Re: QR and Photographers

[pdwyer <pdwyerNOpdSPAM@ecn.net.au.invalid>]

In article <86ats9$t5i$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, thalytgv@my-deja.com wrote:


> There are no reasons for QR or any rail operators in Australia to
> ban people from photographing trains and infrastructures. None of the
> operator expereince constant threatening from terrorist, exactly
> what are they afraid of?

Workplace Health & Safety Legislation. This means that someone on a
platform that is not there for the specific purpose of boarding a train
must be supervised to ensure that said personage won't fall off.

Without paying for the privilege.

QR as a profit making entity is under no obligation to a photographer,
be they professional or amateur. Instead the photographer is a finacial
liability to the corporation.

You may not see it as such, but QR recieves countless lawsuits from
parents or children who believed their darling child/parent was
faultless, rather than doing society a favour.

This does not make these people happy.

> On the other hand I did notice some of the SMs and staffs of
> citytrain can be a bit too rude especially to school kids and
teenagers .

Schoolkids and teenagers are a wonderful source of damage to QR. I'm
not sure that the credit received for running trains to carry school
children offsets the damage bill.

Not all students and teenagers damage the trains they travel on, but
sit in on a few and you'll see what I mean. This prejudices the staff
who see the damage that is done.

All become tarred by the same brush.

Speaking of which, photographing QR trains and slapping large Copyright
notices across them also draws lots of negative press towards
photographers.

PD



* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!