Discussion:
District line staff walk out in support of driver ‘who went through three red lights’
(too old to reply)
C
2018-04-13 05:00:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
TfL Tube strike 2018: Fury as District line staff walk out in support of driver ‘who went through three red lights’

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/tfl-tube-strike-2018-fury-as-district-line-staff-walk-out-in-support-of-driver-who-went-through-a3812231.html

Passengers are to be hit tomorrow [Friday] by a District line walk-out over a Tube driver alleged to have passed three red signals in his 11 weeks driving.

He had been qualified for 18 weeks but due to sickness, retraining and a compulsory removal from duty only drove for 11, London Underground claims. Two of the signals passed at danger (spads) were within a four-week period.

Nigel Holness, director of network operations at London Underground (LU), said it was “simply not safe for this employee to continue in a role as a driver”. LU refused to identify the severity of the spads — which could derail a train — or where they took place.
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-13 08:41:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
TfL Tube strike 2018: Fury as District line staff walk out in support of dr=
iver =E2=80=98who went through three red lights=E2=80=99
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/tfl-tube-strike-2018-fury-as-dist=
rict-line-staff-walk-out-in-support-of-driver-who-went-through-a3812231.htm=
l
Passengers are to be hit tomorrow [Friday] by a District line walk-out over=
a Tube driver alleged to have passed three red signals in his 11 weeks dri=
ving.
Says a lot about the standard of their applicants and training. Would be
interesting to know what ethnicity he is and whether he was recruited simply
to meet diversity quotas.
John Williamson
2018-04-13 09:00:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Says a lot about the standard of their applicants and training. Would be
interesting to know what ethnicity he is and whether he was recruited simply
to meet diversity quotas.
I don't use the tube, but if it was above ground, is it possible that he
was using a mobile at the time?
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-13 09:37:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:00:59 +0100
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Says a lot about the standard of their applicants and training. Would be
interesting to know what ethnicity he is and whether he was recruited simply
to meet diversity quotas.
I don't use the tube, but if it was above ground, is it possible that he
was using a mobile at the time?
I'm pretty sure thats a sackable offence. Whatever the reason he's clearly
incompetant and should think himself lucky he got given station duties. IMO
he should have got his P45 and been shown the door.
John Williamson
2018-04-13 09:50:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:00:59 +0100
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Says a lot about the standard of their applicants and training. Would be
interesting to know what ethnicity he is and whether he was recruited simply
to meet diversity quotas.
I don't use the tube, but if it was above ground, is it possible that he
was using a mobile at the time?
I'm pretty sure thats a sackable offence. Whatever the reason he's clearly
incompetant and should think himself lucky he got given station duties. IMO
he should have got his P45 and been shown the door.
I know it's sackable, but if he wasn't seen, and his employers were not
able to get a call log from his service provider, then it's almost
impossible to prove if he denies it, and without proof, there's no P45.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-13 09:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:50:00 +0100
Post by C
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:00:59 +0100
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Says a lot about the standard of their applicants and training. Would be
interesting to know what ethnicity he is and whether he was recruited
simply
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
to meet diversity quotas.
I don't use the tube, but if it was above ground, is it possible that he
was using a mobile at the time?
I'm pretty sure thats a sackable offence. Whatever the reason he's clearly
incompetant and should think himself lucky he got given station duties. IMO
he should have got his P45 and been shown the door.
I know it's sackable, but if he wasn't seen, and his employers were not
able to get a call log from his service provider, then it's almost
impossible to prove if he denies it, and without proof, there's no P45.
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be out the door.
It shows how backwards the railway industry is that they can't just get rid of
him just for that.
John Williamson
2018-04-13 10:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be out the door.
It shows how backwards the railway industry is that they can't just get rid of
him just for that.
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done so, but
his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some reason.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-13 10:44:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 11:32:19 +0100
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be out the door.
It shows how backwards the railway industry is that they can't just get rid
of
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
him just for that.
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done so, but
his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some reason.
For all their protestations about caring about safety its times like this
the unions prove they don't give a toss about it. All they care about is
exercising their muscle.
David Jones
2018-04-13 12:49:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be out
the door. It shows how backwards the railway industry is that they
can't just get rid of him just for that.
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done so,
but his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some reason.
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were not
followed.
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-13 13:52:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 12:49:43 +0000 (UTC)
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be out
the door. It shows how backwards the railway industry is that they
can't just get rid of him just for that.
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done so,
but his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some reason.
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were not
followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure and
firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd have to be a
complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient excuse to flex their
muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
David Jones
2018-04-13 18:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 12:49:43 +0000 (UTC)
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be
out >> > the door. It shows how backwards the railway industry is
that they >> > can't just get rid of him just for that.
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done
so, >> but his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some
reason.
Post by David Jones
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were
not followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure
and firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd
have to be a complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient
excuse to flex their muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
From the article...
"The driver has been transferred to station duties by “mutual”
decision, said LU — a claim robustly denied by union bosses. Finn
Brennan, Aslef organiser on the Underground, said the only reason the
driver had accepted a transfer of duty was because LU had threatened
disciplinary proceedings if he did not. LU denies taking disciplinary
action."

No doubt, the union rep would have been present if "agreed procedures"
had been followed. But perhaps "agreed procedures" equates to
"disciplinary action".
Roland Perry
2018-04-14 06:25:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Jones
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Post by David Jones
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were
not followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure
and firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd
have to be a complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient
excuse to flex their muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
From the article...
"The driver has been transferred to station duties by “mutual”
decision, said LU — a claim robustly denied by union bosses. Finn
Brennan, Aslef organiser on the Underground, said the only reason the
driver had accepted a transfer of duty was because LU had threatened
disciplinary proceedings if he did not. LU denies taking disciplinary
action."
No doubt, the union rep would have been present if "agreed procedures"
had been followed. But perhaps "agreed procedures" equates to
"disciplinary action".
Sounds like the driver "pleaded guilty" and took the change of job.
Whereas the "agreed procedure" is perhaps for him to plead "Not Guilty"
and for that to trigger a no doubt lengthy disciplinary process
(suspension, hearings etc).
--
Roland Perry
Someone Somewhere
2018-04-14 07:02:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by David Jones
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Post by David Jones
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were
not followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure
and firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd
have to be a complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient
excuse to flex their muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
From the article...
"The driver has been transferred to station duties by “mutual”
decision, said LU — a claim robustly denied by union bosses. Finn
Brennan, Aslef organiser on the Underground, said the only reason the
driver had accepted a transfer of duty was because LU had threatened
disciplinary proceedings if he did not. LU denies taking disciplinary
action."
No doubt, the union rep would have been present if "agreed procedures"
had been followed. But perhaps "agreed procedures" equates to
"disciplinary action".
Sounds like the driver "pleaded guilty" and took the change of job.
Whereas the "agreed procedure" is perhaps for him to plead "Not Guilty"
and for that to trigger a no doubt lengthy disciplinary process
(suspension, hearings etc).
So the union is sulking because the driver took a reasonable option
proposed to them to resolve the problem rather than being at loggerheads
with TfL and TfL let him do that rather than end up in dispute with him
(or her)?

Good to see pragmatism is alive and well in the 21st century!

You couldn't make it up...
Roland Perry
2018-04-14 07:35:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by Roland Perry
Post by David Jones
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Post by David Jones
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were
not followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure
and firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd
have to be a complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient
excuse to flex their muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
From the article...
"The driver has been transferred to station duties by “mutual”
decision, said LU — a claim robustly denied by union bosses. Finn
Brennan, Aslef organiser on the Underground, said the only reason the
driver had accepted a transfer of duty was because LU had threatened
disciplinary proceedings if he did not. LU denies taking disciplinary
action."
No doubt, the union rep would have been present if "agreed procedures"
had been followed. But perhaps "agreed procedures" equates to
"disciplinary action".
Sounds like the driver "pleaded guilty" and took the change of job.
Whereas the "agreed procedure" is perhaps for him to plead "Not
Guilty" and for that to trigger a no doubt lengthy disciplinary
process (suspension, hearings etc).
So the union is sulking because
The agreed procedure wasn't followed.
Post by Someone Somewhere
the driver took a reasonable option proposed to them to resolve the
problem rather than being at loggerheads with TfL and TfL let him do
that rather than end up in dispute with him (or her)?
Good to see pragmatism is alive and well in the 21st century!
You couldn't make it up...
--
Roland Perry
John Williamson
2018-04-14 11:16:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Someone Somewhere
So the union is sulking because
The agreed procedure wasn't followed.
Which suggests that in the minds of the Union officials, the "agreed
procedure" is more important than both safety and the smooth running of
the system.

I remember when it used to be like this in the 1960s, and thought that
maybe we had grown out of the attitude.

Bear in mind that last time I needed the help of the union I was a
member of, they agreed with the employer without actually listening to
my side of the story, so I still got sacked. The company was the only
unionised one in the area, and had the worst pay and conditions in the
area, if not in the industry. This partly explains my dislike of the way
the unions are run.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
Roland Perry
2018-04-14 11:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Someone Somewhere
So the union is sulking because
The agreed procedure wasn't followed.
Which suggests that in the minds of the Union officials, the "agreed
procedure" is more important than both safety and the smooth running of
the system.
It's up the employers and unions, together, to negotiate a compromise
which is as far as possible smooth-running and also effective in
protecting the interests of both workers and employees.
Post by John Williamson
I remember when it used to be like this in the 1960s, and thought that
maybe we had grown out of the attitude.
I think the problem in the 60's was a lack of agreed pocedures, so
wild-cat action on one side, and employee exploitation on the other,
were rife.
Post by John Williamson
Bear in mind that last time I needed the help of the union I was a
member of, they agreed with the employer without actually listening to
my side of the story, so I still got sacked.
The correct procedure would be a disciplinary hearing where the employer
could not fail to be required to listen to your side of the story. If
the union decided not to assist you, then that's something to criticise
that particular union for, not the whole idea of sitting round a table.
Post by John Williamson
The company was the only unionised one in the area, and had the worst
pay and conditions in the area, if not in the industry.
Why did anyone work there, if better pay and conditions were available
elsewhere? Was it a closed shop?
Post by John Williamson
This partly explains my dislike of the way the unions are run.
They aren't all run the same. In my experience (largely from the
employer side of the table) they'll show up at a disciplinary just to
show willing to the workforce in general, even if they know the
individual case is hopeless. They don't want members defecting to a
different union by being seen to fail to at least go through the
motions.
--
Roland Perry
John Williamson
2018-04-14 12:22:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
It's up the employers and unions, together, to negotiate a compromise
which is as far as possible smooth-running and also effective in
protecting the interests of both workers and employees.
I've no argument with that, but in this case, that seems to have fallen
by the wayside.
Post by Roland Perry
I think the problem in the 60's was a lack of agreed pocedures, so
wild-cat action on one side, and employee exploitation on the other,
were rife.
This seems to be very similar, looking at it from outside.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by John Williamson
Bear in mind that last time I needed the help of the union I was a
member of, they agreed with the employer without actually listening to
my side of the story, so I still got sacked.
The correct procedure would be a disciplinary hearing where the employer
could not fail to be required to listen to your side of the story. If
the union decided not to assist you, then that's something to criticise
that particular union for, not the whole idea of sitting round a table.
We had that, the union rep couldn't be bothered attending.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by John Williamson
The company was the only unionised one in the area, and had the worst
pay and conditions in the area, if not in the industry.
Why did anyone work there, if better pay and conditions were available
elsewhere? Was it a closed shop?
It's a smallish industry, and there were few jobs available at the time.
I did what I had to in order to pay the bills. This was one of very few
unionised companies in the industry. If you add up all the employees in
the industry in all grades, we wouldn't fill much more than a medium
sized town. At my lowly grade of coach driver, there are about 30,000 of us.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by John Williamson
This partly explains my dislike of the way the unions are run.
They aren't all run the same. In my experience (largely from the
employer side of the table) they'll show up at a disciplinary just to
show willing to the workforce in general, even if they know the
individual case is hopeless. They don't want members defecting to a
different union by being seen to fail to at least go through the motions.
As an employee, the only union that's ever done me any good was the rail
workers union when I was working there. At the last place I worked, we
actually got union recognition. after a vote in response to a recent
deterioration in conditions after a takeover, and at most meetings, the
union just fell in line with what was going to happen, and according to
the minutes, made no objections. Not that it would have made a
difference anyway, the company still went bust.

As for the union I'm now in because I can't be @rsed leaving, all I get
from them now are spam e-mails and letters trying to sell me insurance
for more than I am already paying. The local branch don't even know I
exist, as the branch I joined hasn't bothered telling them I've moved,
though the spam finds me well enough.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
Roland Perry
2018-04-14 13:20:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
It's up the employers and unions, together, to negotiate a compromise
which is as far as possible smooth-running and also effective in
protecting the interests of both workers and employees.
I've no argument with that, but in this case, that seems to have fallen
by the wayside.
I sounds from the reports that the employer an employee have done a
deal, without going through the previously agreed procedure. It's the
lack of procedure which is the problem.
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
I think the problem in the 60's was a lack of agreed pocedures, so
wild-cat action on one side, and employee exploitation on the other,
were rife.
This seems to be very similar, looking at it from outside.
It looks to me like the complete opposite - there's no lack of an agreed
procedure.
Post by John Williamson
Post by Roland Perry
Post by John Williamson
Bear in mind that last time I needed the help of the union I was a
member of, they agreed with the employer without actually listening
to my side of the story, so I still got sacked.
The correct procedure would be a disciplinary hearing where the
employer could not fail to be required to listen to your side of the
story. If the union decided not to assist you, then that's something
to criticise that particular union for, not the whole idea of sitting
round a table.
We had that, the union rep couldn't be bothered attending.
Nowadays many people would find a different union, if they heard about
that happening to a colleague.
--
Roland Perry
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-16 08:38:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 18:41:34 +0000 (UTC)
Post by David Jones
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 12:49:43 +0000 (UTC)
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be
out >> > the door. It shows how backwards the railway industry is
that they >> > can't just get rid of him just for that.
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done
so, >> but his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some
reason.
Post by David Jones
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were
not followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure
and firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd
have to be a complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient
excuse to flex their muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
From the article...
"The driver has been transferred to station duties by “mutual”
decision, said LU — a claim robustly denied by union bosses. Finn
Brennan, Aslef organiser on the Underground, said the only reason the
driver had accepted a transfer of duty was because LU had threatened
disciplinary proceedings if he did not. LU denies taking disciplinary
action."
No doubt, the union rep would have been present if "agreed procedures"
had been followed. But perhaps "agreed procedures" equates to
"disciplinary action".
Perhaps LU should call these union idiots bluff - follow procedure to the
letter and so end up firing this guy.
Someone Somewhere
2018-04-18 08:44:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 18:41:34 +0000 (UTC)
Post by David Jones
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 12:49:43 +0000 (UTC)
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
If a bus or truck driver kept jumping red lights they'd soon be
out >> > the door. It shows how backwards the railway industry is
that they >> > can't just get rid of him just for that.
Post by David Jones
Post by John Williamson
Reading the contents of the original post, the operator has done
so, >> but his colleagues are objecting to the dismissal for some
reason.
Post by David Jones
Reading the contents linked in the original post ...the strike is
because the "agreed procedures" possibly leading to dismissal, were
not followed.
Sure, the members are striking because instead of following procedure
and firing him they didn't and gave him another job instead. You'd
have to be a complete mug to believe that. Its simply a convenient
excuse to flex their muscle once more and remind LU who's boss.
From the article...
"The driver has been transferred to station duties by “mutual”
decision, said LU — a claim robustly denied by union bosses. Finn
Brennan, Aslef organiser on the Underground, said the only reason the
driver had accepted a transfer of duty was because LU had threatened
disciplinary proceedings if he did not. LU denies taking disciplinary
action."
No doubt, the union rep would have been present if "agreed procedures"
had been followed. But perhaps "agreed procedures" equates to
"disciplinary action".
Perhaps LU should call these union idiots bluff - follow procedure to the
letter and so end up firing this guy.
I assume the mutual agreement involved both parties signing something
saying that ended the process.

To be honest, sacking him/her would be unfair - some people are just not
suited for some jobs and they have therefore been moved out of it, so
job done effectively. Now whether they should have been allowed so many
SPADs before it is a different question.

What I don't get is why pragmatic decisions like this are not allowed -
yes, a union is there to protect their members, but they shouldn't act
(or be allowed to act) like they are the be all and end all.
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-18 09:17:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:44:13 +0100
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Perhaps LU should call these union idiots bluff - follow procedure to the
letter and so end up firing this guy.
I assume the mutual agreement involved both parties signing something
saying that ended the process.
You'd assume so. Employment law applies to LU too.
Post by Someone Somewhere
To be honest, sacking him/her would be unfair - some people are just not
I disagree - he was employed to do a job, he failed. You think an airline
would keep a pilot on the payroll if he ignore air traffic control 3 times?
Post by Someone Somewhere
What I don't get is why pragmatic decisions like this are not allowed -
yes, a union is there to protect their members, but they shouldn't act
(or be allowed to act) like they are the be all and end all.
Its up to the government to tighten strike legislation even further, but there
seems to be little will to act.
Someone Somewhere
2018-04-18 09:40:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:44:13 +0100
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Perhaps LU should call these union idiots bluff - follow procedure to the
letter and so end up firing this guy.
I assume the mutual agreement involved both parties signing something
saying that ended the process.
You'd assume so. Employment law applies to LU too.
Post by Someone Somewhere
To be honest, sacking him/her would be unfair - some people are just not
I disagree - he was employed to do a job, he failed. You think an airline
would keep a pilot on the payroll if he ignore air traffic control 3 times?
If he failed to hear air traffic control 3 times, and consequently was
found to have defective hearing related to hearing things over radios
and the airline offered him a job as cabin crew would you think it was
reasonable, because I would. This is probably more akin to what
happened here and the individual suffered a consequential loss of salary
to take the alternative role.
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Post by Someone Somewhere
What I don't get is why pragmatic decisions like this are not allowed -
yes, a union is there to protect their members, but they shouldn't act
(or be allowed to act) like they are the be all and end all.
Its up to the government to tighten strike legislation even further, but there
seems to be little will to act.
Indeed - employers shouldn't be allowed to ride roughshod over their
employees, but neither should the unions be allowed to dictate how the
workplace is run - finding that balance is difficult, but in this case I
think it's been got wrong (ditto how TFL aren't "allowed" to employ
drivers directly without offering the roles to other grades of staff
first and so on)
b***@cylonHQ.com
2018-04-18 09:50:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:40:36 +0100
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:44:13 +0100
Post by Someone Somewhere
Post by b***@cylonHQ.com
Perhaps LU should call these union idiots bluff - follow procedure to the
letter and so end up firing this guy.
I assume the mutual agreement involved both parties signing something
saying that ended the process.
You'd assume so. Employment law applies to LU too.
Post by Someone Somewhere
To be honest, sacking him/her would be unfair - some people are just not
I disagree - he was employed to do a job, he failed. You think an airline
would keep a pilot on the payroll if he ignore air traffic control 3 times?
If he failed to hear air traffic control 3 times, and consequently was
found to have defective hearing related to hearing things over radios
That would have been found out on annual tests. Ditto eyesight and colour
blindness are tested for on the railways IIRC. The only way this guy missed
all those signals was if he wasn't paying attention.
Post by Someone Somewhere
think it's been got wrong (ditto how TFL aren't "allowed" to employ
drivers directly without offering the roles to other grades of staff
first and so on)
Railway employment seems to be a little microcosm of the 1960s in the 21st
century. And not in a good way.
miken man
2018-05-09 15:52:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
HMU

CALL OR TEXT or whatsapp ....+17546663823
Wickr id............kushpharma35
Email :***@gmail.com

hello we are leading suppliers of pharmaceutical product meds online we operate on daily and retails basis and very reliable and our product are 100% top quality am ready to supply on large and smaller orders and i am looking in building a strong business relationship with potential client around the world i do world wide delivery and delivery is guarantee.
see price list offer and pm me or you can get me on whatsapp

FOR ZOLPICLONE 7.5MG SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs..........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs........................£850
15000 tabs........................£1200
25000 tabs........................£1500

FOR DIAZEPAM SHALINA BRAND
diazepam 10mg 500pills £100
diazepam 10mg 300pills £70
diazepam 10mg 1000pills £150
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £350
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £120
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £300
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £500
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £700

FOR ROCHE DIAZEPAMS 10MG SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs..........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs........................£850
15000 tabs........................£1200
25000 tabs........................£1500

TEVA 10MG DIAZEPAMS SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs...........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs.......................£850
15000 tabs.......................£1200
25000 tabs.......................£1500
..
ketamine £20 each vial/1g
ketamine powder each gram £25

FOR TRAMADOL APPLE FLAVOUR
tramadol 50mg 250pills £80
tramadol 100mg 300pills £90
tramadol 225mg 300pills £120
tramadol 50mg 500pills £130
tramadol 100mg 500pills £140
tramadol 250mg 500pills £150
tramadol 50mg 1000pills £200
tramadol 100mg 1000pills £220
tramadol 250mg 1000pills £250

FOR TRAMADOL BULK ORDER
tramadol 50mg 5000pills £450
tramadol 100mg 5000pills £550
tramadol 250mg 5000pills £700

i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i providedated pictures with buyers name and my name CALL US OR TEXT ....+17546663823 email for detailsi supply more than the quantity listed,i give additional discount to more larger ordersi look forward in doing great business with reliable buyersthanks email for details kushpharma35

CALL OR TEXT or watsapp ....+17546663823
Wickr id............kushpharma35
Email : ***@gmail.com
james mathew
2018-05-10 06:19:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
HMU

CALL OR TEXT or watsapp ....+237679045806
Wickr id............rocheseller355
Email :***@gmail.com



see price list offer and pm me or you can get me on whatsapp



Ketamine hcl liquid 50mg/10mg
5 bottles/vials..........$200
10 bottles/vials.........$300
15 bottles/vials.........$350
20 bottles/vials.........$400
25 bottles/vials.........$600
50 bottles/vials.........$800
75 bottles/vials.........$1000
100 bottles/vials.........$1500
150 bottles/vials.........$2000
200 bottles/vials.........$2500



and all delivery on ketermine is done through DHL....
thats 2 to 3 days from cameroon to any part or Europe,Asia,America,

CALL OR TEXT or watsapp ....+237679045806
Wickr id............rocheseller355
Email :***@gmail.com
miken man
2018-05-11 07:19:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
HMU

CALL OR TEXT or whatsapp ....+17546663823
Wickr id............kushpharma35
Email :***@gmail.com

hello we are leading suppliers of pharmaceutical product meds online we operate on daily and retails basis and very reliable and our product are 100% top quality am ready to supply on large and smaller orders and i am looking in building a strong business relationship with potential client around the world i do world wide delivery and delivery is guarantee.
see price list offer and pm me or you can get me on whatsapp

FOR ZOLPICLONE 7.5MG SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs..........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs........................£850
15000 tabs........................£1200
25000 tabs........................£1500

FOR DIAZEPAM SHALINA BRAND
diazepam 10mg 500pills £100
diazepam 10mg 300pills £70
diazepam 10mg 1000pills £150
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £350
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £120
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £300
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £500
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £700

FOR ROCHE DIAZEPAMS 10MG SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs..........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs........................£850
15000 tabs........................£1200
25000 tabs........................£1500

TEVA 10MG DIAZEPAMS SMALLER ORDER
250 tabs...........................‎£90
500 tabs...........................‎£150
1000 tabs.........................‎£250
2500 tabs.........................£350
5000 tabs.........................£500
7500 tabs.........................£700
10000 tabs.......................£850
15000 tabs.......................£1200
25000 tabs.......................£1500
..
ketamine £20 each vial/1g
ketamine powder each gram £25

FOR TRAMADOL APPLE FLAVOUR
tramadol 50mg 250pills £80
tramadol 100mg 300pills £90
tramadol 225mg 300pills £120
tramadol 50mg 500pills £130
tramadol 100mg 500pills £140
tramadol 250mg 500pills £150
tramadol 50mg 1000pills £200
tramadol 100mg 1000pills £220
tramadol 250mg 1000pills £250

FOR TRAMADOL BULK ORDER
tramadol 50mg 5000pills £450
tramadol 100mg 5000pills £550
tramadol 250mg 5000pills £700

i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i providedated pictures with buyers name and my name CALL US OR TEXT ....+17546663823 email for detailsi supply more than the quantity listed,i give additional discount to more larger ordersi look forward in doing great business with reliable buyersthanks email for details kushpharma35

CALL OR TEXT or watsapp ....+17546663823
Wickr id............kushpharma35
Email : ***@gmail.com

Loading...