"Acrosticus" wrote in message
...
From: Paul Weaver
Date: 24/10/2003 01:37 GMT Daylight Time

"but LU accused the RMT of exaggerating the incident."

wouldn't surprise me

When was the last tube derailment that killed someone? Hoe many people
are
derailed per 1,000,000 commuters?

Oh dear! Expectations of safety on the tube have clearly fallen lower than
many
of us had imagined. At one time transport operators were eager not even to
injure passengers, but now it seems the important thing is not killing
them.

Even aiming not to injure them is too lenient a standard. What they should
be aiming at (and be penalised for falling short of) is zero faults, no
matter whether these causes delays, injuries or deaths.

It's like the NHS targets which endeavour not to keep anyone waiting in
Casualty longer than X hours or waiting more than Y days for an operation.
Right idea, but the numbers are woefully lax.

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 17:49:37 GMT, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:


Even aiming not to injure them is too lenient a standard. What they should
be aiming at (and be penalised for falling short of) is zero faults, no
matter whether these causes delays, injuries or deaths.


I can give you a total safe transport system.

No injuries or deaths.


A transport system where nothing moves.

Is that ok?


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk