Bridge strikes who’s to blame. This firm below think they know.
■■■■■■■ hell that should give the normal suspects on here a hard on
Quality driving there.
dozy:
[zb] hell that should give the normal suspects on here a hard on
Well in the 8 odd years I was at DHL the only bridge strike at our depot was an agency driver who had just passed his C+E. He was also due to be going on to the books full time as well.
It actually would not surprise me if that was the case, as the majority of agency drivers just don’t give a ■■■■ about anything, they seem to think they can just move around to other companies even when causing damage, and they will never run out of places to work at. That’s not to say all agency drivers are the same as I’ve known better agency guys than the full timers. But equally I’ve known a lot worse.
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
BHJ? FFS…Not this bunch again…
Jonathon Backhouse. “I’d say that they account for seven to eight out of 10 of them”
Please expand on the validity of “I’d say” Jonathon.
Personally “I’d say” you should be supplying some evidence if you’re going to make blanket statements like that
“I’d say” I’m highly unimpressed with your scaremongering tactics used to promote your outrageously expensive e-courses, in regard to manual entry requirements (£84 for 90 minutes of your version of something you can read for free on the internet)
Although that wasn’t mentioned in the full article, “I’d say” you’re just using the expo as an opportunity to punt your only-slightly-less-expensive Bridge Strikes e-course (£60 for 90 minutes this time)
“I’d say” for a bunch of solicitors this is not the first time I’ve seen you be a lot less precise with words than your profession dictates is required.
“I’d say” Jonathon, that your statement is merely an opinion, and opinions are like rectums, we’ve all got one, but you seem to be mistaking opinions for facts.
Zac_A:
BHJ? FFS…Not this bunch again…Jonathon Backhouse. “I’d say that they account for seven to eight out of 10 of them”
Please expand on the validity of “I’d say” Jonathon.
Personally “I’d say” you should be supplying some evidence if you’re going to make blanket statements like that
“I’d say” I’m highly unimpressed with your scaremongering tactics used to promote your outrageously expensive e-courses, in regard to manual entry requirements (£84 for 90 minutes of your version of something you can read for free on the internet)
Although that wasn’t mentioned in the full article, “I’d say” you’re just using the expo as an opportunity to punt your only-slightly-less-expensive Bridge Strikes e-course (£60 for 90 minutes this time)
“I’d say” for a bunch of solicitors this is not the first time I’ve seen you be a lot less precise with words than your profession dictates is required.
“I’d say” Jonathon, that your statement is merely an opinion, and opinions are like rectums, we’ve all got one, but you seem to be mistaking opinions for facts.
What do you call 50 solicitors on the bottom of a canal?
the nodding donkey:
Zac_A:
BHJ? FFS…Not this bunch again…Jonathon Backhouse. “I’d say that they account for seven to eight out of 10 of them”
Please expand on the validity of “I’d say” Jonathon.
Personally “I’d say” you should be supplying some evidence if you’re going to make blanket statements like that
“I’d say” I’m highly unimpressed with your scaremongering tactics used to promote your outrageously expensive e-courses, in regard to manual entry requirements (£84 for 90 minutes of your version of something you can read for free on the internet)
Although that wasn’t mentioned in the full article, “I’d say” you’re just using the expo as an opportunity to punt your only-slightly-less-expensive Bridge Strikes e-course (£60 for 90 minutes this time)
“I’d say” for a bunch of solicitors this is not the first time I’ve seen you be a lot less precise with words than your profession dictates is required.
“I’d say” Jonathon, that your statement is merely an opinion, and opinions are like rectums, we’ve all got one, but you seem to be mistaking opinions for facts.
What do you call 50 solicitors on the bottom of a canal?
A start !
Being an agency driver responsible for the majority of bridge strikes, I had to do one of these courses on bridge strikes. It was along the lines of "if your truck is 16’ then should you go under a bridge marked at 15’? ".
Zac_A:
BHJ? FFS…Not this bunch again…Jonathon Backhouse. “I’d say that they account for seven to eight out of 10 of them”
Please expand on the validity of “I’d say” Jonathon.
Personally “I’d say” you should be supplying some evidence if you’re going to make blanket statements like that
“I’d say” I’m highly unimpressed with your scaremongering tactics used to promote your outrageously expensive e-courses, in regard to manual entry requirements (£84 for 90 minutes of your version of something you can read for free on the internet)
Although that wasn’t mentioned in the full article, “I’d say” you’re just using the expo as an opportunity to punt your only-slightly-less-expensive Bridge Strikes e-course (£60 for 90 minutes this time)
“I’d say” for a bunch of solicitors this is not the first time I’ve seen you be a lot less precise with words than your profession dictates is required.
“I’d say” Jonathon, that your statement is merely an opinion, and opinions are like rectums, we’ve all got one, but you seem to be mistaking opinions for facts.
Where’s the like button!
As an agency driver I am paranoid about this. Never driving the same truck twice makes me really pay attention to the dimensions of this week’s pay check provider.
Extra time in the morning with the smart phone getting the Feet and Inches/ Meters in order pay dividends.
“Mirror, signal, today’s truck is 12f 6. Mirror, signal, today’s truck is 12f 6.”
What’s the difference between a catfish and a solicitor?
One’s a scum sucking bottom feeder and the other’s a fish
He may be right. But if he’s saying that, bearing in mind I can’t access the entire article, then something that also needs mentioning is how often a client will skimp on the details a full time driver would get in order to get them out the door and up the road.
simcor:
dozy:
[zb]It actually would not surprise me if that was the case, as the majority of agency drivers just don’t give a [zb] about anything, they seem to think they can just move around to other companies even when causing damage, and they will never run out of places to work at. T
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
It is not as much of a problem is the US because when you change employers you have to provide a 10 year work history ! I’m sure people lie and some companies don’t do references, but I believe somewhere there is a Government Data Base that compiles the information which results in the undesirable being denied employment and loss of Licenses.
dozy:
[zb] hell that should give the normal suspects on here a hard on
These days, a full timer is a failed agency driver, it could be argued…
Who needs “Sick Pay” or “legal protection when I hit a bridge” anyways? 
Firm gets fined for their liveried vehicle hitting a bridge
Firm claims back from outsourced contractor
Contractor claims back from insurances or personal liability insurance if the driver is still self-employed at this late stage…
I have said it before on here that “Insurers” might one day wake up, and realize that there is something wrong with the employment infrastructure in this industry IF it happens to be the case that the supposedly most experienced drivers (agency) end up being the most accident-prone drivers (agency is the only place a 6-points driver can still get a job for the full wage)
Given that “Bridge Hitters” get sacked on the spot, the rest of us are all left guessing “Whodunnit”?
You end up having to work out who “hasn’t been seen anymore this week”…
Forget “Agency” being to blame though:
I reckon the imperial/metric combined with the language barrier that has the most to do with it… Oh, and “Not knowing the roads around this neck of the woods at ALL”.…