[quote]London Underground drivers will stage a second 24-hour strike in a dispute over night Tube plans, the Aslef union has said.[/quote]
[QUOTE]The walkout, set to start at 21:30 BST on 5 August, follows a strike that closed the entire network last week.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Unions are unhappy about pay and shifts for the overnight service, which is due to start on 12 September.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The row is over a 2% average pay rise offer for LU members and workers' terms and conditions linked to plans to introduce an all-night Tube service on the Jubilee and Victoria lines and and most of the Central, Northern and Piccadilly lines.[/QUOTE]
[quote]John Allan, chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, said the prospect of a second Tube strike in less than a month was "disappointing news" and "another blow for businesses."
"Many small companies proved their flexibility and resourcefulness last week, allowing their employees to work remotely, or hold meetings with clients online rather than in person.
"Nevertheless, there will be further damage to the economy and millions of pounds lost to businesses if this strike goes ahead," he said.[/quote]
Source: [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-33512655[/url]
how long before we get automated trains to replace these people
Tube drivers and ASLEF members are well within their rights to strike.
If it's the only way to get their point across then so be it.
[QUOTE=frankie penis;48202285]how long before we get automated trains to replace these people[/QUOTE]
Yeah, make those people jobless!!!! How dare they demand fair treatment!!!!
[QUOTE=frankie penis;48202285]how long before we get automated trains to replace these people[/QUOTE]
Robots just purely cannot perform jobs like this where safety is absolutely imperative, it plainly and simply REQUIRES a human.
[QUOTE=fragger0;48202293]Yeah, make those people jobless!!!! How dare they demand fair treatment!!!![/QUOTE]
i'm sorry but complaining about earning £50k a year as a tube driver is insane. it costs roughly £24k minimum to live in london, they earn over double that amount
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;48202300]Robots just purely cannot perform jobs like this where safety is absolutely imperative, it plainly and simply REQUIRES a human.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro[/url]
[QUOTE=fragger0;48202293]Yeah, make those people jobless!!!! How dare they demand fair treatment!!!![/QUOTE]
Jobs don't grow on trees. If we resisted automation just because it would result in structural unemployment, we would still be farming the land by hand, assembling cars manually and evaluating integrals by drawing rectangles and counting them.
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;48202300]Robots just purely cannot perform jobs like this where safety is absolutely imperative, it plainly and simply REQUIRES a human.[/QUOTE]
Dozens of cities around the world have fully automated train systems that require no attendance for safe running whatsoever. Your argument is patently false.
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;48202300]Robots just purely cannot perform jobs like this where safety is absolutely imperative, it plainly and simply REQUIRES a human.[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure people said the same thing about automating just about everything else.
Unlike humans, computers don't get tired or have mental problems or need to go to the toilet.
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;48202300]Robots just purely cannot perform jobs like this where safety is absolutely imperative, it plainly and simply REQUIRES a human.[/QUOTE]
I found the union worker.
[editline]14th July 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=fragger0;48202293]Yeah, make those people jobless!!!! How dare they demand fair treatment!!!![/QUOTE]
I, as a post grad, have not been able to find a graduate job for almost 2 years now. For the jobs that don't need qualification I'm "over qualified" and "lack experience", for the jobs that do need it I "lack experience".
I'll be luckily to earn £20k a year when I do.
What the [b]fuck[/b] is someone who only needs 2 GCSEs to do the job complaining about earning fucking [b]£50,000[/b] a year for?
[QUOTE=frankie penis;48202312]i'm sorry but complaining about earning £50k a year as a tube driver is insane. it costs roughly £24k minimum to live in london[/QUOTE]
This.
Whoever supports this is an entitled brat. For most people, in terms of hours and pay, this is a dream job.
[QUOTE=Mr Mallet;48202413]
I, as a post grad, have not been able to find a graduate job for almost 2 years now. For the jobs that don't need qualification I'm "over qualified" and "lack experience", for the jobs that do need it I "lack experience".
I'll be luckily to earn £20k a year when I do.
What the [B]fuck[/B] is someone who only needs 2 GCSEs to do the job complaining about earning fucking [B]£50,000[/B] a year for?[/QUOTE]
I'm in exactly the same position as you...
While I agree that they are well paid and are at points holding the city to ransom in some respects, it certainly does not mean they should be all made jobless and replaced by automated systems. How can you support that if you know how bad unemployment is?
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48202340]If we resisted automation just because it would result in structural unemployment, we would still be farming the land by hand, assembling cars manually and evaluating integrals by drawing rectangles and counting them.[/QUOTE]
Totally irrelevant argument, why should we replace jobs just for the sake of it? Jobs are hard enough to come by in this country the last thing we need is to replace even more with machines. I feel exactly the same way with supermarkets using self serve checkouts when they have millions of pounds of profit and the means to employ staff but choose to make a machine do it. Do you think that is good for humanity? Or should we just keep progressing with things like that until half of jobs are done by machines and we have even more unemployed unable to find work?
Because they're clearly not interested in working for their current wages, so replace them.
[QUOTE=fragger0;48202293]Yeah, make those people jobless!!!! How dare they demand fair treatment!!!![/QUOTE]
They get paid stupidly high amounts for jack fucking shit anyway.
[QUOTE=Baron von Hax;48202554]They get paid stupidly high amounts for jack fucking shit anyway.[/QUOTE]
I'm not disputing the pay (i'd jump at the chance of 50k a year), I'm disputing the point made above that they should be replaced by automated systems.
They aren't machines you know, they have feelings, families, mortgages, bills etc and you wan't them to lose their job so they can't provide any of it?
WOT ATWAT!
[QUOTE=Baron von Hax;48202554]They get paid stupidly high amounts for jack fucking shit anyway.[/QUOTE]
"Jack fucking shit"
Do you have any idea of the complex internal workings of a railway?
No?
Thought not.
[QUOTE=fragger0;48202557]I'm not disputing the pay (i'd jump at the chance of 50k a year), I'm disputing the point made above that they should be replaced by automated systems.
They aren't machines you know, they have feelings, families, mortgages, bills etc and you wan't them to lose their job so they can't provide any of it?[/QUOTE]
Irrelevant! A metro system is a public service, not charity. Its only goals are to operate as efficiently (robots win), as cheaply (robots win), as safely (robots win) and without interruption (guess who wins?) as possible.
Will converting to automated cost many jobs? Sure, even the higher qualification jobs that will replace them won't account for all of the lost ones. But that's irrelevant! Does it save the taxpayer money? Yes! Does it save the taxpayer time and frustration? Does it make the service more convenient? You bet it does.
[QUOTE=fragger0;48202479]I'm in exactly the same position as you...
While I agree that they are well paid and are at points holding the city to ransom in some respects, it certainly does not mean they should be all made jobless and replaced by automated systems. How can you support that if you know how bad unemployment is?
Totally irrelevant argument, why should we replace jobs just for the sake of it? Jobs are hard enough to come by in this country the last thing we need is to replace even more with machines. I feel exactly the same way with supermarkets using self serve checkouts when they have millions of pounds of profit and the means to employ staff but choose to make a machine do it. Do you think that is good for humanity? Or should we just keep progressing with things like that until half of jobs are done by machines and we have even more unemployed unable to find work?[/QUOTE]
When it's more efficient (cheaper and a better service for customers) to replace humans with machines, you should.
You put words into his mouth claiming he wanted to make people jobless with automation for the sake of it, when he never claimed to want it done just for the sake of it, he was implicitly saying it should be done when it's more efficient, which is true and not "for the sake of it".
Considering the current world's demand for books, we could probably employ everyone and then some if we took away automated printing and went back to having people write copies of books by hand, but despite 100 percent employment we'd all be significantly worse off as a result of this, employment is not a good reason to carry on with inefficient practices.
If the exorbitant amount of money being paid to train drivers was cut down or they were made redundant, the money that went to them could probably go elsewhere and fund new activities and new jobs for other people.
I've seen that you've been appealing to the emotions of people in this thread by pointing out that train drivers are human and they have financial obligations and families and need money, the problem is you're only looking at things from the perspective of the train drivers, but what they are paid could fund two new jobs for people who have financial obligations and families to feed yet don't have jobs. I think they should keep their jobs until replacing them is more efficient but they should take a huge pay cut.
I feel sorry for you Londoners. Not the tube staff, but all the people who are inconvenienced by their actions.
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;48202571]"Jack fucking shit"
Do you have any idea of the complex internal workings of a railway?
No?
Thought not.[/QUOTE]
For the most part, jack diddly shit.
Most of the workflow for those trains are automated for the most part, and realistically speaking unless you are doing janitorial work, you are just clipping tickets and telling people when shit goes wrong.
My mother works with mentally/physically disadvantages people and has spent years getting the qualifications necessary to further her position and get involved in good private care homes. She has been doing this for over ten years now, and every few years improved her sitting and pay. She frequently works 12 hour shifts, and usually gets a day a week (not always) and her shortest shifts are 7-8 hours.
Every day she is working with/helping people that could (and have) become violent at a moments notice, have aggressive tantrums, suffer from random bouts of pain or emotional distress and it's her job to help them through it all, as well as making sure (if they are unable to) that they are clean, fed, their homes safe and deal with any errands they may need to do (shopping, pet related stuff etc). Usually she works alone, with other specialists working with other
She nets over 5k less per year compared to the average tub staff person (not the drivers). If she were working in a government funded area, she'd likely earn less.
Striking for 25-30k a year, no qualifications, 35 hour weeks is something that she can't comprehend, and neither can I.
[QUOTE=godinthehouse;48202571]"Jack fucking shit"
Do you have any idea of the complex internal workings of a railway?
No?
Thought not.[/QUOTE]
which is why many other cities have introduced automated lines with basically no problem whatsoever
I still think that when people say "You should be paid less because other people don't earn as much as you." it's more a case of those other people should be paid more.
I mean the cost of living in the country and doubly so for London is nothing short of [I]fucking ridiculous[/I] hence people having to work unsociable shifts for long periods of time with little holiday and the tube Unions are the only people who DARED to stand up for themselves where their bosses came in and said
[quote]"You are now going to work longer hours and overnight on weekends for no extra pay."[/quote]
Now tell me what part of that sounds reasonable?
Yes they are getting a %2 extra pay rise but that's only AFTER the first strike happened and %2 is peanuts, it no where near equates to the increase in hours they would have to do.
And let us not forget that it's not just about money or working hours. A BIG part of this, which people nicely gloss over, is the plans to close down staffed ticket offices effectively cutting jobs, so what this strike action is basically saying is "If you want us gone, fine! here's what it's like when we are gone!"
Who's the person who started the other thread about the tube strike LAST WEEK? Get him in here to explain all this, because a second strike in a month is fucking ridiculous.
[QUOTE=MissZoey;48203220]Who's the person who started the other thread about the tube strike LAST WEEK? Get him in here to explain all this, because a second strike in a month is fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
As far as I can tell strike 2 is happening because they did jack shit about strike one.
And these days a tube or transport strike is the only form of public action that ever gets any results these days.
You know it's illegal for people to protest in this country without it having been approved by some official body?
Here's an example, a while ago some Chinese head of state came to visit London, and people filed for a protest and were told "ok you may march down this street in protest" the day came and they took the Chinese visiting party everywhere the protest wasn't. The protest did jack shit because the government has taken control of them.
[QUOTE=thisguy123;48203304]As far as I can tell strike 2 is happening because they did jack shit about strike one.
And these days a tube or transport strike is the only form of public action that ever gets any results these days.
You know it's illegal for people to protest in this country without it having been approved by some official body?
Here's an example, a while ago some Chinese head of state came to visit London, and people filed for a protest and were told "ok you may march down this street in protest" the day came and they took the Chinese visiting party everywhere the protest wasn't. The protest did jack shit because the government has taken control of them.[/QUOTE]
I think if they are doing jack-shit about strike one then they won't bow down to strike two. It could go either way, it could strengthen the governments stance or make them buckle. Either way, shits got to stop for the people of London.
Can't wait for the automation of the Tube service, these strikes are really taking the piss now. They get paid that much and they also get the travel for free. While I earn less than half of what they earn even with a degree.
Added to this, I have to fork out for a travel card to get to Central London (which is about £177 a month cause of the zone I'm in).
[QUOTE=Riutet;48202705]quote[/QUOTE]
Where does the automation end? until most of the population are unable to find work because of the machines doing them?
I'm not disputing the pay, they're way overpaid, but to say we should replace them with machines is downright ridiculous and spares no thought for the jobs lost and lives ruined caused by it. I'm not trying to 'appeal' to peoples emotions, I can just see beyond "blah it makes it more efficient" and understand the actual repercussions it would cause real people if all those jobs were axed. They employ a LOT of people.
[QUOTE=fragger0;48203701]Where does the automation end? until most of the population are unable to find work because of the machines doing them?
I'm not disputing the pay, they're way overpaid, but to say we should replace them with machines is downright ridiculous and spares no thought for the jobs lost and lives ruined caused by it. I'm not trying to 'appeal' to peoples emotions, I can just see beyond "blah it makes it more efficient" and understand the actual repercussions it would cause real people if all those jobs were axed. They employ a LOT of people.[/QUOTE]
Running automated systems requires a lot of people as well things have to maintained and such. there' no point in halting progression. If you were a businessman and saw an opportunity to make a load more profit after investing in automation you would do it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.