"Richard J." wrote in message o.uk...
BBC news report at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4031397.stm

"A plan to run London Underground services for an extra hour on Friday
and Saturday nights will be put to Londoners, the Mayor has said. The
last Tube would run at 1.30am, but [the Tube] would not start running
until an hour later the next day to allow time for maintenance work.

TfL will consult Tube users, businesses and workers about the plans over
the coming months. If approved, services would be extended by the end of
2006."

Something makes me suspect that wannabe-late-night-tube-users will be
more vocal during the consultation period than
already-early-morning-tube-users, and we will end up with an hour more
of ****ed people and an hour less of useful workers, but that's just
me being cynical I guess.

--
Larry Lard
Replies to group please

Something makes me suspect that wannabe-late-night-tube-users will be
more vocal during the consultation period than
already-early-morning-tube-users, and we will end up with an hour more
of ****ed people and an hour less of useful workers, but that's just
me being cynical I guess.


I thought it was in the bye-laws that you can't be intoxicated and
travel on the tube

"Chris" wrote in message
om...
I thought it was in the bye-laws that you can't be intoxicated and
travel on the tube

er interesting concept but not likely to be true otherwise there would be
nobody on the trains after midnight!

"redtube" wrote in message ...
"Chris" wrote in message
om...
I thought it was in the bye-laws that you can't be intoxicated and
travel on the tube

er interesting concept but not likely to be true otherwise there would be
nobody on the trains after midnight!

"4. Intoxication and possession of intoxicating liquor
(1) No person in a state of intoxication shall enter or remain on the
railway.
(2) Where reasonable notice is, or has been given prohibiting
intoxicating liquor on any train service, no person shall have any
intoxicating liquor with him on it, or attempt to enter such train
with intoxicating liquor with him.
(3) Where an authorised person reasonably believes that any person is
in a state of intoxication or has with him intoxicating liquor
contrary to this Byelaw, the authorised person may:
(i) require him to leave the railway; and
(ii) prevent him entering or remaining on the railway until the
authorised person is satisfied that he has no intoxicating liquor with
him. "

From http://tube.tfl.gov.uk/content/about/byelaw.asp

From my experience, most staff of leisure places open beyond midnight
get a taxi paid for by their place of work so most of the travellers
are revellers and most are drunk

On 23 Nov 2004, Chris wrote:

Something makes me suspect that wannabe-late-night-tube-users will be
more vocal during the consultation period than
already-early-morning-tube-users, and we will end up with an hour more
of ****ed people and an hour less of useful workers, but that's just
me being cynical I guess.

On the bright side, you'll be tucked up in bed while they're filling the
carriages with vomit, so it shouldn't affect you too much.

I thought it was in the bye-laws that you can't be intoxicated and
travel on the tube

Presumably; i've certainly never seen anyone do it.

tom

--
Optical illusions are terrorism of the mind.

"LarryLard" wrote in message
om...
"Richard J." wrote in message
o.uk...
BBC news report at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4031397.stm

"A plan to run London Underground services for an extra hour on Friday
and Saturday nights will be put to Londoners, the Mayor has said. The
last Tube would run at 1.30am, but [the Tube] would not start running
until an hour later the next day to allow time for maintenance work.

TfL will consult Tube users, businesses and workers about the plans over
the coming months. If approved, services would be extended by the end of
2006."

Something makes me suspect that wannabe-late-night-tube-users will be
more vocal during the consultation period than
already-early-morning-tube-users,

Well there are more of them, with a corresponding late-night economic
benefit to London.

and we will end up with an hour more
of ****ed people and an hour less of useful workers, but that's just
me being cynical I guess.

Yes you are. There is no need for an hour less of useful workers - in
todays "can do" society companies can just change their shifts to match the
tubes. Or helpfully advise their employees to get bikes. Anybody else has
no business to be up at such unearthly hours on the weekend.

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:18:58 +0000, umpston wrote:
Yes you are. There is no need for an hour less of useful workers - in
todays "can do" society companies can just change their shifts to match the
tubes. Or helpfully advise their employees to get bikes. Anybody else has
no business to be up at such unearthly hours on the weekend.

A another 9-5 shiftist.

Paul Weaver wrote in message ...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:18:58 +0000, umpston wrote:
Yes you are. There is no need for an hour less of useful workers - in
todays "can do" society companies can just change their shifts to match the
tubes. Or helpfully advise their employees to get bikes. Anybody else has
no business to be up at such unearthly hours on the weekend.

A another 9-5 shiftist.

No. I work when I feel like it, whether it be 10-6 or 7-3. I'd
recommend the same for anybody.

"UM Pston" wrote in message
om...
Paul Weaver wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:18:58 +0000, umpston wrote:
Yes you are. There is no need for an hour less of useful workers - in
todays "can do" society companies can just change their shifts to
match the
tubes. Or helpfully advise their employees to get bikes. Anybody
else has
no business to be up at such unearthly hours on the weekend.

A another 9-5 shiftist.

No. I work when I feel like it, whether it be 10-6 or 7-3. I'd
recommend the same for anybody.

Still the same, 8 hours 5 days single minded biggotry

--
Everything above is the personal opinion of the author, and nothing to do
with where he works and all that lovely disclaimery stuff.
Posted in his lunch hour too.

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
...
"UM Pston" wrote in message
om...
Paul Weaver wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:18:58 +0000, umpston wrote:
Yes you are. There is no need for an hour less of useful workers -
in
todays "can do" society companies can just change their shifts to
match the
tubes. Or helpfully advise their employees to get bikes. Anybody
else has
no business to be up at such unearthly hours on the weekend.

A another 9-5 shiftist.

No. I work when I feel like it, whether it be 10-6 or 7-3. I'd
recommend the same for anybody.

Still the same, 8 hours 5 days single minded biggotry

I may be opinionated, flippant and a little rude sometimes but bigoted? It
appears you are the one with a prejudice - are you seriously suggesting
there is something wrong with working regular hours? Many people like it.
I don't think it would suit me but I have no quarrel in principle with
anyone who prefers an alternative lifestyle to mine.