In message , at 11:48:22 on Mon, 3 Apr 2017,
tim... remarked:

I just thought that doing that for 10,000 drivers, once a month (say)
was going to be too much aggro for both parties

If you're running a billion-dollar business, you shouldn't just turn
your back on the costs of doing that business.

but they are a technology business, they aren't a transport operator

That figleaf is rapidly eroding away. (Or were you being sarcastic)
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:48:22 on Mon, 3 Apr 2017,
tim... remarked:

I just thought that doing that for 10,000 drivers, once a month (say)
was going to be too much aggro for both parties

If you're running a billion-dollar business, you shouldn't just turn
your back on the costs of doing that business.

but they are a technology business, they aren't a transport operator

That figleaf is rapidly eroding away.

(Or were you being sarcastic)

Obviously :-)

tim

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 03/04/2017 11:49, Martin Coffee wrote:
On 03/04/17 10:15, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:21:10 on
Mon, 3 Apr 2017, e27002 aurora remarked:

As an aside, the events of that evening showed the value of having a
guard on board. Apparently, the driver went into shock. The card
called the BTP, and Network Rail. He saw that the driver was given
tea and comfort. As we lost heating and the lighting the guard dealt
with a sick passenger and a lady going into labour. The issue of the
role of guards needs careful attention before they are eliminated.

Now that almost everyone has a mobile phone passengers can call for an
ambulance for a lady going into labour. And if they are miles from a
station, that's what air ambulances are for.

The balance here is between the cost of guards on every train, every
day, the cost of sending an air ambulance to a scene like that about
once a month in the whole country.

In any event, many trains will still have a second member of staff on
board, to check tickets. It's just that they won't have the power to
close the doors, and have "guard - I'm paid twice as much" on the name
badge.
But some lines (and tunnels) don't have mobile coverage.

I travelled between Cardiff and Netley on Wednesday and Thursday and at
least 20% of that route has absolutely no mobile coverage but
fortunately still has a guard.

If a train is stranded without a functional driver then the situation
can serious especially if the signalling is such that the signaller
doesn't know exactly where the train is. I dread to think what might
happen if this is somewhere without mobile coverage.

If there is no mobile phone coverage, what is the guard going to do?



Use GSM-R.

If that has failed, walk to the nearest SPT/other phone (e.g. crossing
etc).


Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 11:49:43 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"e27002 aurora" wrote in message
.. .

Have you ever tried to manoeuvre on the Underground with a large
suitcase and a sizable piece of hand baggage, i.e. a pilot's case? I
only tried once. :-)

yep

every time I go to LHR (on the Picc)

tim


You may be younger and in better health than me. I would struggle,
and try the patience of my fellow passengers.

On 03/04/17 11:58, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 03/04/2017 11:49, Martin Coffee wrote:
On 03/04/17 10:15, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:21:10 on
Mon, 3 Apr 2017, e27002 aurora remarked:

As an aside, the events of that evening showed the value of having a
guard on board. Apparently, the driver went into shock. The card
called the BTP, and Network Rail. He saw that the driver was given
tea and comfort. As we lost heating and the lighting the guard dealt
with a sick passenger and a lady going into labour. The issue of the
role of guards needs careful attention before they are eliminated.

Now that almost everyone has a mobile phone passengers can call for an
ambulance for a lady going into labour. And if they are miles from a
station, that's what air ambulances are for.

The balance here is between the cost of guards on every train, every
day, the cost of sending an air ambulance to a scene like that about
once a month in the whole country.

In any event, many trains will still have a second member of staff on
board, to check tickets. It's just that they won't have the power to
close the doors, and have "guard - I'm paid twice as much" on the name
badge.
But some lines (and tunnels) don't have mobile coverage.

I travelled between Cardiff and Netley on Wednesday and Thursday and at

least 20% of that route has absolutely no mobile coverage but
fortunately still has a guard.

If a train is stranded without a functional driver then the situation
can serious especially if the signalling is such that the signaller
doesn't know exactly where the train is. I dread to think what might
happen if this is somewhere without mobile coverage.

If there is no mobile phone coverage, what is the guard going to do?

Network Rail have their own communication system which will work in
those areas.

In message , at 11:49:33 on Mon, 3 Apr 2017,
Martin Coffee remarked:

If a train is stranded without a functional driver then the situation
can serious especially if the signalling is such that the signaller
doesn't know exactly where the train is. I dread to think what might
happen if this is somewhere without mobile coverage.

It's a balance between what might go wrong once a year, and the cost of
all those guards.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 14:03:26 on Mon, 3 Apr
2017, Martin Coffee remarked:

If there is no mobile phone coverage, what is the guard going to do?

Network Rail have their own communication system which will work in
those areas.

Do they issue GSM-R handsets to guards (genuine question).
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 05:15:04
on Mon, 3 Apr 2017, remarked:

My point was to highlight how seriously the law takes lack-of-insurance
offences.

Not seriously enough to routinely stop the cars and ask, though. They
could start with the illegally parked ones - that'll get through the
fleet in no time!
--
Roland Perry

On Sunday, April 2, 2017 at 6:41:09 PM UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:29:00
on Sun, 2 Apr 2017, remarked:
https://www.uber.com/en-GB/drive/lon...-requirements/

The main complaint is that they don't (do much checking). And
reportedly the problem with insurance is they don't track
cancellations

I'm not even sure there's a mechanism for that even if they wanted to

They could do spot checks on the drivers, say once a month on average
for each, and blacklist the ones without insurance.

I think you mean take them to court to get 6 points on their licence?

No, but the licensing authorities and police are.

Why would Uber snitch on their customers (and make no mistake, Uber's
customers are the drivers, passengers are the customers of the drivers).
--
Roland Perry

I'm sorry but you've made the mistake. Uber's customers are the
passengers because Uber debit their credit cards. The passengers
do not pay the drivers.

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:49:33 on Mon, 3 Apr 2017,
Martin Coffee remarked:

If a train is stranded without a functional driver then the situation
can serious especially if the signalling is such that the signaller
doesn't know exactly where the train is. I dread to think what might
happen if this is somewhere without mobile coverage.

It's a balance between what might go wrong once a year, and the cost of
all those guards.

Taking the recent concrete example of introduction of DOO, I'm pretty sure
the agreements on Southern (for now at least) involve a member of staff
being on every train (with limited exceptions), and I'm pretty sure they
were re-employed on their new contracts with no loss of pay. Obviously both
of these things may change in the future, but at present, where does your
huge cash saving come from?


Anna Noyd-Dryver