Snippo

I don't care what anyone says, doctors note or not, there is no
way someone can be well enough to play squash but be unable to
push a few buttons on a train, or perform lesser duties for a
while if necessary.

Snippo again

I don't think anyone can really comment without knowing what's meant
to have been wrong with this person and what is supposed to help them
get better.

Are we being told the full story here?
Apparently the guy was seen leaving a squash club - Am I missing something
or was he actually seen playing squash? Maybe it's another trial by
media as opposed to the system that uses the word justice - possibly
using the words "innocent until proven guilty/ otherwise".
If his actions were within the guidelines given to him by his doctor then he
should be O.K., if not then he should close the door behind him as he
leaves.
Admittedly I don't use LU in the same way that others do but I am left
wondering what some other readers of this NG would do if the finger was
pointing at them and they felt they had done nothing wrong (and no, I don't
belong to a union).
Maybe LU can pull it off and run the system with no union involvment
whatsoever.

(Maybe the disgruntled customers who think it's .OK. to spit at staff will
be surprised when the staff spit back.)

Maybe, maybe, ...

Have a nice day ...

Paul

"John Rowland" wrote in message ...
As for the union being concerned that they might lose credibility with the
public, I can't think of any reason for the union to care about that. After
all, it's only the station assistants who get spat at, not Bob Crowe.


Given that apparently the H&C drivers voted 2 to 1 to strike perhaps its
them who should be spat at instead, or at the least a some choice bits of
verbal abuse directed in their general vacinity. Perhaps if some of these
militant dickheads had to suffer the consequences of holding London to ransom
they wouldn't do it quite so often. Bear in mind Bob Crowe can only get
away with what he does with the majority support of his members and they
seem to give it to him quite readily.

B2003

In article , Paul
writes

Admittedly I don't use LU in the same way that others do but I am left
wondering what some other readers of this NG would do if the finger was
pointing at them and they felt they had done nothing wrong (and no, I don't
belong to a union).

The public are fed up with the unions who think they can hold Londoners
to ransom over every little thing. Too many people skive off, managers
included.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

I don't think anyone can really comment without knowing what's meant to
have been wrong with this person and what is supposed to help them get
better.

Maybe if LU drivers weren't so aggroant and full of themselves they
wouldn't think they could go and play squash when they are suppose to
be injured and think no-one is going to say anything.
Its just another excuse to call a strike. Out of interest do the union
leaders calling the strike get paid while they are on strike? Do the
drivers get paid while on strike?
Only apparently during the recent Royal Mail wildcat strikes the union
leaders in the depots calling their men to go on strike were getting
paid whilist the poor sheep who followed the strike call didn't.
Just a thought.

In article , "I@n"
-uk writes
I don't care what anyone says, doctors note or not, there is no way
someone can be well enough to play squash but be unable to push a few
buttons on a train, or perform lesser duties for a while if necessary.

Irrespective of the facts of the original case, that statement is
rubbish.

Four examples off the top of my head:

(1) The person is short of stamina and can only stay active for an hour
or two. Fine for playing squash but not for driving trains.

(2) The person has an injury in an area which doesn't affect them
playing squash but does affect train driving (e.g. left wrist of a
right-handed person, or a hip problem preventing them sitting in one
position for long periods.

(3) The injured area is reliable enough for unimportant tasks but not
for critical ones. Exercising an injured ankle through playing squash
might be recommended; if it starts to hurt, the person can stop playing,
whereas if it plays up while driving a train, they can't just stop.

(4) The person has an intermittent eyesight problem that doesn't stop
them playing a game but isn't safe for something like train driving. For
example, temporary blindness in one part of the retina, or temporary
blindness in low light.

And finally there's one that's happened to me: "don't you dare go back
to work until everything's been fine for a few days".

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

In article , Clive D. W. Feather
writes

Irrespective of the facts of the original case, that statement is
rubbish.

Four examples off the top of my head:

(1) The person is short of stamina and can only stay active for an hour
or two. Fine for playing squash but not for driving trains.


Squash is probably the most demanding non contact sport there is. If you
can last 2 hours on the squash court then you are fit to drive a train
which does not require much physical exertion and therefore does not
require much stamina.

(2) The person has an injury in an area which doesn't affect them
playing squash but does affect train driving (e.g. left wrist of a
right-handed person, or a hip problem preventing them sitting in one
position for long periods.


All areas of the body are used when playing squash, lots of twisting and
turning, fast sprints etc. If the person was right handed and had an
injury to their left hand they wouldn't be able to serve the ball and
therefore couldn't play squash as they would be unable to do up the
laces on their sports shoes.

(3) The injured area is reliable enough for unimportant tasks but not
for critical ones. Exercising an injured ankle through playing squash
might be recommended; if it starts to hurt, the person can stop
playing, whereas if it plays up while driving a train, they can't just
stop.


Exactly how can an ankle injury stop you driving a train? Yes I know
that some stock has the PED release as a foot switch but otherwise I
don't' but that.

Jeez......

(4) The person has an intermittent eyesight problem that doesn't stop
them playing a game but isn't safe for something like train driving.
For example, temporary blindness in one part of the retina, or
temporary blindness in low light.

But they can see a squash ball whizzing around a brightly lit white
court at 35 mph.........
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

In article ,
(Clive D. W. Feather) wrote:

In article , "I@n"
-uk writes
I don't care what anyone says, doctors note or not, there is no way
someone can be well enough to play squash but be unable to push a few
buttons on a train, or perform lesser duties for a while if necessary.

Irrespective of the facts of the original case, that statement is
rubbish.

Four examples off the top of my head:

(1) The person is short of stamina and can only stay active for an hour
or two. Fine for playing squash but not for driving trains.

(2) The person has an injury in an area which doesn't affect them
playing squash but does affect train driving (e.g. left wrist of a
right-handed person, or a hip problem preventing them sitting in one
position for long periods.

(3) The injured area is reliable enough for unimportant tasks but not
for critical ones. Exercising an injured ankle through playing squash
might be recommended; if it starts to hurt, the person can stop
playing, whereas if it plays up while driving a train, they can't just
stop.

(4) The person has an intermittent eyesight problem that doesn't stop
them playing a game but isn't safe for something like train driving.
For example, temporary blindness in one part of the retina, or
temporary blindness in low light.

And finally there's one that's happened to me: "don't you dare go back
to work until everything's been fine for a few days".

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

Don't have the original posting, but just to dispel some incorrect
thinking:

A driver doesn't have to be fit to drive the train - he could be carried
into the cab and plonked on his seat and still drive the train. However
the driver does have to be fit to deal with anything (emergency or
non-emergency) that may occur while he is in charge of the train. This
often seems to get overlooked. One such thing could be detraining
passengers and/or walking along the track. Drivers have a yearly mobility
test for just this purpose (together with a basic eyesight test).

Roger

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message ...
In article , "I@n"
-uk writes
I don't care what anyone says, doctors note or not, there is no way
someone can be well enough to play squash but be unable to push a few
buttons on a train, or perform lesser duties for a while if necessary.

Irrespective of the facts of the original case, that statement is
rubbish.

Four examples off the top of my head:

(1) The person is short of stamina and can only stay active for an hour
or two. Fine for playing squash but not for driving trains.

Oh bull****. Squash is one of the most active activities you can
participate in. Anyone who can play squash for "an hour or two" can
most certainly stay awake sitting on their arse pushing a lever.

(2) The person has an injury in an area which doesn't affect them
playing squash but does affect train driving (e.g. left wrist of a
right-handed person, or a hip problem preventing them sitting in one
position for long periods.

If he had a bad ankle he wouldn't be able to run around on a squash court.

(3) The injured area is reliable enough for unimportant tasks but not
for critical ones. Exercising an injured ankle through playing squash
might be recommended; if it starts to hurt, the person can stop playing,
whereas if it plays up while driving a train, they can't just stop.

Why exactly can't he drive a train even if he had a bad ankle? Last time
I looked tube trains didn't have floor pedals to operate.

(4) The person has an intermittent eyesight problem that doesn't stop
them playing a game but isn't safe for something like train driving. For
example, temporary blindness in one part of the retina, or temporary
blindness in low light.

Yeah , and if they catch anthrax it might effect their driving too. Meanwhile
back in the real world he was playing squash with a bad ankle. He was taking
the **** and LU were right to fire him.

B2003

wrote in message ...
A driver doesn't have to be fit to drive the train - he could be carried
into the cab and plonked on his seat and still drive the train. However
the driver does have to be fit to deal with anything (emergency or
non-emergency) that may occur while he is in charge of the train. This
often seems to get overlooked. One such thing could be detraining
passengers and/or walking along the track. Drivers have a yearly mobility
test for just this purpose (together with a basic eyesight test).

That may be true but it hardly applies in this case.

B2003

In article , Andrew P Smith
writes
(4) The person has an intermittent eyesight problem that doesn't stop
them playing a game but isn't safe for something like train driving.
For example, temporary blindness in one part of the retina, or
temporary blindness in low light.

But they can see a squash ball whizzing around a brightly lit white
court at 35 mph.........

To continue with this one as an example:
(1) I said "one part of the retina", or "low light"; neither case would
prevent you seeing a brightly lit squash ball in continual motion
relative to your sightlines.

(2) If they fail to spot the ball once, the worst they get is a clonk
from it. If they fail to spot a signal or other hazard once, people can
die.

Sheesh. Do I have to make the difference any clearer?

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address