lock keeper letter

[534l4rk]

I have seen no mention of this on the forum - at the risk of upsetting some contributors I again point to the ATYC website which has a copy of an interesting letter to Lord Smith dated 10th Jan. Bit busy so not put on link (Always takes me a while to achieve)

 

[joejo]

The Letter

1
Ref: CS/JS/EA
Rt Hon Lord Smith of Finsbury
Chairman of the Environment Agency
Millbank Tower
25th Floor
21/24 Millbank
London
SW1P 4XL
10th January 2012

Dear Lord Smith
It is my understanding that you recently held a meeting with members of the
TUGN group along with Lady Suzanne Warner and Professor Ruth Hall, to
discuss proposals in regard to the Waterways Board decision to rent Lock
Houses when they become available and to freeze the positions of the
Resident Lock & Weir Keepers.
This decision, as I am sure you are aware, has caused a great deal of
concern to river users and home owners river wide. This is the second time in
three years that the housing has been brought to the table. The last time was
in 2008, which concluded with Howard Davidson giving assurances to David
Cameron, Teresa May and river user groups that the safest and most sensible
way to run the River Thames was to have a resident lock and weir keeper at
each of the 45 sites.
Resident lock and weir keepers have a long and documented history of
responding quickly to out of hours incidents and have been the first port of call
to those in difficulty for more than 200 years. The role of Resident Keeper is
woven into the fabric of the River Thames and during this time many people
owe their lives to their heroic actions. Resident lock and weir keepers are at
the hub of the local community and are central to increasing the contribution
and involvement of the public.
The E38 Branch of the GMB, which represents the vast majority of both
resident and relief lock keepers, were given assurances in June 2011, that
should a decision to rent out the properties be taken, there would be time for
discussion before the plan was implemented. This verbal agreement was not
honoured. Staff and unions were informed on the decision on a Friday and the
houses made available for rent on Monday.
2
Our members challenge the validity of many of the claims made by the
Waterways Board. Rental achieved to date is evidence that forecast income
has been over inflated, as has the forecast savings in employment costs.
Recent changes to working practices mean that Residents now offer the
Agency as much, if not greater, flexibility than Reliefs
Neither staff nor their unions were involved in the process which led to the
decision to freeze Resident posts and although our members have
unanimously raised concerns over the safety to both staff and the public, the
Waterways Board have refused to delay the implementation of its plans to
allow proper consultation to take place.
The GMB has, on several occasions, written to the Waterways Manager
asking for the detailed figures involved in the plan but to date have only
received ambiguous and vague information. Our members have yet to see
detailed risk assessments associated with the decision.
The GMB understands that the Waterways Board has claimed that it has
sufficient staff on stand-by to respond to the threat of rising water, out of
hours, at all 45 weirs simultaneously. Our members wish you to know that this
statement is untrue. There is not one single employee on stand-by who
has the training or experience to set weirs correctly or make the calculations
necessary to manage water levels on the Thames. We believe the Waterways
Board should be put to a strict test of evidence over this claim.
Whilst it is recognized that the Agency is under financial pressure, our
members believe that the current plans will put safety and property at risk.
Furthermore, our members believe that if the plans were properly scrutinized
they would be found to be fundamentally flawed.
We fully support the TUGN request to have the decision reversed and would
then welcome the chance to work with management in their quest for a
sustainable waterways.
Yours sincerely
CLIVE SMITH
GMB ORGANISER

 

[boatone]

I have seen no mention of this on the forum - at the risk of upsetting some contributors I again point to the ATYC webesite which has a copy of an interesting letter to Lord Smith dated 10th Jan. Bit busy so not put on link (Always takes me a while to achieve)

Although the letter is dated 10th January - last Tuesday - it has only been posted on the ATYC website over the weekend (yesterday?) so perhaps not surprising that there has been no mention on the forum yet?
Why do you think mentioning this might be "at the risk of upsetting some contributors" here ?

I actually think it is interesting to see something about this issue from the lock keepers representatives themselves.

 

[534l4rk]

My previous postings mentioning the ATYC have been a red flag to a bull for some of the forum.

My thanks to joejo for the contribution

 

[Captain Coochie]

Oh please do get over yourself . It's becomming very boring .

 

[Ramage]

My previous postings mentioning the ATYC have been a red flag to a bull for some of the forum.

My thanks to joejo for the contribution

Well, you know how touchy Broom 30 owners are......

 

[No Regrets]

I see no problem in this case

Previous comments by some ATYC henchmen have been less than welcome to many forumites as well you know though.

Nice posts are always welcome.

 

[oldgit]

"Resident lock and weir keepers have a long and documented history of
responding quickly to out of hours incidents and have been the first port of call
to those in difficulty for more than 200 years."

You may wish to take into consideration that the date is 2012 not 1812 and the country is skint ! and exactly how on earth does ever other navigation in the land ever manage.
Ps.No chance of finding a few quid for the permanent manning of our 8 locks while you are at it.?

 

[TrueBlue]

"Resident lock and weir keepers have a long and documented history of
responding quickly to out of hours incidents and have been the first port of call
to those in difficulty for more than 200 years."

You may wish to take into consideration that the date is 2012 not 1812 and the country is skint ! and exactly how on earth does ever other navigation in the land ever manage.
Ps.No chance of finding a few quid for the permanent manning of our 8 locks while you are at it.?

The answer is (too) simple, they don't. The narrow and broad canals are being cast adrift (!) by the government with inadequate funding and donations are very unlikely to fill that gap.

Other river navigations (like yours of which I have no knowledge - so I feel competent to comment.. ) have friendlier locks with proper balance beams and lower falls. Boats using them are more suitable for those waters.

The points about the Thames are:-

• Lockkeepers are there to "work the weirs" and related issues. Passing boats through is a bonus to be treasured.
• Boaters on the River are more diverse in styles of boating and types of craft than any other. To change the way that the system operates would quickly reduce traffic and spoil the character of the River as a public amenity.
• There's a lot more to weir keeping than flood control.
• Even if the system was automated (an herculean task), there would still be a need for a local presence

Apologies - turning a humorous post into something serious.

 

[boatone]

Having read the letter, and also the comments here, I can't help but feel that everybody is banging the same old tired drum.

Last year the Government decided not to immediately include the EA navigations in the transfer of waterways to the Canal & River Trust. Some on the river who had actively campaigned against the transfer are convinced they scored a significant victory although it is likely the decision had as much to do with political and governmental issues.

In the event, in my view, the deferred decision is actually as much a disaster as a blessing in that we now face, in effect, a three year moratorium on any real progress relating to the EA navigations. It is unlikely that any serious decisions about future river management will be made now until the C&RT issue is resolved.

Also, if the C&RT does get its act together and the EA navigations are subsequently transferred we will be joining something which is already established and primarily canal based, not to mention being the newbies.

 

[oldgit]

"Apologies - turning a humorous post into something serious."

Am well aware of all the advantages that the lockies provide and hope that some sort of long term solution can be found to ensure their continued presence at all locks which need them.
It is simply divine when visiting the Thames,to switch off the old brain,and let some other poor bugger do all the hard work.

However things are in flux and it is surely the best policy to try to modify the changes rather than try to defend certain methods of working to the death simply because thats how its always been done.
We have some deep ones to.........

 

[teddington_lock]

Have you got any photos of the deep ones ?

 

[Captain Coochie]

 

[oldgit]

Have you got any photos of the deep ones ?

just because you,ve got Sandford...best we can do is 6.5 ft

 

[teddington_lock]

Sandford ?

Try a little closer to home.

 

[Captain Coochie]

Richmond is deep and then you have Molsey but thats not so bad .

 

[oldgit]

"Richmond is deep and then you have Molesey but thats not so bad ......"Pah a mere 6ft !

O no ..... humbled by the ye mighty thames yet again.Hang on thats cheating,we is referring to locks that in theory could operated by the man on the Bray omnibus not by sea locks so skillfully managed by some of Englands finest.

 

[Celica]

locks

just because you,ve got Sandford...best we can do is 6.5 ft

Old Git,
Both Hampstead and Sluice weir Locks have a rise of over 9ft.
Depending on the state of tide Allington can reach 9.5ft deep during a locking period.

 

[oldgit]

Medway boaters have an extra foot or two !

Old Git,
Both Hampstead and Sluice weir Locks have a rise of over 9ft.
Depending on the state of tide Allington can reach 9.5ft deep during a locking period.

Aha ...the truth will out.

 

[teddington_lock]

Teddington is 8 ft 10 inches and up to 14 feet on the draw off

What is it that you have against the Thames Lockstaff Oldgit ?