Volunteer Lockies

[mayalld]

OK, as promised, let me tell you of our first encounter with real life CRT volunteers.

 

As many will recall, I have been somewhat forthright in expressing my view that (from my own personal POV, which is based upon our circumstances), they were likely to be (at best) an inconvenience, and at worst a hazard.

 

Despite my very clear misgivings about the prospect (based on previous experiences with unwanted "helpers" of other sorts), I have done my utmost to approach this with as open a mind as possible. I also chose NOT to discuss the fact that there are volunteers marauding around the system with Mrs M, lest she be unduly influenced by my experience!

 

We have just returned from a week out, during which we encountered two teams of volunteers. Naturally, I accept that our experience of such volunteers is statistically not a valid representation of the average, but it is a real experience.

 

I suppose that many here will imagine that when I say that our experience of volunteers was not a positive one, I will be sitting smugly with that look that says "told you so". Nothing could be further from the truth, for it seems inevitable that we are to be stuck with these volunteers tinkering with the workings of the canal, and much as I don't want them I would rather be able to say that they are pointless but harmless than to have to say that they were a hazard.

 

However, I have to say that they were a hazard.

 

Our first encounter was last Monday morning, when we arrived at the top of Bosley Locks to be faced with no less than 3 volunteers and their minder (apparently a paid employee).

 

The very INSTANT the top gates touched together, and long before we were safely clear of the cill, one of the volunteers, without so much as a glance at Bev, was winding a bottom paddle up. Bev shouted at him to stop (and as both of us were at the head of the lock, shouting was the only option), and I went down to the tail of the lock and asked him NOT to touch the paddles without the permission of the steerer. The response was to ask "what's her problem?" I explained that until the steerer was happy then the paddles shouldn't be drawn, and that in actual fact he had started to open a paddle before the boat was in a safe position to avoid being cilled, to which his response was "Anyone would think she was trying to berth the F***ing QEII, rather than have a bit of fun", at which point, I told him that as he viewed having a bit of fun as more important than safe operation of the lock his further assistance was distinctly unwelcome.

 

At this point the minder came over and said that "we have to understand" that they are volunteers and that they aren't yet fully trained, and that if we don't want them to help we only have to ask.

 

Sorry, but we don't "have to understand" anything. If they aren't trained, please don't assume that my boat is available for them to practice on. I shouldn't have to ask them not to help, they should be told that they must ask before helping, and I certainly don't think that it is at all acceptable for them to swear at boaters, when they have been told by the boater not to do something that is unsafe.

 

I have made a formal complaint to C&RT about the conduct of the volunteers.

 

Looking at it, why on EARTH would they put volunteers on the top lock at Bosley?

 

It isn't a difficult lock, it has no major traffic management issues, and it isn't the first lock that rookies encounter on a regular basis.

 

Had they been deployed at the BOTTOM lock, which is the first lock hirers encounter, then it might have made some sense (and on that day it would have made a lot of sense, because a broken paddle at lock 9 meant that uphill boats were bunching up 2 to a pound in the short pounds at the bottom, and somebody on the ground could have usefully controlled traffic coming up the flight).

 

Had they been deployed at lock 4, they could have removed the padlock from the sidepond paddle, and shown those who don't know how it works how it works or watched on as those who do know how it works used it.

 

But of course the brew room and toilets are at the top lock, so the volunteers are deployed where they can have a fun day out rather than where they might possibly be useful.

 

The second encounter was on Friday at Bridge 48 on the Macc, which is the manual swing bridge (the one that has been permanently open for donkeys years but is now back in action) upstream of Oakgrove.

 

Several boats were going through, and as we approached, we could see the volunteers standing around in their yellow hi-viz jackets. OK, I can see this as a marginally useful occupation, because that bridge is a bit of a PITA to get off and on to operate.

 

As we approached, the bridge suddenly started to swing shut in front of us, and only a rapid application of reverse avoided us running into it. Apparently the volunteers have been trained that a maximum of 3 boats go through each time they open a bridge, so as to allow road traffic to pass.

 

Now, that would indeed be sound operating practice at Oakgrove swing bridge, where even 3 boats can lead to a bit of reving from the waiting traffic, but this isn't a road bridge! It is a farm access bridge, and a bridge that sees almost ZERO use for crossing the canal. There was no traffic that needed to pass, and in any case if they needed to close the bridge wouldn't some kind of signal have been helpful? If they are opening bridges, and I have no idea whether they are going to keep it open or not, then I'd rather they shut it and let me work it myself.

 

In the interests of balance, I should report that I did see a volunteer performing a valuable public service on a canal in Stone on Wednesday. He was usefully engaged in litter picking. Such a pity that he doesn't count on CaRT's scorecard, because he wasn't a CaRT volunteer, he was a member of Stone Lions Club .

[mrsmelly]

OK, as promised, let me tell you of our first encounter with real life CRT volunteers.

 

As many will recall, I have been somewhat forthright in expressing my view that (from my own personal POV, which is based upon our circumstances), they were likely to be (at best) an inconvenience, and at worst a hazard.

 

Despite my very clear misgivings about the prospect (based on previous experiences with unwanted "helpers" of other sorts), I have done my utmost to approach this with as open a mind as possible. I also chose NOT to discuss the fact that there are volunteers marauding around the system with Mrs M, lest she be unduly influenced by my experience!

 

We have just returned from a week out, during which we encountered two teams of volunteers. Naturally, I accept that our experience of such volunteers is statistically not a valid representation of the average, but it is a real experience.

 

I suppose that many here will imagine that when I say that our experience of volunteers was not a positive one, I will be sitting smugly with that look that says "told you so". Nothing could be further from the truth, for it seems inevitable that we are to be stuck with these volunteers tinkering with the workings of the canal, and much as I don't want them I would rather be able to say that they are pointless but harmless than to have to say that they were a hazard.

 

However, I have to say that they were a hazard.

 

Our first encounter was last Monday morning, when we arrived at the top of Bosley Locks to be faced with no less than 3 volunteers and their minder (apparently a paid employee).

 

The very INSTANT the top gates touched together, and long before we were safely clear of the cill, one of the volunteers, without so much as a glance at Bev, was winding a bottom paddle up. Bev shouted at him to stop (and as both of us were at the head of the lock, shouting was the only option), and I went down to the tail of the lock and asked him NOT to touch the paddles without the permission of the steerer. The response was to ask "what's her problem?" I explained that until the steerer was happy then the paddles shouldn't be drawn, and that in actual fact he had started to open a paddle before the boat was in a safe position to avoid being cilled, to which his response was "Anyone would think she was trying to berth the F***ing QEII, rather than have a bit of fun", at which point, I told him that as he viewed having a bit of fun as more important than safe operation of the lock his further assistance was distinctly unwelcome.

 

At this point the minder came over and said that "we have to understand" that they are volunteers and that they aren't yet fully trained, and that if we don't want them to help we only have to ask.

 

Sorry, but we don't "have to understand" anything. If they aren't trained, please don't assume that my boat is available for them to practice on. I shouldn't have to ask them not to help, they should be told that they must ask before helping, and I certainly don't think that it is at all acceptable for them to swear at boaters, when they have been told by the boater not to do something that is unsafe.

 

I have made a formal complaint to C&RT about the conduct of the volunteers.

 

Looking at it, why on EARTH would they put volunteers on the top lock at Bosley?

 

It isn't a difficult lock, it has no major traffic management issues, and it isn't the first lock that rookies encounter on a regular basis.

 

Had they been deployed at the BOTTOM lock, which is the first lock hirers encounter, then it might have made some sense (and on that day it would have made a lot of sense, because a broken paddle at lock 9 meant that uphill boats were bunching up 2 to a pound in the short pounds at the bottom, and somebody on the ground could have usefully controlled traffic coming up the flight).

 

Had they been deployed at lock 4, they could have removed the padlock from the sidepond paddle, and shown those who don't know how it works how it works or watched on as those who do know how it works used it.

 

But of course the brew room and toilets are at the top lock, so the volunteers are deployed where they can have a fun day out rather than where they might possibly be useful.

 

The second encounter was on Friday at Bridge 48 on the Macc, which is the manual swing bridge (the one that has been permanently open for donkeys years but is now back in action) upstream of Oakgrove.

 

Several boats were going through, and as we approached, we could see the volunteers standing around in their yellow hi-viz jackets. OK, I can see this as a marginally useful occupation, because that bridge is a bit of a PITA to get off and on to operate.

 

As we approached, the bridge suddenly started to swing shut in front of us, and only a rapid application of reverse avoided us running into it. Apparently the volunteers have been trained that a maximum of 3 boats go through each time they open a bridge, so as to allow road traffic to pass.

 

Now, that would indeed be sound operating practice at Oakgrove swing bridge, where even 3 boats can lead to a bit of reving from the waiting traffic, but this isn't a road bridge! It is a farm access bridge, and a bridge that sees almost ZERO use for crossing the canal. There was no traffic that needed to pass, and in any case if they needed to close the bridge wouldn't some kind of signal have been helpful? If they are opening bridges, and I have no idea whether they are going to keep it open or not, then I'd rather they shut it and let me work it myself.

 

In the interests of balance, I should report that I did see a volunteer performing a valuable public service on a canal in Stone on Wednesday. He was usefully engaged in litter picking. Such a pity that he doesn't count on CaRT's scorecard, because he wasn't a CaRT volunteer, he was a member of Stone Lions Club .

 

We often have volunteer lock keepers on the Trent locks. I use Holme lock on a near daily basis and as we are by far the biggest passenger boat on the Trent they are often not at all used to seeing us appear on the horizon so to speak. We have a system based on safety and risk assesment on how we need to use the lock. It has often been shall we say " Intersesting " because of their lack of experience but we have found they listen to us and ask us what they should or should not do and are genuinely interested. Our own Keith " Jelunga " of this forum has been with me in the wheelhouse of the Princess as he was keen to understand from our point of view what was involved as he now is a volunteer on the Trent. I think he learnt a lot from the experience especialy seeing how daft some small boats are at the entrance/exit to the locks when we are around.

I find the volunteers are great and remember they are giving their time for nowt.

Perhaps some narrowboaters could take some of the inexperienced lockies up and down a few locks to give them a boat handlers perspective

 

Tim

[carlt]

OK, as promised, let me tell you of our first encounter with real life CRT volunteers. <snip the predictable rant>.

 

I can only assume that your one encounter with an, as yet, not completely trained volunteer has confirmed your generalisation that all the volunteer lockies will be interfering know-alls.

 

I've no doubt that if your experience had been a good one (impossible though as you are determined to find fault) you would have dismissed it as an isolated incident.

 

You are entirely predictable, Dave, and I am sure you would object if someone dismissed all scout volunteers as kiddy fiddlers if just one is convicted.

 

If your description is viewed with less biased eyes it would reveal that no harm was actually done, the supervisor apologised and gave an acceptable reason for the "incident" and any rational person would have carried on his way without feeling the need to compose a strongly worded letter of complaint.

 

There is no excuse for swearing but there is also no excuse for shouting and, looking at the way you rant here, I can understand how, if this attitude is transferred to real life, you get such a negative response.

 

I'm just so glad I don't have to spend my life seething.

 

 

Perhaps some narrowboaters could take some of the inexperienced lockies up and down a few locks to give them a boat handlers perspective

 

Tim

What, when your sharpened pen is on board, poised to fire off a letter of complaint after over reacting to a minor incident?

 

Why be friendly when it's so much more satisfying (for some) to be angry?

[nicknorman]

Some people do like to make a meal out of locks! Especially going down, we just put the boat in the lock and open the paddles. If someone wants to open the paddles as soon as the top gates touch that is fine by me, and pleasingly expeditious. It does not require any skill or judgement to stop a non-full length boat clear of the sill and before hitting the bottom gates.

 

I can just imagine the scene. Walky talkies out - "Mrs M this is Mr M here, over" ... "Mr M this is Mrs M, pass your message, over" ... "Mrs M this is Mr M, requesting permission to open bottom paddle number 1, over" ... "Mr M this is Mrs M. Standby, risk assessment in progress"...... ...... ..... ...

"Mr M this is Mrs M, permission to wind paddle slowly to half way is granted." ... "Mrs M this is Mr M - Oh poo, I left the windlass on the boat".

 

There really is no need to make it so difficult but perhaps the participants regretted not having a career in Air Traffic Control. All this seeking permission from the steerer is just BS.

 

ETA participants as in the boaters, not the volockies

Edited August 13, 2012 by nicknorman

[carlt]

 

There really is no need to make it so difficult but perhaps the participants regretted not having a career in the military. All this seeking permission from the steerer is just BS.

I think there may be an important element that is missing from the volockie's training...

 

Please be aware that 99% of the time you will have a smooth, relaxed time with happy people who are only interested in having an enjoyable, safe holiday.

 

There will also be the one percent who are constantly angry, looking for fault and will shout and scream if everything is not completely to their rules and they will then be writing to C&RT complaining about your incompetence and insolence.

 

These people are in the minority and please do not tar all other boaters with the same brush...and HEY!

 

Let's be careful out there.

[mayalld]

I can only assume that your one encounter with an, as yet, not completely trained volunteer has confirmed your generalisation that all the volunteer lockies will be interfering know-alls.

 

I've no doubt that if your experience had been a good one (impossible though as you are determined to find fault) you would have dismissed it as an isolated incident.

 

You are entirely predictable, Dave, and I am sure you would object if someone dismissed all scout volunteers as kiddy fiddlers if just one is convicted.

 

If your description is viewed with less biased eyes it would reveal that no harm was actually done, the supervisor apologised and gave an acceptable reason for the "incident" and any rational person would have carried on his way without feeling the need to compose a strongly worded letter of complaint.

 

There is no excuse for swearing but there is also no excuse for shouting and, looking at the way you rant here, I can understand how, if this attitude is transferred to real life, you get such a negative response.

 

Whilst you can choose to believe what you wish about me or my intentions, I can only say that I set out with a very genuine intention of seeing how it went. Despite my antipathy towards the whole thing, I was determined that should I encounter volunteer lockies, I would give them the benefit of the doubt, allow them to proceed unless it became clear that there was an actual safety issue, and to appraise the experience with as little bias as I could muster.

 

Your assertions above, however, are incorrect;

• You say that "no harm was actually done". Do you seriously contend that a "near miss" is OK? We have a safe system of operating the locks where paddles are not opened until we are properly clear of the cill. In this case, the water level was being lowered whilst we were over the cill. In relation to the second incident, do you imagine that throwing the boat into full reverse to stop so as to avoid a collision is "no harm done"?
• You say that the supervisor apologised. This is incorrect. The supervisor actually delivered a mini-lecture about how we would have to be more tolerant of the volunteers making mistakes, because they weren't fully trained.
• You say that the explanation was acceptable. No it was not an acceptable explanation. In previous exchanges here, one of the arguments that you have advanced is that volunteer lockies are OK, because they will all be fully trained. You now shift your position, and it is now OK if they aren't fully trained before being let loose on other people's property.
• You say that there is no excuse for shouting, and reference the way I "rant on here". May I point out that I didn't shout at anybody. Rather Bev, who was at the tiller shouted "drop that paddle" to the person who had wound it up without checking that it was safe to do so. Given that both Bev and I were 70 ft away from the paddle, what would you suggest? Should one of us have ambled over to have a quiet word whilst the boat was settling on the cill? Where there is a safety issue that requires immediate action from somebody some distance away, shouting is an ENTIRELY appropriate way of trying to ensure that the action is taken. At the same time, I was heading towards the tail of the lock to take action if necessary.

As I said in my original post, I fully accept that my experience is not statistically significant, and may well be unrepresentative. I maintain, however that it shows that CaRT are letting untrained volunteers work locks (and the mistakes made are indicative of an abject failure to deliver the basic safety messages that should have been covered before they ever got within a hundred yards of a lock).

 

Perhaps, over time, we will encounter volunteers who are capable (although following this experience, any volunteer who attempts to intervene without asking first will be asked to step away, and we will enquire whether the volunteer has been fully trained).

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Some people do like to make a meal out of locks! Especially going down, we just put the boat in the lock and open the paddles. If someone wants to open the paddles as soon as the top gates touch that is fine by me, and pleasingly expeditious. It does not require any skill or judgement to stop a non-full length boat clear of the sill and before hitting the bottom gates.

 

I can just imagine the scene. Walky talkies out - "Mrs M this is Mr M here, over" ... "Mr M this is Mrs M, pass your message, over" ... "Mrs M this is Mr M, requesting permission to open bottom paddle number 1, over" ... "Mr M this is Mrs M. Standby, risk assessment in progress"...... ...... ..... ...

"Mr M this is Mrs M, permission to wind paddle slowly to half way is granted." ... "Mrs M this is Mr M - Oh poo, I left the windlass on the boat".

 

There really is no need to make it so difficult but perhaps the participants regretted not having a career in the military. All this seeking permission from the steerer is just BS.

 

Although not quite in that level of detail I must confess that I always check with Jan that she is ready for the paddles to be lifted, normally I just do it as I walk past the stern on the way to the bottom paddles.

 

I don't see it as 'seeking permission' - just that she is ready.

Edited August 13, 2012 by The Dog House

[Amber34]

We are only hirers (you know, the ones that constantly speed along the cut ) so nowhere near as experienced as some of the old hands who post on here, but during our most recent jaunt found the volunteers to be really helpful and perfectly pleasant.

 

At Braunston we encountered two volunteers to help us through the first two locks. Due to navigator error (that'll be me then), we missed the opportunity to wind and asked the lockie at the second lock whether he had any recommendations. Without boring you with details, he guided and physically helped us to wind at a convenient point before sending us on our way. He has been a canal boater for 35 years and we gladly accepted his knowledge and experience. I didn't think to ask if he had been trained

 

We also encountered several vols at Hillmorton who were ensuring the parallel locks (is that what you call them?) were working to great efficiency, helping all boaters with the locks whenever they could and generally chatting and sharing their knowledge about the cut.

 

All in all, it was lovely to get a hand, learn a bit of history and have a chin wag with experienced and enthusiastic canal boaters who were kind enough not to complain and moan about any of the folk they had helped.

Edited August 13, 2012 by Amber34

[Paul C]

I've encountered a wide variation in other people (almost always, other boaters) perceptions of how to operate locks. I don't mind the help, and can cope with them doing daft things because I can control the boat even if its not quite approached as a technical military operation etc. The worst ones are when someone accidentally leaves a paddle open (or worse still because you can't see it, 1/4 open) but I've always been able to cope with the boat despite the unusual flows of water in the lock. So, opening the paddles before the boat is positioned right (can't she position it in time as they're closing the back gate?) is pretty mild and if there's a queue, I'd encourage it. Maybe your wife is underconfident at driving the boat in locks?

 

The only time I've actually had to stop someone is when they stepped onto the boat as I was (nearly there) approaching a lock landing and they were going to tie the front rope! I knew they were being helpful though, and meant no harm, so a simple "It's alright mate, don't worry" was sufficient rather than being angry, starting a thread on an internet forum and writing any letters etc.

 

As stated in the other thread, canals AREN'T for the exlusive use of one boater at a time, you need to learn to cope with interacting with other boaters (and other waterways users), and in a friendly way.

[kiki]

Can still remember our training with TopLock, dont lift the paddles until the person on the boat says OK (we had to do some sort of thumbs up thing). I am always nervous about the cill and the fact that the MB has the concentration span of a gnat so always make sure he is ready. Only takes a second or two to avoid a disaster.

[mayalld]

All this seeking permission from the steerer is just BS.

 

No, all this asking permission from the steerer is common sense, and the way that accidents are avoided.

 

There seems to be some particularly wooly-headed thinking from some people that says "oh we are out to have a good time, we don't need to take care of safety".

 

Taking a boat through a lock is (considering the mechanisms involved) something that can be done safely, but that safe operation is TOTALLY dependent upon somebody not doing the unexpected.

 

Like most boaters, Mrs M and I have a system that works FOR US, and which does not rely on huge amounts of verbal communication. We can work a lock quickly, safely and efficiently. A glance and a nod confirms that we are good to go.

[magpie patrick]

I don't understand why volunteer lock keepers are working in places like Bosley, where the norm has been user operation.

 

Whilst I understand Carlt's dislike of Mayalld's stance, I don't understand why volunteers are doing jobs that didn't need doing a year ago. Dave Mayall may have a problem, the volunteer who did what is described (assuming the description is accurate) has a far bigger one.

 

One of my friends called it "helping an old lady across the road, when she didn't actually want to cross the road", that is an apt description not just of some volunteers, but of the jobs that are being offered to them.

[nicknorman]

Although not quite in that level of detail I must confess that I always check with Jan that she is ready for the paddles to be lifted, normally I just do it as I walk past the stern on the way to the bottom paddles.

 

I don't see it as 'seeking permission' - just that she is ready.

We tend to assume that the steerer is ready unless demonstrably otherwise - eg looking the other way, looking flustered, gone below to put the kettle on etc. Of course if the steerer is not ready for some non-obvious reason, he can always voice the problem especially when going down hill, however I can't remember that ever being the case since we try to be efficient and prepared! Going uphill is perhaps slightly different since positioning of the boat is more critical and I would certainly pay attention not only when winding paddles but also for a while afterwards until everything has settled. But we still rely on body language rather than verbal or signed communications and works OK for us and keeps it non-officious! I suppose it depends on how much you trust your partner.

[Guest]

I don't understand why volunteer lock keepers are working in places like Bosley, where the norm has been user operation.

 

Whilst I understand Carlt's dislike of Mayalld's stance, I don't understand why volunteers are doing jobs that didn't need doing a year ago. Dave Mayall may have a problem, the volunteer who did what is described (assuming the description is accurate) has a far bigger one.

 

One of my friends called it "helping an old lady across the road, when she didn't actually want to cross the road", that is an apt description not just of some volunteers, but of the jobs that are being offered to them.

 

The cynical view is that they are preparing them so that they can do away with paid lockies at sites where they are deployed.

[nicknorman]

We tend to assume that the steerer is ready unless demonstrably otherwise - eg looking the other way, looking flustered, gone below to put the kettle on etc. Of course if the steerer is not ready for some non-obvious reason, he can always voice the problem especially when going down hill, however I can't remember that ever being the case since we try to be efficient and prepared! Going uphill is perhaps slightly different since positioning of the boat is more critical and I would certainly pay attention not only when winding paddles but also for a while afterwards until everything has settled. But we still rely on body language rather than verbal or signed communications and works OK for us and keeps it non-officious! I suppose it depends on how much you trust your partner.

 

Sorry, double post. Should have got clearance from other half before pressing "post"

Edited August 13, 2012 by nicknorman

[Guest]

Sorry, double post. Should have got clearance from other half before pressing "post"

[carlt]

• [*]You say that "no harm was actually done". Do you seriously contend that a "near miss" is OK?

 

I contend that your description does not sound anything like a "near miss".

 

We have a safe system of operating the locks where paddles are not opened until we are properly clear of the cill.

 

I'm sure you do, Dave, but you would appear to be incapable of communicating this without shouting and bringing out the worst in those who may have not met your exacting standards. Have you tried being friendly to people and offering them the benefit of your experience, rather than barking at them and approaching them in a confrontational manner? I somehow doubt it.

In relation to the second incident, do you imagine that throwing the boat into full reverse to stop so as to avoid a collision is "no harm done"?[*]

Given your propensity for exaggeration and showboating on the forum I suspect the need for exaggerated reversing was not quite as urgent as you make out. More likely an angry revving in reverse after being held up for no more than a few moments, by volunteers following instructions.

 

Given that both Bev and I were 70 ft away from the paddle, what would you suggest? Should one of us have ambled over to have a quiet word whilst the boat was settling on the cill? Where there is a safety issue that requires immediate action from somebody some distance away, shouting is an ENTIRELY appropriate way of trying to ensure that the action is taken.

No it isn't and if that is how you feel you need to react, in an emergency, then I suggest you have missed out on some of your fantastic scout leader training.

 

Shouting at someone who may be about to do something rash is the best way of making them complete the action that you are trying to avoid.

 

Calmly taking control of the situation is the ENTIRELY appropriate way of avoiding incident or injury rather than barking orders at someone.

 

I would also suggest that if you were both 70 feet away from the paddle that needs lifting then your technique is flawed.

Edited August 13, 2012 by carlt

[mayalld]

I'm sure you do, Dave, but you would appear to be incapable of communicating this without shouting and bringing out the worst in those who may have not met your exacting standards. Have you tried being friendly to people and offering them the benefit of your experience, rather than barking at them and approaching them in a confrontational manner? I somehow doubt it.

 

And when did the opportunity to do this arise? I was at the top gate, the volunteer emerged from the brew room and walked directly to the bottom gate.

 

I would also suggest that if you were both 70 feet away from the paddle that needs lifting then your technique is flawed.

 

Oh DO share your wisdom on the issue!

 

Bev was steering the boat, a task usually best achieved on our boat by standing on the stern. I had JUST closed the towpath side top gate, whilst the offside top gate had swung shut itself (Bosley regulars will confirm that "swingy" gates is a feature of the flight). At that moment, as the gates touched, I really fail to see where else either of us might reasonably have been other than at the head of the lock.

 

Shouting at someone who may be about to do something rash is the best way of making them complete the action that you are trying to avoid.

 

As the paddle was already going up at a rate of knots, shouting was not going to cause it to happen any faster.

[nicknorman]

At that moment, as the gates touched, I really fail to see where else either of us might reasonably have been other than at the head of the lock.

At the foot of the lock winding the paddle, the steerer having shut the gates?

[carlt]

And when did the opportunity to do this arise? I was at the top gate, the volunteer emerged from the brew room and walked directly to the bottom gate.

 

I would have called over (not shouted) in a friendly manner asking him not to raise the paddle, whilst walking towards him.

 

I can just imagine you charging over, face purple, veins popping as you prepared to remonstrate with him.

 

The way you describe your, and your wife's, response leads me to believe that you were actually putting the volocky in danger, and risking damage to the paddle gear, if he'd dropped it in fear of your aggressive posturing.

 

 

 

Oh DO share your wisdom on the issue!

 

Bev was steering the boat, a task usually best achieved on our boat by standing on the stern. I had JUST closed the towpath side top gate, whilst the offside top gate had swung shut itself (Bosley regulars will confirm that "swingy" gates is a feature of the flight). At that moment, as the gates touched, I really fail to see where else either of us might reasonably have been other than at the head of the lock.

 

Did you shout at your wife for not having the stem iron up against the bottom gates by the time you had closed the top ones or do you reserve your fury for people you don't know?

 

When I am single handing the boat is in the correct position by the time the back gates are closed so I think you are slipping up if two of you can't manage it.

 

If the volocky had crushed his fingers or broken the paddle gear, after being startled at your ire, would that be your fault because of your threatening behaviour or his for not having the bottle to stand up to your attitude and (possibly) swearing?

Edited August 13, 2012 by carlt

[MartinClark]

More likely an angry revving in reverse after being held up for no more than a few moments, by volunteers following instructions.

 

But you must admit that they were following instructions that were bonkers? Or interpreting their instructions in an unreasonably literal fashion?

 

The bridge in question really is very little used and to close the bridge after 3 boats because that was what they were told on their training course is plain daft.

 

It would be have been more sensible to open the bridge and leave it open all day, with the volunteer sitting on the off-side just in case the farmer wanted to cross. but then the volunteer would almost certainly complain that he/she had wasted their day sitting there doing nothing!

[carlt]

As the paddle was already going up at a rate of knots, shouting was not going to cause it to happen any faster.

No but shouting may have caused him to drop the paddle, injuring himself or damaging the paddle gear.

 

As long as you're alright though, eh Dave?

 

But you must admit that they were following instructions that were bonkers? Or interpreting their instructions in an unreasonably literal fashion?

If you are just starting a job, voluntary or not, you tend to follow instructions even if you don't see the logic.

 

It is only after getting some experience that you start asking questions.

 

Given Dave's insistence on following rules and regs, however stupid they may seem, I'm surprised at his anger over this.

[David Schweizer]

I can only assume that your one encounter with an, as yet, not completely trained volunteer has confirmed your generalisation that all the volunteer lockies will be interfering know-alls.

 

I've no doubt that if your experience had been a good one (impossible though as you are determined to find fault) you would have dismissed it as an isolated incident.

 

You are entirely predictable, Dave, and I am sure you would object if someone dismissed all scout volunteers as kiddy fiddlers if just one is convicted.

 

If your description is viewed with less biased eyes it would reveal that no harm was actually done, the supervisor apologised and gave an acceptable reason for the "incident" and any rational person would have carried on his way without feeling the need to compose a strongly worded letter of complaint.

 

There is no excuse for swearing but there is also no excuse for shouting and, looking at the way you rant here, I can understand how, if this attitude is transferred to real life, you get such a negative response.

 

I'm just so glad I don't have to spend my life seething.

 

 

What, when your sharpened pen is on board, poised to fire off a letter of complaint after over reacting to a minor incident?

 

Why be friendly when it's so much more satisfying (for some) to be angry?

As too are you Carl!

[carlt]

As too are you Carl!

Yes but I'd rather be my kind of predictable than Dave's.

 

I have rarely clashed in the way Dave so regularly reports and prefer it that way.

Edited August 13, 2012 by carlt

[mayalld]

No but shouting may have caused him to drop the paddle, injuring himself or damaging the paddle gear.

 

As long as you're alright though, eh Dave?

 

Will I take actions that will protect me and mine from danger, even if it means that the person who caused the issue in the first place may himself be in danger.

 

Yes.