BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message
, at
18:28:53 on Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Lüko Willms
remarked:
What if the workers have been signed up by two different interim
agencies for the same job? The workers confirmed that they will be at
the assigned place in time, but nobody really noted that the 5 from
agency Hire-the-Fire are the same as the 5 from agency Fire-the-Hire?

The workers can't legitimately confirm they'll attend on the same days, to
two different agencies.

Have you never had any contact with "temp" workers in what you do Roland?

It is quite common for them to confirm attendance and then not do so.

tim

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 18:28:55
on Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Arthur Figgis remarked:
The workers can't legitimately confirm they'll attend on the same days,
to two different agencies.

But if the second job is offering more money, and the workers are in short
enough supply that they can't not be used, can anyone do much about it?

The agency can't force them to work, but the agency ought to know how many
are actually going to turn up.

Can I have some of this magic potion you're holding?

tim

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

In message , at 21:29:46 on Thu, 26
Feb 2009, tim..... remarked:
The workers can't legitimately confirm they'll attend on the same days,
to two different agencies.

But if the second job is offering more money, and the workers are in short
enough supply that they can't not be used, can anyone do much about it?

The agency can't force them to work, but the agency ought to know how many
are actually going to turn up.

Can I have some of this magic potion you're holding?

If the agency has no clue about the potential attendance record of their
confirmed "yes I'll do it" contractors, then only anarchy will result.

--
Roland Perry

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

In message , at 21:27:49 on Thu, 26
Feb 2009, tim..... remarked:
Have you never had any contact with "temp" workers in what you do Roland?

It is quite common for them to confirm attendance and then not do so.

They wouldn't get a second chance, in any of the lines of work I've been
involved in.
--
Roland Perry

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

In message
, at
13:16:02 on Thu, 26 Feb 2009, remarked:
What would the alternative be, once
the problems became apparent? Postpone it to a later date and so
impact on the other parts of the project, or try and get things done
at the slot set aside for the work, even if it looks like things will
run over.

Admitting the over-run earlier would have helped the public.

But I'd still expect the main work to be major projects during periods
when the line was closed (be that Xmas, weekends, or just overnight).

If they are all agency staff, then how can they be forced to work
weekend or during holiday?

They can't be forced to[1]; but neither should they agree to do it, then
change their mind at the last minute.

[1] Although an agency might well decline to have awkward people like
that on its books.
--
Roland Perry

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:29:46 on Thu, 26
Feb 2009, tim..... remarked:
The workers can't legitimately confirm they'll attend on the same
days,
to two different agencies.

But if the second job is offering more money, and the workers are in
short
enough supply that they can't not be used, can anyone do much about it?

The agency can't force them to work, but the agency ought to know how
many
are actually going to turn up.

Can I have some of this magic potion you're holding?

If the agency has no clue about the potential attendance record of their
confirmed "yes I'll do it" contractors, then only anarchy will result.

And it did.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:27:49 on Thu, 26
Feb 2009, tim..... remarked:
Have you never had any contact with "temp" workers in what you do Roland?

It is quite common for them to confirm attendance and then not do so.

They wouldn't get a second chance, in any of the lines of work I've been
involved in.

But if the job needs doing, you have to employ them if there are no
others with the required skills or availability (at least until such a
time as you can recruit full-time staff).

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 21:27:49 on Thu, 26 Feb
2009, tim..... remarked:
Have you never had any contact with "temp" workers in what you do Roland?

It is quite common for them to confirm attendance and then not do so.

They wouldn't get a second chance, in any of the lines of work I've been
involved in.

I suppose that this does have an effect here.

There is only one end customer for a signalling engineer (though lots of
intermediate employers), whereas people who do what I do can work for any
one of 1000s companies and p*ssing one off isn't career disabling, - point
taken.

tim

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

"Lüko Willms" wrote ...
What if the workers have been signed up by two different interim
agencies for the same job? The workers confirmed that they will be at
the assigned place in time, but nobody really noted that the 5 from
agency Hire-the-Fire are the same as the 5 from agency Fire-the-Hire?

Fine, fine - but no-one has ever suggested that your allegation (sorry,
snide implication) is relevant in this case.

BBC - US firm 'set for Crossrail deal'
 

Am Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:42:30 UTC, schrieb Roland Perry
auf uk.railway :

What if the workers have been signed up by two different interim
agencies for the same job? The workers confirmed that they will be at
the assigned place in time, but nobody really noted that the 5 from
agency Hire-the-Fire are the same as the 5 from agency Fire-the-Hire?

The workers can't legitimately confirm they'll attend on the same days,

same day, same place, same hour

to two different agencies.

They might have confused it? "Hey, sure I go, you already told me".
But it was the other guy who did.

Well, OK, this is a faint possibility, more a subject for a film
than a possible explanation for the incident which gave rise to this
exchange.


Cheers,
L.W.

-- -----------------------------------------------------