Mait001 wrote:
I can't agree with you there, it was only the unions which kept
firemen
and guards on trains in the sixties for safety reasons when the
B.R.B.
Wanted single manning for economy, bugger the safety.
--
Clive.

Yes, and had that double-manning (which was insisted on by unions not
for safety reasons but to keep jobs for their members) been
discontinued, it is arguable that the Beeching axe would have fallen
less heavily since the sheer uneconomic nature of the over-manned
railways led to the closure of many lines that might otherwise have
remained open. If those lines had remained open, the railways and
passengers would have benefited ultimately, but this isn't something
about which the union leaders at the time could then (as now) give a
fig.


So going back in time you presumably think the Government were wrong for
insisting that train drivers should work a mere eight hours per day with a
minimum of twelve hours between shifts?