| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On Thu, 21 May 2009 06:26:06 +0100
"MrBitsy" wrote: Creating another pointless strike? Yes. What trains have you driven? Where did you drive them? Which railway company do you work for? How about telling us when you have the safety of hundreds of others to think about? Oh put a sock in it. Do you know what the strike is about? They're whinging that theres no correct side door opening equipment in the trains on the victoria line. Well guess what: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? B) If doors have been opened on the wrong side perhaps they should be asking the drivers who did it if they're up to the job if they're apparently too dumb to be able to tell which side the platform is on since opening the doors and pressing the start button is all they have to do given the trains are ATO. C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. Oh , and to make their strike seem a bit less pointless they've thrown in a standard issue side order of alleged "bullying" at seven sisters depot. Yeah, right. More like managers telling some lazy arsed drivers to get on with the job they're paid well over the odds to do. B2003 |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On 21 May, 09:34, wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2009 06:26:06 +0100 "MrBitsy" wrote: Creating another pointless strike? Yes. What trains have you driven? *Where did you drive them? *Which railway company do you work for? How about telling us when you have the safety of hundreds of others to think about? Oh put a sock in it. Do you know what the strike is about? They're whinging that theres no correct side door opening equipment in the trains on the victoria line. Well guess what: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? B) If doors have been opened on the wrong side perhaps they should be asking the drivers who did it if they're up to the job if they're apparently too dumb to be able to tell which side the platform is on since opening the doors and pressing the start button is all they have to do given the trains are ATO. C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. Oh , and to make their strike seem a bit less pointless they've thrown in a standard issue side order of alleged "bullying" at seven sisters depot. Yeah, right. More like managers telling some lazy arsed drivers to get on with the job they're paid well over the odds to do. I think it's to do with numbers. LU can reduce the wrong-side errors on most lines through the equipment they now have, but they want to do it on the cheap on the Victoria by dealing more harshly with drivers than in the past. Drivers seem to be saying "either fit the equipment or accept the level of mistakes that you've always accepted in the past". Have I misunderstood? |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
[uk.rec.driving removed from x-posting]
On May 21, 1:03*pm, MIG wrote: On 21 May, 09:34, wrote: On Thu, 21 May 2009 06:26:06 +0100 "MrBitsy" wrote: Creating another pointless strike? Yes. What trains have you driven? *Where did you drive them? *Which railway company do you work for? How about telling us when you have the safety of hundreds of others to think about? Oh put a sock in it. Do you know what the strike is about? They're whinging that theres no correct side door opening equipment in the trains on the victoria line. Well guess what: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? B) If doors have been opened on the wrong side perhaps they should be asking the drivers who did it if they're up to the job if they're apparently too dumb to be able to tell which side the platform is on since opening the doors and pressing the start button is all they have to do given the trains are ATO. C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. Oh , and to make their strike seem a bit less pointless they've thrown in a standard issue side order of alleged "bullying" at seven sisters depot. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
wrote in message ...
On Thu, 21 May 2009 06:26:06 +0100 "MrBitsy" wrote: Creating another pointless strike? Yes. What trains have you driven? Where did you drive them? Which railway company do you work for? How about telling us when you have the safety of hundreds of others to think about? Oh put a sock in it. Do you know what the strike is about? They're whinging that theres no correct side door opening equipment in the trains on the victoria line. Well guess what: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? Why hasn't the problem been fixed in 42 years? B) If doors have been opened on the wrong side perhaps they should be asking the drivers who did it if they're up to the job if they're apparently too dumb to be able to tell which side the platform is on since opening the doors and pressing the start button is all they have to do given the trains are ATO. Any one with the slightest bit of intelligence will understand the concept of mistakes, when the task at hand is repeated thousands of times. You will make similiar mistakes in your daily life, but at least others safety doesn't suffer because of it. How do you explain pilots landing with wheels up, ships colliding with experienced captains and other very experienced people making fundamental mistakes - are they just 'dumb'? C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. Oh , and to make their strike seem a bit less pointless they've thrown in a standard issue side order of alleged "bullying" at seven sisters depot. Yeah, right. More like managers telling some lazy arsed drivers to get on with the job they're paid well over the odds to do. What experience have you of railway management? What experience are you using to make a judgment this bullying is not taking place? -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"MIG" wrote in message
... On 21 May, 09:34, wrote: On Thu, 21 May 2009 06:26:06 +0100 "MrBitsy" wrote: Creating another pointless strike? Yes. What trains have you driven? Where did you drive them? Which railway company do you work for? How about telling us when you have the safety of hundreds of others to think about? Oh put a sock in it. Do you know what the strike is about? They're whinging that theres no correct side door opening equipment in the trains on the victoria line. Well guess what: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? B) If doors have been opened on the wrong side perhaps they should be asking the drivers who did it if they're up to the job if they're apparently too dumb to be able to tell which side the platform is on since opening the doors and pressing the start button is all they have to do given the trains are ATO. C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. Oh , and to make their strike seem a bit less pointless they've thrown in a standard issue side order of alleged "bullying" at seven sisters depot. Yeah, right. More like managers telling some lazy arsed drivers to get on with the job they're paid well over the odds to do. I think it's to do with numbers. LU can reduce the wrong-side errors on most lines through the equipment they now have, but they want to do it on the cheap on the Victoria by dealing more harshly with drivers than in the past. Drivers seem to be saying "either fit the equipment or accept the level of mistakes that you've always accepted in the past". Have I misunderstood? No you haven't. -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"MrBitsy" wrote in message
C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. It would take longer to modify the current stock than they will remain in service. The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
In article ,
Recliner wrote: The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. You *really* should look at details of the dispute. Not just take The Mail's word for it. For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. -- *Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional Dave Plowman London SW 12 |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
Dave Plowman wrote on 21 May 2009 23:16:59 ...
In article , Recliner wrote: The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. You *really* should look at details of the dispute. Not just take The Mail's word for it. Ideally, yes. Perhaps you can tell us where to find such details, as they are not even on the RMT site. Do you disagree with the TfL press release on the subject? For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. No, they tell the facts that are available to them. If the RMT did a better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to 42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a better chance of understanding the "true facts". But then the RMT aren't really interested in us. [crosspost to uk.rec.driving removed, since off-topic for them] -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On May 22, 12:12*am, "Richard J." wrote: Dave Plowman wrote on 21 May 2009 23:16:59 ... In article , * *Recliner wrote: *The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. You *really* should look at details of the dispute. Not just take The Mail's word for it. Ideally, yes. *Perhaps you can tell us where to find such details, as they are not even on the RMT site. *Do you disagree with the TfL press release on the subject? I'm sure Mr Plowman would say that the TfL press release only tells part of the story. Indeed, as reasonable as it sounds, I imagine there's more to this dispute than that (i.e. a more general breakdown in relations between management and some staff etc - note that I'm not saying the management's at fault, nor am I saying they're perfect, I'm just saying that a TfL press release cannot possibly explore all of this). For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. No, they tell the facts that are available to them. *If the RMT did a better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to 42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a better chance of understanding the "true facts". *But then the RMT aren't really interested in us. The problem for the RMT is that it wouldn't look too good for them to go big on what (I think) this dispute is really about - which is that they are objecting to heavier disciplinary procedures for train operators if they do something wrong. If this is what the RMT told the public, the public might well just turn back and ask the RMT what exactly is wrong with their members being disciplined for doing something that could affect safety. And, to be fair it's easy for members of the public to say "well train operators should be capable of concentrating and opening the doors on the right side" without taking into account the quasi-hypnotic nature of watching tube tunnels for hours on end. In essence the RMT is somewhat stymied from publicly making its argument for fear of a public backlash. Of course the information from LU suggests that the RMT are also trying to have a driver who was somewhat less than truthful during a disciplinary reinstated. LU are suggesting this is the root cause, though I can imagine there might be other things causing tension too - but it's also easy to come to the conclusion that this is the RMT pitching in for a battle of willpower against LU, trying to get this driver reinstated so as to prove that they are the ever mighty union. What I would be curious to know is how many wrong-side door openings there have been on the Victoria line in recent years. Could that be an FOI request? [crosspost to uk.rec.driving removed, since off-topic for them] Who x-posted to them in the first place! |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On Thu, 21 May 2009 19:48:43 +0100
"MrBitsy" wrote: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? Why hasn't the problem been fixed in 42 years? It wasn't a "problem" until recently, just like a load of other nonsense the health and safety culture has come up with. How do you explain pilots landing with wheels up, ships colliding with When was the last time a commercial airliner landed with its wheels up because the crew forgot to lower them?? experienced captains and other very experienced people making fundamental mistakes - are they just 'dumb'? No , they're careless and should be fired. Making mistakes in a stressful situation with a lot going on is one thing - not bothering to check which side the flippin platform is on when you're doing bugger all else anyway except possibly reading a copy of The Sun under the control desk is something else entirely. Incidentaly, are you seriously trying to compare operating an automatic tube train to flying an airliner or captaining a ship?? C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. Oh , woah is me, those heart strings pluck so mournfully... Not. What experience have you of railway management? What experience are you using to make a judgment this bullying is not taking place? This "bullying" argument seems to end up as an orderve on most RMT strikes. Either working for LUL is similar to being in Stalins russia or the RMT are full of ****. I know which option I'd go for. B2003 |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
|
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On Fri, 22 May 2009 09:55:15 +0100
"Brimstone" wrote: This "bullying" argument seems to end up as an orderve on most RMT strikes. Either working for LUL is similar to being in Stalins russia or the RMT are full of ****. I know which option I'd go for. And you'd be wrong. Oh right, well cheers for that insightful heads up there. If its really that bad to work for it why do they all get so upset when someone gets sacked? Surely they'd rejoicing for him? B2003 |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 06:18:39AM -0700, Mizter T wrote:
see the comments from Howard Collins, COO of LU, in this press release: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/11781.aspx " He's management. He would say that. " And it's a press release, so is almost certainly a lie, just like other press releases. -- David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic We found no search results for "crotchet". Did you mean "crotch"? |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On May 22, 1:02*pm, David Cantrell wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 06:18:39AM -0700, Mizter T wrote: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *see the comments from Howard Collins, COO of LU, in this press release: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/11781.aspx " He's management. *He would say that. " And it's a press release, so is almost certainly a lie, just like other press releases. Very few press releases are lies. Admittedly, very few press releases tell the whole truth. The District Dave thread on this subject is interesting; I shan't link because IIRC they don't like that. It's clear that: 1) a driver pressed the door open button on the wrong side 2) he failed to tell management about this immediately, which is the rule laid down for this kind of accident 3) he was subsequently dismissed for failing to report the incident 4) the drivers are striking because of 3) 5) nobody seriously believes the equipment should be installed on the Vic It's not entirely clear whether the doors actually opened, or whether he cancelled the action so quickly that nobody was exposed to any real danger[*] and hence failing to report it wasn't entirely outrageous. [*] although, not being a complete ****wit, I tend to check whether there's a platform next to my train before I get off it. I recognise that this isn't the principle on which present H&S legislation is based. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
wrote in message
[*] although, not being a complete ****wit, I tend to check whether there's a platform next to my train before I get off it. I recognise that this isn't the principle on which present H&S legislation is based. I think it's more of a case of the danger of people falling out of a packed train, if they were already pressed against the doors. They wouldn't be expecting the doors to open on the tunnel side and wouldn't be hanging on to the rail. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
|
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On 22 May, 13:54, wrote:
It does seem a bit harsh firing him if he did eventually report it. I'd have thought a written warning would have been enough. Unless of course he never reported it or he'd had a lot of "incidents" before. The procedure is to do a thorough check of the train before moving off (possibly with the help of other staff). He assumed there was no need (apparently after trying and failing to contact control) and carried on. Anyone who, unsure what to do, errs on the side of not following the safety procedure (quite possibly in an attempt to cover up his mistake) has no business driving trains. U |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On 22 May, 14:57, Mr Thant
wrote: On 22 May, 13:54, wrote: It does seem a bit harsh firing him if he did eventually report it. I'd have thought a written warning would have been enough. Unless of course he never reported it or he'd had a lot of "incidents" before. The procedure is to do a thorough check of the train before moving off (possibly with the help of other staff). He assumed there was no need (apparently after trying and failing to contact control) and carried on. Anyone who, unsure what to do, errs on the side of not following the safety procedure (quite possibly in an attempt to cover up his mistake) has no business driving trains. U This seems to be information that no one else has got (and rather damning if true.) It's the sort of thing you get in an RAIB report, but presumably there wasn't one. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
|
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Arthur Figgis" wrote in message
wrote: Either working for LUL is similar to being in Stalins russia But isn't that what Crow et al actually want? :) I would have thought that Stalin was a trifle too right-wing for Brother Crow. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Recliner" wrote in message
... "MrBitsy" wrote in message C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. It would take longer to modify the current stock than they will remain in service. The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. A man lost his job, regardless where the line is. -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Dave Plowman" wrote in message
... In article , Recliner wrote: The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. You *really* should look at details of the dispute. Not just take The Mail's word for it. For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. The BBC news reported it in an awful way. They asked two passengers what they thought. The first was a suited man, obviously used because he looked like a typical business man. They then asked a woman her views - she looked like she had just left an Oscar party. They were used to set up the shot of a black tube driver wearing a cap with a fag hanging out his mouth. -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
wrote in message ...
On Thu, 21 May 2009 19:48:43 +0100 "MrBitsy" wrote: A) There hasn't been since they were built since 42 years ago so why didn't the RMT see fit to go on strike in 1967? Why hasn't the problem been fixed in 42 years? It wasn't a "problem" until recently, just like a load of other nonsense the health and safety culture has come up with. Being able to open the doors on the wrong side is 'nonsense? How do you explain pilots landing with wheels up, ships colliding with When was the last time a commercial airliner landed with its wheels up because the crew forgot to lower them?? I said pilots, not just commercial pilots. All pilots are highly trained people, yet they will make mistakes because they are human. Remember the Airbus that flew into trees at an airshow - the pilot was the makers test pilot! experienced captains and other very experienced people making fundamental mistakes - are they just 'dumb'? No , they're careless and should be fired. Making mistakes in a stressful situation with a lot going on is one thing - not bothering to check which side the flippin platform is on when you're doing bugger all else anyway except possibly reading a copy of The Sun under the control desk is something else entirely. If a mistake like that could cost people lives, the design flaw in the system should be fixed. Incidentaly, are you seriously trying to compare operating an automatic tube train to flying an airliner or captaining a ship?? How much manual flying do you think a commercial pilot does? C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. Oh , woah is me, those heart strings pluck so mournfully... Not. The trains are missing a vital safety feature. Any person operating a train with that flaw could make the same mistake. What experience have you of railway management? What experience are you using to make a judgment this bullying is not taking place? This "bullying" argument seems to end up as an orderve on most RMT strikes. Either working for LUL is similar to being in Stalins russia or the RMT are full of ****. I know which option I'd go for. You would go with that option because of your stereo typical view, plus a lack of experience. Reality is far different to many people views who do not have to work there. For your information, I was a tube driver in the eighties. I went to work on several strike days, bearing the brunt of my colleagues anger. I do not believe in striking, but I do have the experience of the bullying you do not think exists. -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On May 22, 7:40*pm, "MrBitsy" wrote: "Recliner" wrote: "MrBitsy" wrote: C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. It would take longer to modify the current stock than they will remain in service. The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. A man lost his job, regardless where the line is. To which one could retort that he didn't do his job in the first place, and then proceeded to be economical with the actualité when questioned about the incident. Also, not sure if you've noticed, but lots of people are losing their jobs at the moment. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Mizter T" wrote in message
... On May 22, 7:40 pm, "MrBitsy" wrote: "Recliner" wrote: "MrBitsy" wrote: C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. It would take longer to modify the current stock than they will remain in service. The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. A man lost his job, regardless where the line is. To which one could retort that he didn't do his job in the first place, and then proceeded to be economical with the actualité when questioned about the incident. Obviously he made a mistake. The problem is, if the trains still have this flaw, other humans will also make the same mistake at some point. Also, not sure if you've noticed, but lots of people are losing their jobs at the moment. I was made redundant in 2006, I do know what it feels like. -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
MrBitsy wrote:
For your information, I was a tube driver in the eighties. I went to work on several strike days, bearing the brunt of my colleagues anger. I do not believe in striking, but I do have the experience of the bullying you do not think exists. I was LT train crew in the late seventies/early eighties. I was sacked for refusing to break the rules. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Brimstone" wrote in message
... MrBitsy wrote: For your information, I was a tube driver in the eighties. I went to work on several strike days, bearing the brunt of my colleagues anger. I do not believe in striking, but I do have the experience of the bullying you do not think exists. I was LT train crew in the late seventies/early eighties. I was sacked for refusing to break the rules. That won't be believed either :-( -- MrBitsy Rover 75 CDTi |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"MrBitsy" wrote in message
wrote in message ... How do you explain pilots landing with wheels up, ships colliding with When was the last time a commercial airliner landed with its wheels up because the crew forgot to lower them?? I said pilots, not just commercial pilots. All pilots are highly trained people, yet they will make mistakes because they are human. Remember the Airbus that flew into trees at an airshow - the pilot was the makers test pilot! Actually, Captain Michel Asseline was an Air France pilot who disobeyed his employer's instructions about how low to fly. He was supposed to go no lower than 30m, but went as low as 30'. He blamed a faulty altimeter, as well as slow responding engines. But I gather that the conspiracy theorists are still not convinced that all the facts are yet known about this crash from 21 years ago. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
MrBitsy wrote on 22 May 2009 19:40:12 ...
"Recliner" wrote in message ... "MrBitsy" wrote in message C) The trains are due to be replaced in a couple of years time anyway. In two years, this mistake is likely to happen again - I hope it is not someone you love who may be injured. It would take longer to modify the current stock than they will remain in service. The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****, this must be the worst. A man lost his job, regardless where the line is. A man lost his job, not because he made a mistake, but because after making a mistake he failed to carry out the proper safe procedure. If the union think that sacking him was not justified, they should take the matter to an industrial tribunal, rather than inconveniencing thousands of passengers. We are told that the monotony of the job makes it easy to make this sort of mistake. Is that because the cab windows are in the tunnel when the train stops, and the driver can't therefore see which side the platform is by looking through his side window? If so, why don't they put some big signs on the tunnel walls opposite where the cab window stops? (X on the wrong side, tick on the correct side, or something like that.) Just a bit easier and quicker to implement than retro-fitting CSDE on 42-year-old trains. That's if the assessed risk justifies any action at all. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
In message , at 22:47:50
on Fri, 22 May 2009, Richard J. remarked: We are told that the monotony of the job makes it easy to make this sort of mistake. Is that because the cab windows are in the tunnel when the train stops, and the driver can't therefore see which side the platform is by looking through his side window? They have to be able to see the CCTV monitors, which are at the end of the platform by the driver. It's also the case that the driver has spent the previous twenty seconds *driving through* the station, and therefore the platform side is fairly obvious. -- Roland Perry |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On 23 May, 09:42, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 22:47:50 on Fri, 22 May 2009, Richard J. remarked: We are told that the monotony of the job makes it easy to make this sort of mistake. *Is that because the cab windows are in the tunnel when the train stops, and the driver can't therefore see which side the platform is by looking through his side window? They have to be able to see the CCTV monitors, which are at the end of the platform by the driver. It's also the case that the driver has spent the previous twenty seconds *driving through* the station, and therefore the platform side is fairly obvious. -- Roland Perry Both of the above imply that the mistake is down to believing that the platform is on the other side from where it is, rather than just reaching for the wrong button. Didn't they used to have to physically go to the window on the platform side to be able to open the doors on that side? It's relatively new for all door controls to be in one place, and you'd think only safely introduced if there were protection systems in place to compensate for the potential mistakes introduced. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
In article , Richard J.
writes snip why don't they put some big signs on the tunnel walls opposite where the cab window stops? (X on the wrong side, tick on the correct side, or something like that.) Why not, indeed? The mainline railways (well, Southeastern at least - don't know about the others) have "open doors other side" notices attached to the CCTV monitors on the "wrong" side at many stations - but not *all* stations, and I don't know how they decide whether they are necessary. -- Bill Borland |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts
behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. No, they tell the facts that are available to them. If the RMT did a better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to 42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a better chance of understanding the "true facts". But then the RMT aren't really interested in us. Wrong on several counts. For example, when a similiar incident happened on the Piccadilly about 20 years ago, every train was modified to ensure it didn't happen again; no fuss, no bother, no strike. Just fixed. Also, history shows that where unions are concerned, they simply do not get a fair hearing. In most strikes, all we get to hear is the management side, and a pontificating journalist who usually takes the management side. And I'm not making it up; this is normal press, tv and BBC behaviour, and it's been well documented in published papers. Next time you see a strike reported, time the management side, and time the union side - the score is usually about 4-0 on the BBC, 3-0 on ITV and something like 5 - -4 (dissenting union side voice/carefully selected vox pop) on Sky. On a good day it'll be 4-1, 3-1 and 3-0 (BBC, ITV,Sky). The only exception is when unions strike against a Labour council (Tories when in office), when the score may be as high as 3-5. As for press releases, they very rarely tell the truth, never the whole truth, and rarely 'nothing but the truth'. Believe them at your peril. And no-one reading the Daily Mail can seriously expect to get more than one side to *any* story. It just doesn't happen. In this case, it isn't political correctness, it's safety. But who cares when there's a chance to attack the unions, eh? -- Andrew If you stand up and be counted, From time to time you may get yourself knocked down. But remember this: A man flattened by an opponent can get up again. A man flattened by conformity stays down for good. - Thomas J. Watson Jr. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
Andrew Heenan wrote:
For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. No, they tell the facts that are available to them. If the RMT did a better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to 42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a better chance of understanding the "true facts". But then the RMT aren't really interested in us. Wrong on several counts. For example, when a similiar incident happened on the Piccadilly about 20 years ago, every train was modified to ensure it didn't happen again; no fuss, no bother, no strike. Just fixed. Also, history shows that where unions are concerned, they simply do not get a fair hearing. In most strikes, all we get to hear is the management side, and a pontificating journalist who usually takes the management side. And I'm not making it up; this is normal press, tv and BBC behaviour, and it's been well documented in published papers. Next time you see a strike reported, time the management side, and time the union side - the score is usually about 4-0 on the BBC, 3-0 on ITV and something like 5 - -4 (dissenting union side voice/carefully selected vox pop) on Sky. Surely four times longer than nothing is exactly the same as three times longer than nothing, and suggests all are given equal time anyway...? On a good day it'll be 4-1, 3-1 and 3-0 (BBC, ITV,Sky). The only exception is when unions strike against a Labour council (Tories when in office), when the score may be as high as 3-5. As for press releases, they very rarely tell the truth, never the whole truth, and rarely 'nothing but the truth'. Believe them at your peril. But it is all us members of the public have to go on from the horses' mouths. The "management" often put their side on websites etc (maybe they contact the BBC, ITV and Sky as well). The "union" side often doesn't, or if it does it is an unconvincing mix of shroud-waving and Dave Spart. And no-one reading the Daily Mail can seriously expect to get more than one side to *any* story. It just doesn't happen. In this case, it isn't political correctness, it's safety. But who cares when there's a chance to attack the unions, eh? Why should anyone expect the Daily Mail (or whatever) do the unions' public relations work for them? -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
In this case, it isn't political correctness, it's safety. But who cares when there's a chance to attack the unions, eh? But surely, in this case, the union is striking in defence of a member who compromised safety, first by making a dangerous mistake, and then by not taking the prescribed recovery action. So, presumably, the union is *against* passenger safety if that comes before an unsafe member's job? Perhaps Brother Crow should be prosecuted on 'elf 'n safety grounds? |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On Sat, 23 May 2009, Andrew Heenan wrote:
For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. No, they tell the facts that are available to them. If the RMT did a better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to 42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a better chance of understanding the "true facts". But then the RMT aren't really interested in us. Wrong on several counts. For example, when a similiar incident happened on the Piccadilly about 20 years ago, every train was modified to ensure it didn't happen again; no fuss, no bother, no strike. Just fixed. Also, history shows that where unions are concerned, they simply do not get a fair hearing. In most strikes, all we get to hear is the management side, and a pontificating journalist who usually takes the management side. And I'm not making it up; this is normal press, tv and BBC behaviour, and it's been well documented in published papers. Next time you see a strike reported, time the management side, and time the union side - the score is usually about 4-0 on the BBC, 3-0 on ITV and something like 5 - -4 (dissenting union side voice/carefully selected vox pop) on Sky. On a good day it'll be 4-1, 3-1 and 3-0 (BBC, ITV,Sky). The only exception is when unions strike against a Labour council (Tories when in office), when the score may be as high as 3-5. As for press releases, they very rarely tell the truth, never the whole truth, and rarely 'nothing but the truth'. Believe them at your peril. And no-one reading the Daily Mail can seriously expect to get more than one side to *any* story. It just doesn't happen. In this case, it isn't political correctness, it's safety. But who cares when there's a chance to attack the unions, eh? Nice story. So do you dispute the assertion that it would take longer to fit CSDE to the existing trains than it will take for the new trains to come into service? And if not, do you dispute that this makes the RMT's demands absolutely nonsensical? tom -- Outnumbered but never outgunned. |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
Andrew Heenan wrote on 23 May 2009 17:36:51 ...
For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the 'facts' the public want to hear. No, they tell the facts that are available to them. If the RMT did a better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to 42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a better chance of understanding the "true facts". But then the RMT aren't really interested in us. Wrong on several counts. For example, when a similiar incident happened on the Piccadilly about 20 years ago, every train was modified to ensure it didn't happen again; no fuss, no bother, no strike. Just fixed. 20 years ago, the 73 stock was 16 years old. How long did it take to fit CSDE to all 80-odd trains? It would only be relevant to the present issue if it could be designed and fitted much earlier than the introduction of the new Victoria stock, which I doubt is practicable. Also, history shows that where unions are concerned, they simply do not get a fair hearing. In most strikes, all we get to hear is the management side, and a pontificating journalist who usually takes the management side. So where is the RMT press release that explains their position in a credible way? I haven't seen it yet on their own website, so how do you expect the media to give them a "fair hearing"? [snip] In this case, it isn't political correctness, it's safety. But who cares when there's a chance to attack the unions, eh? I care very much about safety, which is why I'm very concerned that, as far as I can tell, the safety procedures weren't followed after the driver made his mistake. If the union thinks his sacking was unfair, why haven't they taken LU to an industrial tribunal? Instead they choose to attack the passengers, so don't blame me if I appear to be attacking them. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
Mr Thant wrote:
On 22 May, 13:54, wrote: It does seem a bit harsh firing him if he did eventually report it. I'd have thought a written warning would have been enough. Unless of course he never reported it or he'd had a lot of "incidents" before. The procedure is to do a thorough check of the train before moving off (possibly with the help of other staff). He assumed there was no need (apparently after trying and failing to contact control) and carried on. Anyone who, unsure what to do, errs on the side of not following the safety procedure (quite possibly in an attempt to cover up his mistake) has no business driving trains. LU Rule Book 7 Section 14 is rather more detailed than that, though there doesn't seem to be an equivalent in the GE/RT8000 Rule Book series for the mainline railways. Cheers, Barry |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
"Tom Anderson" wrote ...
Nice story. true story, actually. So do you dispute the assertion that it would take longer to fit CSDE to the existing trains than it will take for the new trains to come into service? And if not, do you dispute that this makes the RMT's demands absolutely nonsensical? I don't know; neither do you. There's so much spin around the costs and time frames of fixing problem trains, that no-one outside the service can possibly tell where the truth lies. Recall, for example, the problems with SWT's 458 units; we were told that the visual display was a few mm too small, that the door control buttons were a cm or two out (both disability access issues), and fixing it would cost £140,000* per car, and so would never get done on cost grounds, thereby removing them from service. After the ritual brinkmanship, an engineer with a brain was located, and a system was devised and fitted at a fraction of the stated cost, and in a timely manner. If I had the facts of this new drama, I'd happily give a view - but there's so many lies, half truths and plain old fashioned smoke, that neither you nor I could even guess. Time will tell, I guess; hopefully before some poor sod falls out of a train. *That figure may be way out; it was a long time ago - but whatever it was, it was ludicrous. -- Andrew |
Commuters suffer while Crowe inflates his ego even further
On May 24, 11:40*am, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote ... Nice story. true story, actually. So do you dispute the assertion that it would take longer to fit CSDE to the existing trains than it will take for the new trains to come into service? And if not, do you dispute that this makes the RMT's demands absolutely nonsensical? I don't know; neither do you. There's so much spin around the costs and time frames of fixing problem trains, that no-one outside the service can possibly tell where the truth lies. Recall, for example, the problems with SWT's 458 units; we were told that the visual display was a few mm too small, that the door control buttons were a cm or two out (both disability access issues), and fixing it would cost £140,000* per car, and so would never get done on cost grounds, thereby removing them from service. After the ritual brinkmanship, an engineer with a brain was located, and a system was devised and fitted at a fraction of the stated cost, and in a timely manner. If I had the facts of this new drama, I'd happily give a view - but there's so many lies, half truths and plain old fashioned smoke, that neither you nor I could even guess. Time will tell, I guess; hopefully before some poor sod falls out of a train. They've been running under the current setup *for 40 years*, for ****'s sake. It's not a H&S issue, it's a willy-waving issue (and management is doubtless being at least as daft as the union about the whole case - the sensible approach would be to say 'meh, **** happens, anyone who walks out of the wrong side of the train was a ****wit anyway, slap on the wrists and brief telling-off for drivers who make the mistake'). -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 07:07 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk