In message <t19jvn$3tq$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:28:07 on Mon, 21 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t19faa$j7$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:08:26 on Mon, 21 Mar 2022,
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t17ut5$dpn$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:22:13 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 20/03/2022 16:00, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Haines, who is leading the team that will set up GBR, said that
>>>>>>> Treasury would “lose patience” if costs were not tackled as
>>>>>>>the industry seeks to wean itself off state support.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> How many national railway operators worldwide operate without state
>>>>>> support?
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the great tory myth that commuter railways can make a profit.
>>>>
>>>> SWT and bits of what's now GTR used to. Even taking into account the
>>>> grants to Network Rail. But other operators don't have their particular
>>>> economies of scale, passenger densities, and just as important inflated
>>>> fares that they appear to be able to get away with due to a defacto
>>>> monopoly over other modes, even though their passengers might be mainly
>>>> commuters.
>>>
>>> I suspect that with the post-Covid permanent wfh patterns, even those
>>> prosperous commuter networks won't be able to make a profit on commuters
>>> alone.
>>
>> I'm sure that's true.
>>
>>> They'll need to find ways of drumming up more leisure travel to fill
>>> the gaps.
>>
>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>> deep-cleaned them".
>
>That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.

Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.

....

>Postponed family reunions happened last year, when international travel
>opened up again.

I didn't open up until around October.

>Now, people are catching up on missed foreign holidays from the last
>two years. For example, I plan to take at least five foreign holidays
>this year. And it's great to be able to return to the UK with no tests
>required, and no Covid-related paperwork.

And the number of Covid infections doubled last week. Oops.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t19npr$5pq$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:33:15 on Mon, 21 Mar
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t182ci$mk1$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:21:38 on Sun, 20 Mar
>> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:40:55 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A 5 year hiring freeze is only going to change the mean age of the
>>>>> workforce by 5 years. It gets rid of roughly 25% of your
>>>>>workforce. I doubt
>>>>> the railway could cope with losing any more than that.
>>>>
>>>> You still have the problem that the people you lose may not necessarily
>>>> be the ones you can do without. Some key roles will always need filling
>>>> if they become vacant.
>>>
>>> Those won't be the ones eligible for voluntary redundancy, then; or if they
>>> are, a replacement will be recruited as they would for a normal retirement
>>> or resignation.
>>
>> A hiring freeze also affects an organisation's ability to replace key
>> workers who leave *other* than on any form of redundancy scheme. For
>> example if they retire (ago or ill health) or just get a better offer
>> from a different employer.
>>
>> Most hiring freezes will also come with a ban on bribing people to
>> stay, even if that were otherwise possible in more than a handful of
>> industries.
>
>This is true, if the hiring freeze is throughout the organisation and
>non-negotiable, eg "we won't be able to run trains unless we recruit X".
>
>There's also generally a flow upwards within in railway industry, with many
>(presumably most) positions being filled internally;

FSVO "internally". It doesn't help TOC A, if TOC B poaches lots of its
drivers.

>this means your
>shortage of staff is more likely to occur among guards and catering staff,
>as they move on to other roles.
>
>
>Anna Noyd-Dryver
>

--
Roland Perry

On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>
> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>
> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
> that's practicable with modern trains.

I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
this direction.

On 21/03/2022 11:33, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t182ci$mk1$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:21:38 on Sun, 20 Mar
>> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:40:55 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A 5 year hiring freeze is only going to change the mean age of the
>>>>> workforce by 5 years. It gets rid of roughly 25% of your workforce. I doubt
>>>>> the railway could cope with losing any more than that.
>>>>
>>>> You still have the problem that the people you lose may not necessarily
>>>> be the ones you can do without. Some key roles will always need filling
>>>> if they become vacant.
>>>
>>> Those won't be the ones eligible for voluntary redundancy, then; or if they
>>> are, a replacement will be recruited as they would for a normal retirement
>>> or resignation.
>>
>> A hiring freeze also affects an organisation's ability to replace key
>> workers who leave *other* than on any form of redundancy scheme. For
>> example if they retire (ago or ill health) or just get a better offer
>> from a different employer.
>>
>> Most hiring freezes will also come with a ban on bribing people to
>> stay, even if that were otherwise possible in more than a handful of
>> industries.
>
> This is true, if the hiring freeze is throughout the organisation and
> non-negotiable, eg "we won't be able to run trains unless we recruit X".
>
> There's also generally a flow upwards within in railway industry, with many
> (presumably most) positions being filled internally; this means your
> shortage of staff is more likely to occur among guards and catering staff,
> as they move on to other roles.
>

I suspect guards are amongst the roles the treasury regard as
supernumerary.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:38:46 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t19jvn$3tq$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:28:07 on Mon, 21 Mar
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t19faa$j7$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:08:26 on Mon, 21 Mar 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t17ut5$dpn$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:22:13 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 20/03/2022 16:00, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Haines, who is leading the team that will set up GBR, said that
>>>>>>>> Treasury would “lose patience” if costs were not tackled as
>>>>>>>>the industry seeks to wean itself off state support.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How many national railway operators worldwide operate without state
>>>>>>> support?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's the great tory myth that commuter railways can make a profit.
>>>>>
>>>>> SWT and bits of what's now GTR used to. Even taking into account the
>>>>> grants to Network Rail. But other operators don't have their particular
>>>>> economies of scale, passenger densities, and just as important inflated
>>>>> fares that they appear to be able to get away with due to a defacto
>>>>> monopoly over other modes, even though their passengers might be mainly
>>>>> commuters.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect that with the post-Covid permanent wfh patterns, even those
>>>> prosperous commuter networks won't be able to make a profit on commuters
>>>> alone.
>>>
>>> I'm sure that's true.
>>>
>>>> They'll need to find ways of drumming up more leisure travel to fill
>>>> the gaps.
>>>
>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>
>>That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>
>Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.

Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely. Meanwhile, in the real world, TfL was proclaiming that the Underground
was Covid-free more than a year ago:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56110232>

>
>...
>
>>Postponed family reunions happened last year, when international travel
>>opened up again.
>
>I didn't open up until around October.

There was plenty of foreign travel before October.
<https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/traffic-light-system-safe-return-to-international-travel>

>
>>Now, people are catching up on missed foreign holidays from the last
>>two years. For example, I plan to take at least five foreign holidays
>>this year. And it's great to be able to return to the UK with no tests
>>required, and no Covid-related paperwork.
>
>And the number of Covid infections doubled last week. Oops.

So what? We all know it's not going away.

If you're going to cower at home till Covid has completely disappeared, you'll never travel again. Meanwhile, normal
people have moved on with their lives.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

>On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>
>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>
>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>
>I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>this direction.

They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation, masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
to live with it, or become a recluse.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:35:25 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t19jou$8n5$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 10:24:30 on Mon, 21 Mar
>2022, JGD <news@prodata.co.uk> remarked:
>>On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>
>>Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>
>That too.
>
>>What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid
>
>Or to at least make the perception (if it's perception which is putting
>off discretionary passengers) mask wearing.
>
>>is a dramatic increase in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA
>>filtration). But I don't suppose that's practicable with modern trains.
>
>Plenty of them have air-con, and it's my understanding the aircon in
>planes have HEPA filters.

It does, but I don't think train aircon has them. But I don't know how much re-circulation there is in trains.

On 21/03/2022 10:55, Bob wrote:
> On 2022-03-20 14:15:08 +0000, nib said:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 14:08:29 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:40:55 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A 5 year hiring freeze is only going to change the mean age of the
>>>> workforce by 5 years. It gets rid of roughly 25% of your workforce. I
>>>> doubt the railway could cope with losing any more than that.
>>>
>>> You still have the problem that the people you lose may not necessarily
>>> be the ones you can do without. Some key roles will always need filling
>>> if they become vacant.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>
>> And that the ossification that sets in as no new enthusiasm and ideas get
>> brought in encourages the younger ones to leave more than the older ones,
>> so increasing the average age at more than real time.
>>
>> (Says he working in retirement to help out the business that seems unable
>> to recruit and retain young engineers even when it wants to.)
>
> Having been in the Engineering business for some years, there are a
> number of reasons a lot of engineering companies have trouble with
> recruitment, and despite what senior managing people who get quoted in
> the media say, it is not due to too few young people wishing to pursue
> an engineering career.  To start with, engineering companies rarely
> offer remuneration that is competitive with other business sectors that
> value the same skill set, so the good engineering graduates rarely end
> up doing engineering jobs.
>
> Because the companies have a hard time bringing in new good engineering
> graduates, they tend to be very reluctant to let those they have move on
> to other roles, meaning things like career progression is stagnant, and
> it is rare for someone who works in an engineerign technical role to get
> the chance to move into more responsible decision-making and management
> positions.  This means that the perception of engineering as a career is
> that you will never have the chance to actually move beyond a pretty
> basic position.
>
> Another issue is that people who have been in engineering technical
> roles for a long time tend to get first-pick of the interesting and
> challenging tasks, while the newbies get the dull and repetitive ones.
> This means someone might go into an industry with the idea of getting
> involved in the more interesting kinds of work done, but it turns out
> the interesting stuff is all done by people in their 50s and 60s.
>
> The other problem, not unique to engineering, but common in a lot of
> technical type fields is that recruitment processes strongly favour very
> specific experience over bringing in someone who is generally good and
> training them to do the specifics of the job.  I've just opened up
> LinkedIn and the first job posting I found relevant to my profession on
> their contains the following:
>
> Description: Internship - Entry Level
>
> As our ideal candidate you will have:
> at least 5 years' relevant experience
> experience in [two very industry-specific topics]
> have experience with Catia V5
>
> Who exactly is interested in an entry level internship level position
> who already has 5 years of very specific industry related expertise, and
> has proficiency with a specific design tool that nobody lacking a
> corporate-scale IT budget is likely to be able to have access to?
>
> Looking at the next post from a similar industry:
> Description: Entry Level
>
> As our ideal candidate you will have:
> 1-4 years' experience in the idnsutry
> experience with Catia V5 required
>
> The kind of people who actually meet these requirements but are actually
> interested in applying for "entry level" positions are nevery going to
> be the good ones.
>

Reminds me of when I went freelance back in the 1990s. There were
several jobs opening up at various tech colleges for teaching staff for
the newly created media studies courses. As a tutor they wanted minimum
5 years experience, fair enough, but they also wanted a Media Studies
degree which hadn't existed even 2 years before, never mind 5!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 21/03/2022 11:57, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>
>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>
>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic
>> increase in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I
>> don't suppose that's practicable with modern trains.
>
> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
> this direction.

Delete all after "understands".

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:

> Having been in the Engineering business for some years, there are a
> number of reasons a lot of engineering companies have trouble with
> recruitment, and despite what senior managing people who get quoted in
> the media say, it is not due to too few young people wishing to pursue
> an engineering career. To start with, engineering companies rarely
> offer remuneration that is competitive with other business sectors that
> value the same skill set, so the good engineering graduates rarely end
> up doing engineering jobs.
>
> Because the companies have a hard time bringing in new good engineering
> graduates, they tend to be very reluctant to let those they have move
> on to other roles, meaning things like career progression is stagnant,
> and it is rare for someone who works in an engineerign technical role
> to get the chance to move into more responsible decision-making and
> management positions. This means that the perception of engineering as
> a career is that you will never have the chance to actually move beyond
> a pretty basic position.

My Nephew could see that happening, while grateful for being taken on as an
apprentice
he then saw a few signs that graduates from elsewhere were favoured for any
future managerial roles. So armed with his engineering qualifications he
joined the Royal Navy instead, doing very well
and has been been advised by a superior who took him to one side who
suggested he should start the process of becoming an officer. If he
succeeds he says he will celebrate by buying a 2nd house, not bad for a 24
year old. The first one is let out as he lives with in Navy accommodation
most of the time and with Mum and Dad when on leave.
His engineering salary while not too bad would not have let him do that.

GH

On 2022-03-21 13:10:08 +0000, Graeme Wall said:

> On 21/03/2022 10:55, Bob wrote:
>> On 2022-03-20 14:15:08 +0000, nib said:
>>
>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 14:08:29 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:40:55 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A 5 year hiring freeze is only going to change the mean age of the
>>>>> workforce by 5 years. It gets rid of roughly 25% of your workforce. I
>>>>> doubt the railway could cope with losing any more than that.
>>>>
>>>> You still have the problem that the people you lose may not necessarily
>>>> be the ones you can do without. Some key roles will always need filling
>>>> if they become vacant.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>
>>> And that the ossification that sets in as no new enthusiasm and ideas get
>>> brought in encourages the younger ones to leave more than the older ones,
>>> so increasing the average age at more than real time.
>>>
>>> (Says he working in retirement to help out the business that seems unable
>>> to recruit and retain young engineers even when it wants to.)
>>
>> Having been in the Engineering business for some years, there are a
>> number of reasons a lot of engineering companies have trouble with
>> recruitment, and despite what senior managing people who get quoted in
>> the media say, it is not due to too few young people wishing to pursue
>> an engineering career.  To start with, engineering companies rarely
>> offer remuneration that is competitive with other business sectors that
>> value the same skill set, so the good engineering graduates rarely end
>> up doing engineering jobs.
>>
>> Because the companies have a hard time bringing in new good engineering
>> graduates, they tend to be very reluctant to let those they have move
>> on to other roles, meaning things like career progression is stagnant,
>> and it is rare for someone who works in an engineerign technical role
>> to get the chance to move into more responsible decision-making and
>> management positions.  This means that the perception of engineering as
>> a career is that you will never have the chance to actually move beyond
>> a pretty basic position.
>>
>> Another issue is that people who have been in engineering technical
>> roles for a long time tend to get first-pick of the interesting and
>> challenging tasks, while the newbies get the dull and repetitive ones.
>> This means someone might go into an industry with the idea of getting
>> involved in the more interesting kinds of work done, but it turns out
>> the interesting stuff is all done by people in their 50s and 60s.
>>
>> The other problem, not unique to engineering, but common in a lot of
>> technical type fields is that recruitment processes strongly favour
>> very specific experience over bringing in someone who is generally good
>> and training them to do the specifics of the job.  I've just opened up
>> LinkedIn and the first job posting I found relevant to my profession on
>> their contains the following:
>>
>> Description: Internship - Entry Level
>>
>> As our ideal candidate you will have:
>> at least 5 years' relevant experience
>> experience in [two very industry-specific topics]
>> have experience with Catia V5
>>
>> Who exactly is interested in an entry level internship level position
>> who already has 5 years of very specific industry related expertise,
>> and has proficiency with a specific design tool that nobody lacking a
>> corporate-scale IT budget is likely to be able to have access to?
>>
>> Looking at the next post from a similar industry:
>> Description: Entry Level
>>
>> As our ideal candidate you will have:
>> 1-4 years' experience in the idnsutry
>> experience with Catia V5 required
>>
>> The kind of people who actually meet these requirements but are
>> actually interested in applying for "entry level" positions are nevery
>> going to be the good ones.
>>
>
> Reminds me of when I went freelance back in the 1990s. There were
> several jobs opening up at various tech colleges for teaching staff for
> the newly created media studies courses. As a tutor they wanted minimum
> 5 years experience, fair enough, but they also wanted a Media Studies
> degree which hadn't existed even 2 years before, never mind 5!

It's not uncommon in the IT sector to see jobs demanding 5 years'
experience with things that have existed for less than 5 years too.
The problem with these sorts of stupidly crafted job advertisments is
that it actively favours those who just lie on their CVs.

Robin

In message <t19tfg$odc$2@dont-email.me>, at 13:10:08 on Mon, 21 Mar
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:

>> Description: Entry Level
>> As our ideal candidate you will have:

>> 1-4 years' experience in the idnsutry
>> experience with Catia V5 required

>> The kind of people who actually meet these requirements but are
>>actually interested in applying for "entry level" positions are
>>nevery going to be the good ones.
>
>Reminds me of when I went freelance back in the 1990s. There were
>several jobs opening up at various tech colleges for teaching staff for
>the newly created media studies courses. As a tutor they wanted minimum
>5 years experience, fair enough, but they also wanted a Media Studies
>degree which hadn't existed even 2 years before, never mind 5!

Other impossible job adverts: late 70's wanting 5+ years experience
programming 8-bit micros, which hadn't been around (outside the lab and
a very few specialist applications) that long.

And jobs I was looking at earlier this century which wanted degrees
"International Relations", which simply didn't exist when I was a
student.
--
Roland Perry

In message <v9tg3hp9rebievl83mqi1ehoonj7if35ae@4ax.com>, at 13:01:44 on
Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:38:46 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <t19jvn$3tq$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:28:07 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t19faa$j7$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:08:26 on Mon, 21 Mar 2022,
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t17ut5$dpn$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:22:13 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 20/03/2022 16:00, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Haines, who is leading the team that will set up GBR, said that
>>>>>>>>> Treasury would “lose patience” if costs were not tackled as
>>>>>>>>>the industry seeks to wean itself off state support.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How many national railway operators worldwide operate without state
>>>>>>>> support?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's the great tory myth that commuter railways can make a profit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SWT and bits of what's now GTR used to. Even taking into account the
>>>>>> grants to Network Rail. But other operators don't have their particular
>>>>>> economies of scale, passenger densities, and just as important inflated
>>>>>> fares that they appear to be able to get away with due to a defacto
>>>>>> monopoly over other modes, even though their passengers might be mainly
>>>>>> commuters.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect that with the post-Covid permanent wfh patterns, even those
>>>>> prosperous commuter networks won't be able to make a profit on commuters
>>>>> alone.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure that's true.
>>>>
>>>>> They'll need to find ways of drumming up more leisure travel to fill
>>>>> the gaps.
>>>>
>>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>>
>>>That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>>
>>Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.
>
>Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely.

As far as I know the speed of light is still the same, so if I was
watching a programme yesterday, it was probably transmitted yesterday.
The culprit here is Greater Anglia.

>Meanwhile, in the real world, TfL was proclaiming that the Underground
>was Covid-free more than a year ago:
><https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56110232>
>>...
>>
>>>Postponed family reunions happened last year, when international travel
>>>opened up again.
>>
>>I didn't open up until around October.
>
>There was plenty of foreign travel before October.
><https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/traffic-light-system-safe-
>return-to-international-travel>

Most of that is holiday travel. The USA only relaxed restrictions much
later:
"WASHINGTON, Sept 20 (Reuters) - The United States will reopen
in November to air travelers from 33 countries including China,
India, Brazil and most of Europe who are fully vaccinated
against COVID-19, the White House said on Monday, easing tough
pandemic-related restrictions that started early last year."

>>>Now, people are catching up on missed foreign holidays from the last
>>>two years. For example, I plan to take at least five foreign holidays
>>>this year. And it's great to be able to return to the UK with no tests
>>>required, and no Covid-related paperwork.
>>
>>And the number of Covid infections doubled last week. Oops.
>
>So what? We all know it's not going away.

What happened to Herd immunity. HaHa! Bonk.

>If you're going to cower at home till Covid has completely disappeared,
>you'll never travel again. Meanwhile, normal people have moved on with
>their lives.

An interesting perspective. So we have at last embraced the
philosophy of devil take the hindmost. Why don't we just take
everyone in a wheelchair out and shoot them? Save all those
pesky blue badge parking spaces.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 13:46:19 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <v9tg3hp9rebievl83mqi1ehoonj7if35ae@4ax.com>, at 13:01:44 on
>Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:38:46 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <t19jvn$3tq$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:28:07 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t19faa$j7$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:08:26 on Mon, 21 Mar 2022,
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t17ut5$dpn$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:22:13 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 20/03/2022 16:00, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Haines, who is leading the team that will set up GBR, said that
>>>>>>>>>> Treasury would “lose patience” if costs were not tackled as
>>>>>>>>>>the industry seeks to wean itself off state support.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How many national railway operators worldwide operate without state
>>>>>>>>> support?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's the great tory myth that commuter railways can make a profit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SWT and bits of what's now GTR used to. Even taking into account the
>>>>>>> grants to Network Rail. But other operators don't have their particular
>>>>>>> economies of scale, passenger densities, and just as important inflated
>>>>>>> fares that they appear to be able to get away with due to a defacto
>>>>>>> monopoly over other modes, even though their passengers might be mainly
>>>>>>> commuters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suspect that with the post-Covid permanent wfh patterns, even those
>>>>>> prosperous commuter networks won't be able to make a profit on commuters
>>>>>> alone.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure that's true.
>>>>>
>>>>>> They'll need to find ways of drumming up more leisure travel to fill
>>>>>> the gaps.
>>>>>
>>>>> Greater Anglia is currently advertising to potential passengers in East
>>>>> Anglia (on various TV and catch-up channels) to the effect that "It's
>>>>> not as dangerous as you think to travel on our trains, because we've
>>>>> deep-cleaned them".
>>>>
>>>>That was the slogan for public-transport operators a year ago.
>>>
>>>Odd then, I first saw the adverts this weekend.
>>
>>Things must move very slowly in time-warped Ely.
>
>As far as I know the speed of light is still the same, so if I was
>watching a programme yesterday, it was probably transmitted yesterday.
>The culprit here is Greater Anglia.

Yes, but they're catering to yokels like you.

>
>>Meanwhile, in the real world, TfL was proclaiming that the Underground
>>was Covid-free more than a year ago:
>><https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56110232>
>>>...
>>>
>>>>Postponed family reunions happened last year, when international travel
>>>>opened up again.
>>>
>>>I didn't open up until around October.
>>
>>There was plenty of foreign travel before October.
>><https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/traffic-light-system-safe-
>>return-to-international-travel>
>
>Most of that is holiday travel. The USA only relaxed restrictions much
>later:
> "WASHINGTON, Sept 20 (Reuters) - The United States will reopen
> in November to air travelers from 33 countries including China,
> India, Brazil and most of Europe who are fully vaccinated
> against COVID-19, the White House said on Monday, easing tough
> pandemic-related restrictions that started early last year."

You have an American wife, but not everyone's family is American. Conversely, people with Aussie or Kiwi families have
had a longer wait, and those with Chinese families, longer still.

As an aside, the complete absence of the usual throngs of Chinese in tourist hotspots is quite remarkable.

>
>>>>Now, people are catching up on missed foreign holidays from the last
>>>>two years. For example, I plan to take at least five foreign holidays
>>>>this year. And it's great to be able to return to the UK with no tests
>>>>required, and no Covid-related paperwork.
>>>
>>>And the number of Covid infections doubled last week. Oops.
>>
>>So what? We all know it's not going away.
>
>What happened to Herd immunity. HaHa! Bonk.

We've pretty much reached herd immunity, thanks to the vaccines. That's why most of us don't worry about it any more.

>
>>If you're going to cower at home till Covid has completely disappeared,
>>you'll never travel again. Meanwhile, normal people have moved on with
>>their lives.
>
>An interesting perspective. So we have at last embraced the
>philosophy of devil take the hindmost.

No, the UK has a population with a high degree of immunity, with a much milder variant now dominant. It's a very
different situation to two years ago.

> Why don't we just take
>everyone in a wheelchair out and shoot them? Save all those
>pesky blue badge parking spaces.

That's complete BS, as you well know.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>
>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>
>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>
>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>
>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>> this direction.
>
> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
> to live with it, or become a recluse.

So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
baby sister will also be constrained.

Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 21/03/2022 13:11, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 21/03/2022 11:57, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph,
>>>> huge numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the
>>>> trains are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>
>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>
>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic
>>> increase in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I
>>> don't suppose that's practicable with modern trains.
>>
>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>> this direction.
>
> Delete all after "understands".
>
lol

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:03:25 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>
>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>
>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>
>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>> this direction.
>>
>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>
>So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>baby sister will also be constrained.
>
>Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.

Very little, in fact. Mask wearing provides minimal protection: Omicron spread at lightning speed even when people were
all wearing masks.

On 21/03/2022 16:03, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>
>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>
>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>
>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>> this direction.
>>
>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>
> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
> baby sister will also be constrained.
>
> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>
Unfortunately too many extreme right wingers are uninterested in the
ramifications that the vulnerable members suffer under their "covid
crisis is over" policy.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:24:10 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

>On 21/03/2022 16:03, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>>
>>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>>> this direction.
>>>
>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>>
>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>> baby sister will also be constrained.
>>
>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>
>Unfortunately too many extreme right wingers are uninterested in the
>ramifications that the vulnerable members suffer under their "covid
>crisis is over" policy.

So, is the death rate shooting up then?

On 21/03/2022 16:36, Recliner wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:24:10 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>
>> On 21/03/2022 16:03, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>>>> this direction.
>>>>
>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>>>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>>>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>>>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>>>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>>>
>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>>> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>>> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>>> baby sister will also be constrained.
>>>
>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>
>> Unfortunately too many extreme right wingers are uninterested in the
>> ramifications that the vulnerable members suffer under their "covid
>> crisis is over" policy.
>
> So, is the death rate shooting up then?

It's certainly going up at the moment and hospital cases are rising
which means that essential treatments are being delayed again.

On the other hand the number of long covid cases is shooting up.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:41:01 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

>On 21/03/2022 16:36, Recliner wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:24:10 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/03/2022 16:03, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>>>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>>>>> this direction.
>>>>>
>>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>>>>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>>>>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>>>>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>>>>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>>>>
>>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>>>> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>>>> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>>>> baby sister will also be constrained.
>>>>
>>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>>
>>> Unfortunately too many extreme right wingers are uninterested in the
>>> ramifications that the vulnerable members suffer under their "covid
>>> crisis is over" policy.
>>
>> So, is the death rate shooting up then?
>
>It's certainly going up at the moment and hospital cases are rising
>which means that essential treatments are being delayed again.

Actually, the death rate is not going up at the moment. It's about a third of what it was two months ago.

>
>On the other hand the number of long covid cases is shooting up.

Do you have data for that?

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:03:25 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>>
>>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>>> this direction.
>>>
>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>>
>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>> baby sister will also be constrained.
>>
>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>
> Very little, in fact. Mask wearing provides minimal protection: Omicron
> spread at lightning speed even when people were
> all wearing masks.

Which just shows that vulnerable people can’t rely on masks to protect
them, only social isolation in the case where the infection is rife.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:02:25 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:

>On 21/03/2022 11:33, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t182ci$mk1$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:21:38 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>> 2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:
>>>> Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:40:55 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> A 5 year hiring freeze is only going to change the mean age of the
>>>>>> workforce by 5 years. It gets rid of roughly 25% of your workforce. I doubt
>>>>>> the railway could cope with losing any more than that.
>>>>>
>>>>> You still have the problem that the people you lose may not necessarily
>>>>> be the ones you can do without. Some key roles will always need filling
>>>>> if they become vacant.
>>>>
>>>> Those won't be the ones eligible for voluntary redundancy, then; or if they
>>>> are, a replacement will be recruited as they would for a normal retirement
>>>> or resignation.
>>>
>>> A hiring freeze also affects an organisation's ability to replace key
>>> workers who leave *other* than on any form of redundancy scheme. For
>>> example if they retire (ago or ill health) or just get a better offer
>>> from a different employer.
>>>
>>> Most hiring freezes will also come with a ban on bribing people to
>>> stay, even if that were otherwise possible in more than a handful of
>>> industries.
>>
>> This is true, if the hiring freeze is throughout the organisation and
>> non-negotiable, eg "we won't be able to run trains unless we recruit X".
>>
>> There's also generally a flow upwards within in railway industry, with many
>> (presumably most) positions being filled internally; this means your
>> shortage of staff is more likely to occur among guards and catering staff,
>> as they move on to other roles.
>>
>
>I suspect guards are amongst the roles the treasury regard as
>supernumerary.

Yes, very likely.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:53:58 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:03:25 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>>>> this direction.
>>>>
>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>>>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>>>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>>>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>>>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>>>
>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>>> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>>> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>>> baby sister will also be constrained.
>>>
>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>
>> Very little, in fact. Mask wearing provides minimal protection: Omicron
>> spread at lightning speed even when people were
>> all wearing masks.
>
>Which just shows that vulnerable people can’t rely on masks to protect
>them, only social isolation in the case where the infection is rife.

Yes, that's true.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:24:10 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>
>> On 21/03/2022 16:03, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:57:04 +0000, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 21/03/2022 10:24, JGD wrote:
>>>>>> On 21/03/2022 09:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The number of tourists required is enormous (12-car trains 4tph, huge
>>>>>>> numbers), and those tourists don't just need to be assured the trains
>>>>>>> are sanitised, but their destinations are too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Deep-cleaning of trains makes virtually zero difference to Covid
>>>>>> transmission - spreading via surfaces is minimal. (If the threat were,
>>>>>> say, Ebola then it would be a completely different matter.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's needed to make train travel safer re Covid is a dramatic increase
>>>>>> in forced ventilation (and maybe HEPA filtration). But I don't suppose
>>>>>> that's practicable with modern trains.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for ventilation to
>>>>> reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose we'll see any movement in
>>>>> this direction.
>>>>
>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation when
>>>> possible. But things have changed with Omicron:
>>>> we can all expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation,
>>>> masks, or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn
>>>> to live with it, or become a recluse.
>>>
>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter who is on
>>> chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from travelling or taking part in
>>> normal activities, like nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and
>>> baby sister will also be constrained.
>>>
>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>
>> Unfortunately too many extreme right wingers are uninterested in the
>> ramifications that the vulnerable members suffer under their "covid
>> crisis is over" policy.
>
> So, is the death rate shooting up then?

In Scotland the death rate is falling, the hospitalisation rate is higher
now than it was in January, both as a proportion of cases and in absolute
numbers, and the number of people in ICU is rising. The hospitalisation
rate may well reflect the general prevalence in the population, with more
infected patients in hospital for reasons other than COVID. It’s probably
too soon to say whether these trends are stable since the social situation
is changing.

<https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavirus-tracker/>

The issue for me, though, is not the trends in the general population but
what the effect will be on those who are more vulnerable.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply