Re: Yarra Trams Article in Sunday Age

["Rail Roamer" <leadscout@one.net.au>]

Yes distressing stories. I've heard alot of them too. See here is where it
gets a little difficult. You get phone calls about distressing incidents,
but again I ask you are you there to see what really happens and leads it to
those points?
You have seen the bruises....but were you always there to see how they
happened? Did the alleged victim bite of more than he/she could chew and in
resisting the authorised officer have to be restrained.
Some people fight like hell to resist arrest (Yes we have it 219AA) and in
doing so force is used and because of this a person can make things all the
more worse. Maybe this is where the majority of bruising occurs? By fighting
the course of action required to be taken.

In regards to 'booking'. Are we nitpicking here at my term usage?
I said booking because it was far easier to use than the term
'REPORT OF OFFENCE' which is what we fillout upon detection of an offence.
You know this already so don't let my choice of phrases worry you. We aren't
in court here.

It is an offence to travel without a valid ticket unless as we earlier
discussed certain criteria shall we call it is present.
The act clearly says so, what exactly is your understanding for this and can
you state or provide written act(s) of parliament that says otherwise?

Not automatically an offence Vaughn to travel without a ticket but the act
is as it is. Is this what you are unhappy about?
Well that needs to be taken up with your MP. Maybe he/she can change it.
But what people need to realise is that unless all those conditions I spoke
of earlier (Section 221 the term AND)  are present they have committed an
offence. It does not say OR meaning only one has to be present it states AND
meaning all.

Sorry missed the Sam Eades posting. What is the story there?
As for NX misleading the powers that be. No they did not. The government
said from the start, yes the government did, what our roles would be, they
left it upto each company as to how they would market it.  There will be
staff hired purely (or so I'm told) in a Customer Service role however I am
not one of those. The government actually helps to fund our jobs, not all
though, but they help.
We target anti-social behaviour and such but if they have no valid ticket
well they don't have a right to be there unless particular circumstances are
present. So then at our discretion they might find a penalty for a ticketing
offence added.
Similar roles as to the old Transit Patrol unit. Remember them?

I'm not too sure how Connex run things over their way, I've heard a few
stories but thats all they are at this point. Heck they've probably heard
stories about Bayside. What I can tell you about Connex that in the
beginning they were not going to have their staff authorised, but found it
was required in order to help them do the job effectively.
As for your case scenario about the gent/lady who sued and won. Well good on
them, if the authorised officer was at fault then so be it they deserve to
lose.
Victoria Police have suffered the same, but they're not all bad are they,
not even the majority would be.
In generalising what RPO's etc to be like and act like. How have you treated
them? Have you given them anything to get 'narcy' about?

We have no authority to ask for a phone number but we can ask if it will
help make identification easier.
I am allowed to ask, no law to say I can't, just no law to say I can demand
it or that it is an offence to fail to provide it.
All they have to say is no. It nice if it's said in a nice way though.
Not like 'Fuck off not tellin'' etc. If I was to come to your work and treat
you this way you would be appalled and rightly so.

I did not say CPI is influenced by vandals.....in my argument the point I
was trying to get across  was that if vandalism and fare evasion can be kept
low then when there is a CPI increase you don't get a CPI increase and a
little extra to cover vandalism costs etc. Get what I mean?
The government did this when they ran the network. I recall newspaper
articles on the issue. (Wish I'd kept them now...lol)

Another issue I'd like to bring into the open is that there is also a
private company out on the rails till both companies have sufficent staff
trained etc. Please don't confuse them with us. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.


"Vaughan Williams" <ender2000@my-deja.com> wrote in message
95m88p$lcr$1@nnrp1.deja.com">news:95m88p$lcr$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> > As for your thinking you can travel without a valid ticket I think you
> > should note the condtions for you to be able to do such a thing.
>
> Yes, I know.
>
> So its not automatically an offence to travel without a valid ticket.
> We could argue for the next three weeks about what is "reasonable" - in
> practice it depends what sort of mood the magistrate is in on that day.
>
> > I suggest you check with Department of Infastructure if you have any
> doubts
> > ask for the Prosecutions Unit they should be able to advise you
> > and answer any queries you have.
>
> Yeah, Geraldine Sharman knows what she's on about. Shame the majority
> of the RPO's/CSE's don't - and at least in Connex's case the people who
> train them don't either (see post from Sam Eades about 6 months ago)
>
> > Like I said if you wish to dipute any of this I suggest you contact
> > your local member or do as I stated above.
>
> Why would I contact my local member over a difference of legal opinion
> between you and I?
>
> > You may have seen the bruises but it doesn't mean you know the full
> story,
> > hearsay does not count.
>
> Research the legal definition of hearsay.
>
> Some of the injuries I have seen could only have been caused by force
> disproportionate to the offence (and in my view the individual
> concerned committed no offence at all). On the occasion I'm talking
> about he sued and recieved a confidential settlement. Its not the only
> time I've seen bruises because someone (for example) declined to give
> the RPO a telephone number (Which they have no authority to ask for).
>
> > Yes fares go up with the Consumer Price Index......but how much can be
> > softened by how much fare evasion and vandalism occurs.
>
> Nonsense. HOw is the CPI influenced by vandalism? Fares go up by the
> CPI - no more and no less - regardless of how much vandalism there is.
>
> > Yes some inappropiate TIN's get handed out, thats why we all have a
> > thing called DISCRETION. Just because certain elements don't display
> > it I think
> > it's a little unfair to judge all by that act. But you are entitled
> to your
> > opinion of course and so be it.
>
> Its not meant as a personal attack on you yourself. Its a
> generalisation on what I've experienced RPO's/CSE's to be like (I've
> also seen some who I couldn't fault, by the way...).
>
> The discretion of the CSE on the ground is actually often used very
> unfortunately. Its the inconsistency in who they target and who they
> don't that makes me see red most of all.
>
> > Vaughan don't take this personally but I know what I can and can't
> > book people and for you to say below that the particualr offences are
> not it is wrong.
>
> Its not an offence to travel without a ticket, in and of itself.
>
> ALso, though I may be wrong on this one, I didn't think you booked
> anyone, just took details and made a report?
>
> Anyway, aren't you one of these new Safety Officers? If so, and you are
> booking people, then National Express has misrepresented your role to
> the Director of PT's office. Perhaps you could email me privately
> (ender at axs dot com dot au) and clarify this?
>
>  If this was the case even more people out there have paid fines for
> > nothing and the government would have one huge class action looming.
>
> A lot of people do pay fines for nothing because they decide its not
> worth fighting. Others do take it to court and some win. We get
> hundreds of calls in our office about it and hear many distressing
> stories.
>
> Vaughan
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/