Neill wrote:
If the unions called a week-long strike, even tying it in with a week-
long nation rail strike to protest against franchises cutting jobs,
would that cost the companies concerned more in lost revenue than they
save by these probably needless redundancies?

That would be the mandatory redundancies which the article specifically says
will be avoided?

I would support Bob Crow
and his union cronies for once if they took strike action, as I
believe they represent the workers of a public service organisation,
that should be run as such, not as a company that employs people at
the behest of shareholders, consultants and the whimsy of the economic
climate.

Yeah, comrade! Can I point out the glaring contradiction between the words
"Bob Crow and his union represent the workers" and "public service
organisation"? While obviously a compromise must be struck between the
interests of Undergound employees and the interests of the public, they are
heading in opposite directions, and to invoke the word "public" when
discussing Bob Crow's actions, which have always been contrary to the
interest of the public, is utterly dishonest.

People in the private sector are losing jobs all over. If this latest move
helps to keep business rates down and prevents businesses going to the wall,
it will be a good thing for Londoners as a whole.

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:20:10PM +0000, Peter Lawrence wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:47:43 -0800 (PST),
wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7858610.stm
Its the passengers will suffer - they can't cut that many jobs without
some tasks just not getting done any more.

Only if the people losing their jobs are doing useful work.

--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive

Us Germans take our humour very seriously
-- German cultural attache talking to the Today Programme,
about the German supposed lack of a sense of humour, 29 Aug 2001

On Jan 29, 10:37*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 22:20:10 GMT, "Peter Lawrence"

wrote:
Its the passengers will suffer - they can't cut that many jobs without
some tasks just not getting done any more.

Do companies and other organisations not realise that by jumping on
the redundancies bandwagon (aka burying bad news) they make the
recession all the worse?

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

The other week someone plummy was proposing pay cuts on the news.
It's the "workers" who stop spending when announcements like that are
made, and stopping spending means ... as you say, recession.

Trouble is that asking an economist why there's no money is like
asking an electrician why there's no coal. This is really a
pyschological and social phenomenon.

On Jan 29, 9:04 pm, Mizter T wrote:
FWIW no front-line staff are going, and they are the ones that who
really seem to have the clout to negotiate better pay deals as opposed
to those in admin posts. I don't know why I say this as I suspect
it'll just incite you further.

Well of course - the blue collar workers are all unionsed so LU dare
not fire them. So the white collar workers will get the push.

B2003

On Jan 30, 9:32 am, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
I don't work for TfL, because despite the 'unreasonable pay seettlements',
the pay is pretty bloody low - and TfL staff have to actually work, not sit

Pretty bloody low? You might want to check this out.

http://www.mysalary.co.uk/average-sa...be_Driver_3207

around looking at porn all day.

Yeah ,. because thats what everyone in an office does. If they want to
get fired.

B2003

"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
Chickens coming home to roost after all those unreasonable pay
settlements. Unfortunately it looks like the people who got those fat
pay rises arn't the ones who're going to suffer.

I wonder if the nasty little fascists will rejoice in others' redundancy
so much when they lose their own jobs.
But I suppose they don't work anyway ...

I don't work for TfL, because despite the 'unreasonable pay seettlements',
the pay is pretty bloody low - and TfL staff have to actually work, not
sit around looking at porn all day.

But I travel by TfL - and I don't rejoice that they are being targetted -
not least because travelling will get worse.
--
Andrew

"When 'Do no Evil' has been understood, then learn the harder, braver
rule, Do Good." ~ Arthur Guiterman
Right so we have to put up with sky high fares, crap service, held to ransom
by strikes and now we have to feel sorry that some of them are losing their
jobs.
I am rejoicing in them being made redundant, well I am out of work too but I
am, presumably, one of the lazy, overpaid, porn watching workers.

Kevin

"Zen83237" wrote...
Right so we have to put up with sky high fares, crap service, held to
ransom by strikes and now we have to feel sorry that some of them are
losing their jobs.
I am rejoicing in them being made redundant, well I am out of work too but
I am, presumably, one of the lazy, overpaid, porn watching workers.

Yopu don't have to feel sory for anyone (except yourself, of course), but to
rejoice in others' misfortune (especially as it's 99.9999% certain they had
no responsibility for your whines), makes you pure scum.

But then, you knew that, didn't you?

Andrew

Paul Corfield wrote:

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 13:04:33 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote:

Paul, I'm tempted to ask all sorts of questions that I rather suspect
you can't really address, at least not on a public forum - so I'll ask
this one instead. What is the thinking behind these cuts - is it in
expectation of lower passenger numbers and hence lower revenue
courtesy of the recession, or is it part of a (or should I say the)
wider cost-cutting exercise across TfL - and if so has this budget-
crunch been brought on by Crossrail or are the factors at work rather
wider than that?

The following is what I have posted somewhere else - not on usenet. I
think it covers the broad issues. It's also in line with our internal
comms messages.

It's not about the recession at all. It is do with the impact of the
government's funding settlement and the integration of the former
Metronet companies. Taking all that resource back in house means
there is duplication of roles, people and systems. There is a lack of
efficiency as a result of all of this. LUL also has the huge task of
delivering the Line Upgrades and some of the reorganisation is to
make those projects work more effectively. It also needs to be borne
in mind that we do not yet have the cost of restating the contract
with Tube Lines (for post 2010) and there may be a multi billion pound
bill from that. That's why Boris is saying that bill is for government
to meet as PPP was their initiative.

There are cuts being made in TfL - some of that is the
result of changed Mayoral priorities and some is down to lack of cash
more generally despite the £39bn ten year settlement. There has been a
long standing drive to achieve efficiencies within TfL since it was
created out of various organisations. It can be argued that the current
review is simply a more intensive version of what has gone before.

It needs to be borne in mind that Crossrail may offer
job opportunities for a number of years for people who are displaced
or who opt to leave. However those jobs may be with the private
sector contractors chosen to deliver Crossrail rather than TfL itself.

I doubt we will see service cutbacks or effects on maintenance - all
of those staff are out of scope of the review despite the union
comments. As Boris has said that improvements to the bus network will
continue then I'm not sure that we will see cutbacks in that area or
even in the spec for tender awards (if he keeps his word). I am
already noticing a reduction in crowding on the tube in the mornings
when I travel so I am sure ridership is falling a bit but nonetheless
the peak is still extremely busy and operational resources are
typically geared to the peak service level. I haven't noticed much of
a change on the buses but I guess there may be a fall there given so
many routes feed the tube network. A point that just dawned on me
earlier today is that the nature of TfL's revenue stream may switch out
of season tickets and more towards PAYG given the current employment
situation - what that will do in terms of TfL's credit rating and bond
issues remains to be seen. We live in interesting times.

We've all done our calculations using the voluntary severance calculator
that has been put on our intranet. We shall find out in a few weeks
whether we still have our existing jobs, will have to go through a
selection process or if our job has disappeared. Boltar can start
praying or whispering incantations to get as many sacked as possible!

I hope the above goes some way to offering an explanation as to what is
going on.


Of course, how could I overlook Metronet coming back in house - that's
inevitably going to shake things up. I haven't closely followed the
Tube Lines contract business, but this is essentially Tube Lines
appealing to the PPP Arbiter that they aren't getting paid enough for
what they do, and the subsequent result of that appeal, right? When
does the figure come in, and when it does can TfL appeal that figure
at all?

I guess that with regards to what Boris is saying about the government
funding the extra bill is little different from what Ken would have
said, the difference perhaps being how Boris says it compared to Ken -
the ex-Mayor was at least marginally the same hue as the government
and had some influence there.

Changed Mayoral priorities is a broad brush stroke - the immediate
things that come to mind are his mantra of "taxpayer value" which I
suppose results in cuts to what I suppose one might call 'non-core'
activities, also putting the Tramlink extension, Cross River Tram and
other stuff on the (far) back burner. Has not the budget for cycling
has been cut - daft if so. Were there not to be cuts in the TfL
promotion and marketing operation?

I very much hope that Boris doesn't mess up the bus network. I think
the withdrawal of the bendies is a bad move but that really shouldn't
mean people take their eye off what is happening elsewhere - it's only
a relatively small part of the bus network after all. The
specifications for tender absolutely need to be kept at their high
level, otherwise things will fall apart and confidence in the bus
network will erode - we don't want a race to the bottom with bus
companies bidding low and delivering lower. Of course the other danger
is that the 'Boris bus' project will divert funding away from the day
to day operation of the network leading to a deterioration - one very
much hopes this irony will be avoided.

Interesting point about the revenue stream and the recession. Less
season ticket holders and the level of season ticket refunds is
something the TOCs keep on coming up with. I wonder if one of the TOCs
issues with implementing PAYG is that more people might switch to PAYG
from season tickets (or even Travelcard seasons) - even if NR fares on
PAYG were set the same level as paper ticket fares, people might well
still be tempted because of the flexibility and ease of use of Oyster.

Regarding the timing of this announcement - presumably it's been on
the cards for a while? It's just that one wonders if there's a grain
of truth in Neil's rather cynical view that this has been timed so as
to 'bury the bad news' amongst all the other bad tidings of job
losses.

Lastly, best of luck what with the jobs review and all that. It would
be distinctly remiss of LU to lose talent such as yourself because of
this shake-up.

In message , Zen83237
writes
Yopu don't have to feel sory for anyone (except yourself, of course), but
to rejoice in others' misfortune (especially as it's 99.9999% certain they
had no responsibility for your whines), makes you pure scum.

But then, you knew that, didn't you?

Sorry should have read I am not rejoicing. But since you refer to me as
scum, I have never been on a days strike in my life, unlike the scum at
London Underground. As you support strikers I guess that makes you scum
as well.

As one of the 'scum' at LU, I can honestly say I've never yet been on
strike whilst I've been there (7 years and counting).
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

"Steve Fitzgerald" ] wrote in message
...
In message , Zen83237
writes
Yopu don't have to feel sory for anyone (except yourself, of course),
but
to rejoice in others' misfortune (especially as it's 99.9999% certain
they
had no responsibility for your whines), makes you pure scum.

But then, you knew that, didn't you?

Sorry should have read I am not rejoicing. But since you refer to me as
scum, I have never been on a days strike in my life, unlike the scum at
London Underground. As you support strikers I guess that makes you scum as
well.

As one of the 'scum' at LU, I can honestly say I've never yet been on
strike whilst I've been there (7 years and counting).
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

For the record Andrew Heenan referred to me as scum first. I am returned the
compliment to him. I didn't refer to any LU staff as scum.