Is This Any Way To Treat a Pregnant Lady?

Here the situation: a five month pregnant lady is on a tram, she can't get a seat so is holding on to the hand rails, she has been told by her doctor that she needs to keep hydrated and to drink liquids as much as she can, with this in mind she is sipping from a bottle of Diet Coke. 

Enter the Metrolink "Customer Service Representatives" who instead of checking tickets, which as far as I can tell is their primary role, they tell said pregnant lady that she can't drink on the tram and if she continues she can be fined . The pregnant lady explains that the doctor has told her to keep drinking, she is five months pregnant and gets dizzy if she doesn't, it's not helping not having a seat. Perhaps they could assist by asking one of the other passengers who are fully able to relinquish a "priority seat" so she can sit down? No they can't do that a "priority seat" is a polite request, they can't make the polite request? No. 

So they pregnant lady has to continue to stand for the remainder of her trip. 

This is what happened to my wife Janet this afternoon on her way to meet a friend. Once I found out I was quite frankly furious. This isn't some faceless corporation this was a face to face exchange with an employee who could see for herself what was going on. 

I decided to e-mail Metrolink customer services the following:

"Dear Metrolink

Perhaps you could clarify your position with regards to pregnant passengers. My wife, five months pregnant, was standing on one of your trams earlier today. She has not been well and has been told by a doctor she needs to drink lots of fluids. So why, may I ask is she told by your "customer service representatives" that she must stop or be fined for consuming a bottle of diet coke on the tram? Perhaps if your "customer service representatives" were a bit more useful and helped my wife get a "priority" seat as she asked them to do, so she wasn't feeling so dizzy and needing a drink?

I'm sure you'll tell me, as your "customer service representatives" told my wife that they have no power to enforce "priority" seats but are more than happy to deprive a regnant lady of much needed liquid. Seriously, is this the low level petty mindedness of your company and staff that you are more bothered about a potential spillage of diet coke than ensuring a "priority" passenger, by your own definition, gets a seat? Be thankful my wife didn't fall in one of your frequent sudden stops or rocket starts.

No doubt you will file this e-mail away in your deleted folder never to be replied to but it would be nice to think there is somebody at Metrolink that is the tiniest bit concerned about this whole incident as it is clear to me your staff have their "priorities" all wrong.

I look forward to your early reply and comments."

As yet all I've had is an automated reply saying I will get a response in 15 days. Didn't last time I sent them my comments but I'm not letting this one lie. We looked into the Metrolink bylaws and Conditions of Carriage found here. Clause 7 makes interesting reading:

"7. (1) NO person shall consume:

a) any alcoholic beverage on any Vehicle or any Station or;
b) any food which will soil disfigure or destroy the property of any other Person on the System or any Vehicle or any Station.

2) No person who is in a state of intoxication or under the influence of the effects of any illegal substance shall enter or attempt to enter any Vehicle or any Station and (without prejudice to Byelaw 7 (1) above) any Authorised Officer who reasonably believes any Person to be intoxicated or under the influence of the effects of any illegal substance shall be authorised and entitled to require such a Person to leave any such Vehicle forthwith (or when it is next safe to do so) and further to leave (or not to enter) any other Vehicle or any Station."

According to their own rules my wife could drink her Diet Coke, as only alcoholic drinks are excluded. You'd think that Metrolink staff would know the rules they are trying to enforce. 

Metrolink gets a lot of bad press for poor service, broken points etc etc, but that is no one persons fault. This however is, I can't complain about the individual directly as non of the staff wear name badges just "Customer Service Representative". Is this behavior really the offical Metrolink policy or a jobsworth who has nothing better to do than be petty? I'd hope it isn't the first option, but if it is the second I don't want to think what this individual would have done if my wife had fallen as the tram accelerated away or braked sharply as they do? Worrying isn't it.

I look forward to Metrolink's comments on this situation and am sharing this blog in an effort to encourage them to do so, as these days spreading things over social media makes things happen.....