Re: [NSW] Cityrail Millennium Train

["Chris Downs" <cvdowns@ozemail.com.au>]

Tezza <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
3a970171$0$25523$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:3a970171$0$25523$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> | >
> | > Knee-jerk safeworking requirements to look after morons doesn't take the
> | > guards safety into account.
> |
> | I was hoping for a substantive answer, not a knee-jerk response.
>
> Again you don't know what you're talking about. Because morons got caught in
> doors, managements knee-jerk reaction was to change safeworking to say the
> guard had to risk his safety watching for morons.
>
> |  Is this a justifiable change on the basis of reduced risk to guards
> (arrived at as a
> | result of analysis)?
>
> You seem to be the only one who percieves it as a reduced risk.

Since when is asking questions without expressing a view a perception?

My question is simple and I'm thoroughly open minded (my gut instinct is to
agree with you but that's an emotional rather than rational response), I'd
like to know the reasoning for the design.

Chris