Re: [NSW] Female guards are hopeless!!!

[craigd@lios.apana.org.au (C. Dewick)]

bung727@my-deja.com writes:

>Another prime example on just how pathetic the whole AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
>crap is and the consequences of such nonsense. The Cronulla accident
>the other night was caused by the FEMALE guard who gave the driver 3
>bells to reverse, and she walked off, leaving him high and dry, and not
>being able to give him 2 bells to stop.

We don't know that for certain - stop saying things as though they are
proven facts. I am not trying to defend the driver, guard or DM, but you are
coming to a very stupid and ill-thought conclusion.

We have several female guards here at Waterfall and all are very competent.
Two of our female ex-guards even applied to become drivers, and both were
extremely reliable and good at their jobs as guards.

As I have said before, it's the *selection process* which is flawed. It does
not matter that there is an EEO exemption.

>Question 1: Why wasnt she at the rear of the train giving bell signals
>every 5 seconds like she was supposed to?

How do you know that she wasn't? I've heard the usual rumours, and it's
split about 50/50 in regard to the issue of where the guard was on the
train, and what happened after she gave the driver the 'set back' bell
signal.

>Question 2: Why, after weeks/months of training, female guards still do
>NOT know their job, they do NOT know how to divide S sets, and this
>accident is just another example of a female guard not knowing her job
>and responsibilities?

Crap - new male staff can be, and often are, just as imcompetent as the
female staff. Every time I do our guards training roster (Q2 diagram) which
does amalgamations and divisions of S-sets in the yard, I see how false the
claims are that it's just the new female staff that are bad.

>Im not saying ALL female guards are like this, but I can honestly say
>MOST of them are like this.

Crap again - we don't even have 50 percent female train crewing staff yet,
so that's a baseless claim. What you are seeing is a result of there being a
lot more female staff than you're used to, so you notice the problems the
females have more than those of the males.

>Cityrail advertise in newspapers for FEMALE ONLY positions as guards
>etc, so they get these new employees, who knows nothing about trains
>whatsoever, and they think they can get out of doing the dirty work.
>They just wanna bludge in their cabs all shift.

8-) Well what do you think the male guards do then? They don't run back and
forth between the doors of their cab between stations while female guards
sit down and rest, or read something, or eat, or drink, or contemplate
life...

>Here is another example of stupidity. A driver I know was on platform 5
>at Homebush. The signal at the end of the platform was at stop. The
>FEMALE guard opens the doors, gives the usual boring announcements,
>closes the doors and gives him the bell to go. He sits there, and after
>receiving 5 more bells, he tells her that the signal is at stop. She
>shouldve seen that by noticing the guards indicator was not
>illuminated. The story gets better.

[ remainder of drivel deleted ]

All I can say is just as many new male guards do the very same thing.

Regards,

Craig.
--
            Craig Ian Dewick            |       Stand clear - jaws closing
 Send email to craigd@lios.apana.org.au |  Visit my Australian rail transport
   Professional Train Driver, Cityrail  |      and rail modelling web site:
       and HO scale rail modeller       |   http://lios.apana.org.au/~craigd