Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers (customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not turning up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does happen.

If passengers also decided to take some kind of demonstration like not using
the system for a day KEN LIVINGSTONE would only tax those people forcing
them back onto the trains.

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase why
not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not your
customer!

daveF

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:23:12 +0000, dave F wrote:
Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers (customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not turning up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does happen.

Of course it does. It'll be worse when there are no tubes running because
the drivers think it's unsafe/want to strike for the hell of it
(statistics show about a 1 in 2,000,000 chance of being injured)

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase
why not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not
your customer!

Indeed. When was the last tube strike? 600,000 people on the victoria line
every day, thats like 7,000 buses. At least I can WAGN to Liverpool
street, although that's going to be bad too. Might have to invest in that
moped anyway.
Sack em all, let a commuter drive the train. 3 minute course in how to
press the "go" "stop" "open" "close" and "muffled announcement" button and
you're sorted

Why not do a job swap? Commuters drive trains. Tube drivers do ... whatever
jobs it is you do.

--
Remove "0" from from daveb07890 to reply
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:23:12 +0000, dave F wrote:
Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers
(customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not
turning up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does
happen.

Of course it does. It'll be worse when there are no tubes running because
the drivers think it's unsafe/want to strike for the hell of it
(statistics show about a 1 in 2,000,000 chance of being injured)

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase
why not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not
your customer!

Indeed. When was the last tube strike? 600,000 people on the victoria line
every day, thats like 7,000 buses. At least I can WAGN to Liverpool
street, although that's going to be bad too. Might have to invest in that
moped anyway.
Sack em all, let a commuter drive the train. 3 minute course in how to
press the "go" "stop" "open" "close" and "muffled announcement" button and
you're sorted

In article ,
(dave F) wrote:

Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers
(customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not
turning up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does
happen.

If passengers also decided to take some kind of demonstration like not
using
the system for a day KEN LIVINGSTONE would only tax those people forcing
them back onto the trains.

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase
why
not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not your
customer!

daveF



The RMT jump on anything as a reason o ballot for a strike - look at the
past strikes and the so-called reason for them. However they also have a
record having to climb down because they don't get anywhere with them. All
the strikes do is inconvenience the passengers and mean their members lose
money.

Very few people ever want a strike. However it is the sheep that don't
bother to vote and just follow the result that mean a strike gets called
most times. Look at the amount of returned ballot papers and you will find
that there is nearly always an overwhelming majority for a yes vote.
However, broken down, all it means is that the union activists voted yes,
whilst the majority of members (who would probably have voted no) couldn't
be bothered to vote and then bleat that they're losing money when called
out on strike. (Although given the number of people that seem to have
second jobs, they probably don't mind being on strike - especially those
that do mini cabbing). The percentage of the actual membership that vote
for a strike is usually very low when compared to the no vote and the
"can't be bothered to vote" members.

It will be interesting to see how the "go slow" works. I expect that the
union activists will be going slow, whilst everybody else goes at the
usual speed. Where will it end?, what is a "slow" speed?. A derailment or
collision at 5mph could cause just as much harm in certain circumstances
as one at a higher speed. Derailing at 1mph, in front of an approaching
train on the opposite track, could be fatal. Obviously if there is this
concern over the condition of the track in general, then people should
already be going slow and over every set of points, not just over certain
areas.

Drivers know where they think the track might be dodgy (although it may
well be safe) and will usually adjust their driving accordingly. After
all, the driver is thinking about his own safety just as much as that of
the passengers.

Approaching Archway NB, on the bend at the site of the old scissors
crossover, the train is often thrown violently as it passes over
(presumably) a join in the track. This has been like it for about 9+
months and is often being reported by drivers (and passengers). It has
been examined and passed as "OK". This means that trains can go over it at
the normal line speed of 35mph. There are other similar circumstances to
this. However, drivers not trusting the track will usually slow down
anyway.

Roger

On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:23:12 +0000 (UTC), "dave F"
wrote:

Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers (customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not turning up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does happen.

If passengers also decided to take some kind of demonstration like not using
the system for a day KEN LIVINGSTONE would only tax those people forcing
them back onto the trains.

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase why
not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not your
customer!

daveF


I like the idea of the station staff just throwing the gates open for
a day - running the service, but refusing to collect fares. Or there's
a Dutch strike, where all the passengers stay at home for a day.

Civil disobedience can be creative!

R

I like the idea of the station staff just throwing the gates open for
a day - running the service, but refusing to collect fares. Or there's
a Dutch strike, where all the passengers stay at home for a day.

The TSSA union did that a few months ago in Ireland. The problem with that
is that there are differnt unions and some are not in the union. Everyone
would have to talk about it, and if 1 person disagreed then it could not go
ahead because they might refuse to open the Gates.
--
To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline
For Train Information, The Latest News & Best photos around check out the
Award Winning Railways
Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk

Rupert Goodwins wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:23:12 +0000 (UTC), "dave F"
wrote:

Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers
(customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not turning
up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does
happen.

If passengers also decided to take some kind of demonstration like not
using
the system for a day KEN LIVINGSTONE would only tax those people forcing
them back onto the trains.

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase why
not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not your
customer!

daveF


I like the idea of the station staff just throwing the gates open for
a day - running the service, but refusing to collect fares. Or there's
a Dutch strike, where all the passengers stay at home for a day.

Civil disobedience can be creative!



I like the idea of opening the gates. Doing so will get the customer
support - clever!

daveF

On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 20:13:45 +0000 (UTC), "dave F"
wrote:


Rupert Goodwins wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:23:12 +0000 (UTC), "dave F"
wrote:

Tube drivers want to strike but what about the poor passengers
(customers)
who have to put up with not only been injured on the system but delays
caused by bad workmanship, staff either knocking off early or not turning
up
at all! I'm probably going to get some stick now but come on it does
happen.

If passengers also decided to take some kind of demonstration like not
using
the system for a day KEN LIVINGSTONE would only tax those people forcing
them back onto the trains.

Next time tube driver wanna strike because they demand a pay increase why
not find some other way of protesting against your EMPLOYER and not your
customer!

daveF


I like the idea of the station staff just throwing the gates open for
a day - running the service, but refusing to collect fares. Or there's
a Dutch strike, where all the passengers stay at home for a day.

Civil disobedience can be creative!



I like the idea of opening the gates. Doing so will get the customer
support - clever!

daveF

Until they get crushed at Victoria.

The gates at Victoria (Victoria Line) are used to regulate the flow of
passengers onto the platform.


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk