On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:30:57 GMT, (Neil
Williams) wrote:

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:03:12 +0100, nsj wrote:

The newsreader hinted that Mr. Crow wants guards on Tube trains, and that he
is prepared to ballot for strike action if he doesn't get what he wants.

Which, one wouldn't doubt, is more to do with creating jobs than
actual or perceived security, given the generally high[1] level of
staffing already on the Tube.

[1] Many European underground systems have many of their stations
completely unstaffed, even where they are below ground.



That's about the size of it. The RMT is resisting the agreed
reductions in station staff which are paying for the 35 hour week.


Typical. Bob Crow is using the death of 53 people to demand non-jobs
to strengthen his power base.


Rob.

(speaking for self only)
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 21:50:55 GMT, Richard J. wrote:

From The Times this morning:

"Cuts in the numbers of bus conductors and station staff have made it
harder to guard against bombers, according to British Transport
Police. Andy Trotter, the force's deputy chief constable, said CCTV
monitoring had replaced staff in many areas to save money. "I am
concerned about the consequences of destaffing," he said. "I don't
think you can be surprised that undesirable people are getting into
the vacuum.""

You'd think that would make it easy for the police to clean them up...
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p12161698.html
(ex-GWR Railcar 22 in fine form at Didcot in 1995)

In article , Malcolm Pinnell
writes
I think there is a bit more to it than just gaurds. The gaurds thing wont
work anyway. During the peak hours a guard wont be able to walk through a
train anyway - they are crush loaded. So he'll just sit in the end cab.
Perhaps he has some other work in mind for them

I thought his point was that, in an emergency, it's better to have
someone at each end of the train.

--
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:

Clive Feather:
I thought his point was that, in an emergency, it's better to have
someone at each end of the train.

Depends on the type of emergency. On the Toronto subway, the guard
normally rides 4 cars from the front of a 6-car train, and that means
that no point in the train is more than 2 car-lengths away from a
crew member.

Of course, the choice of possible positions is also affected by the
position of any controls or equipment that the guard needs to use.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "...everything else in [the] list is wrong;
| why should [this] be correct?" -- Rob Novak

Yes, Bob Crowe wants more members period. Like the D.L.R. train
"captain" that I saw sitting in the front seat of a train this week,
studiously reading his newspaper throughout, merely breaking off for a
few seconds (how incovenient for him!) to press the "start" button from
his seated position each time the train was ready to depart. He would
not have noticed a bomb if it had been placed right on the seat next to
him!

Marc.

This is a fave tactic on the Stratford branch and of course allows them
to avoid contact with the numerous fare-dodgers who take the DLR for a
ride in all senses.

Incidentally, I wonder by how much crime has fallen on LU since the
system has been flooded with BTP and Met officers?

For a different reason local papers reported that "streetcrime" in
parts of Essex also dropped dramatically when the Central Line was
suspended long-term presumably as offenders (a) couldn't travel into
those areas from the inner-city and/or (b) had no stream of commuters
to prey on.

In message , Robert Woolley
writes
That's about the size of it. The RMT is resisting the agreed
reductions in station staff which are paying for the 35 hour week.


Typical. Bob Crow is using the death of 53 people to demand non-jobs to
strengthen his power base.


Rob.
As the trains can be fully automatic anyway, why have a Motorman on?
Just save money, this is obviously your aim.
--
Clive

In message , Loony Tune
writes
Drivers got no more money when guards were removed
They took extra responsibility for no extra pay? How mean fisted can a
company get?
--
Clive

"As the trains can be fully automatic anyway, why have a Motorman on?
Just save money, this is obviously your aim. "


Indeed - as my D.L.R. example in the foregoing showed, what actual
function does he serve? Why not use the money saved to pay for extra
Police who, at least, do serve a useful purpose, are multi-skilled and
redeployable without causing a fit of frenzy from Bob Crowe and his
ilk, and actually do what they are paid to do?

Marc.

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 20:42:28 +0100, Clive
wrote:

In message , Loony Tune
writes
Drivers got no more money when guards were removed
They took extra responsibility for no extra pay? How mean fisted can a
company get?

I don't think 33k per annum is exacty 'mean fisted'.

As Marc says, more police, fewer train staff....

Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk