|
Post by E279 on Oct 15, 2019 13:18:17 GMT
The difference is nothing, also if you move the 168 to HT so the 24 drivers can drive it where do the 168 drivers go to? It's basically a vicious circle So what are good reasons why the 168 should stay at W? You are being quite ludicrous, moving the 168 to HT will cause loads of new materials to be made such pay for schedules to be put in, new rota lines created, 6 months pay disturbance allowance to every driver shifted garage in this way as I'm sure not all 24 drivers will be staying at HT, pay for blinds and other engineering changes. HT is only a small portion nearer so why would Metroline bother when they'd have to do and account for everything I have just listed. The PVR of the 24 and 168 is also different with the 168 being higher than the 24. This just seems like you want the 168 at HT so you are arguing it to the point of death that its a tiny bit closer. I cannot see it moving at all and then what do you do with the 168 drivers, sack them all and give them a cookie to compensate? In this situation, the cons outweigh the pros by miles, the only good thing about moving it to HT is that it'll be a tiny bit closer.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Oct 15, 2019 16:16:58 GMT
So what are good reasons why the 168 should stay at W? You are being quite ludicrous, moving the 168 to HT will cause loads of new materials to be made such pay for schedules to be put in, new rota lines created, 6 months pay disturbance allowance to every driver shifted garage in this way as I'm sure not all 24 drivers will be staying at HT, pay for blinds and other engineering changes. HT is only a small portion nearer so why would Metroline bother when they'd have to do and account for everything I have just listed. The PVR of the 24 and 168 is also different with the 168 being higher than the 24. This just seems like you want the 168 at HT so you are arguing it to the point of death that its a tiny bit closer. I cannot see it moving at all and then what do you do with the 168 drivers, sack them all and give them a cookie to compensate? In this situation, the cons outweigh the pros by miles, the only good thing about moving it to HT is that it'll be a tiny bit closer. I completely agree. Its utterly pointless to move the 168 back to HT, as that would make moving the route to W in the first place pointless. The 168 wasn't moved out for no reason, and moving it back to HT would just mean the route is going back and forth from one garage to the other needlessly. There are also lots of costs involved in moving the 168 as mentioned.
I really don't see the need to move the 168 to HT. Most of the 24 drivers are being offed to QB anyway because Metroline don't want to keep high earning drivers at HT (Sources include a HT driver and others on this forum) if any are staying, which I don't believe they are, then does that facillitate a need to move the 168 back? No it doesn't. There will be vacancies elswhere, there are probably even vacancies at HT but I'm no expert, and if there aren't vacancies then drivers can go to other garages for work.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 15, 2019 16:36:46 GMT
So what are good reasons why the 168 should stay at W? You are being quite ludicrous, moving the 168 to HT will cause loads of new materials to be made such pay for schedules to be put in, new rota lines created, 6 months pay disturbance allowance to every driver shifted garage in this way as I'm sure not all 24 drivers will be staying at HT, pay for blinds and other engineering changes. HT is only a small portion nearer so why would Metroline bother when they'd have to do and account for everything I have just listed. The PVR of the 24 and 168 is also different with the 168 being higher than the 24. This just seems like you want the 168 at HT so you are arguing it to the point of death that its a tiny bit closer. I cannot see it moving at all and then what do you do with the 168 drivers, sack them all and give them a cookie to compensate? In this situation, the cons outweigh the pros by miles, the only good thing about moving it to HT is that it'll be a tiny bit closer. No you just move something there like the 32, 182 or the 186 so the drivers stay at W. It’s not ludicrous. I’m pretty sure I remember TP446 a Metroline worker saying the 168 was better at HT because it was closer. What will happen to the 24 drivers at HT once the 24 goes to Abellio London. Maybe I shut up now because we’re going nowhere with this. We will have to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Oct 15, 2019 16:41:44 GMT
You are being quite ludicrous, moving the 168 to HT will cause loads of new materials to be made such pay for schedules to be put in, new rota lines created, 6 months pay disturbance allowance to every driver shifted garage in this way as I'm sure not all 24 drivers will be staying at HT, pay for blinds and other engineering changes. HT is only a small portion nearer so why would Metroline bother when they'd have to do and account for everything I have just listed. The PVR of the 24 and 168 is also different with the 168 being higher than the 24. This just seems like you want the 168 at HT so you are arguing it to the point of death that its a tiny bit closer. I cannot see it moving at all and then what do you do with the 168 drivers, sack them all and give them a cookie to compensate? In this situation, the cons outweigh the pros by miles, the only good thing about moving it to HT is that it'll be a tiny bit closer. No you just move something there like the 32, 182 or the 186 so the drivers stay at W. It’s not ludicrous. I’m pretty sure I remember TP446 a Metroline worker saying the 168 was better at HT because it was closer. What will happen to the 24 drivers at HT once the 24 goes to Abellio London. Maybe I shut up now. Did a route move to W when the 232 went to GAL? No. The fact is that just because one garage has space, it doesn't mean its a good idea to move another route to that garage. Its highly likely there'll be other routes for the 24 drivers staying at HT to do once the 24 leaves, drivers staying at garages nearly always find other routes to work without any trouble. Furthermore, moving the 168 ''because HT has space'' won't solve anything as then you propose to just have vacant space at HD or EW instead, I fail to see the advantage of that. Should Metroline win routes at other garages, then perhaps moving routes around may be necesarry, but otherwise, it is a pointless endeavour.
|
|
|
Post by E279 on Oct 15, 2019 16:51:39 GMT
You are being quite ludicrous, moving the 168 to HT will cause loads of new materials to be made such pay for schedules to be put in, new rota lines created, 6 months pay disturbance allowance to every driver shifted garage in this way as I'm sure not all 24 drivers will be staying at HT, pay for blinds and other engineering changes. HT is only a small portion nearer so why would Metroline bother when they'd have to do and account for everything I have just listed. The PVR of the 24 and 168 is also different with the 168 being higher than the 24. This just seems like you want the 168 at HT so you are arguing it to the point of death that its a tiny bit closer. I cannot see it moving at all and then what do you do with the 168 drivers, sack them all and give them a cookie to compensate? In this situation, the cons outweigh the pros by miles, the only good thing about moving it to HT is that it'll be a tiny bit closer. No you just move something there like the 32, 182 or the 186 so the drivers stay at W. It’s not ludicrous. I’m pretty sure I remember TP446 a Metroline worker saying the 168 was better at HT because it was closer. What will happen to the 24 drivers at HT once the 24 goes to Abellio London. Maybe I shut up now because we’re going nowhere with this. We will have to agree to disagree. You don’t just ‘move’ something somewhere..... The things I mentioned have to be considered.... Someone doesn’t just wake up some morning and say right let’s move the 168 to HT, drivers also need notice.
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Oct 16, 2019 14:45:03 GMT
Brentford (AH) Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 10.9m for route 209 and 117 Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 11.5m for route 235 B5LH 10.6m Gemini 3 for route 237 B5LH 10.5m EvoSeti for routes E2 and E8
|
|
|
Post by george on Oct 16, 2019 14:45:48 GMT
Brentford (AH) Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 10.9m for route 209 and 117 Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 11.5m for route 235 B5LH 10.6m Gemini 3 for route 237 B5LH 10.5m EvoSeti for routes E2 and E8 . AH don't opperate the 209
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Oct 16, 2019 14:49:04 GMT
Brentford (AH) Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 10.9m for route 209 and 117 Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 11.5m for route 235 B5LH 10.6m Gemini 3 for route 237 B5LH 10.5m EvoSeti for routes E2 and E8 . AH don't opperate the 209 Oh I mean the 190. Get them two mixed up
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 16, 2019 14:51:48 GMT
AH: VMHs for routes 190, 237, E2 and E8. DEs for route 533. DLEs for routes 117 and 235
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 16, 2019 15:18:35 GMT
BT: BYD D9UR 10.2m / Enviro 200 MMCs for routes 251 and 326 Alexander Dennis E20D 10.9m / Enviro 200 MMCs for route 288 Alexander Dennis E40H / Enviro 400s for H12 Alexander Dennis E40H / Enviro 400 MMCs for routes 258, 303 and H12. BYD DD Electric / Enviro 400 City’s for route 139 Volvo B5LH / Wright Eclipse Gemini 2 for routes 142 and 642 Volvo B5LH / Wright Eclipse Gemini 3 for route 79
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Oct 16, 2019 15:30:26 GMT
AH: VMHs for routes 190, 237, E2 and E8. DEs for route 533. DLEs for routes 117 and 235 I would put the 11.5m on the 235
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 16, 2019 15:31:57 GMT
AH: VMHs for routes 190, 237, E2 and E8. DEs for route 533. DLEs for routes 117 and 235 I would put the 11.5m on the 235 That’s your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by george on Oct 16, 2019 15:51:18 GMT
I would put the 11.5m on the 235 That’s your opinion. The whole thread is peoples opinions!
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 16, 2019 17:01:58 GMT
Brentford (AH) Alexander Dennis Enviro 200 MMC 11.5m for route 235 Does the 235 really need 11.5m Enviro 200 MMCs? Is it really that busy?
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 16, 2019 17:19:05 GMT
S
BYD DD / Enviro 400 Citys for route 94 and 148 BYD D9UR 10.9m / Enviro 200 MMCs for route 70, 72, C1 and N72.
RP Alexander Dennis Enviro 400Hs for route 266 BYD D9UR 10.2m / Enviro 200 MMCs for route 398 BYD D9UR 10.9m / Enviro 200 MMCs for routes 223, 224, 283, 440 and H17 New Routemasters for routes 18 and N18 Volvo B5LH 10.5m / Wright Eclipse Gemini 3 for routes 220 and 266
SO Alexander Dennis E20D 10.9m / Enviro 200 MMC for route H18 and H19 Alexander Dennis E40H / Enviro 400 MMC for routes H14, H18 and H19 BYD D9UR 10.2m / Enviro 200 MMC for route 395 BYD D9UR 10.9m / Enviro 200 MMC for routes H11 New Routemaster for route 183
|
|