Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
GoodGurl

CRT disgruntled staff

Featured Posts

6 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

GG, low moral and anti-management comments are not just made about CaRT. On any of the railway staff internet sites you can read equally (or more) vociferous comments about Network Rail or any of the train operating companies. If you look you could probably find similar about every other large employer in the UK or every Government department.

What has spoiled Jenlyn's "rant" is the fact that he has edited the responses to suit his well known anti-CaRT agenda, and has made his usual insults against members of this forum who do not agree with him. 

You have to take Thunderwotsit for what it is. Quite entertaining to read, but I wouldn't want to be bothered with actually taking an active part in it. There's not much scope for rational debate among  the playground stuff which isn't worth getting upset about either. It's just the bad kids trying to show  they're badder than everyone else. 

As for CRT staff feeling badly done by, I think they are - certainly the Harecastle tunnel staff were when they had their pay and hours cut. But that's just modern work practices, same everywhere. It all stemmed from the weird idea that management was a skill in itself and you didn't need any knowledge of the actual work you were managing.  Everyone except managers knows that that's rubbish. But then, managers get hired by other managers... 

  • Greenie 1
  • Happy 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

GG, low moral and anti-management comments are not just made about CaRT. On any of the railway staff internet sites you can read equally (or more) vociferous comments about Network Rail or any of the train operating companies. If you look you could probably find similar about every other large employer in the UK or every Government department.

What has spoiled Jenlyn's "rant" is the fact that he has edited the responses to suit his well known anti-CaRT agenda, and has made his usual insults against members of this forum who do not agree with him. 

we are not talking about big business's tho are we, we are talking about a charity that are bullying their staff and as for SJ editing the responses he hasn't (go look for yourself) the other comments he didn't post were worse than the ones he did post. everything he posts on the site is took from CRT themselves the only bit added is the "rant" before the post.

ed to add: sorry forgot the link seeing as you have obviously not read it - https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Reviews/Canal-and-River-Trust-Reviews-E841811.htm

Edited by GoodGurl
to add website info
  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What on earth has the fact that they are a "charity" got to do with it?
And sorry but CaRT is a big business, and staff complaints about management occur in all businesses.
Yes I have read the review, and it reads just as I would have expected it to, some positive and some negative comments, as you will find about any other company, big or small. However the positive comments are completely ignored by SJ; I wonder why? Perhaps they didn't fit his agenda? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

What on earth has the fact that they are a "charity" got to do with it?
And sorry but CaRT is a big business, and staff complaints about management occur in all businesses.
Yes I have read the review, and it reads just as I would have expected it to, some positive and some negative comments, as you will find about any other company, big or small. However the positive comments are completely ignored by SJ; I wonder why? Perhaps they didn't fit his agenda? 

 

The fact is graham is it just goes to show that boaters are not making it up when it comes to CRT bullying them re enforcement etc etc and no i'm not getting into that arguement either, i have said what i need to say so you can take it whichever way you choose.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GoodGurl said:

If you won't visit the site to see what has been put then why are you having an input on the content that you haven't read?

It isn't necessary to read a book to know it's contents are of no interest. Sometimes a quick glance at the cover is enough...

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ianali said:

Retired (early) around 15 months ago. Wife and I said at the time we might get bored and end up working again. Have to say that I can't see that happening. There is so much to do. 

Ian.

Retiring is what old people do.

I prefer the expression 'escaped from wage slavery'.

As for management bollockspeak, anyone else watching W1A?

My favourite quote quote is:

What we need to do is identify what we do well and do less of it better"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

so what or who is it that whoever think they are being bullied over?

I believe that there are two subsets of boaters that may feel they are being bullied, the question is, is ‘bullying’ the correct term, or should it be ‘forced to comply’ with what they have agreed to do ?

  1. There are those who buy a boat with little intention of moving but they do not want the expense of a mooring, after all it is just a low cost route to housing, they have jobs, families, schooling etc. in the area so why should they move ? This is not bullying, this is simply enforcement of the law.

  2. There are those that take a ‘home mooring’ and therefore do not need to Bona Fide navigate, however when the navigation authority starts to make up their own rules and try to force these boaters to comply with the specific rules for boats without a home mooring this could be viewed as bullying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

  1. There are those that take a ‘home mooring’ and therefore do not need to Bona Fide navigate, however when the navigation authority starts to make up their own rules and try to force these boaters to comply with the specific rules for boats without a home mooring this could be viewed as bullying.

 

Are there any examples of this actually happening?

Seems to me that the 'rule' has been introduced to the licence T&Cs to give CRT a bit more of a case against people who take a ghost mooring or claim an unverifiable mooring and then proceed to CM in one area claiming they don't need to CC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly feel threatened by CaRT as per Alan's 2 above - especially as their boat reporting system is not fit for the purpose of enforcing cruising rules. It has had me in moored in a totally different marina to where I actually was and in a feeder channel. It is not comprehensive enough to ensure that if, for example, you leave your boat in a marina for a week or so and then start cruising again (all within the rules) you are not logged as overstaying in an area because you were logged the evening before you went into the marina and then when you came out again. It certainly does not give a full picture of your cruising pattern. I have travelled from Calcutt to Liverpool, Leeds, Keadby, Nottingham, Leicester, and back to Calcutt and despite using manned locks and the Liverpool link was only shown as being logged in two or three places.

When I moor up away from the marina for a few days to paint the boat I feel under pressure to always choose a differents places a fair distance apart just in case their logging fails to show the boat back in the marina between times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

I certainly feel threatened by CaRT as per Alan's 2 above - especially as their boat reporting system is not fit for the purpose of enforcing cruising rules. It has had me in moored in a totally different marina to where I actually was and in a feeder channel. It is not comprehensive enough to ensure that if, for example, you leave your boat in a marina for a week or so and then start cruising again (all within the rules) you are not logged as overstaying in an area because you were logged the evening before you went into the marina and then when you came out again. It certainly does not give a full picture of your cruising pattern. I have travelled from Calcutt to Liverpool, Leeds, Keadby, Nottingham, Leicester, and back to Calcutt and despite using manned locks and the Liverpool link was only shown as being logged in two or three places.

When I moor up away from the marina for a few days to paint the boat I feel under pressure to always choose a differents places a fair distance apart just in case their logging fails to show the boat back in the marina between times.

Hi Tony

What action has CART threatened you with re your boat use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Are there any examples of this actually happening?

I believe so, and people have posted on here that they have been so affected.

Irrespective of the implementation of the new ‘rule’ C&RT do not have the power to just write into their T&Cs any T&C which over rides the law.

For example, should C&RT decide to charge the same for their ‘River Only Licence’ as for the ‘Canal & River licence’, would you accept that they can do that ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

I certainly feel threatened by CaRT as per Alan's 2 above - especially as their boat reporting system is not fit for the purpose of enforcing cruising rules. It has had me in moored in a totally different marina to where I actually was and in a feeder channel. It is not comprehensive enough to ensure that if, for example, you leave your boat in a marina for a week or so and then start cruising again (all within the rules) you are not logged as overstaying in an area because you were logged the evening before you went into the marina and then when you came out again. It certainly does not give a full picture of your cruising pattern. I have travelled from Calcutt to Liverpool, Leeds, Keadby, Nottingham, Leicester, and back to Calcutt and despite using manned locks and the Liverpool link was only shown as being logged in two or three places.

When I moor up away from the marina for a few days to paint the boat I feel under pressure to always choose a differents places a fair distance apart just in case their logging fails to show the boat back in the marina between times.

From what I've read in the past this bullying amounts to the boater receiving a polite letter asking them for an explanation. In most cases the explanation is accepted and the matter ends there. P*ss takers excepted!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I believe so, and people have posted on here that they have been so affected.

Irrespective of the implementation of the new ‘rule’ C&RT do not have the power to just write into their T&Cs any T&C which over rides the law.

For example, should C&RT decide to charge the same for their ‘River Only Licence’ as for the ‘Canal & River licence’, would you accept that they can do that ?

I quite agree and to query mtbs other point, if someone does have a home mooring and decides to cruise another part of the network for a year, why (based on their powers)should CrT  do anything to stop them. Any enforcement because CrT feel they should adhere to cc rules could be considered harassment and/or bullying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

I certainly feel threatened by CaRT as per Alan's 2 above - especially as their boat reporting system is not fit for the purpose of enforcing cruising rules. It has had me in moored in a totally different marina to where I actually was and in a feeder channel. It is not comprehensive enough to ensure that if, for example, you leave your boat in a marina for a week or so and then start cruising again (all within the rules) you are not logged as overstaying in an area because you were logged the evening before you went into the marina and then when you came out again. It certainly does not give a full picture of your cruising pattern. I have travelled from Calcutt to Liverpool, Leeds, Keadby, Nottingham, Leicester, and back to Calcutt and despite using manned locks and the Liverpool link was only shown as being logged in two or three places.

When I moor up away from the marina for a few days to paint the boat I feel under pressure to always choose a differents places a fair distance apart just in case their logging fails to show the boat back in the marina between times.

 

This is most curious. I can understand you feeling threatened given a strict interpretation of the T&C, but have CRT proceeded to actually threatening you? 

I feel threatened when I drive past a speed camera van at 28mph, but no-one seems to think those are a problem except people who speed. Are you feeling threatened because  you would like to feel free to do some CMing 100 miles from your home mooring, relying on strict interpretation of the law perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Graham Davis said:

............However the positive comments are completely ignored by SJ; I wonder why? Perhaps they didn't fit his agenda? 

 

And completely ignored by your good self - two posts on here have mentioned SJ's post where he says the missing reviews would make CaRT look even worse. The conclusion most would draw is that they were not positive reviews. I'm no SJ fan and agree he generally has an anti-CaRT agenda, but let's get things in balance else be seen as having an anti-SJ agenda. 

Edited by Midnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During the latter years of employment self or otherwise. I came to the opinion that 'work' is prostitution. You 'do' something and you get financial appreciation for it. It used to really grind into my mind. I now, of course, pay for services of the coal boat, the marina etc.

Martyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are having a hard time. Your finances are poor and you are constantly looking for the cheapest way to exist, by legal means if possible, but in the grey areas when not. You feel the need for "emotional" support in this struggle. "Emotional" is not the right word, nor is "spiritual" but something along those lines. You can get some of this support by feeling that you are part of a group and therefore not alone. The obvious group is "the aggrieved", and you can readily see that it exists by looking on the internet. The feeling of support that you get from belonging to this group is proportional to the strength of this group. Any group is made stronger by having an opposition group. Your instinct as a member of this group is to find an opposition group (or create one) - and thereby make it stronger. To qualify as an opposition group this group has to be as similar as your support group but "opposite". You are boating related, CRT are boating related. Your groups are related. You are suffering hardship, therefore it must be that CRT are inflicting hardship. But you need this opposition to be stronger so that your group is stronger, so you attack CRT with every means at your disposal.

So, if you are having a hard time as a boater, your instinct is:

  • to see yourself as part of a large group, the aggrieved.
  • to see CRT as a monolith rather than a collection of parts than can have individual good & bad points.
  • to see CRT as deliberately vindictive.
  • to attack CRT across the board 100% of the time.

So it behoves every hard-pressed boater to examine their motivation carefully.

Notwithstanding the above, it still may be that CRT is a solid monolith, driven by a vindictive hatred of the small boater, but I doubt it.

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Midnight said:

And completely ignored by your good self - two posts on here have mentioned SJ's post where he says the missing reviews would make CaRT look even worse. The conclusion most would draw is that they were not positive reviews. I'm no SJ fan and agree he generally has an anti-CaRT agenda, but let's get things in balance else be seen as having an anti-SJ agenda. 

Have you seen which reviews he missed off, six of them, and none of those three would make them look any worse.

Some are from people who enjoy the job.

 

Edited by Dave Payne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Hi Tony

What action has CART threatened you with re your boat use?

It is perfectly clear that if I  abide by the rules AND not be able to "prove to the satisfaction of the Board" that I am abiding by their terms and conditions then my boat and license is at risk. The question is is it reasonable to assume someone is guilty of not abiding by the rules when the system that flags the alleged non-compliance is so useless?

What about innocent until proven guilty? A letter or email that asks you to give information the CaRT system SHOULD (but does not) already hold is a threat, however nicely they word it. It matters not a jot if they accept what you tell them or not, they have in effect started their procedure that could eventually result in a loss of license or boat.

Explain why it should be necessary to  explain yourself when abiding by their rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Midnight said:

From what I've read in the past this bullying amounts to the boater receiving a polite letter asking them for an explanation. In most cases the explanation is accepted and the matter ends there. P*ss takers excepted!

This has been my personal experience. Earlier this year I ventured off my mooring and moored up in the afternoon on a length of non vms. The very next day I got a text and email informing e of cruising rules and asking me to continue my journey. I rang and emailed them re their error and received an apology immediately, no threats, no bullying just an instant recognition of their mistake and an apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mrsmelly said:

This has been my personal experience. Earlier this year I ventured off my mooring and moored up in the afternoon on a length of non vms. The very next day I got a text and email informing e of cruising rules and asking me to continue my journey. I rang and emailed them re their error and received an apology immediately, no threats, no bullying just an instant recognition of their mistake and an apology.

 

Does that not support the argument that their systems are not fit for purpose ?

You have a home mooring and yet as soon as you moved off it you were asked why you were not following cruising guidelines.

Not everyone is a roughy-tuffy, some can get upset by the accusation and frightened by the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

It is perfectly clear that if I  abide by the rules AND not be able to "prove to the satisfaction of the Board" that I am abiding by their terms and conditions then my boat and license is at risk. The question is is it reasonable to assume someone is guilty of not abiding by the rules when the system that flags the alleged non-compliance is so useless?

What about innocent until proven guilty? A letter or email that asks you to give information the CaRT system SHOULD (but does not) already hold is a threat, however nicely they word it. It matters not a jot if they accept what you tell them or not, they have in effect started their procedure that could eventually result in a loss of license or boat.

Explain why it should be necessary to  explain yourself when abiding by their rules?

Hi Tony

I understand your point. I suppose my occupation of a few years several years ago makes me less worried about being contacted by such administrative bodies as CART as I have some knowledge of laws and how they can be manipulated. To me CART are a pussycat and as my previous post when I pointed the error of their ways they were first class in response. I can see that some people may be worried by their actions but in reality I have yet to meet someone mistreated by CART.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dave Payne said:

Have you seen which reviews he missed off, six of them, and none of those three would make them look any worse.

Some are from people who enjoy the job.

 

I admit to not seeing them where are they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • 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.