Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message
ups.com...

ah...this is obviously some strange usage of the word 'funny'
that I wasn't previously aware of.

Sounds like you're not aware off any usage of the word. The song
is amusing and
right on the money.


It was as funny as blaming doctors and nurse for the state of the
NHS or shop assistants for the state of the retailer they happen to
work for or any other frontline employee for the state of the
company or organisation they are employed by.

Yes it really isn't fault of the staff when they are on strike is
it?

It takes two to tango.

And only one to stop.

The only group of staff the song explicitly has a go at are the
drivers. It's the drivers who go on strike. It's the drivers who
cause many many hours of delays to people on strike days. etc.

So the drivers have directly caused the problem.

Doctors, nurses, etc. don't directly cause problems with the NHS

therefo Invalid comparison

Why do people go on strike?

Brimstone wrote:
Why do people go on strike?

Not feeling confident / safe / strong enough to cross a picket line?

Or maybe because the RMT seems to be the most incompetent union. Other
unions (not just talking railways) seem to be able to negotiate the
reasonable things they want wheras the RMT seem to use strikes far too
often. Heck, next week two of the issues they are having a strike over
a

1. "...our members believe is the first step to exporting the
call-centre work overseas"

So they aren't striking over an actual issue just an opinion of
something which may become an issue in the future.

2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for 18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within TFL?
Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should I, a
taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need doing
before.

Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Why do people go on strike?

Not feeling confident / safe / strong enough to cross a picket line?

Or maybe because the RMT seems to be the most incompetent union.
Other unions (not just talking railways) seem to be able to negotiate
the reasonable things they want wheras the RMT seem to use strikes
far too often. Heck, next week two of the issues they are having a
strike over a

1. "...our members believe is the first step to exporting the
call-centre work overseas"

So they aren't striking over an actual issue just an opinion of
something which may become an issue in the future.

2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for 18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within TFL?
Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should I, a
taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need doing
before.

How many people work at the museum and how many of them are being made
redundant?

Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for 18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within
TFL?
Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should I, a
taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need doing
before.

How many people work at the museum and how many of them are being
made
redundant?

The RMT ommits the important facts from its website... One assumes from
the quote that they are all being made redundant

Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for 18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within
TFL? Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should I,
a taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need doing
before.

How many people work at the museum and how many of them are being
made redundant?

The RMT ommits the important facts from its website... One assumes
from the quote that they are all being made redundant

So you don't know how many people work there and you don't know how many of
this unknown figure are losing thir jobs yet you feel qualified to complain
about "a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs"?

What about when the mueum reopens, how much will have to be spent on
training and equipping the new people, it is not possble that with redundacy
payments and the costs associated with hiring new people that it might
actually prove cheaper to put these people into some useful job somewhere,
even if it is "only" as a mmeber of station staff?

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for 18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within
TFL? Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should I,
a taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need doing
before.

How many people work at the museum and how many of them are being
made redundant?

The RMT ommits the important facts from its website... One assumes
from the quote that they are all being made redundant

So you don't know how many people work there and you don't know how many
of
this unknown figure are losing thir jobs yet you feel qualified to
complain
about "a whole museum worth of staff to be found jobs"?

What about when the mueum reopens, how much will have to be spent on
training and equipping the new people, it is not possible that with
redundacy
payments and the costs associated with hiring new people that it might
actually prove cheaper to put these people into some useful job somewhere,
even if it is "only" as a member of station staff?

Agreed. There are never enough station and ticket-office staff, so they
should be redeployed wherever possible.

But more importantly: WTF are they doing to the LT Museum for it to take 18
months to be refurbished? Sounds like a pretty radical overhaul. I look
forward to seeing the end result. I'm glad I read that it was going to be
closed: I was thinking about going up to London some time soon and I was
planning to go there - haven't been for a few years. Do they still charge
for admission or has it gone free entry like the Science Museum? Are any of
the exhibits being moved to a temporary exhibition elsewhere for all that
time.

Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for
18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within
TFL? Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should
I,
a taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need
doing
before.

How many people work at the museum and how many of them are being
made redundant?

The RMT ommits the important facts from its website... One assumes
from the quote that they are all being made redundant

So you don't know how many people work there and you don't know how
many of
this unknown figure are losing thir jobs yet you feel qualified to
complain
about "a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs"?


I don't know how many people work there but it's a pretty big place so
it will be a non negligible amount.

Judging by the quote from the RMT it is all these staff who are being
made redundant.

I do feel qualified to make my point known, yes. In my opinion it
would be a waste of money to CREATE one extra un-needed job just
because you had someone who had to be doing something. To try and
find/make up jobs for several people would be an intollerable waste

What about when the mueum reopens, how much will have to be spent on
training and equipping the new people, it is not possble that with
redundacy
payments and the costs associated with hiring new people that it
might
actually prove cheaper to put these people into some useful job
somewhere,
even if it is "only" as a mmeber of station staff?

If it was *cheaper* then there wouldn't be an issue and conflict with
the unions would there?

If the staff wanted to be a station assistant then there isn't anything
stopping them going to the tube website, downloading an application
form and applying is there?

"Chris!" wrote in message
ups.com...

If the staff wanted to be a station assistant then there isn't anything
stopping them going to the tube website, downloading an application
form and applying is there?

Who actually employs the LT Museum staff? Is it LT (or whatever they're
called this week) themselves or is it a separate company. Even if the staff
get temporary jobs as station staff or get re-employed as museum staff after
the refurbishment, they've lost their continuity of service despite some of
them having worked there a long time.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 21:28:49 +0100, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

What about when the mueum reopens, how much will have to be spent on
training and equipping the new people, it is not possible that with
redundacy
payments and the costs associated with hiring new people that it might
actually prove cheaper to put these people into some useful job somewhere,
even if it is "only" as a member of station staff?

If it is true that the staff are being made redundant then I think that
is crazy. As you say what about the need to recruit in future, retrain
etc. A proportion of the staff are highly knowledgeable and it would be
a nonsense to make them leave. However the TfL approach to staffing and
conditions is one of great contrasts - you can draw your own conclusions
as to what that means.

This may explain why the shop staff were deep in conversation about work
matters this lunchtime.

Agreed. There are never enough station and ticket-office staff, so they
should be redeployed wherever possible.

And there is plenty of other work requiring people - a £10bn investment
programme for a start.

But more importantly: WTF are they doing to the LT Museum for it to take 18
months to be refurbished? Sounds like a pretty radical overhaul. I look
forward to seeing the end result. I'm glad I read that it was going to be
closed: I was thinking about going up to London some time soon and I was
planning to go there - haven't been for a few years. Do they still charge
for admission or has it gone free entry like the Science Museum? Are any of
the exhibits being moved to a temporary exhibition elsewhere for all that
time.

I understand that they are enlarging the display space and creating a
theatre and other facilities. The building itself needs substantive
repairs to stop it decaying further.

http://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/support/cgp.html

The shop will relocate to one of the units on the piazza. It closes
from late August so you should still be able to visit if you are coming
to London soon.

Charges still apply. Don't know what is happening to the exhibits but
I'd assume some will go to the Depot at Acton Town and will still be
accessible on the open weekends.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Chris! wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
2. "The transport museum is being closed for refurbishment for 18
months, yet rather than redeploy the staff and use their talents
elsewhere in the organisation they are making them redundant."

They expect a whole musuem worth of staff to be found jobs within
TFL? Where does the sudden influx of jobs come from? Why should
I, a taxpayer, fund extra people to do something that didn't need
doing before.

How many people work at the museum and how many of them are being
made redundant?

The RMT ommits the important facts from its website... One assumes
from the quote that they are all being made redundant

So you don't know how many people work there and you don't know how
many of this unknown figure are losing thir jobs yet you feel
qualified to complain about "a whole musuem worth of staff to be
found jobs"?


I don't know how many people work there but it's a pretty big place so
it will be a non negligible amount.

Judging by the quote from the RMT it is all these staff who are being
made redundant.

I do feel qualified to make my point known, yes. In my opinion it
would be a waste of money to CREATE one extra un-needed job just
because you had someone who had to be doing something. To try and
find/make up jobs for several people would be an intollerable waste

What about when the mueum reopens, how much will have to be spent on
training and equipping the new people, it is not possble that with
redundacy payments and the costs associated with hiring new people
that it might actually prove cheaper to put these people into some
useful job somewhere, even if it is "only" as a mmeber of station
staff?

If it was *cheaper* then there wouldn't be an issue and conflict with
the unions would there?

If the staff wanted to be a station assistant then there isn't
anything stopping them going to the tube website, downloading an
application form and applying is there?

All of which is unnecessary additional work since they are already employed
by TfL, and you claim to want to reduce the expenditure?