|
Post by COBO on Jul 5, 2019 22:02:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 5, 2019 22:13:31 GMT
If you read the full report it was tiredness and not the fact he'd taken crack the night before that caused the accident and he'd taken it because he was suffering from depression after being diagnosed with cancer. I think questions need to be asked why this driver was at work at all. Did his employer know about his circumstances?
|
|
|
Post by george on Jul 5, 2019 22:20:11 GMT
If you read the full report it was tiredness and not the fact he'd taken crack the night before that caused the accident and he'd taken it because he was suffering from depression after being diagnosed with cancer. I think questions need to be asked why this driver was at work at all. Did his employer know about his circumstances? The cocaine was a factor in the case.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 5, 2019 22:23:16 GMT
If you read the full report it was tiredness and not the fact he'd taken crack the night before that caused the accident and he'd taken it because he was suffering from depression after being diagnosed with cancer. I think questions need to be asked why this driver was at work at all. Did his employer know about his circumstances? The cocaine was a factor in the case. Only in that it caused tiredness. More to the point, should he have been at work at all?
|
|
|
Post by george on Jul 5, 2019 22:30:12 GMT
The cocaine was a factor in the case. Only in that it caused tiredness. More to the point, should he have been at work at all? He shouldn't have been working. Thankfully no one was killed.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 5, 2019 22:42:09 GMT
Only in that it caused tiredness. More to the point, should he have been at work at all? He shouldn't have been working. Thankfully no one was killed. Exactly and if his employers were aware of his circumstances surely they have some explaining to do? They have a duty of care and is somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer going to be in a fit state of mind to drive a bus.
|
|
|
Post by joefrombow on Jul 5, 2019 22:53:51 GMT
He shouldn't have been working. Thankfully no one was killed. Exactly and if his employers were aware of his circumstances surely they have some explaining to do? They have a duty of care and is somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer going to be in a fit state of mind to drive a bus. I agree misleading headline in a sense however it does play a part as that is the reason he was tired , and if his employers knew he wasn't in a right state of mind he shouldn't of been at work but regardless the blame still comes down to him just lucky no one was killed .
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 6, 2019 0:06:39 GMT
If you read the full report it was tiredness and not the fact he'd taken crack the night before that caused the accident and he'd taken it because he was suffering from depression after being diagnosed with cancer. I think questions need to be asked why this driver was at work at all. Did his employer know about his circumstances? "Although you were not experiencing a high from the crack cocaine which you had taken at the time of driving, it would have deprived you of sleep the night before and the after-effects the next day would include tiredness. “You were taking crack cocaine to deal with depression and illness, but that was a deliberate decision on your part, knowing that the next day members of the public essentially placed themselves in your care.” It's pretty clear from that statement that him taking cocaine was the cause of the crash because had he not taken it, then he wouldn't of been sleep deprived and hence wouldn't of been tired behind the wheel. He is extremely fortunate that no one was killed as a result of his wreckless actions - he has only himself to blame and trying to lay blame with Arriva is looking for excuses personally.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jul 6, 2019 3:47:23 GMT
He shouldn't have been working. Thankfully no one was killed. Exactly and if his employers were aware of his circumstances surely they have some explaining to do? They have a duty of care and is somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer going to be in a fit state of mind to drive a bus. The very reason why remote sign on is high risk, because no one to check if employee under influence Any employer taking safety seriously wouldn’t allow it, because this case shows some people cannot be trusted to declare if they are not fit for work.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 6, 2019 5:17:15 GMT
Exactly and if his employers were aware of his circumstances surely they have some explaining to do? They have a duty of care and is somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer going to be in a fit state of mind to drive a bus. The very reason why remote sign on is high risk, because no one to check if employee under influence Any employer taking safety seriously wouldn’t allow it, because this case shows some people cannot be trusted to declare if they are not fit for work. I've heard that before although remote signing works ok in other industries and signing on at the garage didn't stop this driver from slipping through the safety net, there seems to be no suggestion that he was under the influence of drugs just that it caused tiredness and he probably would have appeared fine when he signed on. Obviously he shouldn't have smoked crack when he was working the following day and he probably wouldn't have done if it weren't for his medical problems, he had a 30 year unblemished record, and the bigger question for me is whether somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer should have been driving buses in the first place when they might not be fully focused on the job for obvious reasons. Normally I'd have no sympathy for anybody driving after taking drugs or alcohol but I can't help feeling there are some mitigating circumstances here.
|
|
|
Post by rugbyref on Jul 6, 2019 18:21:07 GMT
The very reason why remote sign on is high risk, because no one to check if employee under influence Any employer taking safety seriously wouldn’t allow it, because this case shows some people cannot be trusted to declare if they are not fit for work. I've heard that before although remote signing works ok in other industries and signing on at the garage didn't stop this driver from slipping through the safety net, there seems to be no suggestion that he was under the influence of drugs just that it caused tiredness and he probably would have appeared fine when he signed on. Obviously he shouldn't have smoked crack when he was working the following day and he probably wouldn't have done if it weren't for his medical problems, he had a 30 year unblemished record, and the bigger question for me is whether somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer should have been driving buses in the first place when they might not be fully focused on the job for obvious reasons. Normally I'd have no sympathy for anybody driving after taking drugs or alcohol but I can't help feeling there are some mitigating circumstances here. It is not reasonable for anyone to take crack cocaine. Even more unreasonable when driving the next day. This driver should have been off sick if he was depressed after a diagnosis.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 6, 2019 18:31:21 GMT
I've heard that before although remote signing works ok in other industries and signing on at the garage didn't stop this driver from slipping through the safety net, there seems to be no suggestion that he was under the influence of drugs just that it caused tiredness and he probably would have appeared fine when he signed on. Obviously he shouldn't have smoked crack when he was working the following day and he probably wouldn't have done if it weren't for his medical problems, he had a 30 year unblemished record, and the bigger question for me is whether somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer should have been driving buses in the first place when they might not be fully focused on the job for obvious reasons. Normally I'd have no sympathy for anybody driving after taking drugs or alcohol but I can't help feeling there are some mitigating circumstances here. It is not reasonable for anyone to take crack cocaine. Even more unreasonable when driving the next day. This driver should have been off sick if he was depressed after a diagnosis. Yes..... that's pretty much what I said.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jul 6, 2019 19:52:38 GMT
A number of important issues raised here.
Driver had a PCV licence allowing him to carry members of the public, which rightly places a responsibility to drive professionally and be in a fit state to drive. Clearly this driver wasn't.
One cannot have a responsible job such as a bus driver and take drugs, full stop.
I can understand and have sympathy with the driver being depressed having been diagnosed with cancer. Having had that diagnosis there seems to have been a complete lack of support which really should have been there. There are organisations such a Macmillan who can help provide the necessary emotional support which may have prevented this tragic accident. Now maybe I am being unkind, maybe that support was there but it failed, we simply don't know. Clearly the driver felt unable to tell his employer what was going on and was unable to appreciate or in denial about the risk he was running in taking the drugs and then driving a passenger bus. Perhaps he felt fine at the start of shift and then felt he could not stop in the middle, not that any of this excuses what happened. I think it is difficult for the employer to always know what is going, particularly if the driver hides it, but clearly matters failed here as well.
My big sympathies go to those on the bus, those left in a state of shock, and in particular those injured either physically or mentally, or both. I hope they all make the speediest possible recovery and have the confidence to use the bus service again.
Finally a 2 1/2 year sentence seems quite high to me given the circumstances and relative to some other crimes, but then I know nothing, I am not a judge!
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 6, 2019 19:58:40 GMT
Exactly and if his employers were aware of his circumstances surely they have some explaining to do? They have a duty of care and is somebody who has been diagnosed with cancer going to be in a fit state of mind to drive a bus. I agree misleading headline in a sense however it does play a part as that is the reason he was tired , and if his employers knew he wasn't in a right state of mind he shouldn't of been at work but regardless the blame still comes down to him just lucky no one was killed . That's the press for you, overly dramatic headlines create clickbait
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 6, 2019 20:02:46 GMT
A number of important issues raised here. Driver had a PCV licence allowing him to carry members of the public, which rightly places a responsibility to drive professionally and be in a fit state to drive. Clearly this driver wasn't. One cannot have a responsible job such as a bus driver and take drugs, full stop. I can understand and have sympathy with the driver being depressed having been diagnosed with cancer. Having had that diagnosis there seems to have been a complete lack of support which really should have been there. There are organisations such a Macmillan who can help provide the necessary emotional support which may have prevented this tragic accident. Now maybe I am being unkind, maybe that support was there but it failed, we simply don't know. Clearly the driver felt unable to tell his employer what was going on and was unable to appreciate or in denial about the risk he was running in taking the drugs and then driving a passenger bus. Perhaps he felt fine at the start of shift and then felt he could not stop in the middle, not that any of this excuses what happened. I think it is difficult for the employer to always know what is going, particularly if the driver hides it, but clearly matters failed here as well. My big sympathies go to those on the bus, those left in a state of shock, and in particular those injured either physically or mentally, or both. I hope they all make the speediest possible recovery and have the confidence to use the bus service again. Finally a 2 1/2 year sentence seems quite high to me given the circumstances and relative to some other crimes, but then I know nothing, I am not a judge! That's what I would have thought and if his employers were aware of his condition (obviously we don't know for sure) then surely the HR manager should have been having a tea and biscuits chat with him. It seems very concerning to me that a driver who had been diagnosed with cancer was driving a bus in the first place. I thought the sentence was harsh under the circumstances.
|
|