Need to read to the last line before you'll see the sense of it

[indalo]

The Benenden Healthcare magazine dropped through my letterbox this morning and I had a swift browse while taking an early lunch.

An article caught my eye which turned out to be pretty boring stuff until I got to the last line which made me think the author is a pretty astute guy.


A leap in the dark

I was disappointed to read once again about a campaign to abandon GMT as our standard time. (The author refers to a piece in a previous issue)

An experiment of this type was conducted between 1968 and 1971 - and was not deemed a success. What has changed? Having monitored the weather professionally for over 40 years, I'd like to make the following observations.

The minimum temperature generally occurs around dawn so the incidence of frost and freezing fog is greater then. If accepted, the change would place many more commuters in danger of both darkness and fog. There are no "spare" hours of precious daylight to be had as some campaigners would have us believe.

If all their efforts were channelled instead into a scheme to make pedestrians and cyclists more visible, many deaths and injuries could be prevented.

The article is accredited to a Mr Peter Medwell of Broadstairs.

Mr Medwell neatly ignores all the reasons people have suggested for change and simply homes in on the death and injury rate which, presumably, is higher in the early morning than later. I'm not entirely convinced one way or the other with regard to our standard time and its application but it's nice to read that somebody has taken the trouble to express an opinion on the matter and gives a mention to cyclists in so doing. Any little bit of publicity which may raise people's awareness of cyclists is welcome in my book.

Regards,
Indalo

 

[flecc]

Of course the alternative could have been if we'd got the age of leisure that we were promised many decades ago. Then we wouldn't have to commuting at dawn still.

How is it that, now we've got all the modern technology doing the work for us, so many still have their noses to the grindstone?

 

[lemmy]

Computerisation has enabled us to increase hugely the scope of business, thus employing more people. But many of those jobs are low grade ones, call centres for after sales service, for example. Hence all the people starting early.

In my business, computerisation was seen by the Luddite unions as a way for management to fire people. This did happen but it also lowered the bar for entry into the media publishing business and there are more people employed in publishing than ever before.

Reminds me of a Woody Allen story, his dad comes home one day and says he's been fired. He's been replaced by a chip the size of a matchbox that does everything he did but faster, better and cheaper. That was bad enough, he says, but the next day his mum went out and bought one too.

 

[Orraman]

During those years my children cycled 2.9 miles for the school bus.

From memory there were on average 4 fewer children killed on the roads in Scotland each year. This was attributed to children and drivers being more awake in the morning and both groups could see better in the lighter evenings when weary on the way home.

Because of this I saw no sense in reverting to darker evenings other than profit for farmers.
One biased peasant.

Dave

 

[z0mb13e]

Icelanders don't seem too bothered about changing the clocks one way or the other. Its GMT all year round, dark or light. The arguments seem bizarre when the time we observe on our clocks in notional. Perhaps it is the people affected by (or who don't like) dark mornings/evenings that are better placed to change their habits?

 

[flecc]

The arguments seem bizarre when the time we observe on our clocks is notional. Perhaps it is the people affected by (or who don't like) dark mornings/evenings that are better placed to change their habits?

I've done that ever since I retired, clocks meaning little to me. The problem for working people is their company though.

 

[z0mb13e]

I've done that ever since I retired, clocks meaning little to me. The problem for working people is their company though.

I wish I could, retirement is naught but a pipe dream for me! I've always been a bit of a night owl and getting up early is a tough call. Still, it pays the bills.

As for company hours, for the few I have worked for, the working day seems as notional as the hours on the clock and it is just convention and convenience that keeps things as they are. It isn't the same for every body of course. Some professions work ad hoc hours and some jobs are 24/7.

The idea that changing the time nationwide will be good for everybody or even better for some is, to me at least, odd.

 

[flecc]

I've always been a bit of a night owl and getting up early is a tough call.

Like me, dawn for me is usually around 10 am or later and I'm up well into the night.

That way for me there's no early morning darkness, frost, fog, rush hour crowds or school run chaos, the world being a more sane place when my eyes open.

 

[HarryB]

Like me, dawn for me is usually around 10 am or later and I'm up well into the night.

That way for me there's no early morning darkness, frost, fog, rush hour crowds or school run chaos, the world being a more sane place when my eyes open.

But you miss the Today programme and I need my fix of news in the morning even if I am not working. Mind you having children means getting up at a reasonable time if only to feed them.

 

[flecc]

I sometimes get that fix with the 1pm BBC1 news Harry, both national and local, before my afternoon activities.

No nippers to cater for in retirement of course, I've made sure I live far enough away from the relatives!

 

[z0mb13e]

dawn for me is usually around 10 am or later and I'm up well into the night.

That would suit me down to the ground. I am proper envious!