Volunteer Lock Keepers

[canaldrifter]

BW is now advertising for volunteer lock keepers on the GU at Foxton,

Watford and Stoke Bruern flights. I guess this will result in

redundancies for those already responsible.

 

I wouldn't be able to apply personally, to old and decrepit, but I

wonder if volunteers would have any perks, such as free moorings?

 

Tone

 

http://www.waterscape.com/features-and-articles/news/2945/volunteer-lock-keepers-needed-on-the-grand-union-canal

Edited January 14, 2011 by canaldrifter

[Tam & Di]

BW is now advertising for volunteer lock keepers on the GU at Foxton,

Watford and Stoke Bruern flights. I guess this will result in

redundancies for those already responsible.

 

I wouldn't be able to apply personally, to old and decrepit, but I

wonder if volunteers would have any perks, such as free moorings?

 

Tone

 

I wonder too about the liabilities, if e.g. a boat got hung up on the cill or a line jammed or any of the hundred and one things that might happen do happen, even if there is a lock keeper. Will they be indemnified by BW?

 

My own attitude has always been that people are responsible for their own safety at all times, but we do seem to have moved into a society where blame and fault have to be laid at someone else's door, and financial compensation sought.

[Naughty Cal]

Would the volunteer lockies not just work alongside the existing lock keepers?

[WillC]

BW is now advertising for volunteer lock keepers on the GU at Foxton,

Watford and Stoke Bruern flights. I guess this will result in

redundancies for those already responsible.

 

Tone

 

My understanding from various meetings with BW is that volunteers will

not replace existing staff. The idea is for volunteers to help existing

staff. Possibly this means being able to save the cost of hiring temporary

personnel during busy times. I would guess that the Union is making this

point.

 

At the recent BW AGM the point was made that the move to charitable status

will have a built-in safeguard through TUPE, the law that protects the

rights of existing staff in the event that the business they work for

changes.

 

Cheers

 

Will

[canaldrifter]

I do hope that is so.

 

Tone

[muddywaters]

If I am honest I would consider volunteering but only if it did not mean people would lose their jobs.

Oh and on the subject of insurance, BW would be resposible for insuring any volunteers I would think.

Say this because when I was a volunteer with the ST John Ambulance Brigade they by law had to insure each volunteer

[twbm]

At the recent BW AGM the point was made that the move to charitable status

will have a built-in safeguard through TUPE, the law that protects the

rights of existing staff in the event that the business they work for

changes.

 

True - but TUPE just guarantees a transfer in to the new organistion. It doesn't provide protection from re-structuring of the new company.

[Laurie Booth]

In France they use unemployed people for lock keepers.

Seems to work well.

[john6767]

Don't BW already have volunteers working alongside the lock keepers on some flights anyway. I an sure that one of the "BW" guys I spoke with when going on Grindly Brook was a volunteer.

[Tam & Di]

In France they use unemployed people for lock keepers.

Seems to work well.

 

 

The VNF (French BW equivalent) certainly use a lot of student labour in the "high season", and a right cock-up some of them make of it!

[David Schweizer]

When I worked for the Local Authority, I was responsible for over 1500 volunteers. The County Council classified them as unremunerated staff, and they enjoyed all the same obligations and benefits of Paid Staff, includuing trainng where apropriate, terms and conditions of engagement, and Public Liability Insurance Cover. I would assume that any people working for BW in a Voluntary capacity, would be covered in a similar way.

[terryvanman]

I wonder if you get Luncheon Vouchers..Or beer tokens

[ditchcrawler]

My understanding from various meetings with BW is that volunteers will

not replace existing staff. The idea is for volunteers to help existing

staff. Possibly this means being able to save the cost of hiring temporary

personnel during busy times. I would guess that the Union is making this

point.

 

At the recent BW AGM the point was made that the move to charitable status

will have a built-in safeguard through TUPE, the law that protects the

rights of existing staff in the event that the business they work for

changes.

 

Cheers

 

Will

They already do this at Bratch

 

The VNF (French BW equivalent) certainly use a lot of student labour in the "high season", and a right cock-up some of them make of it!

had us hit the cill on a 2 lock staircase because he didnt have enough water in when opening the second gates

[canaldrifter]

Unverified info passed to me from elsewhere suggests that full-time lock-keepers have already been removed from those sites. The only resident is now responsible for several sites. In which case, volunteers would be replacing the original employees who were certainly there when I last passed that way.

 

The lock keeper at Bingley (who is well known) explained to us last summer that BW had stopped all his overtime. I guess volunteers will be covering that from now on?

 

It seems to be erosion of full-time employment by stealth.

 

Tone

[sueb]

If I am honest I would consider volunteering but only if it did not mean people would lose their jobs.

Oh and on the subject of insurance, BW would be resposible for insuring any volunteers I would think.

Say this because when I was a volunteer with the ST John Ambulance Brigade they by law had to insure each volunteer

Why would anyone want to do unpaid work when the bosses are getting exorbitant bonuses on the back of these volunteers?

Sue

[Albion]

The VNF (French BW equivalent) certainly use a lot of student labour in the "high season", and a right cock-up some of them make of it!

 

We showed one student on the Sardy flight on the Nivernais how to get his top gates open (even though he wasn't watching) after he had achieved a level with the paddles, closed the paddles again but left the gates shut, the lock above had emptied into the very short intervening pound and then he wondered why he couldn't get his top gates open to let us into the lock. He was organising a recall of his VNF supervisor when he turned round and appeared amazed to see my wife opening the gates. She had, of course, just lifted a paddle again and re-equalised the levels. He was really embarrassed and peed off that a woman had got his gates open when he was so convinced there was a problem with the gates.

However, one real advantage with the students is that they are keener, friendlier in general and not such state-employee jobsworths when it comes to timing of their breaks etc. Once they get into the swing of things they often make the boating a pleasure.

Roger

[fanshaft]

Why would anyone want to do unpaid work when the bosses are getting exorbitant bonuses on the back of these volunteers?

Sue

 

The use of volunteers is part of the move into the New Waterways Charity (or whatever it is to be called). It's generally understood (and those concerned have said) that large bonsues and salaries will be a thing of the past - although the amount of money in total is insignificant compared to BW's total costs.

 

I, too, understand (from a BW Director) that it is not intended that volunteers will be used to replace full time lock keepers but that the use of paid seasonal staff will be reduced. I was told that the response to the advertisements for volunteers for the Trent had been extremely good - and why not? Volunteers have been successfully used on heritage railways for 60 years, often in very highly skilled positions - signalmen, train drivers etc. The NWC is going to have to look hard and closely at its costs and how they can be reduced in order to survive, notwithstanding the potential to generate some income from membership / donations (estimated at maybe £10 per annum within 10 years).

 

regards

 

David L

Swallow/ Apollo

[Timleech]

 

I, too, understand (from a BW Director) that it is not intended that volunteers will be used to replace full time lock keepers but that the use of paid seasonal staff will be reduced.

 

It's fairly clear that some full time lock keeping posts will not be kept when staff leave/retire, that's the point at which they will be 'replaced'.

 

Tim

[sueb]

It's fairly clear that some full time lock keeping posts will not be kept when staff leave/retire, that's the point at which they will be 'replaced'.

 

Tim

The lock keepers are being given different duties and so are being encouraged to leave. There is no point of having volunteer lock keepers if the paid variety are still in their jobs.

Sue

[blodger]

The lock keepers are being given different duties and so are being encouraged to leave. There is no point of having volunteer lock keepers if the paid variety are still in their jobs.

Sue

There is no point having paid staff if others are willing to volunteer and do their jobs for nothing

Edited January 24, 2011 by blodger

[Laurie Booth]

Lets hope no one wants to do it.

[blodger]

Lets hope no one wants to do it.

Obviously, there are, and if they are, why not?

[Laurie Booth]

Obviously, there are, and if they are, why not?

Because it is doing someone out of a job, either today or the future.

[magpie patrick]

Foxton and Watford have had summer only cover for several years (it was certainly the case in 2000 when I did a study of the locks and incline for BW)and the main job of the summer lock keeper is to manage traffic not supervise the locks per se. This is necessary because you can't pass in the staircases, and I have had people stare at me in disbelief when I say, "you can't enter that lock because a boat is coming the other way" and just not comprehending that they will end up nose to nose with another boat half way up the staircase.

 

If the volunteer restricts themselves to that role the liabilities are zilch, if he or she helpfully whips up a paddle and the boat catches on a cill, there'll be trouble

[sueb]

More people that are without jobs, the more tax we will pay. Don't volunteer

Sue