I wish we could get a little sweet reason into our arguments. What, for example, does Fr. Holloway mean when he says it is "indefensible" to "detract from human and personal values and the graciousness of life as a condition of economic betterment"? Does he mean that any part of a job that makes one uncomfortable, or is in some way unpleasant or servile, should theoretically, at any rate, be eliminated? If so, there are many far worse things than lodging turns to worry about in industry, and in any case, are we really right in demanding that such things should be eliminated? God surely intends man to work and it is doubtful if he wants work to be anything but a chastening experience. Our Lord set us an example in this, when he deliberetely chose to perform the very servile and no doubt unpleasant task of washing Peter's feet. And then, Mr. Alan Burkitt comes along to say that "trainmen's lives are sufficiently disorganised by the hours at which we go nit duty, without the additional burden of lodging turns." I would ask Mr. Burkitt whether lodging turns existed when he took his job and whether he then accepted them as part of that job. If so, I really cannot see why he should now insist on their abolition because he does not like them any more. He would surely be quick enough to quote the conditions under which he accepted his job. if his employers now said they wished to abolish one of the privileges of that job. In any case, let us see what would happen if Mr. Burkitt's lodging turns were abolished. Extra train staff would be needed, they would have to be paid, British Railways would at once pass the cost on to the public by raising passenger and freight charges, Mr. laurkitt's food would cost him more, and (to judge by past events) he would immediately strike for extra Wages to meet his cost of living. We live in an age of half-digested theories about the rights of man, and Fr. Holloway and Mr. Burkitt are not helping man to obtain or retain those rights by advancing such arguments as they have put forward. F. J. Cammack 11 Sydney Place, Bath.
Page 2, 2nd July 1954
2nd July 1954
Page 2, 2nd July 1954 — L OD GING TURNS Stis,-If we must ar g ue about railway lodgin g turns,Close
Report an errorNoticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.
People: Alan Burkitt
Page 5 from 7th January 1972
Page 4 from 25th October 1963
Page 2 from 3rd October 1941
Page 4 from 3rd January 1947
Page 2 from 5th November 1954
L OD GING TURNS Stis,-If we must ar g ue about railway lodgin g turns,
blog comments powered by Disqus