But I also think there is such a thing as personal responsibility. Put simply, you do not put your head out of the window unless you are certain there is nothing there which will knock it off. In the days when carriages had opening windows that was the abiding principle I adopted, and I never lost my head.....
How do you suppose unions formulate policy ? The accident took place a couple of years ago and the union at all levels will have considered the implications upon their existing policies using the network of committees, member meetings and conference.
While I can't speak for this specific union, my personal experience of unions is that they are more interested in pursuing policies that are in line with extremist ideologies and the people at the HQ are not at all interested in what their actual members think. I quit my union last year and I tried to explain to them how out of touch they were, but they were not at all interested.
Judging by mine (UCU for what it's worth), it's certainly not by consulting members on the branches.
My wife is in a union at her hospital and the rep is not interested in any problems she has. He is interested in trying to get in the house magazine and, even more so, the local media.
Pretty much my exact experience. When I've actually brought up some issues (a change in the expenses policy they sneaked in during Covid when no one was paying attention), my union branch completely ignored me.
Re your first para l don't doubt that there are well established methodologies for what you describe (indeed my own education convinces me of that). What l was questioning however was trying to argue that because other, wholly different, modes might be inferior ALARP should be completely ignored as the poster l responded to implied. There is no way in God's earth that a Court would wear that.
That's incredibly poor. I have only needed assistance from my own TU (Prospect) once but I'm pleased to say that they were incredibly responsive and effective.
It could have been because s/he agreed to it of course......
Would say it would be a mixture of 3 and 4 car. 3 cars will be plenty for most services. They also give flexibility for 5 or 6 car formations for peak lesire travel if required.
There's 16 x 4-car sets in the GWR HST fleet, so 64 vehicles. There's 70 Class 175 vehicles.
Or maybe they took a pragmatic view of the costs involved. May well be cheaper to upgrade/withdraw certain carriages opposed to keeping lineside infrastructure up to spec
That's way too sensible an idea !
There does, except for Chiltern, seem to be a remarkable degree of common sense about all of that.
That sounds fair, if its 158s, but have this feeling it would be 150s.
That is not what was written - 'Clarence Yard' appeared to indicate that 175s could be kept in the North and some sort of cascade would allow 158s to go from Northern to GWR that would avoid GWR having to train staff on a new fleet.
Which just means Northern training staff on 175s rather than GWR. I'm not really seeing that that makes much difference in terms of costs.
.It isn't robbing Peter to pay Paul if 175s go to Northern and release some 158s to go to GWR. It just moves the training requirement and potentially makes it easier to find somewhere to maintain the 175s.
