Not redundant

Published: Friday, 25 September 2020

IT IS THE job function that is redundant not the person. So if volunteers are taking over those functions, the 'job' is clearly not redundant!  Writes Ralph Freeman.

So I'm suggesting the correct terminology to describe CaRT's proposed action is 'sacking' the tunnel operators.  To avoid a tribunal instigated by the present (professional) tunnel operators claiming 'wrongful dismissal' I would expect some sort of compensation package to be necessary; so bang goes any cost saving in the immediate future!

Cost savings?

Apparently employing 'desk jockeys' doing meaningless non waterways related jobs, costing £100,000+ p.a. is fine, but employing front line waterways staff is not.  How many tunnel operators would you get for that (pointless) executive's remuneration package I wonder?

In a previous life I worked as a project manager for a GEC company, so I'm well versed in costing and accounting procedures and know my way around a spreadsheet.  After all the (faux) motto often quoted by GEC staff was "Save money at all costs!"  How is this relevant?

Willing to volunteer

Well, over the winter myself plus a few boaters with business experience are willing to volunteer to work (free of charge) in the CaRT accounts and costings departments and suggest ways of cutting overheads.  That hopefully would free up monies that could be spent on front line staff like tunnel operators, lockies and lengthsmen. I don't expect this generous offer to be taken up though.  No doubt the way in which CaRT (or should that be the 'Towpath Trust'?) squanders boaters and taxpayers monies is a 'commercial secret'.

P.S.  I would love to see the risk assessment for this CaRT proposal.  What? You mean there isn't one?  Boater safety is now a non issue with CaRT it would seem.