# London Underground: RMT ballot results



## Citizen66 (Aug 11, 2010)

Those prepared to take strike action

Total Votes Cast...3727 

Number Voting Yes...2810 
Number Voting No...893 
Spoilt Papers...24
(Yes vote is 76% of valid vote = approx. 3:1 majority) 

Those prepared to take industrial action short of a strike 

Total Votes Cast...3727 

Number Voting Yes...3253 
Number Voting No...449 
Spoilt Papers...25
(Yes vote is 88% of valid vote = approx 8:1 majority) 

There's the figures before the standard start twisting them. Expect disruption I suppose.


----------



## g force (Aug 11, 2010)

I've not been keeping up...but what are they voting on in terms of the strike? Work? Conditions? Overtime?


----------



## stethoscope (Aug 11, 2010)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rmt-votes-for-tube-strike-2049431.html



> The threat of Tube travel chaos rose today after members of the RMT transport union voted overwhelmingly for industrial action in a row over jobs and safety.
> 
> Of those taking part in a ballot, 76% voted for strike action and 88% for action short of a strike.
> 
> ...


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 11, 2010)

800 station staff are being axes iirc. I'll post up more info when I get home as my mobile won't c&p links etc. It's likely to be in the evening standard today too.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 11, 2010)

Cheers for linking steph.


----------



## stethoscope (Aug 11, 2010)

I believe it follows the leaking of a LU spending review?

Smaller central stations would have ticket offices restricted to being open at peak times, with 144 ticket offices being scrapped entirely and reduced to machines only. On top of that it was something like at least 450 ticket office staff would go, plus couple hundred other positions.


----------



## scifisam (Aug 15, 2010)

stephj said:


> I believe it follows the leaking of a LU spending review?
> 
> Smaller central stations would have ticket offices restricted to being open at peak times, with 144 ticket offices being scrapped entirely and reduced to machines only. On top of that it was something like at least 450 ticket office staff would go, plus couple hundred other positions.


 
Are they going to have to leave the gates open then, if there are no staff? Surely that'd lose them money?


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 19, 2010)

TSSA voted in favour of industrial action or action short of a strike too.


----------



## Bungle73 (Aug 25, 2010)

Strike on the 6th of September.  I'm supposed to going to the the BM Members' Open Evening on that day! Fuckers!


----------



## skyscraper101 (Aug 25, 2010)

Holding the public to ransom!


----------



## marty21 (Aug 25, 2010)

I'll get a bus or drive in or even walk if the traffic is too much, about 90 minutes walk I reckon 

up the strikers!


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 25, 2010)

sub standard said:
			
		

> “The RMT need to accept that everyone in the private and public sectors are having to do more with less nowadays and understand that *holding millions of commuters to ransom* is an unacceptable response to not having its demands met.”



Awwww. 

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...elays-as-tube-unions-plan-24-hour-walkouts.do


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Aug 25, 2010)

Just recently I had to go to a London Underground station to sort out my Oyster Card (I couldn't do it anywhere else). I turned up at Hornchurch on the District line at 11am and they told me that the ticket office was shut at 10.30 and what's more the nearest station was in Dagenham. The woman manning the ticket barriers also said that as of next year all the ticket offices after Dagenham will be permanently closed. The cuts they are proposing are really severe.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 26, 2010)

It appears there's two strikes over two days from workers from different parts of the system. Workers from the jubilee and northern lines (im assuming Alstom workers) walk out Sunday evening (?) Through Monday and the afforementioned London underground RMT and TSSA members stage a 24 hour walk out at 5pm Monday through to Tuesday.


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

So this strike's going ahead when only 35% of union members voted for it. Altho you might be led to believe otherwise were you to glance at the RMT site.



> August 25 2010: SOME 10,000 members London Underground’s two biggest unions will begin a rolling series of strikes on September 6 against plans to axe 800 station and other staff and close ticket-offices, after RMT and TSSA members voted *overwhelmingly *for action to defend jobs and safety.



And this over the closure of ticket kiosks that are selling on average 6 tickets an hour. Bonkers.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2010)

800 jobs to be axed. Seems a strange position you have gabi to be happy about receiving a poorer service for no reduction in fare. Typical fucking mug.


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

'Poorer service'? I use Oyster. Like the vast majority of commuters.

Even the most ardent strike fan is going to find it hard to back this one (excluding your good self of course)


----------



## TopCat (Aug 27, 2010)

I salute the RMT for classic organising techniques. Britain's fastest growing trade union.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2010)

gabi said:


> 'Poorer service'? I use Oyster. Like the vast majority of commuters.
> 
> Even the most ardent strike fan is going to find it hard to back this one (excluding your good self of course)


 
They're not just people who sell tickets you fucking muppet. Station staff are their to assist the public and drivers in all manner of situations. People who get lost/hurt/robbed on the system will find themselves without any obvious means of help in some locations. This is aside from the lives that will be ruined as people lose their livelihoods. You're a cunt, gabi, and I can only hope you get a knife pulled on you at some point in a tube station so you can thank yourself for supporting making it a less safe place.


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> They're not just people who sell tickets you fucking muppet. Station staff are their to assist the public and drivers in all manner of situations. People who get lost/hurt/robbed on the system will find themselves without any obvious means of help in some locations. This is aside from the lives that will be ruined as people lose their livelihoods. You're a cunt, gabi, and I can only hope you get a knife pulled on you at some point in a tube station so you can thank yourself for supporting making it a less safe place.


 
How old are you? Serious question..


----------



## TopCat (Aug 27, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> They're not just people who sell tickets you fucking muppet. Station staff are their to assist the public and drivers in all manner of situations. People who get lost/hurt/robbed on the system will find themselves without any obvious means of help in some locations. This is aside from the lives that will be ruined as people lose their livelihoods. You're a cunt, gabi, and I can only hope you get a knife pulled on you at some point in a tube station so you can thank yourself for supporting making it a less safe place.


 
get a knife pulled on them? FFS get a grip.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2010)

gabi said:


> How old are you? Serious question..


 
Are you a cop or something?


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2010)

TopCat said:


> get a knife pulled on them? FFS get a grip.


 
What's wrong with poetic justice?


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> What's wrong with poetic justice?


 


So you're suggesting you'd like me to be knifed on the tube because I don't support next week's strikes?

Sorry, how old were you? I didn't quite catch it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2010)

I certainly support the knifing of gabi.


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> I certainly support the knifing of gabi.


 
Right back at ya sweetcheeks.

Got a job yet btw, oh surplus one?


----------



## cesare (Aug 27, 2010)

Good on the RMT 

Mind you, looking at the extent of this weekend's engineering works, it looks like LU are doing a great job of disrupting travellers all by themselves


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2010)

gabi said:


> So you're suggesting you'd like me to be knifed on the tube because I don't support next week's strikes?
> 
> Sorry, how old were you? I didn't quite catch it.


 
It's like hoping that the potters bar train was full of grasping privateers. But unfortunately its seldom the architects who get shafted by their single mindedness.

Just been sent this but can't access it from my phone:


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> It's like hoping that the potters bar train was full of grasping privateers. But unfortunately its seldom the architects who get shafted by their single mindedness.
> 
> Just been sent this but can't access it from my phone:




35% of members. Good stuff RMT. Overwhelming almost


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2010)

Why are you assuming those who didn't vote are against? What do you have to support this assumption? Of those who voted 76% voted for action including strike action.  Either way, scabby gabi is in full bullshit mode.


----------



## gabi (Aug 27, 2010)

butchersapron said:


> Why are you assuming those who didn't vote are against? What do you have to support this assumption? Of those who voted 76% voted for action including strike action.  Either way, scabby gabi is in full bullshit mode.


 
And the rest couldn't be arsed voting. They're going to disable the tube network based on this mandate - in order to 'save' the jobs of 800 people only slightly more employable than yourself. This is bullshit.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2010)

Who says they couldn't be arsed? What do you have to support this assumption? And why do you think it means wider constitutional democracy should be discarded? Come back when you have something.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 27, 2010)

Well seeing as the RMT _always_ vote in favour of strike action, the onus was on the stragglers to oppose it if that wasn't what they desired.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 3, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> They're not just people who sell tickets you fucking muppet. Station staff are their to assist the public and drivers in all manner of situations. People who get lost/hurt/robbed on the system will find themselves without any obvious means of help in some locations. This is aside from the lives that will be ruined as people lose their livelihoods. You're a cunt, gabi, and I can only hope you get a knife pulled on you at some point in a tube station so you can thank yourself for supporting making it a less safe place.


 
Most of the staff I see in stations can't even speak English.  How anyone can back that illiterate figurehead in the RMT is beyond me.  Fortunately I don't have to bother much with the tube and walk from Fenchurch Street.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 3, 2010)

How is he illiterate? You have evidecne for this bizarre claim of course?


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 3, 2010)

Fedayn said:


> How is he illiterate? You have evidecne for this bizarre claim of course?


 
a radio interview on BBC Essex this evening - he made David beckham sound like Einstein


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 3, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> a radio interview on BBC Essex this evening - he made David beckham sound like Einstein


 
What has that got to do with being illiterate? You're not very good at this are you? As I said, where is your evidence that he is illiterate?


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 3, 2010)

Fedayn said:


> What has that got to do with being illiterate? You're not very good at this are you? As I said, where is your evidence that he is illiterate?



Oh ok - errm let me think - he actually couldn't speak English coherently.  And he's fat, ugly and a Millwall fan - apart from that he's great.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 3, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Oh ok - errm let me think - he actually couldn't speak English coherently.  And he's fat, ugly and a Millwall fan - apart from that he's great.


 
So, nothing to do with illiterate at all, just your own dribbling prejudice. (Ab)normal service resumed then.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't have a car or even a bike and my sight isn't good enough to be safe using them, so I can't pretend it won't be an inconvenience, but in the scheme of things the cuts being proposed will be a massive problem, not just for disabled people in particular, but for everyone who relies on the tube. I support the strike and I'm not even left-wing. I am a Londoner  born & bred who knows what is of real value and worth in this city.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 3, 2010)

Fedayn said:


> So, nothing to do with illiterate at all, just your own dribbling prejudice. (Ab)normal service resumed then.



if anyone wants to be led by someone like that good luck to you.  If I'm prejudiced against individuals with the inability to speak coherently then I'm guilty.  I'll make my 90 second walk on Monday as usual.  This isn't about job cuts, it's about making a statement to the government.  Fortunately, with every strike, fewer and fewer people have sympathy.


----------



## mincepie (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't agree with cuts to station staffing, for security reasons mainly, but I don't see how striking helps, it just annoys the traveller, - lots of pain on Monday night.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 3, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Most of the staff I see in stations can't even speak English.



Erm, that'd be the cleaners who are neither required to be lucid to carry out their duties and don't work directly for London transport you disingenuous cunt.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 3, 2010)

And they can speak English. But they're not required to when chatting amongst themselves.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 3, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> if anyone wants to be led by someone like that good luck to you.  If I'm prejudiced against individuals with the inability to speak coherently then I'm guilty.  I'll make my 90 second walk on Monday as usual.  This isn't about job cuts, it's about making a statement to the government.  Fortunately, with every strike, fewer and fewer people have sympathy.


 
So, I was right, fuck all to do with any 'illiteracy' on Crows behalf. Just a dribbling prejudice against his accent and speech.... You really are pathetic.


----------



## ymu (Sep 3, 2010)

mincepie said:


> I don't agree with cuts to station staffing, for security reasons mainly, but I don't see how striking helps, it just annoys the traveller, - lots of pain on Monday night.


 
Because there are so many other ways for workers to assert their rights vs management.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 3, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Erm, that'd be the cleaners who are neither required to be lucid to carry out their duties and don't work directly for London transport you disingenuous cunt.



no that would be those in uniform on the platforms.  I really don't see how striking garners any sympathy.  It's meant to be a last resort but the RMT has the reputation of calling strike action over the tea bags being in the wrong cupboard.  It'll all end in tears!!!


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 3, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> no that would be those in uniform on the platforms.  I really don't see how striking garners any sympathy.  It's meant to be a last resort but the RMT has the reputation of calling strike action over the tea bags being in the wrong cupboard.  It'll all end in tears!!!


 
No, station staff have to have a pretty solid grasp of English (as do cleaners) or else they wouldnt be able to gain the relevant licenses to work on the railway. So why don't you stop bull shitting?

And besides, if these cuts are made there'll be nobody to respond to you in some stations, whether in urdu, mandarin or Essex illiterate tones.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 3, 2010)

Exactly. Anyway, gunneradt, you say you live in in Essex with a 90 second walk to work, so what exactly is your point?


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 3, 2010)

He labours under the illusion that the striking workers seek his sympathy.

Gunner, the action is about protecting jobs. Your opinion matters none in the whole scheme of things.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> no that would be those in uniform on the platforms.  I really don't see how striking garners any sympathy.  It's meant to be a last resort but the RMT has the reputation of calling strike action over the tea bags being in the wrong cupboard.  It'll all end in tears!!!


 
The problem is exactly that - the point of view you have espoused is exactly that which management wish the public to adopt.  Never mind that these proposals (which follow on, lets not forget, twenty years of near constant bad transport (and especially rail) policy in the UK) will make these stations less safe, and less user-friendly; never mind that the only real weapon the RMT can deploy against madness of this kind is strike action (or the threat of it), the London travelling public *might* be delayed on one or two days!  

That said, I am suspicious of the RMT - and especially Crow - in the way they have seemingly shown a lot more fight against Boris, despite Boris doing far more to actually benefit transport policy in London than Ken (and by extension New Labour) ever did.  They have also been utterly useless in presenting an alternate (ie: safer, cheaper and better) way of doing things on the railway.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 4, 2010)

Could you expand on your last paragraph? 

Tube workers loathed ken for bringing in the part privatisation with brown. There was many actions with most being called off either at the eleventh hour or after the first stoppage. This is the Tories now though who aren't known for backing down from trade unionism.


----------



## ymu (Sep 4, 2010)

Yeah, I don't recall the RMT being soft on Ken at all. Isn't that what prompted Boris to make his famously stupid manifesto promise to reach a no strike deal with them?


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 4, 2010)

Yeah. He's still desperate for that regarding the Olympics. 

Better play fair, Boris.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 4, 2010)

agricola said:


> The problem is exactly that - the point of view you have espoused is exactly that which management wish the public to adopt.  Never mind that these proposals (which follow on, lets not forget, twenty years of near constant bad transport (and especially rail) policy in the UK) will make these stations less safe, and less user-friendly; never mind that the only real weapon the RMT can deploy against madness of this kind is strike action (or the threat of it), the London travelling public *might* be delayed on one or two days!
> 
> That said, I am suspicious of the RMT - and especially Crow - in the way they have seemingly shown a lot more fight against Boris, despite Boris doing far more to actually benefit transport policy in London than Ken (and by extension New Labour) ever did.  They have also been utterly useless in presenting an alternate (ie: safer, cheaper and better) way of doing things on the railway.


 
The radio guy tried to intimate and ask Crow exactly what you are implying in the 2nd para.  He doesn't seem to have the will, or the ability, to even address the question.  He doesn't realise that, eventually, the position of his workers will be weakened by continual striking.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Sep 4, 2010)

cesare said:


> Good on the RMT
> 
> Mind you, looking at the extent of this weekend's engineering works, it looks like LU are doing a great job of disrupting travellers all by themselves


 
innit.
 I've given up on the idea of the Jubilee Line ever  running a full service  at weekends and it will get worse if these cuts being proposed go ahead. Victory to the RMT!


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 4, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> The radio guy tried to intimate and ask Crow exactly what you are implying in the 2nd para.  He doesn't seem to have the will, or the ability, to even address the question.  He doesn't realise that, eventually, the position of his workers will be weakened by continual striking.


 
Everyone is waiting until October when osbourne announces the deep cuts to be made to the public sector. If further jobs are under threat then I wouldn't be surprised if the action continues into the new year and intensifies.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Sep 4, 2010)

just received this message from tubeworkers support group on f/b

''Please come and help us distribute Tubeworker tomorrow. We need to meet up together before we start, because we'll be spending a lot of time underground and phones might not work.

We'll be meeting up to distribute Tubeworker at 12pm at Kings Cross station tomorrow - we'll be meeting up at the McDonald's over the road from Kings X.

That's the McDonald's on Euston Road, opposite the front of the station - not the McDonald's on the corner on the same side of the street as the station.''


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 4, 2010)

dynamicbaddog said:


> just received this message from tubeworkers support group on f/b
> 
> ''Please come and help us distribute Tubeworker tomorrow. We need to meet up together before we start, because we'll be spending a lot of time underground and phones might not work.
> 
> ...


 
ha ha something quite hilarious about that - so it's metro, shortlist, evening standard and tubeworker on Monday.  I know which of the 4 I'll be reading.


----------



## Blagsta (Sep 4, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> no that would be those in uniform on the platforms.  I really don't see how striking garners any sympathy.  It's meant to be a last resort but the RMT has the reputation of calling strike action over the tea bags being in the wrong cupboard.  It'll all end in tears!!!



They may have that reputation, but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.  It's actually quite difficult to call official strike action.  All internal procedures have to be exhausted, they have to be in official dispute, an official ballot has to be undertaken etc.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Could you expand on your last paragraph?
> 
> Tube workers loathed ken for bringing in the part privatisation with brown. There was many actions with most being called off either at the eleventh hour or after the first stoppage. This is the Tories now though who aren't known for backing down from trade unionism.



It is based on a combination of the complete lack of credit given for actually ending the PPP deal (which lets face it Ken never did), and Crow's seeming other role as chief anti-cuts man.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

agricola said:


> It is based on a combination of the complete lack of credit given for actually ending the PPP deal (which lets face it Ken never did), and Crow's seeming other role as chief anti-cuts man.


 
Metronet went bust when labour were still in power. I'm unsure why Boris ended the tubelines contract recently but doubt it was done on saintly grounds but i'll look into it and report back. Not sure what your last sentence means but surely as the general secretary of a union that has many members in the public sector he's likely to take an anti cuts position?


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

LBC are running a poll and the unions are in the lead. Help keep it that way:

http://www.lbc.co.uk/page-20985


----------



## laptop (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> LBC are running a poll and the unions are in the lead. Help keep it that way:
> 
> http://www.lbc.co.uk/page-20985


 
75% !!


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

laptop said:


> 75% !!


 
I know, I was quite surprised at that figure although the fact it's publicised on an RMT affiliated website might have something to do with it.


----------



## mincepie (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> LBC are running a poll and the unions are in the lead. Help keep it that way:
> 
> http://www.lbc.co.uk/page-20985



This poll and the whole debate is stupid!!! There are only two options to vote on! Unions vs Tfl

I don't agree with cutting staffing levels at stations, simply for security reasons.  I think i'd rather a small increase in ticket prices instead. Whats £2.10 vs  a £2 ticket.

BUT I don't see how striking benefits the customer. Now Monday and Tuesday are going to be screwed/painful for people.  Tell me, how does this help anyone??!!


----------



## the button (Sep 5, 2010)

mincepie said:


> Now Monday and Tuesday are going to be screwed/painful for people.  Tell me, how does this help anyone??!!



It helps the strikers pursue their case, and it helps every other trade unionist and person who works for a living by sending a message to the bosses and the government that we won't always take their shit lying down. It's not hard.

I too will have my journey to and from work affected, but I'm not going to cry about it, I'll just walk from Old St to London Bridge instead of getting the Northern Line. Or get the Overground to New Cross, then catch a bus.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

the button said:


> It helps the strikers pursue their case, and it helps every other trade unionist and person who works for a living by sending a message to the bosses and the government that we won't always take their shit lying down. It's not hard.
> 
> I too will have my journey to and from work affected, but I'm not going to cry about it, I'll just walk from Old St to London Bridge instead of getting the Northern Line. Or get the Overground to New Cross, then catch a bus.


 
I'd do anything rather than get on a tube.  The price is ridiculous.  I travelled 3 stops return a couple of months ago - £5.50 I think in zone 1.  Absolutely ridiculous.


----------



## Blagsta (Sep 5, 2010)

get an oyster card


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

Blagsta said:


> get an oyster card



What?  For one journey every 2 months.  It's an utter rip off.  I only want a ticket, not some useless oyster card.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

Well quit pissing and moaning about it. You've been informed of the solution and so if you can't be arsed then it's down to you that you're paying so much.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Well quit pissing and moaning about it. You've been informed of the solution and so if you can't be arsed then it's down to you that you're paying so much.


 
It's not a solution. Tickets are a solution at a reasonable price.  Are tourists meant to purchase an oyster card?  Oyster cards are a nuisance - the one sure fire thing that holds barriers up - if there's a delay it's nearly always an oyster card that hasn't opened the barrier.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

Well that sort of thing will only get worse with 800 station staff job losses with the aim to make smaller stations automated. Yet you appear to be against the strikes. Most odd.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Sep 5, 2010)

*The RMT want you to show  support!*







List of picket lines -

http://www.rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/node/1682


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Well that sort of thing will only get worse with 800 station staff job losses with the aim to make smaller stations automated. Yet you appear to be against the strikes. Most odd.



There are plenty of options

how about printing off a ticket online with a bar code - job done


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 5, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> It's not a solution. Tickets are a solution at a reasonable price.  Are tourists meant to purchase an oyster card?  Oyster cards are a nuisance - the one sure fire thing that holds barriers up - if there's a delay it's nearly always an oyster card that hasn't opened the barrier.


 
It is fairly obvious from the above that you don't really use the London public transport system much.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It is fairly obvious from the above that you don't really use the London public transport system much.



I use public transport every day - and I know what a nuisance the oyster card is at mainline stations.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

Tickets need to be of a certain size to go through the machines. I doubt everyone is that good with scissors to not make a pig's ear of it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 5, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> I use public transport every day - and I know what a nuisance the oyster card is at mainline stations.


 
Apparently not in London. Issues at barriers are frequently caused by Oysters but the proportion is minimal compared to the number of people who use Oysters. Far more, proportionately and perhaps even without considering proportion, are caused by people trying to force card tickets through the machine and using the wrong one or messing it up in some other way. And yes, tourists are supposed to get Oysters, and anyone sensible does.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Apparently not in London. Issues at barriers are frequently caused by Oysters but the proportion is minimal compared to the number of people who use Oysters. Far more, proportionately and perhaps even without considering proportion, are caused by people trying to force card tickets through the machine and using the wrong one or messing it up in some other way. And yes, tourists are supposed to get Oysters, and anyone sensible does.


 
why would you get an oyster card for one jorney per year - can you put £2.50 on it?  why not just sell them instead of tickets?  Or better still adapt the card reader to read bar codes exactly like the royal mail system


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 5, 2010)

You'd know the answer to that if you used public transport in London.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You'd know the answer to that if you used public transport in London.


 
would I? - it's a proprietary card.  No use unless it's accepted everywhere and it also has one massive flaw - you've no idea how much there is on it.  I can see exactly how much my national rail ticket has on it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

Of course you know how much there is on it. You're informed every time you use it (passing through tube barriers). Something you would know if you actually bothered to look into it instead of pulling facts out of your arse.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Of course you know how much there is on it. You're informed every time you use it (passing through tube barriers). Something you would know if you actually bothered to look into it instead of pulling facts out of your arse.



not much use when not at a tube station -


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> not much use when not at a tube station -


 
When you're using it to chop lines of coke? Doing what with it? At what other point will you need to know how much is on there? And besides, if you're informed when you last used it how much is on there there's nothing stopping you remembering that. Write it down if your memory is unreliable.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> When you're using it to chop lines of coke? Doing what with it? At what other point will you need to know how much is on there? And besides, if you're informed when you last used it how much is on there there's nothing stopping you remembering that. Write it down if your memory is unreliable.


 
I don't need one thankfully - and if I do my company will pay for the ticket.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 5, 2010)

So why all the fucking bluster?


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 5, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> So why all the fucking bluster?



Because the tube should be attracting customers not putting them off - charging ridiculous amounts because you havent got an oyster card is crazy


----------



## 1%er (Sep 5, 2010)

It is the fault of the people going for cheap travel cards and Oyster cards who are responsible for the 800 people loosing their jobs, may be if they all stood in line every morning and paid over the odds for a ticket each way everyday these people would still have jobs.

But they are selfish and cheapskates, they don't want to queue up and will not pay more for their tickets so their actions will result in 800 being made redundant.

Call yourselves socialists


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Because the tube should be attracting customers not putting them off - charging ridiculous amounts because you havent got an oyster card is crazy


 
I completely agree. The price of a journey should be the same regardless of whether it comes as a ticket or deducted from an oyster card. Not sure what it has to do with the industrial action though. Fire off a letter of complaint to TFL about it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2010)

The RMT have long argued for comprehensive fare reduction - good old Bob Crow eh gunner?


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Sep 6, 2010)

*Tube safety strike protest at Euston*

I'm going to try and get to this http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=138780
8am  tomorrow at Euston Station.


----------



## the button (Sep 6, 2010)

dynamicbaddog said:


> I'm going to try and get to this http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=138780
> 8am  tomorrow at Euston Station.



Won't be able to make this because of the tube strike.


----------



## dynamicbaddog (Sep 6, 2010)

the button said:


> Won't be able to make this because of the tube strike.



I haz bicycle


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

I'll be on a picket line from 05:30 so won't be able to make it.


----------



## co-op (Sep 6, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> I'd do anything rather than get on a tube.  The price is ridiculous.  I travelled 3 stops return a couple of months ago - £5.50 I think in zone 1.  Absolutely ridiculous.


 
Which city was this in? Sounds like an expensive place.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

tbf the tube is waaay more pricey than the Berlin or Barcelona subways. But then we're consistently shafted over transport prices in a way our European cousins aren't.


----------



## trashpony (Sep 6, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> tbf the tube is waaay more pricey than the Berlin or Barcelona subways. But then we're consistently shafted over transport prices in a way our European cousins aren't.


 
They don't arse around trying to privatise public services like we do in the UK. In Brussels the metro system is very cheap but it's subsidised.


----------



## mincepie (Sep 6, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> tbf the tube is waaay more pricey than the Berlin or Barcelona subways. But then we're consistently shafted over transport prices in a way our European cousins aren't.



When I was in Barcelona they station train info system counts down till the train comes in seconds. And it was always right. I was shocked! In London i'm just happy to see a-non delayed-train within a 7 min window!


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

mincepie said:


> When I was in Barcelona they station train info system counts down till the train comes in seconds. And it was always right. I was shocked! In London i'm just happy to see a-non delayed-train within a 7 min window!


 
Hey, I've been sitting at a station (Ruislip Gardens) and witnessed it count down to one minute and then back up to two minutes again!


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 6, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> tbf the tube is waaay more pricey than the Berlin or Barcelona subways. But then we're consistently shafted over transport prices in a way our European cousins aren't.


 
I can travel return from east essex to central london for £14.50 - in fact a day ticket is so cheap there's not much benefit in buying a season.  I have to travel all 5 days to make a weekly worthwhile and I then save a fiver.,  A monthly only saves me about thirty quid too.


----------



## cesare (Sep 6, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> I can travel return from east essex to central london for £14.50 - in fact a day ticket is so cheap there's not much benefit in buying a season.  I have to travel all 5 days to make a weekly worthwhile and I then save a fiver.,  A monthly only saves me about thirty quid too.



You could save a lot more by not travelling in at all. That can only be a good thing.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

But his company pays for it anyway...


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 6, 2010)

well Ill be at work at work tomorrow!!


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

Hopefully the punters travelling from London will be able to meet you at the relevant Hotels.


----------



## Oxpecker (Sep 6, 2010)

I love Urban75 when there's a tube strike pending  it's better than the telly


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 6, 2010)

Fella, how's it looking with the drivers? Most of them are ASLEF aren't they? Will they cross picket lines?


----------



## cesare (Sep 6, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> I love Urban75 when there's a tube strike pending  it's better than the telly



I'm not sure that finally narrowing it down to gunneradt = entertainment


----------



## lenny101 (Sep 7, 2010)

Good luck to anyone struggling into work today. I am on my bike buts is meant to rain this afternoon.


----------



## Garek (Sep 7, 2010)

How come the Northern Line is running?


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

Because a different company does the maintenance for that line who were on strike From Sun eve to Mon eve. I don't think all of its stations are open though.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

funniest thing I saw on twitter today


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

2010, we've got 2004 on the line.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

And the original was animated by Manic (aka Tim Ireland), who posts on B3ta. 

http://www.bloggerheads.com/archives/2007/10/london_undergro/


----------



## Oxpecker (Sep 7, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Fella, how's it looking with the drivers? Most of them are ASLEF aren't they? Will they cross picket lines?


 
Just back from a 13 hour shift on the picket line. Some Aslef drivers refused to come into work despite the disgraceful instruction of their leaders to work as normal. Solid response from the 50% of drivers in the RMT. The central Line only had 8/85 trains running. The Piccadilly Line at one point only had one train running a shuttle from Hammersmith to Acton which enabled LUL to describe the service as as "running with delays." A phenomenal response from workers who have identified a major threat to their living conditions and job security and have decided to take action to defend themselves.

And to respond to what is said above about Bob Crow's intelligence - he has a mercurial intellect and the ability to read and understand a complicated brief and respond with a coherent plan faster than anyone I have ever met. He is the reason that the RMT is the fastest growing union in Britain.


----------



## Mrs Magpie (Sep 7, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> a mercurial intellect


Do you mean mercurial? I hope not...mercurial means going from sweet as pie to postal in the blink of an eye. It's not usually applied to intellect...anyway, as I said in my earlier post. I support the strike because I don't want eerily empty staffless stations. It's bad for safety and also will reduce access for people with disabilities. Not good. We want people out of cars onto public transport and creating stations that people don't feel safe in will not attract passengers.


----------



## Oxpecker (Sep 7, 2010)

Now if I was as clever as Bob I wouldn't have made such a silly mistake!

All these years I've just assumed that mercurial meant quick and fluid like quicksilver. You live and learn - even at my age


----------



## Mr T (Sep 7, 2010)

just to back up Oxpecker, the tfl staff intranet was reporting around 180 out of 500 trains in service at lunchtime, about 40%, which is roughly the proportion you'd expect among drivers of ASLEF members and non-union members.  what was quite laughable was that they were reporting 'part suspended' and 'minor delays' on lines which were running pretty useless shuttle services in outer London, and not reporting most of the station closures - one of my colleagues got a bakerloo line train in this morning which went queens park-fast to marylebone-baker st-fast to embankment - hardly minor delays! more like the opposite if you were going to embankment but completely useless if you were coming from paddington where most of the demand on that line is generated.

i think its interesting that there is relatively little debate about the rights and wrongs of this action on u75 - i seem to remember much more heated debates about the last big tube strike (15/18 months ago?) which i think was mainly over pay (and i was completely in support of), whereas the debate on this thread is about the price of tickets on paper vs oyster... hopefully this reflects that actually although loads of people are inconvenienced and seriously pissed off about the disruption to their day, they recognise that the strike is actually in defence of what most customers want - staff on stations.


----------



## cesare (Sep 7, 2010)

Oxpecker, will next month's strike action (if LUL don't come to the table) have a bit more bite? I hope so.


----------



## Oxpecker (Sep 7, 2010)

Hi Cesare. Today's had plenty of "bite" but LUL are distorting the figures. We intend to build on today's success with more and better strikes and with overtime bans. Aslef may be forced into action once the full extent of the budget cuts become clear in October.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

From what Quartz said earlier it looks like they threw whatever resources they had available at keeping a link between the City and Canary Wharf going on the Jubilee line. Can't be upsetting the tossers that brought about this quandary now, can we.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

All I noticed was the c2c service stopping at extra stations - business as usual in London.  If Bob Crow has talent, Lord help us all.  It'll all end end in tears - hopefully


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> All I noticed was the c2c service stopping at extra stations - business as usual in London.  If Bob Crow has talent, Lord help us all.  *It'll all end end in tears* - hopefully



Are you one of those Daily Mail Headline generators?



gunneradt said:


> no that would be those in uniform on the platforms.  I really don't see how striking garners any sympathy.  It's meant to be a last resort but the RMT has the reputation of calling strike action over the tea bags being in the wrong cupboard.  *It'll all end in tears*!!!


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Just makes me giggle that the tube workers think striking has any effect - everyone gets to work and no-one has any sympathy.  Was not one person absent in my office and no sympathy at all - I am sure it's the same in virtually every office.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> All I noticed was the c2c service stopping at extra stations



That's a bit of a swine then. Because the whole purpose of the c2c is to travel into London quickly. I know this because I use it myself when working at Upminster. All those extra stops with more people getting on must have been a bit annoying for the regular commuters.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Hardly noticed - normally on the laptop - I always get a seat.  I think c2c may well have laid on extra trains today too.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

Where do you catch it from?


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Where do you catch it from?


 
westcliff


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

Ah right. The sticks.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

I noticed something was up when I looked up and noticed Id stopped at Upminster


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

They normally stop at Upminster. Unless there's a fast one that I'm not aware of.

Upminster > Barking > West ham > Limehouse > Fenchurch St


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Ah right. The sticks.


 
ha ha it's a great service into fenchurch st - about 47 mins I think.  I really dont think striking is going to have an effect this time.  More and more people can work remotely anyway - it just doesn't have the same effect anymore.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> They normally stop at Upminster. Unless there's a fast one that I'm not aware of.
> 
> Upminster > Barking > West ham > Fenchurch St



the 5.15 and and 5.30 out of fenchurch st are first stop benfleet - they even skip Limehouse

I think


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> ha ha it's a great service into fenchurch st - about 47 mins I think.  I really dont think striking is going to have an effect this time.  More and more people can work remotely anyway - it just doesn't have the same effect anymore.


 
Estimated £50m losses per action doesn't appear to tie in with that view.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Estimated £50m losses per action doesn't appear to tie in with that view.



That's a notional amount - no one has any idea how it's calculated.  The strikers do not have any sympathy amongst City folk and I think that shows a lot.


----------



## Santino (Sep 7, 2010)

He has a point. Normally City workers have nothing but good to say for Tube workers, but a couple of strikes make them completely reverse their opinions. If the unions aren't careful they'll lose all the support they have in investment banking and hedge funds.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2010)

Santino said:


> He has a point. Normally City workers have nothing but good to say for Tube workers, but a couple of strikes make them completely reverse their opinions. If the unions aren't careful they'll lose all the support they have in investment banking and hedge funds.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 7, 2010)

Fedayn said:


>



ha ha I was being serious.  I'm not anti any workers but I really feel that this time most feel this is politically motivated.  Despite what many think most in the City are perfectly normal people.  Most are just grateful they've just still got their jobs.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 7, 2010)

Whenever I've met City Boys they were anything but 'normal'. Coked-up tossers springs to mind. One guy justified owning his own employment 'consultant' agency as he wanted to 'make a difference'.

Aye. Make a difference to his bank balance.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Whenever I've met City Boys they were anything but 'normal'. Coked-up tossers springs to mind. One guy justified owning his own employment 'consultant' agency as he wanted to 'make a difference'.
> 
> Aye. Make a difference to his bank balance.


 
most don't own a business but work for one


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

But presumably they all agree with the bonus-driven banking culture which has led to the financial crisis and which the Tories now want to punish public sector workers for? To balance the books, like.

In fact, I'd hazard a guess that many were lining their pockets throughout the last decade.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> ha ha I was being serious.  *I'm not anti any workers* but I really feel that this time most feel this is politically motivated.  Despite what many think most in the City are perfectly normal people.  Most are just grateful they've just still got their jobs.


 
Well that's a blatant lie, as you are clearly opposed to this strike. 



gunneradt said:


> if anyone wants to be led by someone like that good luck to you.  If I'm prejudiced against individuals with the inability to speak coherently then I'm guilty.  I'll make my 90 second walk on Monday as usual.  This isn't about job cuts, it's about making a statement to the government.  *Fortunately, with every strike, fewer and fewer people have sympathy*.





gunneradt said:


> no that would be those in uniform on the platforms.  I really don't see how striking garners any sympathy.  It's meant to be a last resort but the RMT has the reputation of calling strike action over the tea bags being in the wrong cupboard.  It'll all end in tears!!!


 


gunneradt said:


> All I noticed was the c2c service stopping at extra stations - business as usual in London.  *If Bob Crow has talent, Lord help us all.  It'll all end end in tears - hopefully*



Yup those qiotes make it clear how you're not anti any group of workers....


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

Funny as well how his "90 second walk to work" suddenly switched to a ride on the C2C. I think he's just making it all up as he goes along.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Funny as well how his "90 second walk to work" suddenly switched to a ride on the C2C. I think he's just making it all up as he goes along.


 
I meant fronm the station quite obviously


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Fedayn said:


> Well that's a blatant lie, as you are clearly opposed to this strike.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I'm not classing Bob Crow as anything like a worker


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

Well Mrs M misunderstood you as well and then you didn't clarify what you meant.



Mrs Magpie said:


> Exactly. Anyway, gunneradt, you say you live in in Essex with a 90 second walk to work, so what exactly is your point?


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Well Mrs M misunderstood you as well and then you didn't clarify what you meant.


 
well I knew what I meant


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

Seems you should be looking closer to home on the lack of coherency front.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Seems you should be looking closer to home on the lack of coherency front.


 
I'll take Bob on in a literacy exam any day


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> I'm not classing Bob Crow as anything like a worker


 
Only one of those quotes mentioned Crow. Crow is not the RMT and the RMT is not Crow. But hey, let your own dribblingly prejudicial opinion of Crow-a union leader with more guts than most others-cloud the issue. You clearly don't support this group of workers. As such your claim that you're "not anti group of workers" is utterly hollow and in short a lie. Because you clearly are anti this group of workers.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Fedayn said:


> Only one of those quotes mentioned Crow. Crow is not the RMT and the RMT is not Crow. But hey, let your own dribblingly prejudicial opinion of Crow-a union leader with more guts than most others-cloud the issue. You clearly don't support this group of workers. As such your claim that you're "not anti group of workers" is utterly hollow and in short a lie. Because you clearly are anti this group of workers.


 
Im anti people who think it's a good idea to strike for no good reason.  And everyone Ive spoken to thinks it's no good reason.  There was not one iota of good press yesterday for those on strike.  There are 2.5 million unemployed - maybe this lot should step aside and let those that want a job do theirs.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2010)

Spoke to anyone striking? Great survey.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2010)

Actually on remembering who and what you are...


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

I was over at canary wharf at the weekend at a hotel and managed to read a copy of wharf magazine. The editorial comment was basically that the RMT couldn't see the bigger picture that by losing their jobs and with it their pensions and hard fought-for conditions they would be making way for their saviours in the private sector who would 'generate' wealth for them. Utterly fucking deluded. The privateers can go to hell, if they throw me on to the dole then that's where I'm staying.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> And everyone Ive spoken to thinks it's no good reason


and of those, how many were RMT members? or members of _any_ TU?



> There was not one iota of good press yesterday for those on strike.


yes, and our national daily press are famous for their sympathy for people on strike, in any industry, aren't they?
You utter fucking moron.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Was not one person absent in my office and no sympathy at all - I am sure it's the same in virtually every office.


jesus, you really are dumb, aren't you? Let me explain: ALL strikes cause someone, somewhere, a degree of inconvenience, or else they are useless. So it's no surprising that no-one in your toryboy workplace aren't showing 'sympathy'. And I doubt the strikers care about that: they care about getting a fair deal.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2010)

Strikes in causing inconvenience shocker. When these same office idiots are whining about the RMT wages do they ever have the brains to put it together with ability and willingness to cause inconvenience? It's sort of the point.


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

It was interesting what Sandra Parsons had to say in today's mail. Besides the strike attempting to ruin a veterans' knees up she also claimed that the RMT were striking against changes in working practices designed to save jobs. 

Either she doesn't research the subjects she pontificates about or is a bare faced liar.


----------



## Blagsta (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> That's a notional amount - no one has any idea how it's calculated.  The strikers do not have any sympathy amongst City folk and I think that shows a lot.


 
Yeah it shows that city workers are selfish tossers.  Tell us something we don't know!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2010)

'city folk' -almost makes them sound human.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> That's a notional amount - no one has any idea how it's calculated.  The strikers do not have any sympathy amongst City folk and I think that shows a lot.


ahh..that'll be those same City geniuses  whose greed, recklessness and appalling misjudgement brought us to the brink of edconomic catastrophe, would it? Like we're really gonna value _their_ good opinion!
to fedayn, blagsta and BA: apols cos kicked off on this Tory dipshit b4 I realised you'd already done the job pretty damn well!


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

The irony of the mail - which had a two page spread today about the veterans and nothing save for Parsons' comment on the strike - is that when the w/c fight to protect the interests of the ruling classes they are praised for their 'war time spirit' but when they fight to defend themselves from the ruling classes they are routinely misrepresented or ignored.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2010)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not entirely true that under the job cuts proposals some stations will become entirely unstaffed is it?


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

I'm not sure how the new rosters will pan out. I liked how the management are pushing the idea that axing 800 jobs will give commuters better value for money. If they're not reducing fares then how does that work? Even basic o-level maths tells you it's a blatant lie.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

The delusion in this thread is quite staggering. 

When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to everyone else.  Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.  I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for. It'll be pay deals next.

Everyone will get to work during the ensuing strikes too. Eventually lame bob will realise he needs to change tactics or hell be facing staff losing their jobs.


----------



## Blagsta (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> The delusion in this thread is quite staggering.
> 
> When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to everyone else.  Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.  I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for. It'll be pay deals next.
> 
> Everyone will get to work during the ensuing strikes too. Eventually lame bob will realise he needs to change tactics or hell be facing staff losing their jobs.



*whooosh*


----------



## cesare (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> The delusion in this thread is quite staggering.
> 
> When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to everyone else.  Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.  I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for. It'll be pay deals next.
> 
> Everyone will get to work during the ensuing strikes too. Eventually lame bob will realise he needs to change tactics or hell be facing staff losing their jobs.



Like they're not losing their jobs anyway, lol.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> The delusion in this thread is quite staggering.
> 
> When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to city folk


 
Delusional?


----------



## Citizen66 (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> The delusion in this thread is quite staggering.
> 
> When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to everyone else.  Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.  I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for. It'll be pay deals next.
> 
> Everyone will get to work during the ensuing strikes too. Eventually lame bob will realise he needs to change tactics or hell be facing staff losing their jobs.



If the strike is having no effect then why have you felt the need to be glued to this thread and belly-ache about it?


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to everyone else.


since when did a bunch of smug canary wharf parasites constitute 'everyone else'?



> Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.


err, no, it's just you've missed the point. by a mile.



> I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for.


oh, yeah, cos all TUers are thick puppets of Bob Crow aren't they?
CRetin.


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> since when did a bunch of smug canary wharf parasites constitute 'everyone else'?
> 
> 
> err, no, it's just you've missed the point. by a mile.
> ...


 
Thick puppets of Bob Crow - who knows?  I certainly wouldn't strike and never have done.  I don't need someone else to tell me what to do and run my life for me - especially someone with an IQ of 6.

Smug canary wharf parasites? Where did canary wharf come into it?  The envy of anyone who doesn't wear Doc Martens and a jumpsuit to work seems quite high here.  Is it really any wonder the RMT is losing this PR war hands down?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm not sure how the new rosters will pan out. I liked how the management are pushing the idea that axing 800 jobs will give commuters better value for money. If they're not reducing fares then how does that work? Even basic o-level maths tells you it's a blatant lie.


 
I don't think it's really possible to argue that either way - it seems plausible that axing jobs will save some money, and commuters can get "better value for money" in many other ways than an immediate and obvious fare reduction. The savings will just be one figure amongst a whole load of plusses and minuses, and maybe the next time there's a fares increase it will be slightly less than it would otherwise have been, or maybe they can refurbish an extra station somewhere, or, I'm sure you'll say it'll all go straight into some shareholders' or managers' pockets or whatever. I don't think anyone can prove one way or the other, and it's not true to say that basic o-level maths tells you that it's a lie.

Anyway, back to the point of whether any stations will actually be left unstaffed as seems to be being implied by quite a lot of people. The RMT are saying it's "all about safety" but I don't think many people believe that - it's about people losing their jobs. Fair enough if tube workers want to take whatever action they can to try and protect their jobs but I don't think they really help themselves by pretending it's "all about" something else.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Thick puppets of Bob Crow - who knows?  I certainly wouldn't strike and never have done.  I don't need someone else to tell me what to do and run my life for me - especially someone with an IQ of 6.
> 
> Smug canary wharf parasites? Where did canary wharf come into it?  The envy of anyone who doesn't wear Doc Martens and a jumpsuit to work seems quite high here.  Is it really any wonder the RMT is losing this PR war hands down?


 
I usually get myself in enough trouble on these threads by criticising the RMT/Bob Crow but even I can see you're talking an awful lot of nonsense here.


----------



## Oxpecker (Sep 8, 2010)

blimey - who'd have thought teuchter would become the voice of reason - gunneradt must be a right cunt


----------



## gunneradt (Sep 8, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I usually get myself in enough trouble on these threads by criticising the RMT/Bob Crow but even I can see you're talking an awful lot of nonsense here.


 
ok I'll settle for semi-literate in fairness to Bob Crow.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2010)

This thread has gone quiet. Despite LUL management and gunneradt saying the strike wasn't having much of an effect it was an interesting contrast to see Boris Johnson looking angry and stressed about the situation.

Not the same footage, but here he is banging on about 'puerile' workers trying to protect their jobs:



But back to politics. I hear on the grapevine that LUL have announced another 400 job cuts. That's 400 on top of the 800 in the dispute so that's now 1,200 jobs under threat. And that's before these glorious cuts announcements are made.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 7, 2010)

Um another 800, not 400, so that makes 1,600. The info is all over the place and it shouldn't be.

Although the email concludes:



> Ironically many of these new redundancies are the very managers who volunteered to work during the previous strikes. Well that’s gratitude for you!



They'll be getting divvied up to the eyeballs with severance money to walk away with.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 21, 2010)

> *Wednesday, 20 October 2010*
> 
> *Assembly urges Mayor to rethink Tube ticket office staff cuts*
> 
> ...



Ram it up yer jacksy, Boris.


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 22, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Thick puppets of Bob Crow - who knows?  I certainly wouldn't strike and never have done.  I don't need someone else to tell me what to do and run my life for me - especially someone with an IQ of 6.


Then on what do you base 


> I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for.


 apart from some ignorant subtabloidesque drivel, about ordinary TU members not being able to think for themselves. If you knew anything about TUs - and you don't, it's one of the many, many things of which you know FUCK ALL - you'd know a worker thinks long and hard before going on strike.
btw, BC has gone from being a 16 year old track repairer, to the elected general secretary of an 80,000 organisation. Most people would say that means he's comfortably outperformed you in life. Would they not?


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 22, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> The delusion in this thread is quite staggering.
> 
> When you canvas opinion on a strike you don't talk to those within the union, you talk to everyone else.  Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.  I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for. It'll be pay deals next.
> 
> Everyone will get to work during the ensuing strikes too. Eventually lame bob will realise he needs to change tactics or hell be facing staff losing their jobs.


who the fuck appopinted tyou spokesman for 'everyone else', anyway? disco dave?


----------



## ymu (Oct 22, 2010)

And what the fuck has everyone else got to do with it anyway?


> Dear Customers
> 
> Would you mind awfully if we went on strike.
> 
> ...





> Dear Bob
> 
> Yes. It would be terribly inconvenient.
> 
> ...





> Dear Customers
> 
> Oh. OK then.
> 
> ...


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2010)

ymu said:


> And what the fuck has everyone else got to do with it anyway?


 
Making an effort to get the general public to understand why the strike is taking place and how it works is one of the kind of things that might make them slightly less likely to do stuff like vote Conservative...


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 22, 2010)

Which is why the union has people handing out leaflets at major stations and the management have a scab squad pointing folk towards alternative travel options.


----------



## ymu (Oct 22, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Making an effort to get the general public to understand why the strike is taking place and how it works is one of the kind of things that might make them slightly less likely to do stuff like vote Conservative...


 
And that's what Gunneradt was suggesting, is it?


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 22, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Im anti people who think it's a good idea to strike for no good reason.  And everyone Ive spoken to thinks it's no good reason


can I assume then, given this "everyone", that you move in circles comprised of ill-informed reactionary fuckwits, then?
you really should get out and about more...


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 22, 2010)

In one breath he says the strike has no effect and people can get to work any way then in the next he reveals that him and his mates have been huffing and grunting about it. Seems odd that people would care either way about a strike that wasn't affecting them.


----------



## smokedout (Oct 22, 2010)

gunneradt said:


> Most people get to work now during a strike so its a lame way to make a point.  I suspect that most of those on strike hadn't a clue what they were striking for. It'll be pay deals next.
> 
> Everyone will get to work during the ensuing strikes too.



fuck, you're one of those jobsworth arselickers who actually wants to go to work aren't you

when I worked in central london everyone loved a tube strike, was an excuse to roll in three hours late or not turn up at all


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2010)

smokedout said:


> fuck, you're one of those jobsworth arselickers who actually wants to go to work aren't you


 
You're giving me flashbacks to being back at school


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 22, 2010)

Why, were you teacher's pet, teuch?


----------



## smokedout (Oct 22, 2010)

takes teuchter's shatterproof ruler and snaps it


----------



## Oxpecker (Oct 23, 2010)

The firefighters are on strike tomorrow so perhaps teuchter will give us poor old tube workers a break and abuse them instead.

I don't think he's fussy about which workers he's going to denigrate.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2010)

I don't believe I've ever "abused" any tube workers.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 23, 2010)

I spoke to a woman who knew you on the march today, oxpecker. I got roped into carrying a unite banner as she almost blew away then she named people she knew from the rmt and I recognised yours from that article. Didn't catch her name though.


----------



## Oxpecker (Oct 25, 2010)

I thought it was a pretty good march given that it was organised at fairly short notice.


----------



## newbie (Oct 25, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Which is why the union has people handing out leaflets at major stations and the management have a scab squad pointing folk towards alternative travel options.


 
I was going to ask about them.  I guess if you're calling them 'scab squad' the question is answered. Is that the official union position?


----------



## Streathamite (Oct 25, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> I thought it was a pretty good march given that it was organised at fairly short notice.


yes, I thought it was OK too


----------



## grit (Oct 26, 2010)

smokedout said:


> who actually wants to go to work aren't you



I sure do, that money stuff is quite handy to have.


----------



## Oxpecker (Oct 26, 2010)

newbie said:


> I was going to ask about them.  I guess if you're calling them 'scab squad' the question is answered. Is that the official union position?



LUL have "trained" office workers to wear blue vests and act as emergency station cover; not surprisingly senior managers realised that if these office workers had so little to do they could volunteer to do someone else's work they're not exactly indispensable. Another 800 job losses have now been announced amongst these very grades. So much for loyalty 

The official union position is that they are indeed scabs - some of whom worked double shifts.


----------



## grit (Oct 26, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> The official union position is that they are indeed scabs - some of whom worked double shifts.


 
Whats the official union position of the members of the public that they assist?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2010)

Teuchter - is that you? What a fantastically relevant and not at all leading question.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2010)

opps, wrong strike thread


----------



## teuchter (Oct 26, 2010)

What is "R&F"?


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 26, 2010)

grit said:


> Whats the official union position of the members of the public that they assist?


 
The official position is that they're members of the public.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What is "R&F"?


 
Rank and file.


----------



## agricola (Oct 26, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> LUL have "trained" office workers to wear blue vests and act as emergency station cover; not surprisingly senior managers realised that if these office workers had so little to do they could volunteer to do someone else's work they're not exactly indispensable. Another 800 job losses have now been announced amongst these very grades. So much for loyalty
> 
> The official union position is that they are indeed scabs - some of whom worked double shifts.


 
You have to wonder what on earth the LUL management are up to - I mean, ffs if you are going to sack scabs then surely even they can see that you do so after you no longer need them to scab.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 26, 2010)

I don't think particular workers have been named so it will cause the arse lickers to lick a little harder in order to secure their positions. Big companies don't do loyalty though.


----------



## newbie (Oct 26, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> LUL have "trained" office workers to wear blue vests and act as emergency station cover; not surprisingly senior managers realised that if these office workers had so little to do they could volunteer to do someone else's work they're not exactly indispensable. Another 800 job losses have now been announced amongst these very grades. So much for loyalty
> 
> The official union position is that they are indeed scabs - some of whom worked double shifts.


 
thanks for that, I had no idea who they are, who they work for etc, so the background is interesting.  Don't suppose they'll get much in tyhe way of support if they try to fight their own redundancies.  idiots.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 26, 2010)

This evening's Evening Standard editorial claimed that the proposed job cuts would be made entirely through voluntary redundancies and retirement, and that no worker's pay and conditions would change. Is that simply untrue and if so can a complaint be made?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2010)

Here we go again...


----------



## teuchter (Oct 26, 2010)

Is it or isn't it true? If it's not, I hereby undertake to write to the press complaints commission.


----------



## Oxpecker (Oct 26, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Is it or isn't it true? If it's not, I hereby undertake to write to the press complaints commission.



I wrote a lengthy reply but pressed the wrong button  The ES position is true in parts and false in others.

This site may help explain

http://www.rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/


----------



## Refused as fuck (Oct 26, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Making an effort to get the general public to understand why the strike is taking place and how it works is one of the kind of things that might make them slightly less likely to do stuff like vote Conservative...


 
So is that why you voted Conservative, neutral teuchter?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 26, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> I wrote a lengthy reply but pressed the wrong button  The ES position is true in parts and false in others.
> 
> This site may help explain
> 
> http://www.rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/


 
I have looked through there. It is hard to find a definitive outline of what is being proposed and what is being opposed. There is the reference to these "800 operational job cuts" and there is talk about job cuts "compromising on safety". But I can't see any detail on exactly what the jobs are, and where, and how the cuts are proposed to be made. Or, specifically in what way they will compromise safety.

In this leaflet it says



> RMT has slammed as ‘savagery’ another huge tranche of up to 800 job cuts among ‘support staff’. London Underground has revealed that it intends to sack another 400 staff and to leave another 400 vacancies unfilled. This is on top of the 800 station staff already earmarked for the axe.



My understanding is that this is the "office" staff mentioned a few posts back, announced in addition to the 800 "station staff" which is what the recent strike was in relation to (is that right?).

When it says "earmarked for the axe" this doesn't really tell me how the cuts are to be made. It's sufficiently ambiguous that it's not incompatible with the ES claims.

I know you think I'm here with sinister motives and I know you also don't really care about public perception when it comes to these strikes. 

But I see frequent complaints here about the bias of the mainstream media and the distortion in the way things are reported. And actually I agree that happens. However, nobody can do anything about that if there isn't a definitive summary of what is actually being proposed. I would honestly be prepared to write to the ES and/or press complaints commission if I could be confident in saying that what they wrote in their editorial was untrue or misleading.

It's hardly any surprise that so many people don't really understand what strikes are about, either generally or specifically. The information they get is what they read in papers like the Evening Standard. The ES says that the strikes are being held despite the fact that there will be no compulsory redundancies and no change to existing pay and conditions, and that's about as much information as most people will read. I read that this evening and wondered if that was really true, but where do I go to find out? The RMT website doesn't really clarify anything.

I do understand that a decision to strike or not is independent of public opinion, and that it's the workers' call, and that they should have the right to do so regardless of what "public opinion" is. But I don't see how it's in their interests in the long term, to allow people to have misconceptions (or confusion) about why they are doing what they are doing. Why do people vote Conservative? Don't you think that trying to get the union case across to as many people as possible might be a sensible way to minimise the number of people who do?

Anyway I don't really know why I'm bothering to type this - we've kind of been over all this before.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 27, 2010)

teuchter said:


> This evening's Evening Standard editorial claimed that the proposed job cuts would be made entirely through voluntary redundancies and retirement, and that no worker's pay and conditions would change. Is that simply untrue and if so can a complaint be made?



They are trying to get rid of workers through 'natural wastage' including retirements, not filling vacancies and severance packages etc but that doesn't suddenly mean that it doesn't place a heavier workload on the remaining workforce; makes stations more hazardous environments for drivers and the public alike; amongst other stuff etc.

E2A: Pay will be an issue as Cameron has already announced a public sector pay freeze which means a real terms pay cut taking inflation and the rise of VAT into account. It remains to be seen if that will be in dispute or not. The ES is premature to mention that if it has. Will know at the end of the tax year when there's nothing on the table I guess.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 27, 2010)

TBH people who use the tube should be kicking up a fuck about the management's position. It's like going to a packed restaurant and having a steak prepared for you by three chefs and twelve waiters at your beck and call for fifteen pounds.

Next week your steak takes a little longer to arrive as there's only one chef and six waiters. The Restaurant owner says he cut the staff to give his customers better value for money - but the steak still cost you fifteen pounds...


----------



## teuchter (Oct 27, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> TBH people who use the tube should be kicking up a fuck about the management's position. It's like going to a packed restaurant and having a steak prepared for you by three chefs and twelve waiters at your beck and call for fifteen pounds.
> 
> Next week your steak takes a little longer to arrive as there's only one chef and six waiters. The Restaurant owner says he cut the staff to give his customers better value for money - but the steak still cost you fifteen pounds...


 
Hrm, maybe if it was a private company, but the analogy isn't entirely accurate because in that restaurant you wouldn't just be paying the £15, you'd be paying a bit of the twelve waiters' and six chefs' wages too.


As regards the stuff about it placing a heavier workload on the remaining staff after the "natural wastage" - that's a fair enough point but (if they are interested in getting passengers on side) the RMT could do with focussing on that rather than talking about axed jobs (because if you say stuff like that, and then it turns out no-one's actually going to be made compulsorily redundant, people think you're putting a spin on things and exaggerating them), and explaining how and why it will really affect safety. From the point of view of a sceptical passenger, it seems perfectly plausible that you need less station staff once everyone's using oyster cards etc. And the impression you get in most tube stations currently is that there are more staff than necessary - if there is a good argument for having a certain number of people there in case of emergencies, then make it clearly and straightforwardly.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 28, 2010)

Yes, of course you need less staff if they automate stations - until you have a problem with your oyster card at eleven o-clock at night and there's nobody there to assist you. 

The analogy was right. How can removing staff who assist the public be sold as 'better value' when their fares aren't being reduced to reflect it? If your fare remains the same or inevitably increases but there are less staff to respond to any problems you may have during your journey why aren't you kicking up a fuck about being mugged off in this way?

Blame the strikers and then get less value for your money. Have you not actually thought about any of it?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 28, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Yes, of course you need less staff if they automate stations - until you have a problem with your oyster card at eleven o-clock at night and there's nobody there to assist you.



Would that be the case, though? Will stations actually be unstaffed?



Citizen66 said:


> The analogy was right. How can removing staff who assist the public be sold as 'better value' when their fares aren't being reduced to reflect it?


 
It could be sold as "better value" in that the wage bill will be reduced.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 28, 2010)

Yes, some of the quieter stations could end up unstaffed. It could be sold as 'better value' but it isn't better value for those who pay to use the tube. And it will be the most disadvantaged in society that will be affected the most by having less people available to assist them.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 28, 2010)

Apology to Bob Crow in todays Sun: 

WWW.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3200253/Bob-Crow.html


----------



## Oxpecker (Oct 28, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Apology to Bob Crow in todays Sun:
> 
> WWW.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3200253/Bob-Crow.html



Just clicked on that thread - before I go to wash my hands just want to point out that The Sun forgot to mention that they're paying money into the RMT Widows and Orphans Fund by way of an apology.


----------



## grit (Oct 28, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> And it will be the most disadvantaged in society that will be affected the most by having less people available to assist them.


 
edit: I'll rephrase rather than being so aggressive. ... ah fuck it nvm.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 28, 2010)

If they are disabled in some way. For example.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 29, 2010)

grit said:


> edit: I'll rephrase rather than being so aggressive. ... ah fuck it nvm.


 
Go on then...


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 29, 2010)

teuchter said:


> If they are disabled in some way. For example.


 
Don't throw him a lifeline. I want to know what dipshit remark he made.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 31, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Go on then...


 
*drums fingers...*


----------



## grit (Oct 31, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> *drums fingers...*



I called you a dirty cunt, happy now?

The comment was along the lines that regardless of your financial status the cuts to the service would affect people in the same way. It also included a bit that your complaints just sound like the same knee jerk bollocks, but I'm sure you could have guessed that yourself.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 31, 2010)

grit said:


> I called you a dirty cunt, happy now?
> 
> The comment was along the lines that regardless of your financial status the cuts to the service would affect people in the same way.



That's not necessarily true though, is it? With greater means comes a greater ability to find an alternative service.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 31, 2010)

grit said:


> I called you a dirty cunt, happy now?
> 
> The comment was along the lines that regardless of your financial status the cuts to the service would affect people in the same way. It also included a bit that your complaints just sound like the same knee jerk bollocks, but I'm sure you could have guessed that yourself.


 
As teuchter rightly deduced and pointed out, by 'disadvantaged' I meant people who rely on help being at hand to assist them. People with conditions that already make the transport system difficult to use without removing that very assistance.


----------



## grit (Oct 31, 2010)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's not necessarily true though, is it? With greater means comes a greater ability to find an alternative service.


 
Well yes of I was a millionaire I could have Jeeves fire up the chopper. However for a large amount of the public they are in the same position.


----------



## Citizen66 (Oct 31, 2010)

grit said:


> Well yes of I was a millionaire I could have Jeeves fire up the chopper. However for a large amount of the public they are in the same position.


 
But who mentioned them? I said the most disadvantaged would be affected the most, something that made you get out of your pram. You made yourself look a bit of a tosser, frankly.


----------



## ymu (Oct 31, 2010)

grit said:


> Well yes of I was a millionaire I could have Jeeves fire up the chopper. However for a large amount of the public they are in the same position.


 
Not really. If you own a car and have enough spare dosh to pay for the parking/park in the outskirts and get a cab in, then it's a lot easier. And if you have a fairly autonomous office job you're more likely to be able to work from home.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 18, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Would that be the case, though? Will stations actually be unstaffed?



Appears so.



> The RMT have leaked a document  picked up today by BBC and the evening Standard ,in which  a senior  line upgrades manager Paul Killius Smith  admits that under the proposals to axe station staff jobs then stations will be unstaffed. Up until now Lul have always maintained that stations would be staffed at all times. We knew their claim to be untrue as there have been 500 occasions in the past 6 months when stations have been unstaffed even without the job cuts. The leaked document proves conclusively that LUL and indeed the mayor have been lying through their teeth in order to mislead the public. The dangers of unstaffed stations are not just applicable to the public but also our drivers, engineering staff and indeed anyone who may need to be evacuated whilst working in a station area. It goes without saying that Vandals and perhaps those with even more sinister motives will be encouraged by the prospect of having no staff  on duty to deter them. It seems that even the press who are usually only too willing to spin TFL/LUL lies are now finally waking up to the fact that people will be put in unnecessary danger by LUL’S reckless de-staffing proposals.
> 
> Many thanks
> 
> ...





> *Tube users could be left in dark at unstaffed stations, says memo*
> 
> A Tube boss confirmed in a leaked memo that stations are being "left unstaffed from time to time".
> 
> ...


----------



## teuchter (Nov 18, 2010)

It seems the message is that some small, above-ground stations may be temporarily unstaffed more frequently than is already the case.

A bit like most regular overground rail stations, then (many of which aren't staffed at all). I know that doesn't necessarily make it a good thing, but just to keep things in perspective, like.


----------



## Streathamite (Nov 18, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> As teuchter rightly deduced and pointed out, by 'disadvantaged' I meant people who rely on help being at hand to assist them. People with conditions that already make the transport system difficult to use without removing that very assistance.


Having spent most of the second half of this year on crutches, I would like to second this, emphatically. We NEED fully staffed stations, especially the ones like my local one, which has neither lifts nor escalator


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 18, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> Having spent most of the second half of this year on crutches, I would like to second this, emphatically. We NEED fully staffed stations, especially the ones like my local one, which has neither lifts nor escalator


 
It had an effect on me earlier this year. I get free travel but my staff pass borked (must learn not to keep it in my back pocket where it warps it ). No bother, I could just flash it at the barriers and be let through by a member of staff... except on the occasions that there weren't any there of course.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 18, 2010)

teuchter said:


> It seems the message is that some small, above-ground stations may be temporarily unstaffed more frequently than is already the case.
> 
> A bit like most regular overground rail stations, then (many of which aren't staffed at all). I know that doesn't necessarily make it a good thing, but just to keep things in perspective, like.


 
Well of course it isn't terrible. Until there's some kind of disaster then, of course, it will be.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 18, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> Well of course it isn't terrible. Until there's some kind of disaster then, of course, it will be.


 
What kind of disaster? From a safety point of view I don't really see any difference from a regular unstaffed rail station, of which, like I say, there are many already.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 18, 2010)

Well, having trained staff on hand.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 18, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What kind of disaster? From a safety point of view I don't really see any difference from a regular unstaffed rail station, of which, like I say, there are many already.


 
I'm not talking about small pissy unstaffed stations. They're reducing staff across the network. Look what happened with Jarvis when they started reducing staff and cutting corners. You might think I'm doom mongering but disasters happen. 7/7, kings cross etc and Hatfield and Potters Bar on the mainline.


----------



## Streathamite (Nov 18, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> It had an effect on me earlier this year. I get free travel but my staff pass borked (must learn not to keep it in my back pocket where it warps it ). No bother, I could just flash it at the barriers and be let through by a member of staff... except on the occasions that there weren't any there of course.


very good point; your ticketing technology is bloody unreliable, to say the least, and on the frequent occasions when someone's Oyster fails, the human touch is vital. I'd imagine your staff pass is just as technically unreliable?


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 18, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> very good point; your ticketing technology is bloody unreliable, to say the least, and on the frequent occasions when someone's Oyster fails, the human touch is vital. I'd imagine your staff pass is just as technically unreliable?


 
Well it's the second time mine has gone yeah and I know others it has happened to. Presumably it will happen to everyone elses oyster cards at some time or another which will be a royal pain in the arse for them if there isn't a ticket office there to replace it for them (the machines only top them up, not administer the actual cards). Local newsagents close to the station won't replace it as they don't have the wherewithall to ascertain that it's legit; they will only sell them another for three quid. Ker-ching kerr-ching.


----------



## Oxpecker (Nov 18, 2010)

LUL have also announced their intention to lose almost 50% of their "safety directorate"

This includes the managers employed to inspect the track and surrounding areas to ensure that we all travel safely.

Don't sound like backroom staff to me...


----------



## teuchter (Nov 19, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> I'm not talking about small pissy unstaffed stations. They're reducing staff across the network. Look what happened with Jarvis when they started reducing staff and cutting corners. You might think I'm doom mongering but disasters happen. 7/7, kings cross etc and Hatfield and Potters Bar on the mainline.


 
The memo was referring to the small stations. It was saying there will be an increased likelihood of small overground stations being temporarily unstaffed. OK if staffing levels are being reduced across the network, maybe there are safety implications, but let's be specific about what those are if so. This is what always seems to happen - some information comes to light, in this case about small overground stations being unstaffed from time to time, and then it is spun into a whole load of stuff about 7/7 or whatever. It's exactly why I'm sceptical each time the RMT makes some announcement about passengers' lives being endangered and so on...it's the boy who cried wolf.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 19, 2010)

The boy who cried wolf? 

They're axing 800 station staff posts, how can that not have a detrimental effect? Were they paid to spend all day scratching their bums or something? The tube isn't a charity. People get employed when they're needed.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 19, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> LUL have also announced their intention to lose almost 50% of their "safety directorate"
> 
> This includes the managers employed to inspect the track and surrounding areas to ensure that we all travel safely.
> 
> Don't sound like backroom staff to me...


 
So they've learnt nothing from Potters Bar.

The unions clearly weren't crying wolf when they warned about cutting maintenance and contracting it all out back then.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 19, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> So they've learnt nothing from Potters Bar.
> 
> The unions clearly weren't crying wolf when they warned about cutting maintenance and contracting it all out back then.


 
What should they have learnt? The reality is that rail safety did not worsen post-privatisation. In fact if I remember the numbers correctly, the downward trend in accidents per year actually increased.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 19, 2010)

teuchter said:


> What should they have learnt? The reality is that rail safety did not worsen post-privatisation. In fact if I remember the numbers correctly, the downward trend in accidents per year actually increased.


 
So Hatfield and Potters Bar didn't happen. Both have been acknowledged to be as a result of privatisation BTW and even led to Railtrack being part nationalised again. The railway used to have men walking the track that would have picked up the faults that led to Potters Bar but of course were cut to increase profits.


----------



## Streathamite (Nov 19, 2010)

teuchter said:


> The memo was referring to the small stations. It was saying there will be an increased likelihood of small overground stations being temporarily unstaffed. OK if staffing levels are being reduced across the network, maybe there are safety implications, but let's be specific about what those are if so. This is what always seems to happen - some information comes to light, in this case about small overground stations being unstaffed from time to time, and then it is spun into a whole load of stuff about 7/7 or whatever. It's exactly why I'm sceptical each time the RMT makes some announcement about passengers' lives being endangered and so on...it's the boy who cried wolf.


Has the contrary ever occurred to you - that this is TfL cutting major corners and then trying to make a molehill out of a risk mountain? To me, their panicked response to the leak sounded much like "ulp! nothing to see here - move on - move on"> And why be more sceptical of RMT than TfL, since the latter have by far the less glowing reputation?


----------



## Streathamite (Nov 19, 2010)

Oxpecker said:


> LUL have also announced their intention to lose almost 50% of their "safety directorate"
> 
> This includes the managers employed to inspect the track and surrounding areas to ensure that we all travel safely.
> 
> Don't sound like backroom staff to me...


That is fucking SCARY!


----------



## teuchter (Nov 19, 2010)

Citizen66 said:


> So Hatfield and Potters Bar didn't happen. Both have been acknowledged to be as a result of privatisation BTW and even led to Railtrack being part nationalised again. The railway used to have men walking the track that would have picked up the faults that led to Potters Bar but of course were cut to increase profits.


 
Hatfield and Potters Bar happened, of course, and I acknowledge that the causes of these two accidents were tied up with the way the railways had been reorganised post-privatisation. It's not really true to say it was due to a lack of people walking the track: in both instances the defects that led to the derailments had been picked up by inspection teams - the failure was in the systems for making sure that something was done about defects that are reported.

I've never been in favour of rail privatisation (or at least, the manner in which it was privatised) and those two accidents do illustrate what can happen if you fragment the responsibility for maintenance. But they didn't have anything to do with reducing numbers of station staff. Talking about Potters Bar or Hatfield is a bit of a jump from what is being proposed in the case of the LUL station staff cuts.

If there are other staff cuts being made then yes, of course they may be of concern from a safety point of view. I'd like to hear more detail on the cuts to the "safety directorate" that oxpecker has mentioned.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 19, 2010)

Streathamite said:


> Has the contrary ever occurred to you - that this is TfL cutting major corners and then trying to make a molehill out of a risk mountain? To me, their panicked response to the leak sounded much like "ulp! nothing to see here - move on - move on"> And why be more sceptical of RMT than TfL, since the latter have by far the less glowing reputation?


 
I'm sceptical of them both.

I expect the truth lies somewhere in the middle of what each side is saying.


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 19, 2010)

teuchter said:


> Hatfield and Potters Bar happened, of course, and I acknowledge that the causes of these two accidents were tied up with the way the railways had been reorganised post-privatisation. It's not really true to say it was due to a lack of people walking the track: in both instances the defects that led to the derailments had been picked up by inspection teams - the failure was in the systems for making sure that something was done about defects that are reported.



And what do you think these 'systems' actually are if not staff employed in particular roles and the procedure of them carrying out their duties? You're making it sound like its some abstract element that was to blame.


----------



## Streathamite (Nov 19, 2010)

teuchter said:


> I expect the truth lies somewhere in the middle of what each side is saying.


I certainly don't. The logic of privatisation - in short, it means everything is driven by management greed and govt tightness, so that cutting corners is the only game in town - means that there is virtually nothing TfL won't at least try, and their management have zero regard for both us passengers and their staff.Fontline public sector staff have always struck me as, at least, having some basic, common decency about passenger welfare - and a TU IS its' members.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 19, 2010)

Have we had this leak which exposes TFL as being utter liars about plans for unmanned stations via job cuts mentioned yet?


----------



## Citizen66 (Nov 19, 2010)

Yeah, the Standard and BBC reported on it too.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 6, 2011)

Here's an update on the lies about plans for un-staffed stations that apparently don't exist:



> Tube union RMT today demanded an immediate halt to the London Underground (LU) cuts programme as new documents released the union show that 30.5% of stations have been scheduled to be unstaffed during operational hours – a direct contradiction of the speech given by Mayor Boris Johnson at the Tory Party conference in October last year where he said that staffing cuts would leave “no station unstaffed at any time.”
> 
> RMT research into the latest LU operational plans shows that of 249 LU managed stations 76 (30.5%) are scheduled to be unstaffed in the future for “part of the traffic day” which means during passenger hours.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2011)

*The RMT today slammed underground bosses as it emerged cash that has been saved through £12 million of recent cuts is to be spent on hotels, drinks, flowers, lunches and management consultants.*



> In a circular to top tube bosses (attached) Boris Johnson’s Transport Commisioner, Peter Hendy, tells managers that they have now got a green light from the top to spend money on a wide range of luxuries just at the time that the union has exposed plans to leave a third of tube stations unstaffed and just at the point that station security alerts have been upgraded to severe.



Link


----------



## hipipol (Jan 10, 2011)

Sadly both groups seem to consist of lying self interested bags of shite

It'll be those who have to ride inside the cattle trucks that get fucked over

A plague on both houses


----------



## Chz (Jan 12, 2011)

I don't really see the point of the PR wars they engage in, given that the public hates both fairly equally. Can't they just sort it out amongst themselves?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

hipipol said:


> Sadly both groups seem to consist of lying self interested bags of shite
> 
> It'll be those who have to ride inside the cattle trucks that get fucked over
> 
> A plague on both houses


 
Insightful commentary as ever.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> *The RMT today slammed underground bosses as it emerged cash that has been saved through £12 million of recent cuts is to be spent on hotels, drinks, flowers, lunches and management consultants.*
> 
> 
> 
> Link


 
Where's this circular 'attached'? I can't see it on the RMT website.

Good tabloid-style vaguery there with the implication that £12m is going to be spent on flowers and drinks etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

teuchter said:


> Where's this circular 'attached'? I can't see it on the RMT website.
> 
> Good tabloid-style vaguery there with the implication that £12m is going to be spent on flowers and drinks etc.


 
That's because it's not attached. If it specifically authorises expenditure on those items why do you think that is?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 12, 2011)

The BBC have also been caught out fibbing by reporting that there'll be no strike action in january. The truth is that the RMT executive are still discussing strategy and nothing has been announced yet.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> That's because it's not attached. If it specifically authorises expenditure on those items why do you think that is?


 
Why is it not attached if it says it is?

The headline is written in such a way that you get the impression that they have been authorised to spend 12m on the items listed. If we could see this circular we could see what it actually authorises and whether the 12m figure has any relevance to it. None of the things on the list seem unreasonable things to spend on; it totally depends how much is being spent on what. The press release doesn't actually contain any significant information whatsoever. It just provides a tabloid-friendly headline. I'm surprised you reposted such nonsense really.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

teuchter said:


> Why is it not attached if it says it is?
> 
> The headline is written in such a way that you get the impression that they have been authorised to spend 12m on the items listed. If we could see this circular we could see what it actually authorises and whether the 12m figure has any relevance to it. None of the things on the list seem unreasonable things to spend on; it totally depends how much is being spent on what. The press release doesn't actually contain any significant information whatsoever. It just provides a tabloid-friendly headline. I'm surprised you reposted such nonsense really.



I don't know. Maybe someone made a mistake? What do you think?  The headline says that it authorises things it's authorised.

It contains information about what things bosses are now authorised to spend money on whilst insisting on cuts elsewhere. For someone as neutral as you i can see why this might not matter - for others, i think they might find it interesting and useful.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2011)

What did you find ineresting and useful about it? Did you find it interesting and useful to know that they are authorised to spend on things they are authorised to spend on? Did it tell you anything more than that they are authorised to spend on things they are authorised to spend on?

Perhaps you learnt other stuff like that Peter Hendy is Peter Hendy, or that the circular was a circular.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

teuchter said:


> What did you find ineresting and useful about it? Did you find it interesting and useful to know that they are authorised to spend on things they are authorised to spend on? Did it tell you anything more than that they are authorised to spend on things they are authorised to spend on?
> 
> Perhaps you learnt other stuff like that Peter Hendy is Peter Hendy, or that the circular was a circular.



Yes, because i didn't realise that the bosses were now authorised to spend money on these things whilst demanding cuts elsewhere.

Maybe a comment could be wheedled out of you?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 12, 2011)

Or let's make cuts to save 16 million annually while we waste 12 million on a jolly good knees up for the managers.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, because i didn't realise that the bosses were now authorised to spend money on these things whilst demanding cuts elsewhere.
> 
> Maybe a comment could be wheedled out of you?


 
Who was previously authorised to spend money on these things? Or is this the first time that LU have ever spent any money on any of these things?

My comment is that without including the circular itself it's a contentless and sensationalist press release.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

Are you accusing the RMT of lying? (Or Peter Hendy?) Why haven't they been challenged then? Even without the circular it's useful and interesting -  thanks.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Or let's make cuts to save 16 million annually while we waste 12 million on a jolly good knees up for the managers.


 
so this is what has happened - they have actually spent 12m on a knees up for the managers?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

That's your fantasy.

Have you not made up worries about the info on the RMT site or something to be cracking on with?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 12, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Are you accusing the RMT of lying? (Or Peter Hendy?) Why haven't they been challenged then? Even without the circular it's useful and interesting -  thanks.


 
No, how could a press release containing essentially no information be accused of lying?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 12, 2011)

teuchter said:


> No, how could a press release containing essentially no information be accused of lying?


 
It contained plenty of info. Try again.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 13, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> It contained plenty of info. Try again.



Aye seek an ye shall find, eh?
Everybody standing about pointing fingers and saying 'they do this, they do that' does not add up to dialogue nor does it shed any light on whats really happening other than to confrim that both sides distrust, dislike and well 'bend' the truth in order to hurt the other

ETA - at no point does the RMT press release claim that £12m is being spent on flowers, hotels, lunches etc, it hints at that but in fact makes no claim for the size of the expenditure for the ents and accom spend. It also bundles 'management consultants' fees - those guys charge an arm and fucking leg a minute, so if £12m is the the budget, they might have enough change for a single Tesco meal deal after the MCs have ravaged it

TFLs budget for last year was £9.2 BILLION so its a very small part of that

I agree with the RMTs posiition on safety, especially the unmanning of stations - all those fucking recorded meassages about CCTV for my safety are just bollocks - a camera does not call the cops nor does in intervene.

However the sensationalist style of 'look at them look theyr'e spending millions of flowers' just undermines the case


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 13, 2011)

hipipol said:


> Aye seek an ye shall find, eh?
> Everybody standing about pointing fingers and saying 'they do this, they do that' does not add up to dialogue nor does it shed any light on whats really happening other than to confrim that both sides distrust, dislike and well 'bend' the truth in order to hurt the other



How are the RMT bending the truth when nobody has accused them of lying?

Logic fail.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 13, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> How are the RMT bending the truth when nobody has accused them of lying?
> 
> Logic fail.



If you read the explanation I added to the psot, you'll see what I mean


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 13, 2011)

hipipol said:


> Aye seek an ye shall find, eh?
> Everybody standing about pointing fingers and saying 'they do this, they do that' does not add up to dialogue nor does it shed any light on whats really happening other than to confrim that both sides distrust, dislike and well 'bend' the truth in order to hurt the other
> 
> ETA - at no point does the RMT press release claim that £12m is being spent on flowers, hotels, lunches etc, it hints at that but in fact makes no claim for the size of the expenditure for the ents and accom spend. It also bundles 'management consultants' fees - those guys charge an arm and fucking leg a minute, so if £12m is the the budget, they might have enough change for a single Tesco meal deal after the MCs have ravaged it
> ...


 
What a load of fucking waffle. Your time would be better spent thinking.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 13, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> What a load of fucking waffle. Your time would be better spent thinking.



Entirely at variance with your short sharp insult style I agree but deductive reasoning is like that


----------



## teuchter (Jan 13, 2011)

The press release is (deliberately I suspect) is written in such a way that a quick reading of it gives the impression that 12m of 'cuts' (implication - jobs cuts or cuts that affect passengers) money is being spent on luxuries for LU management.

As far as I can work out from news reports the reality is that the 12m represents savings made since TfL imposed stricter controls on what LU managers could authorise in the way of spending for the various items mentioned (presumably plus other stuff not mentioned in the RMT release because it doesn't sound shocking enough). What has happened now is that the decision making on spending on these items has been delegated back to less senior levels of management.

The RMT press release doesn't lie, it's just written in a slightly misleading way.


----------



## g force (Jan 14, 2011)

So more strikes on Northern and Bakerloo - and of the 192 NL staff, allegedly only 82 took part with 38 voting to strike. If that's true (caveat being a big 'if') it's taking the piss.


----------



## Chz (Jan 14, 2011)

The Northern Line's run fairly well with a reduced capacity the past couple of strikes. There's definitely a minority of drivers there who are behind it, but their union is there to support them. It may seem like RMT insanity, but from what I've heard the NL drivers that turn up (the majority) don't get too much stick over it. There's certainly something weird going on down in Mordor, er Morden...

The ones in the news now are from ASLEF - maybe Crow's sick of being the pantomime bad guy on telly all the time?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 18, 2011)

g force said:


> So more strikes on Northern and Bakerloo - and of the 192 NL staff, allegedly only 82 took part with 38 voting to strike. If that's true (caveat being a big 'if') it's taking the piss.


 
Of 192 staff 82 voted? That's over 40% turnout, how is that 'taking the piss'? Have you checked out how many votes Cameron got compared to who turned out and the size of the electorate and the havoc he can wreak compared to a few hundred workers on the northern line?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 18, 2011)

Chz said:


> The Northern Line's run fairly well with a reduced capacity the past couple of strikes. There's definitely a minority of drivers there who are behind it, but their union is there to support them. It may seem like RMT insanity, but from what I've heard the NL drivers that turn up (the majority) don't get too much stick over it. There's certainly something weird going on down in Mordor, er Morden...
> 
> The ones in the news now are from ASLEF - maybe Crow's sick of being the pantomime bad guy on telly all the time?



ASLEF is the every driver for himself and fuck everyone else union. Drivers have the ultimate power and a large proportion want it for themselves rather than collectively. Fuck ASLEF and big up to the RMT drivers who will miss a shift for solidarity with station staff.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

I think he's saying that when under 50% vote in favour on a turnout of 40% it's taking the piss. Which it is. the first half of that sentence is critical.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

No it's not - it's perfectly valid and the same rules that apply to elected politicians. 

Make an argument as to why you think it is 'taking the piss'. Chz.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

I'm not aware of what RMT/ASLEF's internal rules on balloting are. And in this case, it's irrelevant - no-one is arguing whether or not the decision is a legal, binding or not. However, when there are only 2 choices available and less than a majority vote for it, on a turnout that's less than 50%, the public is perfectly entitled to think they're taking the piss. "It's not democratic!", the average person would think. They'd be right, but the unions have never pretended to be so.

Trying to say it's _anything whatsoever_ like a general election is either a complete strawman or demonstrates a profound ignorance of the Westminster system versus a simple referendum.

For what it's worth, it *is* possible to 100% support their right to strike while still thinking they're being silly about it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Wow, you've elected yourself the voice of the people, of the average person - what was the turnout in your rigged ballot? 100%? Who was allowed to vote? No one average that disagrees with you presumably? 

Tell us _why_ it's different from a general election and so should be conducted under different rules. 

What was the ballot question on this strike vote btw - what were the 'two choices'? (A majority did vote for it btw - all legal and stuff)


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

Then explain, rather than spouting off about how we're all ignorant? My comments are based on the information provided in this thread and those available from the more widely consumed media outlets. I'm perfectly prepared to change my opinion, given some new information. Instead of providing such information, you merely attack people for posting their opinions.

I'll repeat for a second time that at no point did I question the legality or bindingness of the vote. Organizations (and governments) are entitled to their own rules.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

wtf? Are you mental? Where the hell did i say you/we (nice attempt at the we there - too obvious though) are all ignorant? You've got nothing have you? You post a shit opinion, it gets challenged and you revert to whining _but it's my opinion_ rather than backing up the points you made. I'm perfectly at liberty to to attack your opinion on a discussion forum. You holding those opinions doesn't give them or you some divine right or something. _Defend_ your points ffs. Explain _why_ this result is 'taking the piss'. Explain _why_ union ballots should be run on different grounds than other elections. Explain _how_ and _why_ you speak for the average person. Explain _what_ the 2 choices on the ballot paper were.

What information are you after? You haven't asked for any.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

Perhaps where voter turnout isn't sufficient to call strike action the RMT and TESSA should be allowed to form a coalition and go on strike any way.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

1 - I have explained why it's taking the piss. You just feel it isn't.
2 - I never said that union ballots should be run differently to a parliamentary election. Merely that they aren't, as referenda and elections are entirely different beasts. In an election, someone has to win; in a referendum it's normally the case that if no option receives over 50% (in many cases, 67%) support then nothing changes.
3 - The information I'm after is exactly what you've said in your last point - I don't know the ballot options, they haven't been reported. If you could share them, it would shed some light on the subject.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

What was the turnout for the London Mayor elections and how many of those votes did Boris get btw?


----------



## laptop (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> 1 - I have explained why it's taking the piss. You just feel it isn't.


 
I see nothing other than you re-stating that you feel it's taking the piss.

I feel you are taking the piss.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> 1 - I have explained why it's taking the piss. You just feel it isn't.
> 2 - I never said that union ballots should be run differently to a parliamentary election. Merely that they aren't, as referenda and elections are entirely different beasts. In an election, someone has to win; in a referendum it's normally the case that if no option receives over 50% (in many cases, 67%) support then nothing changes.
> 3 - The information I'm after is exactly what you've said in your last point - I don't know the ballot options, they haven't been reported. If you could share them, it would shed some light on the subject.



1. you haven't said why you think it's taking the piss. You've just said it is.

2+3. ballots tend not be a choice of option 1 or 2 - they tend to be votes on support for action 'up to and including' so you may have  options of a) no action b) forms of action such as work-to-rule c) action short of a strike d) action up to and including strikes. It's not - or rarely - a referendum type vote, so similarity with those sort of votes and arguments associated with turnout invalidating goes out the window.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> 1. you haven't said why you think it's taking the piss. You've just said it is.



Allow me to quote myself:


> However, when there are only 2 choices available and less than a majority vote for it, on a turnout that's less than 50%, the public is perfectly entitled to think they're taking the piss. "It's not democratic!", the average person would think.



That was based on what was reported here and in the press about the ballot. So far, all you've said is that ballots "tend not to" be like that, without actually substantiating anything. And yes, it is like a referendum because there is no post to fill - in a sane system the default should be to do nothing if there is not majority support for any one action. Doing it any other way is an embarrassment to the democratic process (this is not to say it doesn't happen elsewhere). The only reason elections are run differently is because there *has* to be a winner.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Ahh!! You've done it again! You, despite what you think, haven't said why (whilst holding your own one man ballot). Say why. Go on.

Post to fill? That's pretty desperate. That's your argument as to why union ballots should not be held under the same rules as other elections? Want to say _why_ this changes anything?

What will it take to make you say _why_ on any of your points?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> Allow me to quote myself:
> 
> 
> That was based on what was reported here and in the press about the ballot. So far, all you've said is that ballots "tend not to" be like that, without actually substantiating anything. And yes, it is like a referendum because there is no post to fill - in a sane system the default should be to do nothing if there is not majority support for any one action. Doing it any other way is an embarrassment to the democratic process (this is not to say it doesn't happen elsewhere). The only reason elections are run differently is because there *has* to be a winner.



Im not sure why you think they're undemocratic. It was the Tories after all who brought in the current rules on how and when a strike can be called. And now they want to shift the goal posts again. People can vote for a strike, vote for action short of a strike or vote against any action at all. They can also sit on their arse and do none of the above but that doesn't count as a no vote. There's apathy in the electorate too. Should we announce that David Cameron isn't actually prime minister and Boris Johnson isn't Mayor because not enough people could be arsed to vote? Or do we just count the votes we do have? Think carefully as you can't have it both ways.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

Uhm, if you'll see there, I'm arguing quite the opposite - that union ballots should be the same as any other referendum. They're of course private organizations that are free to do as they please, but the fact that they don't follow the same rules as others is why it's taking the piss.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Im not sure why you think they're undemocratic. It was the Tories after all who brought in the current rules on how and when a strike can be called. And now they want to shift the goal posts again. People can vote for a strike, vote for action short of a strike or vote against any action at all. They can also sit on their arse and do none of the above but that doesn't count as a no vote. There's apathy in the electorate too. Should we announce that David Cameron isn't actually prime minister and Boris Johnson isn't Mayor because not enough people could be arsed to vote? Or do we just count the votes we do have? Think carefully as you can't have it both ways.


I'm not arguing one bit about turnout, and yes the government's rules on what is and isn't a legal strike (see that whole BA thing) is utter bollocks. But that's not what I'm on about.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> I'm not arguing one bit about turnout, and yes the government's rules on what is and isn't a legal strike (see that whole BA thing) is utter bollocks. But that's not what I'm on about.



You're all over the place i know that much.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> Uhm, if you'll see there, I'm arguing quite the opposite - that union ballots should be the same as any other referendum. They're of course private organizations that are free to do as they please, but the fact that they don't follow the same rules as others is why it's taking the piss.


 
The opposite of what? The case that referendums - those with a 2 option vote - is the model that should be followed has been dealt with. Unions ballots aren't 2 options ballots. And you're yet to say say why you think such ballots should be subject to such rules. Please, for the love of god, do so.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> I'm not arguing one bit about turnout, and yes the government's rules on what is and isn't a legal strike (see that whole BA thing) is utter bollocks. But that's not what I'm on about.


 
Yes you are! wtf?


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> You're all over the place i know that much.


 No, I just don't feel the same way you do about things. My bizarre logic is at least internally consistent.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Yes you are! wtf?


 Where? Where did I say that low turnout is what invalidates it? I've focused entirely on the actual votes cast.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> Where? Where did I say that low turnout is what invalidates it? I've focused entirely on the actual votes cast.


 
Well wtf are you on about then when you mention the majorities vote on a 40% turnout? Why mention turnout at all? if you're simply on about the vote then fine - let's be clear here before we go any further.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

Chz said:


> No, I just don't feel the same way you do about things. My bizarre logic is at least internally consistent.



As long as you're comfortable with being wrong about everything.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

teuchter said:


> Anyway, back to the point of whether any stations will actually be left unstaffed as seems to be being implied by quite a lot of people. *The RMT are saying it's "all about safety" but I don't think many people believe that* - it's about people losing their jobs.






			
				Evening Standard said:
			
		

> A Tube passenger was attacked and beaten up on a platform at an unstaffed station, it was revealed today.
> 
> The 32-year-old man was kicked and punched by a gang on a Northern Line train and the fight spilled out on to the platform at West Finchley.
> 
> ...



My emphasis.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jan 19, 2011)

Emphasis in bold is historically pro-union, and thus can be discounted. That article contains no useful information.


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 19, 2011)

teuchter said:


> This is what always seems to happen - some information comes to light, in this case about small overground stations being unstaffed from time to time, and then it is spun into a whole load of stuff about 7/7 or whatever. *It's exactly why I'm sceptical each time the RMT makes some announcement about passengers' lives being endangered and so on...it's the boy who cried wolf.*



Would you like fries and salad to go with your words there?


----------



## Refused as fuck (Jan 19, 2011)

There is no useful information in that quote.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> As long as you're comfortable with being wrong about everything.


 It's a happy, fluffy world that I live in. I think it's because my firstborn is still not quite 4 months old and sleep is something that other people get.


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2011)

butchersapron said:


> Well wtf are you on about then when you mention the majorities vote on a 40% turnout? Why mention turnout at all? if you're simply on about the vote then fine - let's be clear here before we go any further.


 You're right. I mention it only because I hear a lot of griping about it. But if I'm to be fair and only complain about that which concerns me, it is irrelevant. I do believe that it you can't be arsed to vote then your opinion doesn't count.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 20, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> Would you like fries and salad to go with your words there?


 
Why do you expect this one incident would change what I said in those words? Do you think that this news item has suddenly revealed to me that fights sometimes break out on underground trains?

We still haven't (as far as I'm aware) actually seen any of these leaked documents that allegedly reveal that a third of stations will be left unstaffed - I'm sorry but I'm not prepared to simply take the RMT on trust and assume that no spin has been added to any of their revelations. I'm sceptical about what TfL say too - not that you will believe that - and like I said before I imagine the truth lies somewhere in between what the two sides say.

Setting aside the fact that it's kind of stupid to base an argument around one single incident - I don't even see what would have happened differently had there been a member of staff at the station. As mentioned in the bit you conveniently didn't include in your quote, the police were called by the driver of the train as soon as they got to the station. Or do you expect station staff to become physically involved in a fight to try and stop it?


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 20, 2011)

teuchter said:


> Why do you expect this one incident would change what I said in those words? Do you think that this news item has suddenly revealed to me that fights sometimes break out on underground trains?



Are people safer in staffed stations than unstaffed ones, y/n?



> We still haven't (as far as I'm aware) actually seen any of these leaked documents that allegedly reveal that a third of stations will be left unstaffed - I'm sorry but I'm not prepared to simply take the RMT on trust and assume that no spin has been added to any of their revelations. I'm sceptical about what TfL say too - not that you will believe that - and like I said before I imagine the truth lies somewhere in between what the two sides say.



If you read the article carefully you'll see that the standard admit having seen the leaked document. Maybe they, as a right wing publication, are lying on behalf of the union? I have no idea why they haven't published the document. Why don't you ask them to send you a copy?



> Setting aside the fact that it's kind of stupid to base an argument around one single incident - I don't even see what would have happened differently had there been a member of staff at the station. As mentioned in the bit you conveniently didn't include in your quote, the police were called by the driver of the train as soon as they got to the station. Or do you expect station staff to become physically involved in a fight to try and stop it?



Because staff at a station would have more time available to deal with the situation than a driver; whose job it is to drive the bloody train and speak primarily with the line controllers, not piss around sorting out Friday night shenanigans.

They will also have had training in dealing with the public and situations regarding all eventualities. Drivers just drive trains.


----------



## Chz (Jan 21, 2011)

> Drivers just drive trains.


That's not what we're told every time they justify their salaries!

Edit:
Yes, I'm just being a wise-ass. No, I don't expect drivers to take over from station staff. However it is true that drivers are expected to do a lot more than drive the trains when circumstances dictate.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 21, 2011)

As chz says I thought drivers were there to deal with emergencies and that's why we don't have driverless trains.

Anyway, are staffed stations safer than unstaffed ones? I'm sure they feel safer, and I reckon they probably are a bit safer. 

Staffed bus stops would be safer than unstaffed ones. 

Hundreds of rail stations around the country are unstaffed and have been for some time.

I don't think subsurface stations should ever be unstaffed. Above ground stations, well it's nice if they are staffed but I'm not sure the cost of employing two people full time can really be justified if they aren't needed to sell tickets. I feel fairly happy with the idea that they are staffed by one person and that occasionally if that person doesn't show up for work they might be unstaffed for a period of time. That seems to be essentially what's proposed. I consider the safety impact of that would be marginal. Of course that is just my unexpert opinion. If you can tell me that x number of people per year are injured/killed at unstaffed above surface tube stations in incidents which could have been prevented by a member of staff being present, and relate that to the extra cost of providing that staffing level, then I'd possibly change my mind.

Anyway, the boy who cried wolf comment as far as I recall was in response to the RMT going on about 7/7 etc. That's kind of different from talking about the implications of above-ground stations occasionally being without a member of staff to try and sort out drunken fights etc.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 21, 2011)

About ten years ago in Liverpool street I saw and older tube employee getting pushed around by a pissed up banker because said bankedr was having probs with then new fangled ticket machines.
There were two very long queues of people at the ticket windows, not one of them playing a blind bit of notice.
So being daft I said to the guy, 'leave him alone mate, it says on the machine it hasn't got any change' at which pointed 'whats that your business you cunt? You want some too?' while holding the old bloke by his jacket. 'Leave him alone@ say I, he did, then tried to punch me in the face, I dodged it and gripped him by the tie. Thius tangled, I dragged him away from the ticket guy, getting hits on the head. Not ONE fucker in the queues helped, but two LT guys vaulted the barrier and came to the rescue.
Impossible if there is only one person on the station by the way
Result, guy gets done for assault, fined, bound over etc
Its rare the public will help
It may not happen often but usually the station workers are ready for this sort of shit
Unmanned stations will result in soemones death
The RMT is ENTIRELY correct on this


----------



## Blagsta (Jan 21, 2011)

careful now!


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 21, 2011)

Chz said:


> That's not what we're told every time they justify their salaries!
> 
> Edit:
> Yes, I'm just being a wise-ass. No, I don't expect drivers to take over from station staff. However it is true that drivers are expected to do a lot more than drive the trains when circumstances dictate.


 
They get paid what they get paid because they work mental shift patterns, not because they're expected to deal with the public. When it comes to the public they will radio concerns to the next station for staff to deal with - something they are unable to do if there's none on duty.


----------



## hipipol (Jan 21, 2011)

Blagsta said:


> careful now!



Happy New Year Sarky!!!!!!

You know me, of confused idealogical bent etc.........


----------



## Blagsta (Jan 21, 2011)

confused and bent, yeah, that's you 

x


----------



## Citizen66 (Jan 21, 2011)

Scratch a hippy...


----------



## Chz (Jan 24, 2011)

Citizen66 said:


> They get paid what they get paid because they work mental shift patterns, not because they're expected to deal with the public. When it comes to the public they will radio concerns to the next station for staff to deal with - something they are unable to do if there's none on duty.


No, it's because they're essential safety personnel. They're the only ones on-site trained to deal with emergencies on the train. Most jobs with mental shift patterns pay peanuts. So they are very much expected to deal with the public, but only in an emergency situation. If they didn't perform such a crucial safety role, they'd have replaced the lot with computers ages ago. (But that's another, entirely different sort of commuting nightmare - I know other countries have done it well, but here?)


----------

