angry 185 bus driver - the sequel? (Lounged)

[Gimme]

Got the 185 this morning for the first time in ages. The driver didn't say anything, drove safely and didn't annoy anyone.

I was soooooo disappointed. It can't have been Nasty Nigel.

Can anyone give me an idea of when Nasty Nigel generally gets to ED so I can try to get his bus?

[goose1]

I was on a 185 a couple of weeks back and the bus driver called a lady with a babe in buggy back so he could check her one day bus pass,he also took the pass and looked it over.

He seemed a bit of a jobs worth.

The lady was very annoyed and told him it was in date but he still wanted to have the last word.

185 buses are not the safest way to travel day or night and he may be rude to the wrong person one day,especially on route past the maudsley!

Calm down mr bus driver you dont own the bus company!

[lenk]

So you're saying a bus driver asked to see someone's bus pass?

UNBELIVABLE. *tuts loudly*

[LibraCarr]

goose1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was on a 185 a couple of weeks back and the bus

> driver called a lady with a babe in buggy back so

> he could check her one day bus pass,he also took

> the pass and looked it over.

> He seemed a bit of a jobs worth.

> The lady was very annoyed and told him it was in

> date but he still wanted to have the last word.

> 185 buses are not the safest way to travel day or

> night and he may be rude to the wrong person one

> day,especially on route past the maudsley!

> Calm down mr bus driver you dont own the bus

> company!

Hi,

In regard to your posting I find it very, very offensive. The Maudsley caters for people that have suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, as well as other mental problems. Recently a ex-soldier that I know had treatment there. Normal treatmnet is for 12 sessions, he had to have 23 He is continuing at Maudsley with a vocational specialist to try and get him back to work.

He is just one of the many thousands in the Armed Forces that think of your liberty and freedom, and puts himself second.

Perhaps you might just think next time when you post a item without thinking.

Kind regards,

Libra Carr.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Libra Carr

Are you saying people attending sessions at the Maudsley for whatever problems would benefit from an encounter with a less-than-customer-focused bus driver?

Perhaps goose1 was pointing out that people do need to travel to the Maudlsey and don't need that kind of aggro

[cdonline]

The Maudsley also run a smoking cessation clinic, but smokers probably don't get much sympathy, but I'm guessing a fair few might use the 185 occassionally.

[LibraCarr]

Hi,

The point was that goose1 mentioned the Maudsley in what appeared a derogatory way. Goose1 could have mentioned Sainbury's or King's, but chose not to do so.

Kind regards,

Libra Carr.

[Domitianus]

piglet Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have spoken at length to various people and made

> numerous complaints in writing about this

> particular driver but nothing ever happens. Just

> last week he shouted from his cab to an elderly

> lady who refused to pass her paper travelcard to

> him under the hatch "I am english remember unlike

> you". He is a disgusting individual and I have

> witnessed him bully and abuse passengers on a

> regular basis.

>

> Today I spoke to a controller at East Thames Buses

> who tells me the driver is based at the Belvedere

> depot and his name is not Nigel. The attached

> photograph should help.

>

> I don't know what else can be done about this

> man.

>

> photo of a bus driver removed - The Administrator

If the above comments are true, then the driver is clearly guilty of racially abusing his passengers. Now, I may be wrong but I believe that racial abuse is a criminal offence? It seems eminently possible that this driver has strayed from just being a bit of an all-round c**t (bad enough) to actually being guilty of criminal harassment of passengers. If that is the case are TFL going to stand by him?

[SeanMacGabhann]

Sorry LibraCarr but I don't see it - people in Sainsbury's or wherever are going about there business and haven't (as a rule) "suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, as well as other mental problems."

I read goose1 post as looking out for people suffering from symptoms like this - in a supportive way

It is possible they meant otherwise but you haven't sought clarification - just become "very, very offended" which seems a bit hairtrigger-ish

[LuLu Too]

Rarely use buses so can't comment on 185 or "angry Nigel", but I too, like Libra Carr, intrepreted goose1's comments re: travelling past The Maudsley in a negative way.

Perhaps wrongly, so am happy to be corrected.

*Should perhaps declare professional interest*

Anyway, back to tales of the 185!

[ianr]

I just have nightmares that I'll one day have to take a 185 bus, that it'll turn out to be Nigel's, and I'll be left with mental scars that will affect me for the rest of my life.

[Mick Mac]

i read goose1 comment as meaning the driver could say the wrong thing and provoke a maudsley patient into a reaction to which angry nigel may come off worse. I think goose should not have mentioned the maudsley but i think we know what she meant being that some day nigel will over step the mark with the wrong person. And would people stop saying he is only doing his job, its not what he does its the rude way in which he does it.

[Gimme]

Domitanius - I'm not sure how pointing out that he is English and that someone else isn't is racial abuse...

Quote from Nigel apparently: "I am english remember unlike you".

Who would be proud to be English these days with all the negative connotations. In London it's far better to be exotic.

If he'd called me English, that would have been a real insult!

Don't be too quick to play the 'racism' card.

[Domitianus]

Gimme Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Domitanius - I'm not sure how pointing out that he

> is English and that someone else isn't is racial

> abuse...

> Quote from Nigel apparently: "I am english

> remember unlike you".

> Who would be proud to be English these days with

> all the negative connotations. In London it's far

> better to be exotic.

> If he'd called me English, that would have been a

> real insult!

> Don't be too quick to play the 'racism' card.

(Accidentally sent the following to Gimme as a PM but was meant for public consumption).

I am not playing any 'card' The implication from the report given by the poster who mentioned this comment was that Nigel was pointing out his Englishness in an attempt to claim some sort of superiority or authority over the passenger he was interacting with. This implicitly diminishes the racial or ethnic origin of the other person and there is no doubt whatsoever that under the law this would be seen as racially discriminatory behaviour. I know a little of these complexities having been closely involved in a couple of legal cases involving claims of racial harrassment and discrimination.

Obviously this interpretation of the nature of the exchange between driver and passenger may not be accurate but in the context of the thread in general, and since the event was offered as further evidenc e of 'Nigel's' nastiness, I wonder what other interpretation there could possibly be. Perhaps Nigel was engaging in jocular, modest, self-effacing humour, attibuting his own personal stupidity, unpleasantness and meaness to his being English, and contrasting this with the infinitely superior racial/national/ethnic characteristics of the passenger concerned - but I doubt it.

[KalamityKel]

"in the context of the thread in general"

Anything goes it would seem

[lenk]

i got the bus this morning. I didn't say a word to anyone.

My Oyster card beeped without incident.

Couldn't even tell you if the driver was male or female

Might start a new thread

[Ted Max]

Couldn't even tell you if the driver was male or female

There's no need to be unkind.

[Domitianus]

KalamityKel Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "in the context of the thread in general"

>

> Anything goes it would seem

Kels dear, we appreciate that you wish to defend those who are driving for TFL and that is fine. No-one is for one moment suggesting that ALL drivers are like that or that it is anything but a tough and unrewarding job driving a bus for thankless people. Fact is, however, it seems that this particular driver sticks out like a sore thumb due to his attitude and apparently completely unreasonable behaviour. If the vast majority of decent, hard-working bus drivers manage to get through a long day, facing what are undoubtedly challenging and often unpleasant situations, without needing to engage in aggressive, offensive, racist, abusive, confrontational behaviour then it seems that this particular driver is a bad apple and is unworthy of your protection or concern. Surely those who have loved ones working for the bus companies should be quite glad to see drivers who consistently behave unreasonably dealt with, to avoid those they care about being tarred with the same brush?

[lenk]

I was on a bus driver forum earlier, you should see what they're saying about this place

[Horsebox]

Lenk's obsession with Nasty Nigel is a strange one. Would Penk have had the same feelings for him?

I somewhat doubt it.

Bring back Penk.

[lenk]

Horsebox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lenk's obsession with Nasty Nigel is a strange

> one. Would Penk have had the same feelings for

> him?

>

> I somewhat doubt it.

>

> Bring back Penk.

Penk sends his regards from the cabin of the 185, which he drives from where he's been hiding.

[KalamityKel]

Domitianus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> KalamityKel Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > "in the context of the thread in general"

> >

> > Anything goes it would seem

>

> Kels dear, we appreciate that you wish to defend

> those who are driving for TFL and that is fine.

> No-one is for one moment suggesting that ALL

> drivers are like that or that it is anything but a

> tough and unrewarding job driving a bus for

> thankless people. Fact is, however, it seems that

> this particular driver sticks out like a sore

> thumb due to his attitude and apparently

> completely unreasonable behaviour. If the vast

> majority of decent, hard-working bus drivers

> manage to get through a long day, facing what are

> undoubtedly challenging and often unpleasant

> situations, without needing to engage in

> aggressive, offensive, racist, abusive,

> confrontational behaviour then it seems that this

> particular driver is a bad apple and is unworthy

> of your protection or concern. Surely those who

> have loved ones working for the bus companies

> should be quite glad to see drivers who

> consistently behave unreasonably dealt with, to

> avoid those they care about being tarred with the

> same brush?

Dom, I stress again, I am NOT defending anyone. It is quite clear from everything you have just mentioned that whilst those complaining about this particular individual find "his" behaviour unacceptable it is acceptable to throw insults all round and say all kind of things (in quite a disgusting and shameful manner) about someone who is not a participant to the discussion. Surely this behaviour is just as bad as the accused!

How many would openly say such things face to face?

[Gimme]

Domitanius

How could Nasty Nigel hassling people with paper tickets - which is something he appears to does without discrimination (i.e. to everyone who doesn't have a dog) - constitute discrimination?

And why would it make it "racially discriminatory behaviour" just because he pointed out that he is English when this is nothing in particular to boast about. He didn't disparage the other persons race, just indicated that he thought that being English was superior.

I get called a "Sweaty" (Sweaty Sock = Jock) and get comments about tightness continually but would never in a million years count as "racially discriminatory behaviour". Naturally the people saying this are just jealous :-)

Why don't we call the police to see to everyone who thinks they are superior because they are English.

That would probably keep them busy for a while.

[Domitianus]

Gimme, I am amazed that you could come onto this forum and make such a dumb, ill-informed, ignorant comment. You clearly haven't the faintest notion what you are talking about and have obviously never worked for any organisation that has any type of well constructed and properly communicated equal opps policy. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that making comments that insinuate that someone else's national/racial/ethnic oprigin is inferior to one's own is an example of blatantly discriminatory behaviour on the grounds of race. There isn't even an issue to be discussed there. If you have any doubt about that go and sit in the Employment Tribunals for a morning and listen in on a few cases involving claims of racial discrimination. I think you will have your eyes opened. If anyone was subject to an insinuation (let alone a direct statement)in the workplace that another person was superior or inferior to someone else based upon their nationality/race/ethnic origin it would be an open and shut case and any Employment Tribunal would find for the plaintiff.

Well recognised forms of racial harrassment and discrimination include the indulgence of stereotypes and nicknames. Therefore, if you have been subject in a relevant place to nicknames of the type you have described and to stereotyped allegations of "tightness" etc, then you have, according to the law, been subject to racial harrassment and would have a legal case. Whether you feel offended or have any desire to pursue such a case is obviously a completely personal matter for you, but it doesn't alter the provisions of the law one jot!

And in case you were thinking of going along the lines of "it was all done in good humour", "it was just a bit of banter, we were having a laugh", or "people shouldn't take it so personally" - think again. Such 'justifications' have absolutely no merit in law whatsoever and Tribunals or other legal bodies look extremely poorly on what they view as such feeble attempts at justification, as many companies have found to their considerable finacial disadvantage when large sums of compensation have been awarded against them. The law also enshrines the concept of 'perception' of harrassing behaviours by the victim as being of paramount importance in determining whether harrassment/discrimination has taken place and the 'intention' of the perpetrator is of no relevance.

If you want to say that the state of race relations legislation in this country is excessive and representative of a nanny state, go right ahead. You may well have a case. But please do not try to deny the current state of the law is, for better or for worse, what it is.

[Gimme]

Domitanius,

I'm glad that you've come onto this forum to make such a clever, well informed and world-wise point.

Since I'll take it from your self-important rant that you are speaking from a position of knowledge, I'll bow down to your superior point of view (have I perhaps been a victim of intellectual harrassment here as you are obviously insinuating that my point of view is inferior to yours).

It would seem that as is often the case, the law that is in place to protect people who are genuinely being harrassed or disadvantaged, racially or otherwise, is a total ass when it comes to trivial situations. And if you can take a case against someone for saying on a bus that "I'm English and you're not" then the law is clearly an ass here - it was surely never intended to protect people from childish (and frankly embarrassingly weak) insults made by bus drivers... in the same way as it was never intended to protect people who can look after themselves against weak anti-Scottish jokes.

I'm not saying that people don't get racially discriminated against or that they shouldn't have the protection of the law but there has to be a dividing line between totally trivial (which shouldn't be wasting court time) and serious cases (where someone has been genuinely wronged rather than mildly offended). And I would have thought that had you sat in Employment Tribunals for a morning then you would have realised that.

I'm sure I'll get a superbly worded reply that will put me to shame and will suggest again that I work for an inferior company, have an inferior intellect and an inferior point of view, as you are obviously someone of great wisdom and importance. I look forward to it.