News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

Yes, it negatively impacts customer service, requires more staff involvement, and makes no sense. The train should be able to comfortably handle 1 personal item (at seat), 1 carry-on (above seat), and 1 piece of luggage (on shelf). The passengers are responsible for their luggage and must stow it in the space provided or check it. Only if the luggage is being checked should it be weighed because what does the weight matter otherwise?? Only checked luggage or luggage above the standard allotment should be charged. If the luggage is 10 lbs overweight... so what if VIA customer service isn't carrying it? I have to pay more for carrying my own heavier luggage??
 
EnviroTO said:
Yes, it negatively impacts customer service, requires more staff involvement, and makes no sense. The train should be able to comfortably handle 1 personal item (at seat), 1 carry-on (above seat), and 1 piece of luggage (on shelf). The passengers are responsible for their luggage and must stow it in the space provided or check it. Only if the luggage is being checked should it be weighed because what does the weight matter otherwise?? Only checked luggage or luggage above the standard allotment should be charged. If the luggage is 10 lbs overweight... so what if VIA customer service isn't carrying it? I have to pay more for carrying my own heavier luggage??
Click to expand...
And even if we assume that 23 kg per bag is the absolute limit that a human can carry, why is there a different weight limit for the small item? As long as it fits under the seat, then who cares how heavy it is? It's a train, not an airplane. Luggage weight is not a big deal.

Someone really needs to point out to Via that they are a railway, not an airline. It's long past time they start acting like one.
 
reaperexpress said:
And even if we assume that 23 kg per bag is the absolute limit that a human can carry, why is there a different weight limit for the small item? As long as it fits under the seat, then who cares how heavy it is? It's a train, not an airplane. Luggage weight is not a big deal.

Someone really needs to point out to Via that they are a railway, not an airline. It's long past time they start acting like one.
Click to expand...

OSHA
 
Unfamiliar with any of these acronyms (other than “OSHA” being VIA’s station code for Oshawa), a short Google search suggests that “OSHA” is an American agency created by American legislation with the same acronym (“Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the United. States Department of Labor, formed by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970”). The Candian equivalents are “CCOHS” (Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety) for the agency and “OHSA” (Occupational Health and Safety Act) for the legislation.

I would welcome if people would verify and explain acronyms before using them. Thank you!
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
Everything says that VIA HFR is a subsidiary of VIA. So why wouldn’t it use VIA branding, even if its arms length? Cuz WestJet really needed their Swoop flanker brand? Well that’s gone now.
Click to expand...

If you don't believe me, you can read the HFR website. "VIA HFR" is nothing but a name. It beats very little relation to VIA. And most definitely is not a subsidiary. It answers directly to the Minister. Just like VIA.
 
Urban Sky said:
“VIA-HFR” is the project office and promoter, not the future operator. “VIA HFR” is (at least on paper) “a wholly owned subsidiary of VIA Rail”, but the future operator certainly (and explicitly) won’t…
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying. I mixed that up. All I know is the documents specifically say the operator won't be answering to VIA and will have full control of all assets in the Corridor.

Personally, I'm glad for the split. VIA adventure and regional routes makes the organization schizophrenic.
 
Urban Sky said:
Unfamiliar with any of these acronyms (other than “OSHA” being VIA’s station code for Oshawa), a short Google search suggests that “OSHA” is an American agency created by American legislation with the same acronym (“Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the United. States Department of Labor, formed by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970”). The Candian equivalents are “CCOHS” (Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety) for the agency and “OHSA” (Occupational Health and Safety Act) for the legislation.

I would welcome if people would verify and explain acronyms before using them. Thank you!
Click to expand...
To be fair, the OSHA (meaning the Occupational Health and Safety Act) is a fairly commonly known workplace acronym in Ontario, but I suppose we should try to avoid 'insider lingo'. Clearly, it wouldn't apply for the this discussion since VIA comes under federal legislation and, besides, it wouldn't apply to passengers.
 
Urban Sky said:
Unfamiliar with any of these acronyms (other than “OSHA” being VIA’s station code for Oshawa), a short Google search suggests that “OSHA” is an American agency created by American legislation with the same acronym (“Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the United. States Department of Labor, formed by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970”). The Candian equivalents are “CCOHS” (Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety) for the agency and “OHSA” (Occupational Health and Safety Act) for the legislation.

I would welcome if people would verify and explain acronyms before using them. Thank you!
Click to expand...

OSHA is also the nickname given to any workplace laws or rules that tell the worker what to do safely. It is like using the word "kleenex" when the facial tissue is not made by kleenex, or saying crescent wrench when talking about an adjustable wrench not made by the Crescent company. So, you work in an office.....as saying OSHA is a well known thing to say in a shop.

TBH I do not know the acronyms for the stations, but I have figured it out as time goes on.
 
lenaitch said:
To be fair, the OSHA (meaning the Occupational Health and Safety Act) is a fairly commonly known workplace acronym in Ontario, but I suppose we should try to avoid 'insider lingo'.
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarifying, as I had never heard of the “OSHA” acronym despite receiving multiple trainings on workplace regulations as an employee working (though remotely from Montréal) in Ontario. Referring to the rights granted by US legislation to individuals in the US always reminds me of the trucker protestors executing their imaginary “First Amendment Rights”, but I do agree that at least when speaking, “OSHA” is a lot more snappy as an acronym than “OHSA”…

lenaitch said:
Clearly, it wouldn't apply for the this discussion since VIA comes under federal legislation and, besides, it wouldn't apply to passengers.
Click to expand...
Indeed, OHSA is provincial legislation of Ontario and federal workers are covered by the “Canada Labour Code Part II”…
 
reaperexpress said:
Clearly occupational health and safety is not the reason they are charging for large bags, given that Business class passengers continue to be allowed to bring 2 large bags on for free.
Click to expand...
Not all occupational risks can realistically be entirely eliminated; therefore, creating financial incentives for passengers to reduce the occupational risks of employees (which may have to assist passengers while boarding) might still be a valid mitigation strategy…
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top