Is there any reason why the staff don't work as usual while striking
but just refuse to take money for tickets? Only single/return tickets
for that day/journey. That way the passengers don't get
inconvenienced. Is the problem that the staff would be treated as if
they've stolen the money? Or would the tube bosses actually prefer
this course of action - or maybe they save money during a strike from
less electricity usage? I'd imagine a lot of the costs are fixed
though.

Poldie wrote:
Is there any reason why the staff don't work as usual while striking
but just refuse to take money for tickets?

Because then there would be no point in striking during NYE or England
football matches

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

Poldie wrote:
Is there any reason why the staff don't work as usual while striking
but just refuse to take money for tickets?

Because then there would be no point in striking during NYE or England
football matches


Of course there would be - the company takes a massive dive because it's
running a full service, and not getting any money for it. Them striking on
NYE demonstrates my point exactly.

The unions have beef with management, yet they take it out on the public.
The public are then expected to kick up a stink and get management acting in
the way the unions want. Why don't they cut out the middle man and stick it
to the management straight away? It seems absolutely ridiculous for unions
to penalise the public for the management's decisions.

I'm a left-leaning individual, and even I can see those asshats at london
underground (Mr Crow I'm looking at you, you fat pie-eating redneck) are
looking out for themselves with no consideration for the public (which, for
a public transport company, is not a great idea).

In article ,
d wrote:
Of course there would be - the company takes a massive dive because it's
running a full service, and not getting any money for it. Them striking on
NYE demonstrates my point exactly.

I think you're wrong the I guess most LuL users have a season ticket.

(has anyone got figures on that?)

--
RIP Morph (1977-2005)

And also I'd imagine revenue protection inspectors would still be out
and about. Not sure what the situation would be if staff shut down
ticket machines etc though,

"Zappomatic" wrote in message
ups.com...
And also I'd imagine revenue protection inspectors would still be out
and about. Not sure what the situation would be if staff shut down
ticket machines etc though,


If striking staff somewhere let you in without a ticket, presumably the non
striking staff (the majority in this case?)elsewhere would feel obliged to
give you a penalty fare!

Also, if the strike has been called until 1830 tonight, why aren't all the
stations reopened at 1830?

Paul

Zappomatic wrote:
And also I'd imagine revenue protection inspectors would still be out
and about. Not sure what the situation would be if staff shut down
ticket machines etc though,

You'd have a ticket, it just wouldn't have cost you anything.

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 15:37:48 GMT, "d" wrote:

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

Poldie wrote:
Is there any reason why the staff don't work as usual while striking
but just refuse to take money for tickets?

Because then there would be no point in striking during NYE or England
football matches


Of course there would be - the company takes a massive dive because it's
running a full service, and not getting any money for it. Them striking on
NYE demonstrates my point exactly.

There were no fares charged for much of New Year's Eve night so it is
irrelevant in that specific example. The reason for the dates is that
they were both expected to inflict maximum reputational damage on LUL
thus forcing management to the table. There were news articles about
the NYE dispute on Hong Kong and Asian television channels for goodness
sake. The strike threat therefore got a worldwide audience. Today's
strike date was cynically chosen to coincide with the expected full
scale return to work post Christmas. Hence also why it was timed to
wreck both peak periods. There is no subtlety here.

The RMT's strategy has always been to get public sympathy and concern on
their side - hence the "safety" argument this time round and the attempt
to move the goal posts to "safety" to widen the dispute. My personal
view is that the public are fed up with the antics of the tube unions.
The unions are on the verge of squandering the positive view that most
of the public have of transport workers post 7/7. That would be an
immensely silly thing to do.

The unions have beef with management, yet they take it out on the public.
The public are then expected to kick up a stink and get management acting in
the way the unions want. Why don't they cut out the middle man and stick it
to the management straight away? It seems absolutely ridiculous for unions
to penalise the public for the management's decisions.

Unions have always withdrawn their labour - it is, after all, the
resource they claim to represent. Therefore they are not very good at
learning new tricks. "All out brothers!"

I'm a left-leaning individual, and even I can see those asshats at london
underground (Mr Crow I'm looking at you, you fat pie-eating redneck) are
looking out for themselves with no consideration for the public (which, for
a public transport company, is not a great idea).

Do you seriously expect any consideration of the public by the RMT?
They only represent their members.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 17:17:44 +0000 (UTC), "Paul Scott"
wrote:

If striking staff somewhere let you in without a ticket, presumably the non
striking staff (the majority in this case?)elsewhere would feel obliged to
give you a penalty fare!

No, this is the new post-Thatcher unionism. Grab what you can, every
man for himself. The upside (for us) is that almost no-one takes any
notice of the strike call :-)

In article ,
Paul Scott wrote:
Also, if the strike has been called until 1830 tonight, why aren't all the
stations reopened at 1830?

I understant that people whose shift started between 20060108T1830
and 20060109T1830 were expected not to do their shift, while people
whose shift started outside that time were expected to turn up and
work the whole shift.

In other words, if your shift started yesterday at 1800, you were
expected to turn up and work all of it, while if it started today
at 1800, you were expected to work none of it.

However, I neither work for LuL nor am a member of the RMT, so I
could be talking rubbish.

--
RIP Morph (1977-2005)