Disabled Access Controversy on Southern Rail — an expert view from Ann Bates OBE
Ann Bates OBE has a wealth of experience advising on access for a range of disabilities and modes of transport. As a former advisor to the Department for Transport, there can be few better qualified to provide an expert opinion on Southern Rail’s accessibility crisis.
Controversy over the ‘exceptional circumstances’ clause in GTR’s proposed deals with the rail unions reached its peak earlier this week, with the publication of the third such agreement between Southern Rail and Aslef. This latest attempt to solve the dispute over driver only operation (DOO) will allow some trains to run without a second member of staff, and has now been sent out to drivers in the form of a non-binding referendum. Whatever the outcome of the vote, one thing is certain: an expert view of the implications of DOO for the disabled is long overdue.
The Association of British Commuters has campaigned on this issue for over a year, on the basis that the ‘exceptional circumstances’ clause will form an institutionalised breach of the Equality Act, as well as a significant move away from the rail industry’s professed goal of ‘turn up and go’ travel. In light of the worrying lack of feedback from the Department for Transport and Office of Rail and Road on this issue, we have asked one of the UK’s foremost experts on disabled access to go public with her views.
Ann Bates OBE spent a decade as the Chair of the Rail Group for the Disabled Person’s Transport Advisory Committee at the Department for Transport. Her high-profile roles advising on pan-disability approaches to transport include: Transport for London, Network Rail, Govia Thameslink Railway, Gatwick Airport, easyJet and the Civil Aviation Authority. She was awarded an OBE for her services to disabled people in 2010.
Interview with Ann Bates OBE:
The switch from guard to ‘onboard supervisor’ was completed in January. What meaningful difference has this made to disabled peoples’ travel?
The previous Southern franchise had gradually lost numbers of station staff on the basis that passengers (especially those with disability-related needs) would always have the support of a qualified second person on the train. The trains were designed under the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations to contain an on-board ramp, an audio-visual information system and door closure warning sounds — among other features — so that the second person could assist passengers with the full range of disabilities, ranging from invisible (visual impairments, anxiety and other cognitive conditions) to wheelchair users. The problems since January have mostly not been caused by the designation of the second person as OBS, but the fact that trains are allowed to run without a second person on board in ‘exceptional circumstances’.
Southern Rail and the DfT make the argument that in ‘exceptional circumstances’ it is better for the train to run without an OBS, in order to save inconveniencing others by cancelling the train. Is this a reasonable argument?
I am a regular traveller on Southern and whilst I really feel for my fellow passengers in the above scenario, I also really feel that the days of “let’s blame it all on the awkward ones” went out with the Thatcher government! The essence of discrimination is preventing access to services for any protected group (race, gender, sexuality, religion, or disability) and I would not tolerate a service that decides whether a train runs on such principles. Next, we will be leaving obese people on the platform as they are ‘taking up the room of two people’, and I believe our society is better than that.
Is the agreement on ‘exceptional circumstances’ in the latest Aslef deal acceptable in your opinion?
Even if we took the list of ‘exceptional circumstances’ at face value, it would destroy the assurance that passengers with any type of vulnerability (including young teenagers) would have about the availability of human intervention at short or no notice. I have been involved in drafting various laws and legislation and I feel the list is open to misinterpretation and change to suit the business ‘needs’ of the train operating company, with scant regard to passengers’ priorities and reasonable expectations. As a mother, I would have been really concerned if one of my sons had ended up travelling on a late night London train with no on-board staff, passing through mostly unstaffed, rural stations. The ‘pass call system’ is only useful if the next convenient station to stop at is staffed.
Would the ‘exceptional circumstances’ arrangement form a breach of the Equality Act?
In my view it would, especially on Electrostar trains which are covered by the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations and are designed to be double-manned (except in metro areas if stations are staffed from first to last train).
If these ‘exceptional circumstances’ become the norm, they will limit ‘turn up and go’ travel. Will disabled people still be able to travel with confidence if they pre-book?
Pre-booking was never designed to be compulsory, although I have always used this service (with varying success), and many passengers with disabilities are happy to do this if it will ensure a more reliable, confidence building journey. I know many train company staff well and like to try to make their jobs easier so I pre-book where I can - although my ‘booked train’ could still be cancelled under these ‘exceptional circumstances’.
I think it is important for non-disabled people to consider a world where - at least two days before travelling — you have to plan every leg of your journey (with precise timings). No more spontaneous gathering for drinks after meetings, long periods waiting for your ‘booked’ train if a meeting is cancelled, no possibility of meeting an old friend on the train and adjusting your journey to spend more time with them, etc. Pre-booking is not fit for purpose for a multi-destination working life, even though many of us catch regular trains successfully.
If the ‘exceptional circumstances’ outlined in the Aslef agreement go through, what problems do you foresee?
In the long term, I believe an agreement with such non-specific, ultra flexible criteria that take no account of the consequences for passengers (both disabled and non-disabled) will open the door to the wholesale move to Driver Only Operation across the country. As we have found, the misinformation that 30% of Southern trains ‘happily’ run DOO (without mentioning platform staffing) has been used again and again.
Disabled people have the right to a free taxi if they are unable to travel. Does this constitute a ‘reasonable adjustment’ in your opinion?
Oh, taxis! This is a wonderful example of ‘let’s just get them off the station’ thinking. The non-metro area of Southern is NOT awash with accessible taxis for hire. In fact, apart from Brighton and perhaps Eastbourne, there will be a long wait until said ‘accessible’ taxi arrives. Many will not take any wheelchair slightly larger than a fictional measurement, and most drivers make you travel sideways if you can access the cab. All this delay in all weathers for the privilege of joining the very traffic jams you had taken the train to avoid! Even without the travel sickness aspect, the huge delays and access problems make taxis, I believe, not a reasonable adjustment; except in a genuine emergency.
When I started working in rail some 20-odd years ago there was an enchanting CEO of a train operating company who said “It would be cheaper to take them [wheelchair users] around in a Rolls Royce” — completely missing the fact that you cannot get a wheelchair into a Rolls Royce!
Do you think there is an economic argument to be made for disabled people to be able to travel spontaneously and with confidence?
Rail is beginning to lag behind other transport modes/services in their understanding of the impact of the spending power of ‘the purple pound’! As the population ages and disability has a direct correlation with age, other transport modes have realised the value of making reasonable adjustments. Aviation has seen a rise in disabled travel of over 15% per year, the cruise industry depends on our custom, etc. Importantly though, the failure to have policies to deal with travellers with disabilities efficiently can have massive negative impact on business models such as ‘dwell times’ in rail and ‘turnaround times’ in aviation.
The Rail Delivery Group held back a report on accessibility and DOO for two years, until it was leaked by an unknown party in June this year. Could this have been an honest mistake on their part?
I think as this report was produced by excellent people - who I have every confidence in and a long track record of working with — it would not be fair to comment. It is worth remembering though that under the Equality Act, all government departments are meant to consider access. The RDG, RSSB, Transport Focus and ORR have made various attempts at this - although like all research, quality and public visibility varies.
Are you satisfied that Govia Thameslink Railway and the Department for Transport have disabled peoples’ interests at heart?
I don’t believe that any of the players in this emerging disaster are acting with bad intent. I think the DOO argument is very simplistic in terms of simple money saving, fails to take into account the wider picture and (unusually for the rail industry) has failed to look to ‘corporate memory’ of the days when train travel was largely seen as free because of the lack of customer service.
Some believe that there has been a lack of representation of this issue in the media. Who is speaking up for disabled people in all of this?
If you work in the disability field, you rapidly get to understand the media and their priorities when looking for stories. They are happy to cover ‘brave’, ‘plucky’ paralympians as part of a good news slot, and young people with a tragic illness can make headlines; but trying to get the mainstream media interested in issues that can look disturbingly like disabled peoples’ future is difficult is much harder to achieve (with the honourable exception of John Pring’s fabulous Disability News Service). Disability access groups such as Transport for All are also working very hard.
If you have been affected by these issues, you can contact us here. We are a volunteer-run campaign, so please bear with us if you do not receive an immediate response.
