|
Post by snoggle on Jun 19, 2013 21:29:27 GMT
Good first episode. Cant wait for the episode where the driver says "we are not going to HELL, we are going to Ilford" I think I must be getting jaded but I wasn't that impressed. I think there are only so many times you can watch people doing a job that interracts with the public before it all starts to blur into one. I'm also worn out by the endless hype about "we must be given billions of pounds to keep London moving" and I'm very sympathetic to having a really good public transport system. Imagine what real critics must think of the non stop publicity. One thing that irritated me was the statement that "TfL employ 30,000 people to keep London on the move". Unless something has changed that simply is not true so far as Surface Transport is concerned. Almost everyone pictured "out on the road" was employed by a contractor and not directly by TfL. The control room people are TfL employees but the bus staff, the "road" police and all the people patching up pot holes and giving people piggy backs were with outsourced contractors. The balance might change in future programmes but I don't think it helps to mislead people. Showing contractor staff being told off by a woman beside a sloppy pot hole repair just left me thinking "so they're prepared to be slap dash in front of a TV camera what is their work like when no one is watching?" Cynical of me I know but I've managed performance contracts so know the tricks that people get up to.
|
|
|
Post by lc1 on Jun 20, 2013 0:11:45 GMT
Presumably southbound which can accomodate DDs fine. It's the northbound tunnel that's rather different in its dimensions! I have driven a double deck back via the southbound tunnel a few times. Indeed, the BX driver's used to do it when returning from Barking Rail jobs thus pocketing the money already given to them to come back via the Dartford toll ;D
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Jun 20, 2013 8:09:52 GMT
Good first episode. Cant wait for the episode where the driver says "we are not going to HELL, we are going to Ilford" I think I must be getting jaded but I wasn't that impressed. I think there are only so many times you can watch people doing a job that interracts with the public before it all starts to blur into one. I'm also worn out by the endless hype about "we must be given billions of pounds to keep London moving" and I'm very sympathetic to having a really good public transport system. Imagine what real critics must think of the non stop publicity. One thing that irritated me was the statement that "TfL employ 30,000 people to keep London on the move". Unless something has changed that simply is not true so far as Surface Transport is concerned. Almost everyone pictured "out on the road" was employed by a contractor and not directly by TfL. The control room people are TfL employees but the bus staff, the "road" police and all the people patching up pot holes and giving people piggy backs were with outsourced contractors. The balance might change in future programmes but I don't think it helps to mislead people. Showing contractor staff being told off by a woman beside a sloppy pot hole repair just left me thinking "so they're prepared to be slap dash in front of a TV camera what is their work like when no one is watching?" Cynical of me I know but I've managed performance contracts so know the tricks that people get up to. 1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 20, 2013 9:10:03 GMT
I think I must be getting jaded but I wasn't that impressed. I think there are only so many times you can watch people doing a job that interracts with the public before it all starts to blur into one. I'm also worn out by the endless hype about "we must be given billions of pounds to keep London moving" and I'm very sympathetic to having a really good public transport system. Imagine what real critics must think of the non stop publicity. One thing that irritated me was the statement that "TfL employ 30,000 people to keep London on the move". Unless something has changed that simply is not true so far as Surface Transport is concerned. Almost everyone pictured "out on the road" was employed by a contractor and not directly by TfL. The control room people are TfL employees but the bus staff, the "road" police and all the people patching up pot holes and giving people piggy backs were with outsourced contractors. The balance might change in future programmes but I don't think it helps to mislead people. Showing contractor staff being told off by a woman beside a sloppy pot hole repair just left me thinking "so they're prepared to be slap dash in front of a TV camera what is their work like when no one is watching?" Cynical of me I know but I've managed performance contracts so know the tricks that people get up to. 1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint. I agree with you on point 1) but not with point 2) - temporary repair or not, that was awful and should of been done a lot better. Your correct that sometimes they come back at a later date to paint it and re-do but in some instances - even then it's not a very good job. It's only when the council hires someone to resurface a road that a proper job is done.
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Jun 20, 2013 9:27:00 GMT
1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint. I agree with you on point 1) but not with point 2) - temporary repair or not, that was awful and should of been done a lot better. Your correct that sometimes they come back at a later date to paint it and re-do but in some instances - even then it's not a very good job. It's only when the council hires someone to resurface a road that a proper job is done. The point though was that that was a red-route, i.e. it needed to be filled in quickly. I could live with that as a temporary daytime fix. You don't want to block a red route and you don't want to waste excessive time/money on something that's going to be properly repaired at night in the near future [TfL seem good at that, councils not so]
|
|
|
Post by greeny253 on Jun 20, 2013 9:37:06 GMT
I agree with you on point 1) but not with point 2) - temporary repair or not, that was awful and should of been done a lot better. Your correct that sometimes they come back at a later date to paint it and re-do but in some instances - even then it's not a very good job. It's only when the council hires someone to resurface a road that a proper job is done. The point though was that that was a red-route, i.e. it needed to be filled in quickly. I could live with that as a temporary daytime fix. You don't want to block a red route and you don't want to waste excessive time/money on something that's going to be properly repaired at night in the near future [TfL seem good at that, councils not so] Had it been me I'd of offered her to do it That said, I'm pretty sure they did similar before completely resurfacing the road outside/around Great Portland Street station.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 20, 2013 10:11:03 GMT
I think I must be getting jaded but I wasn't that impressed. I think there are only so many times you can watch people doing a job that interracts with the public before it all starts to blur into one. I'm also worn out by the endless hype about "we must be given billions of pounds to keep London moving" and I'm very sympathetic to having a really good public transport system. Imagine what real critics must think of the non stop publicity. One thing that irritated me was the statement that "TfL employ 30,000 people to keep London on the move". Unless something has changed that simply is not true so far as Surface Transport is concerned. Almost everyone pictured "out on the road" was employed by a contractor and not directly by TfL. The control room people are TfL employees but the bus staff, the "road" police and all the people patching up pot holes and giving people piggy backs were with outsourced contractors. The balance might change in future programmes but I don't think it helps to mislead people. Showing contractor staff being told off by a woman beside a sloppy pot hole repair just left me thinking "so they're prepared to be slap dash in front of a TV camera what is their work like when no one is watching?" Cynical of me I know but I've managed performance contracts so know the tricks that people get up to. 1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint. Well OK I might be being a bit pedantic but I see little point in broadcasting a programme *about TfL* that is not factually accurate. The impression created was that these people were employed by TfL. In the strictest sense they are NOT TfL employees. It would have taken seconds to make the point that they work under contract to TfL. That is a fundamental issue when it comes to the bus network which I assume we will touch on at some point in the series. As for the road works then sorry but it would have taken seconds for the repair crew to say to "that woman" that it was a patch repair and a permanent repair would be made later. I don't recall that being said. As the subtext of this programme is how important and efficient TfL is in keeping London moving then it would have made enormous sense to say "this is a temporary repair so the road surface is safe but we will come back at a much quieter time to make a permanent repair". Leaving viewers with the impression of bad "patch and mend" repairs is just shoddy and doesn't demonstrate value for money.
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Jun 20, 2013 11:40:53 GMT
1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint. Well OK I might be being a bit pedantic but I see little point in broadcasting a programme *about TfL* that is not factually accurate. The impression created was that these people were employed by TfL. In the strictest sense they are NOT TfL employees. It would have taken seconds to make the point that they work under contract to TfL. That is a fundamental issue when it comes to the bus network which I assume we will touch on at some point in the series. As for the road works then sorry but it would have taken seconds for the repair crew to say to "that woman" that it was a patch repair and a permanent repair would be made later. I don't recall that being said. As the subtext of this programme is how important and efficient TfL is in keeping London moving then it would have made enormous sense to say "this is a temporary repair so the road surface is safe but we will come back at a much quieter time to make a permanent repair". Leaving viewers with the impression of bad "patch and mend" repairs is just shoddy and doesn't demonstrate value for money. Your criticism there is of the roadworkers rather than the fly-on-the-wall documentary makers?
|
|
|
Post by greeny253 on Jun 20, 2013 13:05:00 GMT
1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint. Well OK I might be being a bit pedantic but I see little point in broadcasting a programme *about TfL* that is not factually accurate. The impression created was that these people were employed by TfL. In the strictest sense they are NOT TfL employees. It would have taken seconds to make the point that they work under contract to TfL. That is a fundamental issue when it comes to the bus network which I assume we will touch on at some point in the series. As for the road works then sorry but it would have taken seconds for the repair crew to say to "that woman" that it was a patch repair and a permanent repair would be made later. I don't recall that being said. As the subtext of this programme is how important and efficient TfL is in keeping London moving then it would have made enormous sense to say "this is a temporary repair so the road surface is safe but we will come back at a much quieter time to make a permanent repair". Leaving viewers with the impression of bad "patch and mend" repairs is just shoddy and doesn't demonstrate value for money. He did tell the woman it was a temporary repair, around the same time she likened repairing a pothole to making a cake....
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jun 20, 2013 15:33:44 GMT
1) You have a narrow definition of employed. TfL does employ those people, even if there is a middle man. They are employed to do a job for TfL so I wouldn't take enormous issue with that claim. 2) You're just as bad as that woman. She failed to understand that the repair was temporary - they do a lot of those repairs all over the place and generally speaking they are returned to at a later date to fully plane the area, re-tarmac and paint. I agree with you on point 1) but not with point 2) - temporary repair or not, that was awful and should of been done a lot better. Your correct that sometimes they come back at a later date to paint it and re-do but in some instances - even then it's not a very good job. It's only when the council hires someone to resurface a road that a proper job is done. Totally agree about point 1. A contractor is not an employee unless they are on the payroll. If the people on the road are paid by another company then they shouldn't be included in employee count. Its very poor reporting to reclassify them , suppose it reflects the lack of accuracy that some think is ok.
|
|
|
Post by Swadbus on Jun 20, 2013 20:17:17 GMT
I was surprised to see a certain forum member has made it into the series opening credits... Episode 2 is far more bus orientated... Timeout Website‘We’re not going to hell, we’re going to Ilford.’ If it helps to have a sense of humour to work at TfL, it’s probably essential when you’re driving a London night bus. Carrying more than 100,000 people every night (a threefold increase since 2000), the ever-expanding night bus network has become essential to the smooth(ish) running of the city. Episode two of this amiable docusoap presents incidents that won’t surprised too many scarred veterans of the post-midnight Trafalgar Square ruck – all human life is here and generally misbehaving – but ‘The Route Masters’ does underline the nightmarish job of the driver. There’s obviously the pee, vomit and general abuse. But then there’s a moment of physical intimidation, when a gang storms a bus without paying, that meets with a response rather more measured than most of us would manage (albeit one exposing a couple of unfortunate racial faultlines). Other associated characters, including those at nerve centre CentreComm and a homeless man who rides the buses to keep warm, prove just as mildly diverting. Hectic and enjoyable, if inessential – the ska soundtrack, needless to say, comes as standard.
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Jun 20, 2013 21:22:44 GMT
I agree with you on point 1) but not with point 2) - temporary repair or not, that was awful and should of been done a lot better. Your correct that sometimes they come back at a later date to paint it and re-do but in some instances - even then it's not a very good job. It's only when the council hires someone to resurface a road that a proper job is done. Its very poor reporting Anything but. I think we've just proved here that "employed" is open to semantic debate and can be quite subjective.
|
|
|
Post by slr on Jun 24, 2013 20:21:19 GMT
I was surprised to see a certain forum member has made it into the series opening credits... we are conversing with celebrity lol
|
|
|
Post by eggmiester on Jun 24, 2013 21:01:22 GMT
I have driven a double deck back via the southbound tunnel a few times. Indeed, the BX driver's used to do it when returning from Barking Rail jobs thus pocketing the money already given to them to come back via the Dartford toll ;D We never pocketed it at all! We only got one toll fee, for the northbound run! You only got both if your job finished at upminster before 10pm.
|
|
|
Post by greeny253 on Jun 25, 2013 0:04:36 GMT
I was surprised to see a certain forum member has made it into the series opening credits... Episode 2 is far more bus orientated... Timeout Website‘We’re not going to hell, we’re going to Ilford.’ If it helps to have a sense of humour to work at TfL, it’s probably essential when you’re driving a London night bus. Carrying more than 100,000 people every night (a threefold increase since 2000), the ever-expanding night bus network has become essential to the smooth(ish) running of the city. Episode two of this amiable docusoap presents incidents that won’t surprised too many scarred veterans of the post-midnight Trafalgar Square ruck – all human life is here and generally misbehaving – but ‘The Route Masters’ does underline the nightmarish job of the driver. There’s obviously the pee, vomit and general abuse. But then there’s a moment of physical intimidation, when a gang storms a bus without paying, that meets with a response rather more measured than most of us would manage (albeit one exposing a couple of unfortunate racial faultlines). Other associated characters, including those at nerve centre CentreComm and a homeless man who rides the buses to keep warm, prove just as mildly diverting. Hectic and enjoyable, if inessential – the ska soundtrack, needless to say, comes as standard. I just had to look at the opening credits just to see who you meant "Hello mum, I'm on the tele!"
|
|