[nfitz]

My spouse was on a VIA train a few months back that was delayed about 5 hours. Communication was less than stellar. They were eventually offered some credit, but only if they remained on the train and didn't disembark when stopped at a station.

How do they know who disembarked at a station? It's not like there'd be someone at Guildwood or Dorval handing out coupons, for those who legitimately got off there!

Perhaps I missed someone posting it, but it's made CBC.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/via-rain-passengers-stuck-1.7311176

Also interestingly, the impact (or perhaps benefit) of the rail strike (along with HFR discussion) made the New York Times last week. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/24/world/canada/canada-freight-via-rail.html

 

[lenaitch]

I didn't mean to jump down anybody's throat on this, but I don't think in a forum such as this the great unwashed should be reduced to sitting cross-legged in silent awe at the feet of experts, bureaucrats or politicians. Maybe there was a really good reason, or set of reasons, why this event happened, but we haven't heard that and certainly the affected passengers haven't that we are aware of. For the people involved, and future others like them, why the event happened is less important that how it was responded to. In situations like this, if VIA had come out and said "we tried (or are trying) to send a bus but nobody answered the phone', I might be inclined to cut them some slack. If I recall the previous winter storm event correctly, a pizza shop managed to do what nobody else seemed able or willing to. I also get that VIA's first responsibility is not to keep the chattering classes up-to-date with the latest information, but many other companies and agencies seem to manage to do it. Going dark just fuels people to fill in their own blanks. As NL says "communication, communication, communication", and with today's technology, it's not that difficult.

Perhaps part of the problem is VIA's tenant-style relationship with the railways and the way it is set up. A landlord is not responsible for keeping my medicine cabinet stocked, but is responsible to keep the door unlocked and driveway clear so the paramedics can cart me off.

I don't think the answer is to set up some kind of 'VIA Emergency Services', with trucks full of water and Snickers bars, warm and idling across the corridor, not do I think there is any particular role for the railway police, or the creation of a 'VIA police'. Railway police are a rather unique property-related police service, and CN and CPKC combined don't add up to 250 across the country. These types of events really aren't a police matter anyway. That the police respond is an acknowledgement that they are trained - to a degree - are already out there, and are reachable. Trying to establish any kind of dedicated service in a corridor-type environment would end up being a costly collection of bored employees or something with horrible response times.

Local emergency services respond to every incident on every highway in the country. Outside of large airports, they respond to aviation incidents as well. True that local emergency services may not have specific training regarding rail corridor safety, but much of that could be provided by an on-site rail supervisor. The tragic chain of events in Lac Megantic, although set in motion with TC permitting lax operating procedures, could have been prevented by the local fire service talking to a knowledgeable dispatcher ('we're going to shut down the engine'. 'No, don't do that'.). Besides, we're not talking here about dinking around with equipment; this event and others like it are 'people focused'.

Outside of any strict legal or contractual responsibilities, when you take somebody into your care, you have at least a moral obligation to reasonably see to their needs.

 

[Mihairokov]

On a better note, I experienced my first 160kph on the Corridor and my train today was actually ten minutes early for the first time in a long time.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

I suggest you might want to actually work in a customer-facing job where you might find yourself locked with hundreds of increasingly anxious and exasperated passengers into a confined space while their 3-hour trip and your 4-hour shift unexpectedly triples in length before you start volunteering your opinions about what kind of behaviors might be excusable given the circumstances and which ones aren’t…

Disclaimer: I have not watched the video footage, in respect of the privacy of everyone involved in such a stressful and extraordinarily uncomfortable situation.

Apologetics noted, but we're speaking of a 13 hour period where paying customers had to wait stuck in a train in the middle of no where. Then they get yelled at by staff like they where an unruly kindergarten...

...you know, there's only so much of defending the indefensible you can do here. So I stand by what I said.

 

[Urban Sky]

Apologetics noted, but we're speaking of a 13 hour period where paying customers had to wait stuck in a train in the middle of no where. Then they get yelled at by staff like they where an unruly kindergarten...

Has it ever occured to you that the staff on board the train has spent there even more time than any of the passengers?
That they were enduring the same inconveniences as the passengers?
That they were exposed to the same extreme situation, but that on top of that they were still responsible for the passengers and their safety?
That they probably felt the same frustrations and exasperations as their passengers (probably more so, since they might actually know what measures would have prevented such a situation if the necessary resources and permissions had been granted and deployed)?
That they might have felt just as abandoned by VIA’s dispatchers or management as their passengers?
That they are the only available target on a train of some 200 increasingly anxious, exasperated and angry passengers?
That they were held accountable by the passengers for things which are entirely outside of their control?
That unlike the passengers they didn’t have the luxury to just decide to temporarily withdraw themselves from the situation (e.g., by listening to music or allowing them to nod off) in order to recharge their batteries before trying to deal again with the situation?

What really pisses me off is when people are empathetic only with customers and their tendency to react badly while circumstances deterirorate, while they expect employees to stay as calm, friendly and upbeat as at the very beginning of the trip, even if they have their worst day in their career and are exposed to the pressures of responsibility which no customer feels. Employees are humans, humans make decisions and often these decisions turn out to be bad or have even horrible consequences. And that’s why we usually don’t judge individual actions by their outcomes, but also by the circumstances under which the individual acted.

Now think about how any staff member on board that train (or in fact any customer-facing employee in the railroad or similar industries) might feel when they read how you want to see heads roll for how they dealt with a situation which was impossible in the first place.

…you know, there's only so much of defending the indefensible you can do here. So I stand by what I said.

The indefensible is the situation in which the passengers and customers found themselves. I’m sufficiently aware about my own human flaws to know that I would have made a horrendously bad job as an employee on that train and I am extremely grateful that I will with almost total certainty never find myself in auch an impossible work situation. It is quite possible (and, to be honest, almost inevitable) that many of the employees involved have made bad decisions they probably already regret.

This is why I asked you to reflect on what kind of impossible situation all these employees were placed into before joining the online and media mob with their pitchforks in their witch hunt against employees who might not have handled this extreme situation in the most perfect way possible.

It’s easy to judge people who make questionable decisions. The question is if we would find those same standards fair if they were applied to ourselves instead if we happened to find ourselves in such an unfortunate situation. I believe that we should be very grateful if we are never going to find out…

 

[rbt]

I don't think the answer is to set up some kind of 'VIA Emergency Services', with trucks full of water and Snickers bars, warm and idling across the corridor, ...

They just need the number of local cab companies. Every single one of them will buy 20 packs of water from the local grocery store and toss them into their trunk, then bring them to the train (nearest roadway) within a short time period for a fee (like $200 over the normal cab charge), and VIA would only incur a cost when this service is used. I've hired rural cab companies to do resupply while hiking trails; they're often thrilled (paid in advance for the trip, no passenger).

And that assumes they're in a remote area. Within urban areas they can use Instacart or DoorDash which have 1 hour delivery. After 3 hours stuck staff on the train should have a ~$1000 budget they can spend on fast restocking through any means. $50k/year won't impact their budget one way or the other, but it'll eliminate much of the negative press.

The trickiest parts are ensuring staff have a method of payment (or a process for reimbursement) and creating a chart with contact information based on which section of track they're within. Stuck in Mile X to Y, call cab companies A/B. Since they always have contact with head-office this may not even need to be on-train (head-office can do it); though an off-road dolly might be useful if the nearest roadway is some distance.

 

[micheal_can]

The difference between a passenger and a train crew is that the train crew have a mode of communication with Via Rail that allows them to know what the status of the situation is. In other words, the crew would know when food, water, alternative transportation or another train is on its way. The passengers do not know this.

This is the one time @Urban Sky is wrong.

 

[Urban Sky]

They just need the number of local cab companies. Every single one of them will buy 20 packs of water from the local grocery store and toss them into their trunk, then bring them to the train (nearest roadway) within a short time period for a fee (like $200 over the normal cab charge), and VIA would only incur a cost when this service is used. I've hired rural cab companies to do resupply while hiking trails; they're often thrilled (paid in advance for the trip, no passenger).

And that assumes they're in a remote area. Within urban areas they can use Instacart or DoorDash which have 1 hour delivery. After 3 hours stuck staff on the train should have a ~$1000 budget they can spend on fast restocking through any means. $50k/year won't impact their budget one way or the other, but it'll eliminate much of the negative press.

The trickiest parts are ensuring staff have a method of payment (or a process for reimbursement) and creating a chart with contact information based on which section of track they're within. Stuck in Mile X to Y, call cab companies A/B. Since they always have contact with head-office this may not even need to be on-train (head-office can do it); though an off-road dolly might be useful if the nearest roadway is some distance.

I really recognize myself in the ideas you are expressing, as I was starting my first week at VIA’s HQ at PVM in July 2015 and was thrilled to finally meet people who would actually have to listen to my long list of suggestions which I had accumulated over the years while living and studying in Germany, the UK and Canada (and also travelling by train extensively in many countries beyond).

All I can say is that in my entire professional career, I’ve never experienced such a steep learning curve than when meeting people who actually understood the constraints which applied to the problems I thought I was solving!

Especially towards the end, there were many situations where I disagreed with their assesments and this is a big part of why I eventually left VIA 3 years ago, but my main takeaway from the 6 years I spent there is that problems tend to become much harder to solve, the more of the relevant information and constraints you actually have knowledge of. This realization has really grown a lot of humility in me about the work which the Subject Matter Experts at VIA perform and even more so given the extremely unsupportive role TC plays and the absurd level of short-cuts and work-arounds this neglect (in resources, legislation and attention) causes…

 

[PinkLucy]

How do they know who disembarked at a station? It's not like there'd be someone at Guildwood or Dorval handing out coupons, for those who legitimately got off there!

They know which station you are getting off at based on your ticket. They did indeed give a code that you had to use to purchase your next ticket with a discount … but not online, you could only use it by calling in. It was also only a 50% off code, not a full ticket.

 

[nfitz]

They know which station you are getting off at based on your ticket. They did indeed give a code that you had to use to purchase your next ticket with a discount … but not online, you could only use it by calling in. It was also only a 50% off code, not a full ticket.

How do they know you didn't disembark earlier? The original post said they would only get a credit "if they remained on the train and didn't disembark when stopped at a station".

 

[PinkLucy]

How do they know you didn't disembark earlier? The original post said they would only get a credit "if they remained on the train and didn't disembark when stopped at a station".

You got the code when you disembarked at your planned station. If you disembarked earlier than that, they didn’t give the code. So if you were supposed to go to union but could arrange for someone to pick you up in Cobourg, no code for you. I have no idea on the reasoning ,,, why not let a disgruntled passenger get off the train? The trip was disrupted so why not give them a future credit? But they didn’t.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Has it ever occured to you that the staff on board the train has spent there even more time than any of the passengers?
That they were enduring the same inconveniences as the passengers?
That they were exposed to the same extreme situation, but that on top of that they were still responsible for the passengers and their safety?
That they probably felt the same frustrations and exasperations as their passengers (probably more so, since they might actually know what measures would have prevented such a situation if the necessary resources and permissions had been granted and deployed)?
That they might have felt just as abandoned by VIA’s dispatchers or management as their passengers?
That they are the only available target on a train of some 200 increasingly anxious, exasperated and angry passengers?
That they were held accountable by the passengers for things which are entirely outside of their control?
That unlike the passengers they didn’t have the luxury to just decide to temporarily withdraw themselves from the situation (e.g., by listening to music or allowing them to nod off) in order to recharge their batteries before trying to deal again with the situation?

What really pisses me off is when people are empathetic only with customers and their tendency to react badly while circumstances deterirorate, while they expect employees to stay as calm, friendly and upbeat as at the very beginning of the trip, even if they have their worst day in their career and are exposed to the pressures of responsibility which no customer feels. Employees are humans, humans make decisions and often these decisions turn out to be bad or have even horrible consequences. And that’s why we usually don’t judge individual actions by their outcomes, but also by the circumstances under which the individual acted.

Now think about how any staff member on board that train (or in fact any customer-facing employee in the railroad or similar industries) might feel when they read how you want to see heads roll for how they dealt with a situation which was impossible in the first place...

It doesn't matter. The fact of the matter is that the way VIA treated this is both unacceptable and deplorable.. And that elephant in the room can't be hidden with a wall of excuses.

...to be clear though, I am not just pointing my fingers just at the staff that where directly involved here...but to the dynamics that forced people to be stuck on a train for 13 hours, regardless whether everyone effected was getting long just peachy or not. So there you go.

 

[reaperexpress]

On a better note, I experienced my first 160kph on the Corridor and my train today was actually ten minutes early for the first time in a long time.

I also spotted a Siemens set on Via Moving Maps achieving 160 km/h yesterday, something I'd never seen before. I know this was a Siemens set because I filmed it a few minutes later but unfortunately it was only going 154 when it passed by me.

This observation means that the Siemens sets have finally received (at least) Passenger+ certification, which means they can operate as fast as the P42+LRC trains. Until now the Siemens sets had only had the basic Passenger certification which meant that their speed limit was 5-10 mph slower than other train types.

 

[lenaitch]

Has it ever occured to you that the staff on board the train has spent there even more time than any of the passengers?
That they were enduring the same inconveniences as the passengers?
That they were exposed to the same extreme situation, but that on top of that they were still responsible for the passengers and their safety?
That they probably felt the same frustrations and exasperations as their passengers (probably more so, since they might actually know what measures would have prevented such a situation if the necessary resources and permissions had been granted and deployed)?
That they might have felt just as abandoned by VIA’s dispatchers or management as their passengers?
That they are the only available target on a train of some 200 increasingly anxious, exasperated and angry passengers?
That they were held accountable by the passengers for things which are entirely outside of their control?
That unlike the passengers they didn’t have the luxury to just decide to temporarily withdraw themselves from the situation (e.g., by listening to music or allowing them to nod off) in order to recharge their batteries before trying to deal again with the situation?

What really pisses me off is when people are empathetic only with customers and their tendency to react badly while circumstances deterirorate, while they expect employees to stay as calm, friendly and upbeat as at the very beginning of the trip, even if they have their worst day in their career and are exposed to the pressures of responsibility which no customer feels. Employees are humans, humans make decisions and often these decisions turn out to be bad or have even horrible consequences. And that’s why we usually don’t judge individual actions by their outcomes, but also by the circumstances under which the individual acted.

Now think about how any staff member on board that train (or in fact any customer-facing employee in the railroad or similar industries) might feel when they read how you want to see heads roll for how they dealt with a situation which was impossible in the first place.

…you know, there's only so much of defending the indefensible you can do here. So I stand by what I said.
[/QUOTE]
The indefensible is the situation in which the passengers and customers found themselves. I’m sufficiently aware about my own human flaws to know that I would have made a horrendously bad job as an employee on that train and I am extremely grateful that I will with almost total certainty never find myself in auch an impossible work situation. It is quite possible (and, to be honest, almost inevitable) that many of the employees involved have made bad decisions they probably already regret.

This is why I asked you to reflect on what kind of impossible situation all these employees were placed into before joining the online and media mob with their pitchforks in their witch hunt against employees who might not have handled this extreme situation in the most perfect way possible.

It’s easy to judge people who make questionable decisions. The question is if we would find those same standards fair if they were applied to ourselves instead if we happened to find ourselves in such an unfortunate situation. I believe that we should be very grateful if we are never going to find out…
[/QUOTE]

Agree. I can only hope that the public has a similar forgiving latitude when a cop, teacher or, horrors, a politician has a similarly bad and very public day.

My position was never directed at the crew. Failings, where they existed, were at a higher level. An organization needs to foster an environment where people feel empowered to 'do what's right' vs. simply 'do the right things', because the latter generally means strictly following the rules or procedure. Not following the rules doesn't mean ignoring safety, or tossing the entire rule book out. Brainstorming some out-of-the-box thinking can result in some effective decisions. During the great ice storm of 1998, emergency police communication in the area was threatened because a design flaw in radio tower cabins was causing the diesel generators to overheat. The solution was to get a couple of local farmers to use their tractors to punch a hole in the walls. The person that made that decision (I don't know if they were the one to come up with the idea) weighed it against the alternative.

(Edit: Apologies - I somehow screwed up the post I was trying to quote)

The difference between a passenger and a train crew is that the train crew have a mode of communication with Via Rail that allows them to know what the status of the situation is. In other words, the crew would know when food, water, alternative transportation or another train is on its way. The passengers do not know this.

This is the one time @Urban Sky is wrong.

But I think the point he making was that the crew was no less in the dark than the passengers. A "mode of communication" doesn't necessarily mean information was forthcoming from the other end of the microphone.

 

[smallspy]

I also spotted a Siemens set achieving 160 km/h yesterday, something I'd not yet seen. I know this was a Siemens set because I filmed it a few minutes after the screenshot but unfortunately it was only going 154 when it passed by me.

View attachment 593421

This observation means that the Siemens sets have finally received (at least) Passenger+ certification, which means they can operate as fast as the P42+LRC trains. Until now the Siemens sets had only had the basic Passenger certification which meant that their speed limit was 5-10 mph slower than other train types.

They were cleared for P+ speed about a week and a half ago. At the same time, they were cleared for Passenger speeds on the Dundas Sub as well.

They are still not cleared for LRC speeds, however.

Dan