A recent survey by security conglomerate G4S (Group 4 Securicor) emphasises what everyone in public transport knows—when things go wrong (and sometimes even when they don’t) front line staff take the brunt. In the last five years, almost a fifth of those surveyed witnessed verbal abuse. And one in a thousand had seen a physical assault.
During inflationary times, it used to be that supermarket checkout staff bore the wrath of angered shoppers. Here at least there was always a supervisor or manager on hand to defuse any nasty situation.
G4S concentrated on the rail side of things. At medium to large stations, staff are on hand and you might even expect British transport police to help. Matters are different on the buses. The driver is very much on his or her own, may be miles from anywhere.
Where something nasty happens, the first reaction is to blame the operator when, in fact, it’s a societal problem. It’s often said that people complain that the police should be out there fighting ‘real’ crime but survey after survey points to littering, dog fouling and antisocial behaviour as the main law enforcement issues that concern the community. Yet, persuading the police to take matters seriously on public transport isn’t always easy.
In fairness, each operator these days will have (should have!) generic and specific risk assessments that have resulted in safer systems of work. There’s been a sea change in terms of a robust safety culture. This includes picking from a suite of measures that can assist drivers, such as:
- Installing perspex protection windows
- CCTV linked to real time monitoring or just recording
- Panic buttons
- Rapid response security
- Mobile phones
- Increased supervisory presence at termini
- Involving community police support officers Spit kits
- Double crewing
- Reporting systems that identify & then monitor hotspots
- Drivers reporting all incidents, large and small Withdrawing service
2 comments:
I personally have been assaulted (thumped in the face by a passenger leaving the bus) for trying to carry out my job. I had insisted that late night passengers pay their fares before leaving an unmanned bus station. And I have to say that, despite the incident, I would do the same again. At least this type of attack is 'predictable' - we have had attacks in the middle of the day by 'off their head' druggies.
I would also still take a bus without an assault screen in preference to one so fitted, although I think that CCTV is the one measure that is useful in such circumstances, primarily to prevent the culprits of such crime making false allegatioons about bus company staff.
Asault screens do more to put passengers off than any antisocial behaviour. They form an unatural barrier between passenger and driver.
Completely agree with Venturer about quality CCTV and false allegations (CCTV gives evidence). Only problems are people forget the cameras are there and hoodies wear hoods.
Post a Comment