I hear, from the radio news, that Bob Crow doesn't think the police and
security services are doing enough to protect Tube drivers in wake of the
recent terrorist attacks.

The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains, and that he
is prepared to ballot for strike action if he doesn't get what he wants.

Hmm.

I see from the Metro that they will ballot for a strike if they don't
get what they want. I bet that when the guards were eliminated the
drivers got extra pay for the added responsibility. I bet that they
wont give that up.
I wonder what Ken and Tim now think of his brave drivers, not so proud
of them now I bet.

In message , at 09:03:12 on Wed, 27
Jul 2005, nsj remarked:
The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains

Armed guards?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news
In message , at 09:03:12 on Wed, 27 Jul
2005, nsj remarked:
The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains

Armed guards?

Or, more of his members in the firing line.

Mick.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:03:12 +0100, nsj wrote:

The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains, and that he
is prepared to ballot for strike action if he doesn't get what he wants.

Which, one wouldn't doubt, is more to do with creating jobs than
actual or perceived security, given the generally high[1] level of
staffing already on the Tube.

[1] Many European underground systems have many of their stations
completely unstaffed, even where they are below ground.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

nsj wrote:
I hear, from the radio news, that Bob Crow doesn't think the police and
security services are doing enough to protect Tube drivers in wake of
the recent terrorist attacks.

The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains, and
that he is prepared to ballot for strike action if he doesn't get what
he wants.

Hmm.


Well it is summer!
Before the attacks they were going to ballot to strike over toilets, the
bombs are a better excuse for some extra days off

wrote in message
oups.com...
I bet that they wont give that up.

Drivers got no more money when guards were removed

Loony T

Well how would have guards have prevented it happening. Part of the
reason they want guards is to have less work for drivers, they know
they are not going to getting them so at the end of the day they will
want a bigger pay rise for drivers because of 'increased risks'. I bet
if extra money for drivers was offered the guards campaign would soon
go on.

I find it sad that the recent bombings are being used as the latest
excuse to start another dispute

"Stuart" wrote in message
. uk...
nsj wrote:
I hear, from the radio news, that Bob Crow doesn't think the police and
security services are doing enough to protect Tube drivers in wake of the
recent terrorist attacks.

The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains, and that
he is prepared to ballot for strike action if he doesn't get what he
wants.

Hmm.


Well it is summer!
Before the attacks they were going to ballot to strike over toilets, the
bombs are a better excuse for some extra days off

No...I'm not a member of his union.
I think there is a bit more to it than just gaurds. The gaurds thing wont
work anyway. During the peak hours a guard wont be able to walk through a
train anyway - they are crush loaded. So he'll just sit in the end cab.
Perhaps he has some other work in mind for them - he hasn't mentioned what
they will do yet.
He also wants to maintain staff levels on section 12, underground stations.
There has been talk of reducing numbers on these larger stations despite
having a minimum staff level at the present. Its only in a moment of crisis
that anyone would notice a reduction. I think the reason is that stations
have had to close due to not the correct number of staff on duty. These
rules were set after the Kings Cross fire so i guess LU is saying things are
more safe than they were then and they have been risk assesed as ok to
reduce. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me....... but i'll always listen
to a good argument.
I cantt see much logic in removing staff from these places at
present....surely any kind of presence will act as a deterant. If someone
thinks they might be spotted they wont do it??? I was in Italy the week
before the first outrage, evrywhere we went there were armed soldiers.
Stations, parks, shopping malls etc - they haven'y had any violence like we
have, could it be because they do have a presence unlike us who leave it to
a station assistant whos main job is to oversee the gates?

Mal

nsj wrote:
I hear, from the radio news, that Bob Crow doesn't think the police
and security services are doing enough to protect Tube drivers in
wake of the recent terrorist attacks.

The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains,
and that he is prepared to ballot for strike action if he doesn't
get what he wants.

He's also pressing for more staff at stations, and he's not alone. From
The Times this morning:

"Cuts in the numbers of bus conductors and station staff have made it
harder to guard against bombers, according to British Transport Police.
Andy Trotter, the force's deputy chief constable, said CCTV monitoring
had replaced staff in many areas to save money. "I am concerned about
the consequences of destaffing," he said. "I don't think you can be
surprised that undesirable people are getting into the vacuum.""
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)