Re: [NSW] Cityrail Millennium Train

["Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au>]

"Chris Downs" <cvdowns@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
r4%l6.5287$v4.221393@ozemail.com.au">news:r4%l6.5287$v4.221393@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.


You've edited too much out. Only the 1st and 3rd paragraphs are mine.