Nanny believes that everyone should have a role in society, and that we should stick to our predefined roles.This is especially the case if you are a lollipop man (for the benefit of non Brits - this a person who stands outside school gates wearing a long white coat and carrying a large round sign on the end of a stick, he guides the schoolchildren across the road with his "lollipop").
Michael Hunt, an ex RAF officer who is now lollipop man, went beyond his call of duty by helping children cross a busy road.
He was employed to help primary school children cross one road of a T-junction in Marown, Isle of Man. However, he started helping those who were struggling to cross the other adjacent road too.
Nanny didn't like that, and her chums in the Isle of Man transport dept told him to stop helping on this second road.
Why?
It's too dangerous, Nanny said that the second crossing did not meet safety requirements.
Nanny's solution?
Simple, the children must cross by themselves.
Mr Hunt's response:
"The politest thing I can say is that it is a load of horse manure."
Knobheads!
If Michael Hunt had NOT been considerate enough to help the children over the second road, and one or more of them had been injured, or even worse, killed crossing said road, Michael Hunt would no doubt have got the blame for it. His bosses should be pleased that they have such a conscientious man in this position, and commended him, instead of behaving like a bunch of prats!
ReplyDeleteAh, now, as I have said before, I'm not one to wish to be seen as contrary BUT ...
ReplyDeleteClearly the couoncil has a duty of care to its employees and must not be seen to be putting them, or their insurance company, into an area of added risk if a risk assessment says it is an area too risky. (If you see what I mena.)
The children, on the other hand, are not employees ansd are only customers by proxy. As yet they pay no rates. They are an overhead not a revenue stream.
And as an overhead they are clearly a target to reduction which will potentially offer long term savings to the local operational costs if a few of them can be, er, culled at someone elses expense.
(Note that this assumes that start up and end of life costs are likely, in this area, so exceed any positive reveue streams from the mid-life of the product. Thus on the short term or the long term fiscal plan, by far the easiest to work with, the picture looks bleak.
The mid term is a more difficult plan to work. Why? Well, in the short term the figures could be fairly predictable and already budgetted. Of course they might be wrong, but if they are it will prablably be someone elses fault - Magie Thatcher or someone like that.
Tghe long term is easy becasue you can say anything that is vaguely plausible - which seems to be anything at all these days - and nobody will over prove otherwise. At least not in your lifetime.
The mid term is more difficult because the figuires that can be compared will be yours and you may still be around to take the flak if they are wrong, which they will be most of the time.
Of course there could be another reason. If the gentleman is not always where he is expected to be mothers and their children approaching the crossing may think tho query where he is. The idea of of large numbers of ladies walking the streets with youngsters in tow asking "Has anybody seen Mike Hunt?" may be unacceptable to the good people of the Isle of Wight.
Can he carry on helping the kids, surely common sense - and their safety - must prevail.
ReplyDeleteSad to see this sort of attitude has reached the Isle of Man, which I had always thought was a bit old-fashioned - "We are now landing at Douglas Airport, please set your watches back twenty years"
ReplyDeleteIt's down to values in society. In the late 90s, in the U.S., kids of about 11 or 12 were appointed to work crossing patrols. It's a badge of honour, like getting a prefect's badge in junior school.
ReplyDeleteI could not believe it. My American friends could not believe that I could not believe it - what's to make me think that people don't drive that bit more carefully near to schools.
Go figure, as they'd say.
They do have a somewhat different attitude to things like School buses in the US - you never pass one if it is stationary - penalty of death I believe. ;-)
ReplyDeleteThey have slow speed zones and all the other paraphernalia that people think necessary and of course the busses are clearly identifiable as school buses, unlike most of ours.
Probably does not matter much really.
If you look at the official records of child pedestrian fatalities (not very many compared to the size of the population . ..) and serious injuries the times reported suggest that the greater portion , which mostly involve 10/11 to 16 year olds, 16 being the age at which the young person moves from the official 'child' stats. (Unless you are a road safety campaigner whan any age up to about 25 seems to be OK if it helps your figures).
Furthermore the greater portion by some way occur between 7 and 8.30 am - so mostly before reaching the school environs in the morning - and after 4 pm up to about 6.30 pm - so mostly away from the school environs in the evening. And, as ever, boys are much better represented in the figures than girls.
All of which suggests that, whatever the causes of child pedestrian road accident casualites may be, the focus on road safety around schools and almost solely around schools which will further persuade people that anywhere else may not matter so much, is misleading. At best.
But it is very easy to get people to accept it and believe that something useful is being done every time they pass a school.
See http://www.lollipopman.me.uk for Mikes official site with all the latest news on his on going fight.
ReplyDeleteLink http://www.lollipopman.me.uk
ReplyDelete