4 ms·

Why tf would they diminish staff levels NOW?! Train conductors are practically isolated from the passengers and quite safe. They should increase their staff l

• ljm 7y ago
  Far be it from me to be an armchair epidemiologist, but I don't think it's a good idea to over-utilise your staff in such a situation. They can quite easily get infected themselves while monitoring the platforms, and pass it on to other colleagues. And then suddenly you have a real staff shortage.
• interfixus 7y ago
  Could you perhaps cool down a bit? I do not drive trains. I drive buses, and must continue to do so through all this. I run a well understood risk every day, that's how it is, but constantly operating on heightened alert is noticably beginning to extract a mental toll. We really, really do not need an army of random outsiders screaming their heads off about what must be done.
• matthewmacleod 7y ago
  When you see a large, generally well-regarded public transport authority take a counterintuitive action, a good approach is to think about which aspects of the situation you might have missed, instead of launching into offensive tirades about how everybody is stupider than you. TfL is flawed, like any large organisation, but it is still stuffed with many subject-matter experts who are better-informed about the London public transport system than you are. It's unlikely that a broad and highly impactful decision like this is taken on a whim. In this specific case, London's public transport network is essential to the movement of key workers. It's required in order to get medical staff, emergency services, delivery staff, and a whole bunch of other people to their jobs. The majority of city-centre residents don't have access to a car. This means that it's impractical to shut public transport down completely. On the other hand, ridership is substantially down as a large number of people begin to either lose their jobs, work from home, or otherwise isolate – so there is less demand for transport in the first place. And on top of that, the number of available staff across the network will also start to fall as some become sick, have to self-isolate, or have to deal with childcare issues. A reasonable approach to dealing with these main factors is to shut down less-used or less-essential stations, and then to focus on providing a more reliable cut-down core service. This relies on the understanding that it is better to have a planned, sustainable, and reliable service that operates consistently, rather than aiming to run a "normal" service which is not currently required and likely unsustainable, while cutting services or stations in an ad-hoc manner as staff availability changes. Please just take the time to sit back and realise that not everybody else in the world is dumb, that there are often hidden factors that you don't see in any decision someone takes, and that it's often good to think (and question!) what those might be before sticking your bum oot the windae.
• wlll 7y ago
  They're likely not doing it on purpose, they'll be losing staff to Corvid-19 and/or self isolation. My kids school, due to close on Friday, was planning to shutdown by year anyway as they were running out of teachers who were well. As it happens they sent home at least one year today as they had such low staffing levels even today.