Jump to content
Fancy running a forum? Sheffield Forum is for sale! Learn more


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Annoni_mouse

  1. Any of these customers who you were dealing with spit in your face? Pull a knife on you? Scream foul obscenities in your face? Could these same people make up some BS complaint which could lose you your job? (Here's a fun game kids - walk on to a bus and smell weed? Why not report the bus driver? Must be him smoking it in his cab, musn't it?! Can't be one of the smelly passaengers, oh no..) Please don't try an equate working in a call centre (a call centre, seriously?) with dealing with the type of people who you wouldn't open your door to in any other occasion on a face-face basis. And yes, there are plenty of people waiting to take my job. Weirder still, despite being in a massive recession, most bus companies still manage to be in a position to be recruiting for new drivers. Doesn't that tell you something? I know I'm holering at the wind here. For most, bus drivers are on a par with News of the World journalists and traffic wardens and all they want to believe is that we set out to be as rude as possible for the sake of it. But talk to anyone who has been a bus driver and they will tell you exactly the same thing. Bus driving would be a fantastic job - if we didn't have to pick up passengers.
  2. In my depot, we have drivers from such far flung places as Ghana, Somalia, Poland, Germany, Hungary, Egypt and Ireland. We have drivers who used to be managers, qualified ADI driving instructers, former squaddies, taxi drivers and loads of former HGV drivers to name just a few occupations. For my part, I am a former salesman who worked in engineering company travelling around the country to visit customers replete with all the trappings i.e company car, sales seminars etc. Yet according to some, ALL bus drivers are miserable sods. If thats true, and as I've shown above we are all a pretty disperate bunch, what's the common link between all drivers regardless of their background? Lets see. Could it be that we all have to deal with passenegers day in day out, put up with their aggression and hostility, rudeness and arrogance? Nah, couldnt be that could it?! Try doing the job and you'll soon realise the truth of it and the wonderful British public. It cannot be compared with any other job, certainly nothing else I've ever done. Just because you work in retail and have to say 'have a nice day' does NOT give you an insight into our world anymore than because I drive for a living that somehow puts me in the same position as Jenson Button...
  3. That's fine if other passengers are prepared to stand up to people. If not, you just have one aggressive individual who can quite easily intimidate and subdue a bus load of people. This isn't just pie in the sky. I've seen it happen. I've been the bus driver who's stopped and ordered said passenger off the bus. His reaction? A bunch of threats and expletives followed by punching my screen and kicking two shades out of the bus. Luckily, his aggression was vented towards me and the vehicle, but it could easily have been turned against the passengers, and if it had considering it took a good ten minutes for the Police to arrive, what would have happened then? As for the other passengers, they just sat there and did nowt, apart from ask how long I thought we'd be before we started going again! Most driver I know would love nothing better than being able to get out of their cab and *persuade* these 'orrible passengers to get off their bus, but we simply can't. We'd be subject to the companies disciplinary procedures as well as possible action form the Police. As a nation, this is the kind of bs society we've created were miscreants and ne'er-do-wells can do what they do with impunity.
  4. What exactly was the driver to do? Bus drivers are not allowed to leave the cab to confront a passenger, regardless of provocation. If they are found to have left the cab without an extremely good reason, they will be subject to a disciplinary hearing and possibly lose their job. Any physical contact between the driver and passenger is a big no-no, so the driver cannot physically 'turf-off' any passenger. So the bus driver can only do one thing. Park up and contact the police. Simple, right? Well, the driver is afforded some protection from aggression by the perspex shield, however the other passangers on board the bus have none, so we have an aggresive individual who has already threatened one passenger who will soon twig on that the bus isn't moving and realise that the driver is up to something. What does the angry passenger do? Of course he may decide to just get off the bus. Or he may decide to vent his aggression against the passenger/s, in which case a physical assault becomes more and more likely. It's all very well complaining that the driver didn't do anything, but thanks to the restriction placed on us, the sad truth is we CANT do anything. And in case anyone is dubious about the above series of events, as a bus driver I can assure you that I have seen enough of the delightful British public to know that the above is not at all far-fetched and I've actually been in a similar (if not identical) situation myself.
  5. I don't usually post on these type of threads but this news has genuinly shocked me. sccsux was always an intelligent and forthright forummer and although I didn't always agree with his views, he will be sorely missed by the forum. RIP
  6. This is why we need a 'like' button on the forum! AD>CYE>Seinfeld (no abbr. ) Also worth looking out for is 'It's always sunny in Philadelphia' very much in the curb/arrested Dev. mould
  7. The point is that this individual doesn't believe that she should have to work in a job which she has no interest in, which of course she doesnt. She can simply say 'no thanks'. However, when she is expecting handouts(in the form of JSA) from the taxes of people who will equally be doing jobs that they don't have any interest in, then that's where the problem lies. It's not slave labour to expect people to work for their up keep, only in a society as perverse as this would it be seen as such. Everywhere else in the world, it would simply be called 'real life'. It's often said that American society has a 'can do' attitude. If we as a nation had an attitude, it would be 'why should I?' and this girl is a prime example.
  8. That's right, far better as a taxpayer you subsidise the lifestyles of people who don't want to work, or only work in areas that interest them. And this is why this country is up the junction...
  9. Evidently I don't have your admirable level of restraint...
  10. Do you ever hit that point in a 'debtate' where you think "Whats the point?"
  11. Arrogance? You'd know all about that! Thanks for your concern, but I'm more than happy with my driving skills ta, seeing as it's how I make my living and I'm subject to regular appraisals and assesments... YOU brought up the FACT that slow drivers are as dangerous as speeding drivers, even claiming statistics back you up. I've already showed you that your FACT is patently untrue. One last thing, if your posting style is indicative of your driving style, I would suggest that you're not nearly as competent a driver as you think you are. Anyone who flies off the handle so aggresively about something as trivial as drivers going a few MPH's under the speed limit should probably stick to sunday driving in a micra...
  12. Well, in the sitution you describe, there certainly wouldn't be a situation without a slow moving vehicle however, as a driver you have to be prepared to handle any situation including slow moving vehicles which may have no choice but to travel slowly. I find the proportioning of whole of the blame to the slow driver simply because the driver of the following car is 'frustrated' to be laughable, if I'm honest. As a pro driver I can tell you without hesitation that if I were involved in an accident attempting to overtake a slow moving vehicle and I gave the excuse that I had become frustrated by the slow speed of the vehicle in front, I would lose my job, no question. That there is some responsibility to be attributed to the slow moving driver, if they are driving slowly through lack of confidence or ignorance of the speed limit, I would agree with although for me the bulk of the reponsibility lies with the overtaker. If that long winded explanation makes sense
  13. The difference being that a static object is not going anywhere - you have to deal with the obstruction or park up and not move. A slow moving vehicle will still be moving and you will still get to your destination, all be it a little later than you had planned. How you respond to the slow moving vehicle is entirely up to you, if you get frustrated and attempt a dangerous manouver then that decicision is yours - you shouldnt blame the slow vehicle for your own impatiance. But you and I have had this same discussion before and I already know we will never agree.
  14. If that's the best you can come up with, I would leave it be if I were you! For a start, that report was compiled by an insurance company and appears to have been based on little more than the opinion of drivers. Hardly a scientific approach, is it? According to the Dept. of Transport, there were 154000* reported road accidents in the UK last year. Using that figure, the number of accidents caused by slow drivers (which according to the report you supplied is a 143) that means that slow driving contributes to 0.09% of all road accidents, if my math is correct. Hardly indicates that slow drivers are 'one of the biggest dangers on the road' does it? On the other hand, you throw about a figure of 94% of accidents not being caused by speeding - meaning that 6% of accidents are (again, according to your stats). That means that out of 154000 accidents, approx. 9200 are as a direct response to speeding. 9200 vs 143 Quite a difference, no? Now, I don't believe that speeding is the be all and end all of bad driving, but it is a symptom of selfish, ignorant driving which is, in my opinion, the source of most, if not all, bad driving. *Source
  15. No they don't. Don't you ever get tired of banging on about slow drivers? Go out and have a walk or something, take your mind off it....
  16. What a rediculous assertion. Just because an accident takes place within the speed limit for the road, that is no indiction that speed played no part in the accident. Inappropriate speed is most certainly a major cause of accidents and for the most part will be commited by drivers who, I would wager, consider their skills above average and who would scoff at the idea of being called a 'Slow Driver'. Take a look at this link -http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/13/1362.asp I've deliberately picked an anti speed camera website so I can't be accused of cherry picking information. According to the website, which quotes a Dept. of Transport report Nowhere on that list does it say that slow drivers were behind 'most' accidents. Infact of the above list at least 4 causes are unlikely to be attributed to slow drivers. The same data also shows that speed is
  17. The Barnsley megarider will only take you as far as Chap(eltown), just as the Sheffield megarider will only take you as far as the Norfolk Arms at Chapeltown coming in t'other direction.
  18. I think you're probably right. Agentina can play the wronged party to Britain's 'Colonial Aggression' and win some favour amongst the usual suspects. This is much more of a threat to the Islands remaining British than any military intervention. As for Chavez, I don't really see him as ny more than a blow hard. He'll certainly supply the rhetoric and hyperboly (sp?) but I don't see any meat with the gravy, if you catch my drift! Brazil I believe, are the real players in the region. They are an emerging nation and they have a lot of sway in that part of the world,but as an emerging nation, they are unlikely to show support for any naked aggression by one of their close neighbours, however much they my support the cause.
  19. Range would still be an issue for any land based air force. During the 82 conflict, the actual amount of loiter time for the FAA (fuerza aerea argentina) aircrft was limited to the amount of fuel they could carry in drop tanks - which meant that only two hardpoints were available for offensive stores. I think the idea that Argentina could mobilise the forces required to attempt to retake the islands without our inteligence picking up on it is extremely unlikely. Thats if they had the same level of capability as in 82. Which they don't. Not to mention the forces on the Islands have a far greater capability than they did in 82. In short, you've more chance of platting fog than you have of the Argentines retaking the Falklands by force.
  20. Hi all We have an (approx.) 6/7 year old apple tree in our back garden which to the best of my knowledge, has never been trimmed/pruned in any way (certainly not since we've lived here) I'm not scared to have a go at lopping off a few of the errant branches, but I would hate to do any lasting damage to the tree as it is really fertile and always produces a good crop of apples. Any tips would be appreciated
  21. Ok last post on this thread (promise:hihi:) But you havent, im sorry all you've offered is your assumptions and belief of what the woman meant. You, I or Uncle Tom cobley cannot know for certain what she meant, so your assumption of what she meant is no more valid than mine.
  22. My Grammar would kick your grammar's ass! At least she would if she was still alive
  23. I beg to differ. When you make an assumption, you are totally convinced that you are correct and everyone else's opinion is wrong. Yet you have nothing to back up your assumptions with anymore than I do. If you'd bother to read what I've posted (not once but twice) earlier, you would have seen that I was applying the same criteria to the black lady as has been applied to the white woman. She responded to a verbal tirade (based on race) with an equally racist comment (in my opinion). And as I've said, the comment was racist in content, not in intent. However according to most on 'ere, there is no justification for making racist insults. And to take the discussion back full circle (again) we still don't know what prompted the outburst.
  24. In that case, you'll realise that what I said was that if you air those views, you have to deal with the consequences. Man or woman. The gender shouldnt be relevant. Equally, advocating violence against someone for holding an opinion that is contrary to your own is also illegal. Yet you don't seem to have a problem with that. Hypocritical much?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.