Why Does Reedham Have A Quay Ranger?

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

This is a forum for the public to either join, or just read, therefore, it`s perfectly justified for someone who is a member of the public who is disenchanted with something, or someone, to voice their opinions. If we`re going to chastise people for forewarning of a possible problem in a popular, and sometimes difficult area to moor, purely because a few on here think it should`nt be allowed, what`s the point of having the forum.  It would be a pretty sad place if all we could do was gleefully congratulate where due, but not say a word (also where rightfully due) just because some might not like it.  Let people have their say, and respect their view, not ridicule them just because you don`t like what they say.

[Londonlad1985]

I've not met the latest ranger but last year I found the last guy bad tempered. I put it down to it being high season and lots of novice skippers (myself included) around.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

This is a forum for the public to either join, or just read, therefore, it`s perfectly justified for someone who is a member of the public who is disenchanted with something, or someone, to voice their opinions. If we`re going to chastise people for forewarning of a possible problem in a popular, and sometimes difficult area to moor, purely because a few on here think it should`nt be allowed, what`s the point of having the forum.  It would be a pretty sad place if all we could do was gleefully congratulate where due, but not say a word (also where rightfully due) just because some might not like it.  Let people have their say, and respect their view, not ridicule them just because you don`t like what they say.

That's fine as long as it's a fair playing field ie the subject of the discussion/ grievance has the right to reply and even knows there the subject of a problem otherwise I would be far better to address the person's employer , an example being if you had a problem with a co worker would you talk to your boss or your mate down the pub ? And who would be better to resolve it ? 

[diesel falcon]

The wife allways complains that the ranger at Reedham never helps us......reason? we should know what we are doing!

Must admit there is one guy there who is bad tempered and grumpy, but that dosn,t stop him doing a good job.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

That's fine as long as it's a fair playing field ie the subject of the discussion/ grievance has the right to reply and even knows there the subject of a problem otherwise I would be far better to address the person's employer , an example being if you had a problem with a co worker would you talk to your boss or your mate down the pub ? And who would be better to resolve it ? 

If I could be a little pedantic here; the OP does not discuss a problem that he personally experienced it was an observation of what he perceived as the experience of others.

[Wussername]

This is wrong. The new guy, one guy, the last one. This is character assisination on a completely unjustified scale. It is wrong on so many levels. If you have an issue inform the authorities in a proper civilised manner. It is wrong to hound those who are unable to defend or even recognize who amongst their colleagues, or indeed themselves, as being judged as being unsuitable.

Andrew

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Wussername said:

This is wrong. The new guy, one guy, the last one. This is character assisination on a completely unjustified scale. It is wrong on so many levels. If you have an issue inform the authorities in a proper civilised manner. It is wrong to hound those who are unable to defend or even recognize who amongst their colleagues, or indeed themselves, as being judged as being unsuitable.

Andrew

Who else can we have a go at?

Make formal complaints, unfairly compromise their employment record, maybe risk dismissal and loss of income.

 

[MauriceMynah]

Dr Packman. He's NEVER taken MY ropes.  :(

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Dr Packman. He's NEVER taken MY ropes.  :(

He takes money instead

[MauriceMynah]

Ahhh True!

[Wussername]

8 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

Who else can we have a go at?

Make formal complaints, unfairly compromise their employment record, maybe risk dismissal and loss of income.

 

A formal complaint does not necessarily mean that their employment record is compromised or risks dismissal and loss of income. The Quay Assistants do in fact receive many compliments and indeed some complaints all of which are received and acted upon in a correct and just process.

I am not sure that such a discipline exists on any forum.

Andrew

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

Who else can we have a go at?

Make formal complaints, unfairly compromise their employment record, maybe risk dismissal and loss of income.

 

What do you think happens to a formal "letter of complaint" about an employee......it goes into the employee record.

To be seen each time the record is opened for whatever reason.

[dnks34]

7 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

What do you think happens to a formal "letter of complaint" about an employee......it goes into the employee record.

To be seen each time the record is opened for whatever reason.

Not if it turns out to be unfounded......otherwise anyone could make anything up about anyone!! (Not that im saying the OP has done!)

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Not if it turns out to be unfounded......otherwise anyone could make anything up about anyone!! (Not that im saying the OP has done!)

Really

In these days of compliance documents cannot be destroyed they have to be filed. An employee complaint will be filed in the employee file with supporting documents to say what action was taken as a result, maybe the action was no action due to lack of evidence etc. Now how many no action events need to be on file before the employers think "maybe there is something amiss" thereby compromising the employee record.

[Meantime]

I purposely didn't provide a date for my trip and observation last week, in exactly the same way as I didn't describe the ranger. My concern is more as a toll payer why is there a quay ranger, and perhaps more importantly do we need one?

I have already covered off the safety issue. The Blessed Authority's mooring prices for Yarmouth pay NO attention to safety otherwise they would be more flexible. There are also other free BA moorings that are equally as tidal and do not have rangers in attendance. If one is needed at Reedham on the basis of safety then one is needed at these other moorings. If one is needed at Reedham on the basis of safety then he should leave the hut a little more often.

It is not the first time I have noticed issues at Reedham, and with more than one ranger.

I witnessed a hire boat a couple of years ago collide with the support for Reedham bridge so hard that a passenger on the bow who was about to fend the boat off got catapulted onto the wooden surround. I was sitting at the pub and witnessed this and looked towards the hut and saw no response. I walked over to the hut and the ranger had his feet up looking the other way. I told him about the incident and he told me he was at lunch and that the bridge was outside of his remit!!!! I did suggest that even so, I thought he might still have informed Broads control, which he reluctantly agreed to do!!!!! He might have been at lunch, but even so a dangerous situation still warranted more of a response than that.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I purposely didn't provide a date for my trip and observation last week, in exactly the same way as I didn't describe the ranger. My concern is more as a toll payer why is there a quay ranger, and perhaps more importantly do we need one?

I have already covered off the safety issue. The Blessed Authority's mooring prices for Yarmouth pay NO attention to safety otherwise they would be more flexible. There are also other free BA moorings that are equally as tidal and do not have rangers in attendance. If one is needed at Reedham on the basis of safety then one is needed at these other moorings. If one is needed at Reedham on the basis of safety then he should leave the hut a little more often.

It is not the first time I have noticed issues at Reedham, and with more than one ranger.

I witnessed a hire boat a couple of years ago collide with the support for Reedham bridge so hard that a passenger on the bow who was about to fend the boat off got catapulted onto the wooden surround. I was sitting at the pub and witnessed this and looked towards the hut and saw no response. I walked over to the hut and the ranger had his feet up looking the other way. I told him about the incident and he told me he was at lunch and that the bridge was outside of his remit!!!! I did suggest that even so, I thought he might still have informed Broads control, which he reluctantly agreed to do!!!!! He might have been at lunch, but even so a dangerous situation still warranted more of a response than that.

Interesting but:

You start by saying your observations were last week yet the supporting evidence involves a collision a couple of years ago.

Could a Ranger have prevented the collision?

Is the same Ranger on the quay a couple of years ago still on the quay today? 

[Meantime]

I am not going to say anything that identifies which ranger, but I did also say, and it's in your quotation of me, 

"It is not the first time I have noticed issues at Reedham, and with more than one ranger."

The ranger may not have prevented the collision, but it was his indifferent attitude once informed of the issue that quite frankly hacked me off.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I am not going to say anything that identifies which ranger, but I did also say, and it's in your quotation of me, 

"It is not the first time I have noticed issues at Reedham, and with more than one ranger."

Why do the people who you feel have issues not complain... like the boat that collided with the bridge?

 

[Meantime]

1 minute ago, Philosophical said:

Why do the people who have issues not complain... like the boat that collided with the bridge?

 

I raised awareness with the ranger on duty at the time, but I repeat, my real question is, Does Reedham need a quay ranger?

[dnks34]

25 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

Really

In these days of compliance documents cannot be destroyed they have to be filed. An employee complaint will be filed in the employee file with supporting documents to say what action was taken as a result, maybe the action was no action due to lack of evidence etc. Now how many no action events need to be on file before the employers think "maybe there is something amiss" thereby compromising the employee record.

Maybe something is amiss and the paper trail is how these things can come to light.  

Im not quite sure what your saying, are you saying dont make a complaint even if you feel you have genuine grounds to as it might get someone in trouble? 

[Guest]

Just now, EastCoastIPA said:

I raised awareness with the ranger on duty at the time, but I repeat, my real question is, Does Reedham need a quay ranger?

You have described a bridge collision as being somehow the responsibility of a Ranger without explaining how the Ranger was delinquent in his duties.

To answer you question:  Consensus of responses to this post says yes.

[Meantime]

1 minute ago, Philosophical said:

You have described a bridge collision as being somehow the responsibility of a Ranger without explaining how the Ranger was delinquent in his duties.

To answer you question:  Consensus of responses to this post says yes.

I suggest you reread my post again. At no point did I say it was the responsibility of the Ranger. I actually said that I went to the hut to report what I'd seen and saw him with his feet up and looking the other way. That is a full admission that he may not even have seen the event. When I appraised him of what I had seen it was his reply that hacked me off. I'm at lunch and the bridge is not my jurisdiction. There was still a person stranded on the bridge support at that time. I don't care if it was his bloody lunch or not. Common sense says as a matter of safety he should show an interest and at least inform Broads control in case a launch was in the area. The ranger on that particular day was as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.  

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, dnks34 said:

Maybe something is amiss and the paper trail is how these things can come to light.  

Im not quite sure what your saying, are you saying dont make a complaint even if you feel you have genuine grounds to as it might get someone in trouble? 

Not at all; making a formal complaint based on a single event or even worse on an observation without first speaking to the offending person is unreasonable. A forum such as this is a good place to air complaints about a particular service, if the overriding consensus is that other members have a similar complaint then maybe yours is justified. If however there is not a consensus of agreement then maybe you should consider if your complaint is justified and serious enough to possibly comprise an employees record.   

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I suggest you reread my post again. At no point did I say it was the responsibility of the Ranger. I actually said that I went to the hut to report what I'd seen and saw him with his feet up and looking the other way. That is a full admission that he may not even have seen the event. When I appraised him of what I had seen it was his reply that hacked me off. I'm at lunch and the bridge is not my jurisdiction. There was still a person stranded on the bridge support at that time. I don't care if it was his bloody lunch or not. Common sense says as a matter of safety he should show an interest and at least inform Broads control in case a launch was in the area. The ranger on that particular day was as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.  

Again you are an observer complaining on behalf of other people who probably don't have a complaint themselves.

[Wonderwall]

Last year when I was at Reedham, I encountered a swan who was very aggressive, in fact it was downright rude. Is it a myth it belongs to the queen? Is that where I should direct my complain?

Later in the week, the swans were very graceful .

I had lovely time , on both occasions.