In message , at 14:07:55 on Wed, 7 May
2014, tim..... remarked:
Unless you use auto-topup.

As someone who sometimes doesn't use his card for a year at a time the
trigger point and the minimum top up are far too high. (It's
ridiculous to treat me like a child and assume that I might - without
realising it, want to use my card to go to Watford and thus need the
fare to there to be available.

They are treating you as a criminal, who might make an unresolved
journey to (say) an unbarriered commuter station in Kent, where they can
at least collect the fare to Watford from you before you shred the card
and get a new one for tomorrow.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:07:55 on Wed, 7 May
2014, tim..... remarked:
Unless you use auto-topup.

As someone who sometimes doesn't use his card for a year at a time the
trigger point and the minimum top up are far too high. (It's ridiculous
to treat me like a child and assume that I might - without realising it,
want to use my card to go to Watford and thus need the fare to there to be
available.

They are treating you as a criminal, who might make an unresolved journey
to (say) an unbarriered commuter station in Kent, where they can at least
collect the fare to Watford from you before you shred the card and get a
new one for tomorrow.

But I can do that anyway with auto top-up turned off

tim

In message , at 15:41:57 on Wed, 7 May
2014, tim..... remarked:
Unless you use auto-topup.

As someone who sometimes doesn't use his card for a year at a time
the trigger point and the minimum top up are far too high. (It's
ridiculous to treat me like a child and assume that I might - without
realising it, want to use my card to go to Watford and thus need the
fare to there to be available.

They are treating you as a criminal, who might make an unresolved
journey to (say) an unbarriered commuter station in Kent, where they
can at least collect the fare to Watford from you before you shred
the card and get a new one for tomorrow.

But I can do that anyway with auto top-up turned off

But if you come into the category of "stupid criminal" they'll get their
£8 worth of flesh from you. This appears to matter to them quite a lot.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 15:41:57 on Wed, 7 May
2014, tim..... remarked:
Unless you use auto-topup.

As someone who sometimes doesn't use his card for a year at a time the
trigger point and the minimum top up are far too high. (It's ridiculous
to treat me like a child and assume that I might - without realising it,
want to use my card to go to Watford and thus need the fare to there to
be available.

They are treating you as a criminal, who might make an unresolved
journey to (say) an unbarriered commuter station in Kent, where they
can at least collect the fare to Watford from you before you shred the
card and get a new one for tomorrow.

But I can do that anyway with auto top-up turned off

But if you come into the category of "stupid criminal" they'll get their
£8 worth of flesh from you. This appears to matter to them quite a lot.

Not entirely sure if you are making a relevant point

or just an aside

:-(

tim

On Wed, 7 May 2014 09:47:34 +0200, "tim....."
wrote:

"Richard" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 6 May 2014 17:04:13 +0200, "tim....."
wrote:

"Steve Fitzgerald" ] wrote in message
...
[POM, AFM, CSA]

This isn't TfF's staff forum, can we have a translation please

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ound_ticketing shows the
ticket machine types.

Thanks

A moment's Googling found the other two.

It wasn't even clear that one of the other two wasn't another type of
machine

I take your point, and I may have made mine too bluntly. If I may say
so, your reply to Steve was also quite direct!

Richard.

On 07/05/2014 19:52, Richard wrote:
[...]
[POM, AFM, CSA]

This isn't TfF's staff forum, can we have a translation please

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ound_ticketing shows the
ticket machine types.

Thanks

A moment's Googling found the other two.

It wasn't even clear that one of the other two wasn't another type of
machine

I take your point, and I may have made mine too bluntly. If I may say
so, your reply to Steve was also quite direct!

Agreed - a polite question rather than a harrumph would have been
preferable.

On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:07:55PM +0200, tim..... wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote:
True, but there will still be more helpers per customer.
(I presume that you mean, than now? - no, that can't be right. If everybody
who was previously in the TO was now to be out front helping customers use
the machines, there wouldn't be any scope redundancies nor any union gripes
about people having to move locations, change shift patterns. etc)

Ah, but you're assuming that ticket office staff are currently helping
customers who need it. They're obviously not. A lot of the time they're
selling tickets instead, to customers who could be serving themselves
with a machine, or just not doing anything at all.

Of all the stations I use regularly, the only one where there is always
a queue for the ticket office is Victoria. The queue there seems to
consist mostly of tourists, who will still have their needs served by
a ticket office. But at, for example, Balham, the person in the ticket
office probably spends most of his time reading a good book, because he
certainly doesn't spend it helping people while locked up in his little
room. Now, Balham already has at least one person out front, and I
expect that a lot of the time that's enough, so it makes sense to move
the person currently doing the crossword in the ticket office either to
a different shift or to a different location, so they can help people
where there are people needing help - or to get rid of them.

--
David Cantrell | even more awesome than a panda-fur coat

THIS IS THE LANGUAGE POLICE
PUT DOWN YOUR THESAURUS
STEP AWAY FROM THE CLICHE

In message , at 11:51:37
on Fri, 9 May 2014, David Cantrell remarked:
Of all the stations I use regularly, the only one where there is always
a queue for the ticket office is Victoria.

You obviously don't go to Kings Cross or Euston then.

The queue there seems to consist mostly of tourists, who will still
have their needs served by a ticket office.

But the proposed replacement is an enquiry office - with a huge queue -
(go to Euston concourse to see what I think is an example).
--
Roland Perry

"David Cantrell" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:07:55PM +0200, tim..... wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote:
True, but there will still be more helpers per customer.
(I presume that you mean, than now? - no, that can't be right. If
everybody
who was previously in the TO was now to be out front helping customers
use
the machines, there wouldn't be any scope redundancies nor any union
gripes
about people having to move locations, change shift patterns. etc)

Ah, but you're assuming that ticket office staff are currently helping
customers who need it. They're obviously not. A lot of the time they're
selling tickets instead,

I had assumed that selling a ticket at the window counted as "helping a
customer". If it isn't, what is it?

to customers who could be serving themselves
with a machine, or just not doing anything at all.

If they are (at any one point in time) doing "nothing at all, then it seems
reasonable to conclude that there are no customers waiting who can't use the
machines, so if they were outside "helping", they would still be doing
"nothing at all".

The point of contention isn't just about whether the number of "helpers" is
adequate, it was about the claim that there would be more of them.

If you meant a comparison with the number currently outside helping at a
machine then of course there will be, as that number is often zero. So that
would be a silly claim.

Of all the stations I use regularly, the only one where there is always
a queue for the ticket office is Victoria. The queue there seems to
consist mostly of tourists, who will still have their needs served by
a ticket office.

Not if it doesn't sell tickets, they won't

But at, for example, Balham, the person in the ticket
office probably spends most of his time reading a good book, because he
certainly doesn't spend it helping people while locked up in his little
room. Now, Balham already has at least one person out front, and I
expect that a lot of the time that's enough, so it makes sense to move
the person currently doing the crossword in the ticket office either to
a different shift or to a different location, so they can help people
where there are people needing help - or to get rid of them.

No-one (except the unions) is arguing that there isn't scope to downgrade TO
at "commuter" type stations.

It's the blanket "Every" TO that they disagree with

tim

"tim....." wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 02:07:55PM +0200, tim..... wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote:
True, but there will still be more helpers per customer.
(I presume that you mean, than now? - no, that can't be right. If everybody
who was previously in the TO was now to be out front helping customers use
the machines, there wouldn't be any scope redundancies nor any union gripes
about people having to move locations, change shift patterns. etc)

Ah, but you're assuming that ticket office staff are currently helping
customers who need it. They're obviously not. A lot of the time they're
selling tickets instead,

I had assumed that selling a ticket at the window counted as "helping a
customer". If it isn't, what is it?

I think he meant doing things for customers that they couldn't have done
for themselves at a machine.


to customers who could be serving themselves
with a machine, or just not doing anything at all.

If they are (at any one point in time) doing "nothing at all, then it
seems reasonable to conclude that there are no customers waiting who
can't use the machines, so if they were outside "helping", they would
still be doing "nothing at all".

The offices are closed for most of the day at suburban stations, with staff
sitting inside, but not doing anything useful for passengers. The aim of
this plan is to reduce ticket office staffing by something line 950, so
obviously some of these people will no longer be there.


The point of contention isn't just about whether the number of "helpers"
is adequate, it was about the claim that there would be more of them.

If you meant a comparison with the number currently outside helping at a
machine then of course there will be, as that number is often zero. So
that would be a silly claim.

Of all the stations I use regularly, the only one where there is always
a queue for the ticket office is Victoria. The queue there seems to
consist mostly of tourists, who will still have their needs served by
a ticket office.

Not if it doesn't sell tickets, they won't

The travel advice offices will sell tickets if needed, but that's not meant
to be their main function.