Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2014 10:46:33 GMT
I understand there is yet another strike on the underground today. No doubt there will be banner headlines as a result. It is a long way away from me so the effect on me is zilch.
I hear Boris Johnson on R4 this morning (when he was not being interrupted) who was arguing the case for modernising the railways. Bob Crowe however seems to have other ideas.
But there are suggestions that the Underground should be classified as an 'essential service' making it virtually impossible for the work force to strike. (That puzzles me a bit because I had assumed the fire service was an 'essential service' but they seem to go on strike from time to time.)
Be interested in other views as to whether the London Underground is an essential service.......
|
|
|
|
Post by ARENA on Feb 5, 2014 12:02:54 GMT
I think the question is should the incumbent 'mayor' of London take it upon himself to make underground staff redundant, without consultation.
(1) Is it in the interest of the public to remove staff?
(2) As an expanding service does it require less staff?
These points need open discussion . Boris is an egomaniac who makes sneering comments about the staff. He has yet to meet the heads of the unions.
Is this normal behaviour?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2014 12:18:55 GMT
I must admit Arena that I have not been following this one very closely, but what I think has been mooted is that there will be methods to pay for tickets without the need for kiosk type staff, which is almost there in any case, and also there is now foolproof (I do hope so!) technology to run driverless trains.
His argument (and I am not saying he is right)is that this will save millions in wages which could be re-invested in the underground to improve the service and even run trains 24 hours.
Sadly progress in many industries comes at the cost of manpower. I think that close to your heart was the furore over the change from hot type to modern printing methods.
|
|
|
|
Post by ARENA on Feb 5, 2014 13:19:51 GMT
I think that close to your heart was the furore over the change from hot type to modern printing methods. Certainly not, although it was diabolical the way it was achieved. The facts of the complicity between Murdoch and Thatcher have yet to come fully to light. The criminality is another matter. Yes, for the sake of those involved, I hope it doesn't go down the same path. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2014 14:46:11 GMT
I agree with you on Murdoch, which is why I do my best to avoid making his empire any richer by refusing to sign up to Sky or anything else. That said it is damned difficult not to unwittingly contribute to such a vast conglomerate.
And Robert Maxwell was no better. Members of my own family were left with very little in their pension pots after that criminality.
|
|
|
|
Post by ARENA on Feb 6, 2014 10:18:31 GMT
It was known amongst we at the top in Fleet Street, that Murdoch was a joke. He bid for every title but had no money to buy a decent car! So how did he wangle a bridging loan to purchase the Mirror?
Likewise the Digger. He bought a defunct union rag and turned it into a Bonker's daily.
Pre Thatch you had to be a Brit to own a National paper.
What happened over the purchase of the Times was a massive scandal.
She found the 'D' notice a very handy tool.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2014 11:36:01 GMT
I agree Arena, it all stinks.
And I think I am right in saying that in the US you can't own or control a newspaper unless you are a US citizen. Which is why Murdoch is 'American' now.
Some of the so called newspapers here are to be read in a tea break, as long as they don't have too many long words, or if they do then those words are hyphenated. Maybe we should reclassify some of them as comics, negating the tax breaks claimed on newspapers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2014 11:38:32 GMT
It was known amongst we at the top in Fleet Street, that Murdoch was a joke. He bid for every title but had no money to buy a decent car! So how did he wangle a bridging loan to purchase the Mirror? Likewise the Digger. He bought a defunct union rag and turned it into a Bonker's daily. Pre Thatch you had to be a Brit to own a National paper. What happened over the purchase of the Times was a massive scandal. She found the 'D' notice a very handy tool. Not being picky but I think you meant Maxwell was a joke etc. |
|
|
|
Post by ARENA on Feb 6, 2014 12:01:35 GMT
Yes < sorry.......
|
|
