Dave Plowman wrote on 21 May 2009 23:16:59 ...
In article ,
Recliner wrote:
The demand is simply absurd. In any case, with a line
entirely in tunnel, the risk to pax is less than on any line with
surface or double-track tunnel running. Of all the bizarre Crow-****,
this must be the worst.

You *really* should look at details of the dispute. Not just take The
Mail's word for it.

Ideally, yes. Perhaps you can tell us where to find such details, as
they are not even on the RMT site. Do you disagree with the TfL press
release on the subject?

For your education it's very difficult to find out the true facts behind
any industrial dispute. The press, as with everything else, tell the
'facts' the public want to hear.

No, they tell the facts that are available to them. If the RMT did a
better job of explaining what really happened, instead of going on
strike ostensibly because LU haven't fitted a safety feature to
42-year-old trains that are about to be replaced, then we would have a
better chance of understanding the "true facts". But then the RMT
aren't really interested in us.

[crosspost to uk.rec.driving removed, since off-topic for them]
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)