London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   NTfL: usual suspects short-listed (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/14747-ntfl-usual-suspects-short-listed.html)

[email protected] January 22nd 16 11:31 AM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 
On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:40:36 -0000
"tim....." wrote:
wrote in message ...
If you're talking some 3rd world dump


Nope, some EU countries


Which ones?

then no doubt, but one would hope most
if not all western nations do initial selection on candidates based on
intellectual ability.


On appropriate aptitude certainly, but being a doctor out in the real world
doesn't require many of the skills that "passing exams" test.


What, skills like knowledge, critical thinking & logical deduction? There's
more to being a doctor than empathising - any idiot can do that. The fact that
trainee doctors do boatloads of exams as they progress I think says it all.

--
Spud



Arthur Figgis January 22nd 16 10:06 PM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 
On 20/01/2016 21:32, Roland Perry wrote:

The biggest problem was
getting the school to agree to let her drop General Studies (which was
virtually compulsory), but simply a way to easily increase a school's
league table results - however clearly cuts no ice with the major
universities.


In my day (mid-1990s) General Studies was compulsory at my school, and
when I enquired about not doing it - or at least not turning up to the
lessons, and just sitting the exam - I was told that this was not
permitted (in retrospect, I wonder if they could/would really have
kicked someone out over it?). There seemed to be a sincere belief that
universities would choose an applicant with lower grades in proper
subjects but with General Studies over someone with better grades (and
possibly also Further Maths) but without General Studies.

Are (were?) there any universities where this was actually the case, I
wonder?


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

tim..... January 23rd 16 10:25 AM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 

"Steve Fitzgerald" ] wrote in message
...
In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner writes

A 5 day 36 hour week currently,

7hrs a day. Wow!

7 hours 12 mins actually but that was not the point.

and the offer is a 4 day 36 hour week.

So moving to 9 hour days with all the potential fatigue issues that
involves...


Presumably there are multiple breaks and rest periods during the shift?


Feel free to presume that.

There is nothing extra offered other than the standard 30 minute unpaid
meal break that I am aware of.


all I can do is repeat my question that has been ignored

If the drivers think it unsafe, why are the union asking for it?

tim





Peter Smyth[_3_] January 23rd 16 04:21 PM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 
tim..... wrote:

A 5 day 36 hour week currently,

7hrs a day. Wow!

7 hours 12 mins actually but that was not the point.

and the offer is a 4 day 36 hour week.

So moving to 9 hour days with all the potential fatigue issues
that involves...

Presumably there are multiple breaks and rest periods during the
shift?


Feel free to presume that.

There is nothing extra offered other than the standard 30 minute
unpaid meal break that I am aware of.


all I can do is repeat my question that has been ignored

If the drivers think it unsafe, why are the union asking for it?


Some drivers would prefer 4 longer days, others prefer 5 shorter days.
Presumably the majority are in the former group, otherwise ASLEF
wouldn't be pushing for it.

Many NR TOCs already have a 4 days week.

Peter Smyth

tim..... January 24th 16 10:35 AM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 

"Peter Smyth" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

A 5 day 36 hour week currently,

7hrs a day. Wow!

7 hours 12 mins actually but that was not the point.

and the offer is a 4 day 36 hour week.

So moving to 9 hour days with all the potential fatigue issues
that involves...

Presumably there are multiple breaks and rest periods during the
shift?

Feel free to presume that.

There is nothing extra offered other than the standard 30 minute
unpaid meal break that I am aware of.


all I can do is repeat my question that has been ignored

If the drivers think it unsafe, why are the union asking for it?


Some drivers would prefer 4 longer days, others prefer 5 shorter days.
Presumably the majority are in the former group, otherwise ASLEF
wouldn't be pushing for it.

Many NR TOCs already have a 4 days week.


as 9+ hour days in a 7 day week?

Or as part of a move to "Sunday as a normal day": 8 hour days, 4 on, 2 off,
4 on, 2 off...?

tim



Peter Smyth





Roland Perry January 24th 16 01:16 PM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 
In message , at 11:35:05 on Sun, 24 Jan
2016, tim..... remarked:

Many NR TOCs already have a 4 days week.


as 9+ hour days in a 7 day week?

Or as part of a move to "Sunday as a normal day": 8 hour days, 4 on, 2
off, 4 on, 2 off...?


AIUI it's four days on, three days off, plus some lucrative overtime on
a Sunday because that's no-one's official "day on".

There's also apparently 40 days holiday a year, but I'm not sure if that
equates to 40/4=10 weeks, or the 40/5=8 weeks that most other workers
would expect it to translate to.
--
Roland Perry

tim..... January 24th 16 04:38 PM

NTfL: usual suspects short-listed
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:35:05 on Sun, 24 Jan 2016,
tim..... remarked:

Many NR TOCs already have a 4 days week.


as 9+ hour days in a 7 day week?

Or as part of a move to "Sunday as a normal day": 8 hour days, 4 on, 2
off, 4 on, 2 off...?


AIUI it's four days on, three days off, plus some lucrative overtime on a
Sunday because that's no-one's official "day on".

There's also apparently 40 days holiday a year, but I'm not sure if that
equates to 40/4=10 weeks, or the 40/5=8 weeks that most other workers
would expect it to translate to.


I bet there's a queue outside the door of this ToC, because my source tells
me that not all are nearly this generous

tim




David Cantrell January 27th 16 11:00 AM

Ntfl: usual suspects short-listed
 
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:06:10PM +0000, Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 20/01/2016 21:32, Roland Perry wrote:
The biggest problem was
getting the school to agree to let her drop General Studies (which was
virtually compulsory), but simply a way to easily increase a school's
league table results - however clearly cuts no ice with the major
universities.

In my day (mid-1990s) General Studies was compulsory at my school


In my day (early 90s) it was compulsory if you were only doing three
A-levels. I never asked, but I presume that the justification was that
the school's insurers didn't want a load of teenagers with loads of free
time goofing off and doing stupid ****.

when I enquired about not doing it - or at least not turning up to the
lessons, and just sitting the exam


There was an exam?

--
David Cantrell | top google result for "topless karaoke murders"

Support terrierism! Adopt a dog today!

Steve Lewis January 27th 16 01:43 PM

Ntfl: usual suspects short-listed
 
It was the other way round at my school - there were no General Studies lessons, but everyone had to take the exam (2x3hr papers).


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk