Does anyone know if the guy displayed in the mug shot picture with the words
"hornchurch to temple" is actually a fare evader or just a model?

Raymond Kirk wrote:
Does anyone know if the guy displayed in the mug shot picture with the words
"hornchurch to temple" is actually a fare evader or just a model?

I read an article yesterday stating they were actors.

(Though I figured it was obvious before I had read it.)

"Raymond Kirk" wrote:

Does anyone know if the guy displayed in the mug shot picture with the
words "hornchurch to temple" is actually a fare evader or just a model?

Not sure.

I have noticed that in TfL advertising, anyone behaving criminally is white,
and usually young and male. These are just about the *only* adverts for
which TfL use young, white males.

Chris

The PC-themed imigary of TfL is beyond belief. Just look at their
websites and staff newsletters!!!

I've often wondered if the pictorial contact of "On The Move" - LUL's
staff newsletter, actually represents the demographic make-up of
employees overall. I suspect it doesn't. But then this is the
organisation that, in the latest issue of O-T-M, says that the one
group that can not have its own staff "support group" is white males
because there's too many of us! So much for equal ops.

I must admit that sometimes I think the company's approach to equal
ops does backfire on the very people it's supposed to encourage.
Having gained promotion last year, I have heard a number people
comment "oh well you had an advantage as a woman, they want more women
controllers", which is more than a little annoying - especially as I
know full well that I got the position on merit and hard work.

Also I think a lot of it is lip-service and window-dressing i.e. they
have to look like they are making a serious effort on equal ops but
what this mainly means is things in OTM, special recruitment days for
women into certain grades, but very little practical action to examine
WHY certain groups are so under-represented.

JMO though.

And why is the LU board so, to use the words of Greg Dyke, "so
hideously white"? A case of one law for one....I wonder?

I'm old enough to remember when race, gender, ethnicity etc was never
mentioned as a subject within LT (as was), and in fact everyone seemed
to get on far better then before we were all taught to regard
ourselves as diverse (i.e. different) and to blame every lack of
advancement or ill-fortune on some perceived form of discrimination.

On 22 Mar 2007 09:54:29 -0700, wrote:

And why is the LU board so, to use the words of Greg Dyke, "so
hideously white"? A case of one law for one....I wonder?

Have you met or seen the Director of Human Resources and the Director of
Engineering? Not sure I'd say they were hideously white.

I'm old enough to remember when race, gender, ethnicity etc was never
mentioned as a subject within LT (as was), and in fact everyone seemed
to get on far better then before we were all taught to regard
ourselves as diverse (i.e. different) and to blame every lack of
advancement or ill-fortune on some perceived form of discrimination.

Never mentioned does not mean there were not issues.
People "seeming" to get on does not mean that they did.

The company's policies are there to raise awareness of where there may
be issues that actually need action to ensure that there is greater
fairness and there is not deliberate or inadvertent discrimination.

I don't believe in positive discrimination but equally I don't have an
issue with ensuring that the company takes clear action to provide
proper facilities and opportunities for people to advance regardless of
their gender, age, sexuality or disability. Encouraging women to enter
the operational grades as drivers or controllers and also ensuring there
are proper and decent facilities for them strikes me as an eminently
sensible thing to do as just one example of the policy.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!