Tuesday, 13 March 2012

When is late actually late

As I stood waiting for the 7.07am train this morning I noticed it was actually 7.09 on my watch. Yet the overhead signage said the train was "On Time." At 7.10 the train went from being "On Time" to being due at 7.10...and actually arrived at 7.12am. Now these are not large margins, unless you have a connection to make at Reading, in which case on time needs to be on time, especially with all the improvement works (which I am sure will be worth it.) That seems reasonable doesn't it? As I watched the freight train rumble through the station at the time my train was due I knew my train would be late, so why not just be honest on the signs. People cutting it fine for connections can then make other plans. Strangely the 2 minute time lag continued to be present at journeys end (Ealing Broadway today) where the train due at 8.18 was "Exp. to arrive at 8.23" and actually arrived at 8.25. Come one FGW just cough, after all honesty is the best policy, and late is late, even if the sign says "On Time."

3 comments:

  1. I'm feeling a fellow accurist/pedant at work. You are right, it either is, or is not, on time. Just as you either are, or are not, pregnant. These are clear cut, and not intangible. You can either trust first great Western, or not. You can't slightly trust them. Although based on your fb posts, trust probably isn't in the fgw lexicon of possible choices!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trust and FGW....that's a whole new blog topic my friend. And Melody, you are too kind.

      Delete