"Richard J." wrote in message
. uk...
Dave Liney wrote:
"Richard J." wrote in message
. uk...
Dave Liney wrote:
"Mizter T" wrote in message
oups.com...

As one of "the rest of the pax" I'll just say that it doesn't
sound like gloating to me. I think it's fair enough that those who
work
for a transport organisation to get free travel on that
organisation's services as a perk of the job, just as I'd expect
someone who works for a telecoms company to get a reduced rate
subscription or someone who works for a retailer to get discounts
etc.

Free ... discount ... discount

Doesn't seem to be the same to me.

Not that I mind TfL staff travelling free; compared to the cost of
the Oyster bribery fares it's a raindrop in the ocean of subsidy
of London's public transport.

What are you talking about? London has probably the least
subsidised public transport of any comparable capital city.

Sorry. I thought it was obvious that I was talking about the Oyster
fares being so much lower than non-Oyster fares for the same
journey.

No, it wasn't obvious at all. You started ranting about bribery and the
ocean of subsidy when all you really meant, I think, was that you
disagreed for some reason with TfL's price structure. If you want to talk
about that, please start a separate thread. This one's about the validity
of staff passes.

You're quite right that I should have started a different thread. I was
trying to say that despite pointing out how TfL's staff benefit differs from
the others Mizter T mentioned I wasn't objecting to free staff travel, and
it got mixed up with the Oyster fares issue that had been tumbling round in
my head recently.

Getting back on thread though I am curious if free travel outside of getting
to and from a place of work is considered a benefit in kind by the Inland
Revenue as they have recently tightened the rules on the use of company vans
for non-work journeys.

Dave.