Re: Chubb Guards

["Derick Wuen" <cullend@webone.com.au>]

Peter R K wrote in message <7lplv8$4tj$1@toto.tig.com.au>...

>It is interesting that today a report found that guards spend 3 out of
every
>4 hours not on a train - and the Minister calls this good news!
>
>

Did the report go on to say that servicing the transport needs of a city
with 2 humungous peaks in the daily demand pattern will leave many of the
resources unemployed during the inevitable humungous troughs? Not only
guards and other personnel but capital in the form of rolling stock, track
capacity, stations, signalling system etc.

2 hours peak load in an 8 hour shift seems intuitively ok, with a shift
covering just one of the peaks. Better management might squeeze a bit more
out. Acceptance of more flexibility (read deterioration of work conditions)
by employees might improve raw efficiency numbers, but lead to worse
performance and service.... permanent part-time guards, drivers, signalmen
and station staff doesn't sound safe.

The distinct bi-modal distrubution of the daily transport demand pattern is
a feature of many "civilised" cities. But Sydney's seems to be more severe
than most. Anyone with some facts?

Did the report go on further and attribute the blame for the demand pattern
to be partly the result of planning failures over many years by governments
of all persuasions in the face of the those interests vested in the
continued suburban sprawl?

Public policy initiatives are available to penalise futher sprawl and
encourage decentralisation. But there does not seem to be any votes in them,
despite deteriorating services, nor does there seem to be money to bankroll
an education campaign.... the sources of bankrolls seem to be part of the
vested interest problem.