Stimpy wrote:
OE-QuoteFixDave Babb wrote:

I think most people, (me included) would need it explained in very
short and simple word what exactly a driver might need to do that
could possibly involve some movement of foot / ankle / leg that a
game of squash would not be expected to involve to some degree.

I have climbed in and out of a full sized 3rd rail EMU via the
drivers steps to track level a few times, and while not completely
simple, I did not find it that much of a challenge.
I am inclined to go with the public opinion that he was swinging
the lead a bit until someone explains how running around a court
making major course changes at short notice can be more physically
demanding than climbing out of a cab and walking along the track.

Remember it's reported he originally claimed that he was playing
squash on medical advice but later reports said he'd said he found
the prescribed physio
'monotonous' so had self-prescribed squash to strengthen the ankle.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/st...212011,00.html

Also, the tribunal judgement was that he was 75% to blame for his own
dismissal. AFAIK London Underground lost the case on a technicality,
because they had introduced additional grounds for dismissal at the
appeal stage.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In article ,
Jack Taylor wrote:
My initial reaction to this guy was to damn him as a 'lead-swinger' but,
having read much more about the case and heard some of his points from his
own mouth, rather than as they have been reported, I'm beginning to think
that there is a little bit more to this than meets the eye!

There always is more than meets the eye, when comparing Real Life (tm)
with anything printed in a newspaper.

--
You dont have to be illiterate to use the Internet, but it help's.

Niklas Karlsson wrote...

In article , Jack Taylor wrote:

Try doing a search on Clive's name on uk.transport.london and uk.railway or
looking at his website and you'll realise what a stupid statement that was!
;-)

Uh, he was referring to Boltar, not Clive.


Thanks Niklas. I'd tried posting another message myself explaining
that, but the news server was down.

Boltar's definitely a troll. Look at his post in the Croxley thread
where says the link is illogical because going via Buckinghamshire
won't be the quickest route from London to Waford...

No way he could genuinely believe even half of what he types. He's
just doing it to wind us up. Ignore him and he'll go away, (or at
least think up some better material).

Kat wrote in message ...
In message , Jack Taylor
writes

"Kat" wrote in message
...
I don't believe SP was referring to Clive as a troll but the person
Clive was replying to...
(One of the problems with 2D conversations)

It doesn't help with me being half asleep whilst I'm reading through uk.r
and u.t.l !!! ;-))

LOL!
B2003 is your usual sort of LU-staff hater; cast from the CJG mould but
lacking the elegant turn of phrase ;-)

I don't hate LUL staff, in fact I don't even hate this guy though I believe
he's a waste of space. What I do hate is the get-away-with-it mentality that
seems to be prevalent. And judging by the fact that I've been called a troll
(uk.transport.london speak for someone who actually had an opinion and doesn't
just bleat along in time with the rest of the sheep) it seems that a lot of
people on here have no problem with it. Which sums up Britain today.

B2003

On 14 May 2004 08:56:39 -0700, (Boltar) wrote:

And judging by the fact that I've been called a troll
(uk.transport.london speak for someone who actually had an opinion and doesn't
just bleat along in time with the rest of the sheep)

On that definition I must be a troll as well. Well that's made my week
that has.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Boltar" wrote in message
om...

I don't hate LUL staff, in fact I don't even hate this guy though I
believe
he's a waste of space. What I do hate is the get-away-with-it mentality
that
seems to be prevalent. And judging by the fact that I've been called a
troll
(uk.transport.london speak for someone who actually had an opinion and
doesn't
just bleat along in time with the rest of the sheep) it seems that a lot
of
people on here have no problem with it. Which sums up Britain today.

Whether or not I agree with you opinion(s) I wholeheartedly defend your
right to express them. As you say, it is PC these days not to have an
opinion or, if you do, not to express it. Grey days indeed!

Boltar wrote:
Kat wrote in message
...
In message , Jack
Taylor writes

"Kat" wrote in message
...
I don't believe SP was referring to Clive as a troll but the person
Clive was replying to...
(One of the problems with 2D conversations)

It doesn't help with me being half asleep whilst I'm reading
through uk.r
and u.t.l !!! ;-))

LOL!
B2003 is your usual sort of LU-staff hater; cast from the CJG mould
but
lacking the elegant turn of phrase ;-)

I don't hate LUL staff, in fact I don't even hate this guy though I
believe
he's a waste of space. What I do hate is the get-away-with-it
mentality that
seems to be prevalent. And judging by the fact that I've been called
a troll (uk.transport.london speak for someone who actually had an
opinion and doesn't
just bleat along in time with the rest of the sheep) it seems that a
lot of
people on here have no problem with it. Which sums up Britain today.


I haven't noticed anyone condoning the situation regarding this bloke.
Management is paid to manage, people in all sorts of jobs everywhere take
the ****. As I said earlier, if management were doing their job properly
something would have been done.

"Boltar" wrote...

I don't hate LUL staff, in fact I don't even hate this guy though I
believe he's a waste of space. What I do hate is the get-away-with-it
mentality that seems to be prevalent.

Oh, come on. Everyone, everywhere, has done a sickie at some time in their
lives. Big deal. What's so special about this guy that suddenly, for the
first time iever, it becomes a bad thing? Why is it Ok for us to do it to
our employers but not Ok for him to do it to LUL?

I've been called a troll (uk.transport.london speak for
someone who actually had an opinion and doesn't
just bleat along in time with the rest of the sheep)

Please, I've been around on various Usenet groups long enough to spot a
troll when I see one. They're the same everywhere, not just this group.
I've even enjoyed doing some trolling in the past, so I'm talking from
experience here.

And it's not just your opinion on the sicknote issue, it's other things too.
E.g. your claim that people in Buckinghamshire shouldn't have a direct route
to Watford Jn. because it isn't the fastest route from London. (Or
something. I *still* don't understand what you were trying to say there.)

You make a habit of posting various opinions that no-one in their right mind
could share. Either you're stupid, or you're a deliberate troll. I'm
giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you're not stupid. That's
more than Clive was prepared to to give you.

it seems that a lot of people on here have no problem with it. Which
sums up Britain today.

Would you have any problem with anyone working for another employer doing a
sickie? Of course not. You've probably done it yourself. We all do it.
So why the double standards in this case? What's so special that sickies
suddenly become a bad thing when the employee just happens to work for LUL?

But you can't answer that, can you? Why not? Because you *are* a troll,
and you don't really believe the nonsense you're talking. You're just
winding us up for fun. You might fool the others, but as an ex-troll
myself, I can see right through you. And you're not even a very good troll.
Sorry, but you're just not entertaining enough. Into the killfile with
you... **PLONK**

"Jack Taylor" wrote...

Whether or not I agree with you opinion(s) I wholeheartedly defend your
right to express them.

That's assuming that they really ARE his opinions in the first place. It's
more likely Boltar's just a troll making up opinions to **** us off.
Whining on about how you're being oppressed because your "opinions" aren't
fashionable is the standard troll defence. (I should know, I used it myself
back in my troll days.)

In article , Boltar
writes
There are *plenty* of circumstances where one can be able to play squash
yet be unable to do a job like train driving.

Maybe there are , but he was claiming a dodgy ankle. Please do explain how
he could play squash with a bad ankle but couldn't drive a train with one?

Strangely enough, I'm not a doctor, so I can't give you definitive
details.

But I can well imagine that someone could play half an hour of squash
*knowing that you can stop at any time* but not spend 3 hours driving a
train *unable to stop*.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: