in the chest, he attacked two more passengers as they ran towards the door..."If things had turned out that way, would the driver's actions still seem reasonable and measured? Would his decision to physically confront the man, despite the potential risk to himself and passengers, still be considered sensible and professional? It's very easy to praise such actions when everything turns out fine. But the next time a driver chooses to intervene in the same way, things might not go so well. And that's the point: the driver in this latest incident was very fortunate that things didn't go wrong. The next driver who decides to do the same thing might not be so lucky. That's precisely the reason that there are staff rules and guidelines for dealing with problem passengers. Those rules are there to protect drivers and ensure their safety, as well as that of their passengers. I don't personally see anything commendable about the driver's actions in that video. Ok, so let’s say he intervened in a robbery and prevented someone getting robbed, or gave cpr, or on his routine check of the bus, found someone asleep and helped him/her off the bus. Anyone of these situations *could* have played out against the drivers favour. And he would have had to leave the cab. I find it really odd, and frankly disappointing, that some people play the “he wasn’t following the rules” card. And then add utter nonsense to this bizarre train of thought, and chuck in “he wasn’t wearing uniform” “brings shame onto the company, which proves the whole company is a shambles as well. 😂😂 Blimey, if we all adopted these risk averse, pedantic lives, then we really would be in a sorry state. Perhaps his uniform hadn’t arrived ...shock....outrage ...horror.... And can you imagine , should that driver be told off, how he would feel ? He probably got a lot of thanks (even if his passengers didn’t actually say thank you) ..... Managerial skills , or rather lack of them, are displayed in abundance here. By all means tell him he shouldn’t perhaps have done it as per the red book , he should have stopped the bus, turned the engine off, let the drug user spark up, or blowing smoke around his bus or snorting the powder, meanwhile his passengers aren’t afforded the protection of a safety screen, probably felt on edge , absolutely would have waited ages for the police.... he solved this issue within seconds, brilliant ! people are allowed to do to do their own risk assessments , precisely to avoid being governed by overly risk averse and unnecessarily pedantic people who pass any responsibility to someone else. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. Frankly the driver took an unnecessary risk and deserves to be spoken to by management. Like I’ve said and others have drug users are unpredictable and just because this one didn’t have a weapon doesn’t mean the next one wouldn’t. Self risk assessment doesn’t exist when there is clearly defined procedure. It’s exactly how staff in retail settings are disciplined for stopping thieves, it’s against the rules and procedures for insurance, liabilities and to avoid assault charges for the member of staff as they are not trained to deal with the situation. If the driver got injured he wouldn’t get any insurance payout and the company wouldn’t be liable because he broke the rules and didn’t follow clear procedures. It’s difficult but rules are rules to maintain safety for all. I firmly believe the driver whilst well intentioned is entirely in the wrong here.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 2, 2022 13:37:16 GMT
Not interested in the whole debate around whether the driver was right or wrong in that situation but one thing I will say, one of the most friendliest and helpful drivers I've had the pleasure of speaking to over the last few years was one who wasn't in any uniform at all. This was the driver I had a few weeks back on the 339 when there was roadworks at Shadwell and TfL put up notices wrongly directing people to the stop they should use.
There have been issues with drivers receiving uniforms before from bus companies I remember hearing about but I also know from personal experience, this can be an issue at other businesses particularly some supermarkets.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 2, 2022 13:51:24 GMT
Ok, so let’s say he intervened in a robbery and prevented someone getting robbed, or gave cpr, or on his routine check of the bus, found someone asleep and helped him/her off the bus. Anyone of these situations *could* have played out against the drivers favour. And he would have had to leave the cab. I find it really odd, and frankly disappointing, that some people play the “he wasn’t following the rules” card. And then add utter nonsense to this bizarre train of thought, and chuck in “he wasn’t wearing uniform” “brings shame onto the company, which proves the whole company is a shambles as well. 😂😂 Blimey, if we all adopted these risk averse, pedantic lives, then we really would be in a sorry state. Perhaps his uniform hadn’t arrived ...shock....outrage ...horror.... And can you imagine , should that driver be told off, how he would feel ? He probably got a lot of thanks (even if his passengers didn’t actually say thank you) ..... Managerial skills , or rather lack of them, are displayed in abundance here. By all means tell him he shouldn’t perhaps have done it as per the red book , he should have stopped the bus, turned the engine off, let the drug user spark up, or blowing smoke around his bus or snorting the powder, meanwhile his passengers aren’t afforded the protection of a safety screen, probably felt on edge , absolutely would have waited ages for the police.... he solved this issue within seconds, brilliant ! people are allowed to do to do their own risk assessments , precisely to avoid being governed by overly risk averse and unnecessarily pedantic people who pass any responsibility to someone else. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. Frankly the driver took an unnecessary risk and deserves to be spoken to by management. Like I’ve said and others have drug users are unpredictable and just because this one didn’t have a weapon doesn’t mean the next one wouldn’t. Self risk assessment doesn’t exist when there is clearly defined procedure. It’s exactly how staff in retail settings are disciplined for stopping thieves, it’s against the rules and procedures for insurance, liabilities and to avoid assault charges for the member of staff as they are not trained to deal with the situation. If the driver got injured he wouldn’t get any insurance payout and the company wouldn’t be liable because he broke the rules and didn’t follow clear procedures. It’s difficult but rules are rules to maintain safety for all. I firmly believe the driver whilst well intentioned is entirely in the wrong here. How times change. When I was a schoolboy working in a supermarket, if the appropriate coded message was played and you were free, you were expected to join the thief chase. We normally caught them.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 2, 2022 14:01:48 GMT
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this issue. Frankly the driver took an unnecessary risk and deserves to be spoken to by management. Like I’ve said and others have drug users are unpredictable and just because this one didn’t have a weapon doesn’t mean the next one wouldn’t. Self risk assessment doesn’t exist when there is clearly defined procedure. It’s exactly how staff in retail settings are disciplined for stopping thieves, it’s against the rules and procedures for insurance, liabilities and to avoid assault charges for the member of staff as they are not trained to deal with the situation. If the driver got injured he wouldn’t get any insurance payout and the company wouldn’t be liable because he broke the rules and didn’t follow clear procedures. It’s difficult but rules are rules to maintain safety for all. I firmly believe the driver whilst well intentioned is entirely in the wrong here. How times change. When I was a schoolboy working in a supermarket, if the appropriate coded message was played and you were free, you were expected to join the thief chase. We normally caught them. Nowadays most retailers would rather take the loss and hire a trained security guard than use staff who would have higher liabilities attached to them. We were trained to observe and alert a guard only, 9/10 times they has already clocked them.
|
|
|
Post by Volvo on Sept 2, 2022 14:18:43 GMT
340 is coming to BT confirmed by manager this morning. Also currently buses for the 303 are also going to be parked overnight at the Golf Course. The 340 was already confirmed to be running from BT by deppy42 when he posted the results yesterday (Just for the RATP routes). I didnt go through the whole thread so I was unaware of that confirmation.
|
|
|
Post by Volvo on Sept 2, 2022 14:19:53 GMT
What golf course is that? I think it’s the Lost Jungle golf course on the A41 just before M1 J4. I recall last month’s TLB mentioning they were also using SM to park the excess buses as well. Is that still going on? That is the one. There are no buses parked at South Mimms anymore. They have been moved to the Golf Course.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 2, 2022 14:20:55 GMT
How times change. When I was a schoolboy working in a supermarket, if the appropriate coded message was played and you were free, you were expected to join the thief chase. We normally caught them. Nowadays most retailers would rather take the loss and hire a trained security guard than use staff who would have higher liabilities attached to them. We were trained to observe and alert a guard only, 9/10 times they has already clocked them. Has the law changed now, as in those days, the 80s, they had to leave the shops premises before they had committed a crime
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 2, 2022 14:25:30 GMT
Nowadays most retailers would rather take the loss and hire a trained security guard than use staff who would have higher liabilities attached to them. We were trained to observe and alert a guard only, 9/10 times they has already clocked them. Has the law changed now, as in those days, the 80s, they had to leave the shops premises before they had committed a crime No, that’s still the same but you’d normally learn to spot the likely suspects. Where I worked the security office was behind my department so I’d often see them being walked through.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 2, 2022 15:13:36 GMT
How times change. When I was a schoolboy working in a supermarket, if the appropriate coded message was played and you were free, you were expected to join the thief chase. We normally caught them. Nowadays most retailers would rather take the loss and hire a trained security guard than use staff who would have higher liabilities attached to them. We were trained to observe and alert a guard only, 9/10 times they has already clocked them. Providing you have a competent security guard of course - whatever firm we use, most aren't capable of policing our store so it ends up needing various parts of management and us to actually do something
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 2, 2022 15:21:04 GMT
Nowadays most retailers would rather take the loss and hire a trained security guard than use staff who would have higher liabilities attached to them. We were trained to observe and alert a guard only, 9/10 times they has already clocked them. Providing you have a competent security guard of course - whatever firm we use, most aren't capable of policing our store so it ends up needing various parts of management and us to actually do something Which you shouldn’t be doing. God forbid you get injured handling a shoplifter because your company would like hold you responsible and offer nothing beyond your statutory pay. It could also result in action to terminate you by them.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 2, 2022 15:29:39 GMT
Providing you have a competent security guard of course - whatever firm we use, most aren't capable of policing our store so it ends up needing various parts of management and us to actually do something Which you shouldn’t be doing. God forbid you get injured handling a shoplifter because your company would like hold you responsible and offer nothing beyond your statutory pay. It could also result in action to terminate you by them. I'm aware of the rights and wrongs and I don't get involved myself outside of merely reporting to keep an eye on person X, just reporting what happens at our store
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 15:35:12 GMT
Providing you have a competent security guard of course - whatever firm we use, most aren't capable of policing our store so it ends up needing various parts of management and us to actually do something Which you shouldn’t be doing. God forbid you get injured handling a shoplifter because your company would like hold you responsible and offer nothing beyond your statutory pay. It could also result in action to terminate you by them. Get sacked for stopping a shoplifter ? What world do you live in ?!
|
|