At lastPleased to see the RSSB has finally removed gender-specific language from the rule book with Pilotman becoming Pilot and "manned" (i.e. manned level crossings) becoming "manually controlled".
Why are you pleased?Pleased to see the RSSB has finally removed gender-specific language from the rule book with Pilotman becoming Pilot and "manned" (i.e. manned level crossings) becoming "manually controlled".
I hear this term very rarely. Usually people seem to use "staffed".I've never heard of "manned" being considered a gendered term.
It's not really. A colleague refers to the space she is in charge of supervising being "manned" for example. That said, it's use is probably declining and one day the meaning of this term may be deemed to have changed; this can be a gradual process.I've never heard of "manned" being considered a gendered term.
Nobody has suggested that they were insulting, derogatory or offensive. The reason for it is stated to be to make a working environment more inclusive and to remove the risk of deterring applications for employment or promotion - why don't you like those things?Why are you pleased?
The words are not insulting, derogatory or offensive.
Indeed. It's difficult to see how revising the documents in this way uses up any extra resources that could have been used for anything else. They do have to be reviewed anyway and it doesn't cost anything extra to go through these processes.By that logic, you shouldn't be commenting on this thread at all. Don't you have more important things to worry about?
This is a red herring; it's about being inclusive.Why are you pleased?
The words are not insulting, derogatory or offensive.
That isn't really a logical argument; people are welcome to discuss topics and anyone who comments on a topic isn't really in a strong position to suggest the topic doesn't merit discussion.Plenty of more important things to worry about.
I've never heard of "manned" being considered a gendered term.
Please, come on, The worlds gone mad!This is a red herring; it's about being inclusive
This is important. Other things are also important. It’s not a competition.What next, "operating personuals"? Don't we have more important things to worry about?
Plenty of more important things to worry about.
What next, "operating personuals"? Don't we have more important things to worry about?
I am in favour of terms that could reasonably considered gendered and could easily be made gender neutral being changed, for example signaller is a better term than signalman and it is only right (in my opinion) that the grade has been renamed.
However I can understand that this can be taken too far.
Pleased to see the RSSB has finally removed gender-specific language from the rule book with Pilotman becoming Pilot and "manned" (i.e. manned level crossings) becoming "manually controlled".
The simpler 'man+hole' seems a lot more likely.This can cause confusion when people misunderstand the history - e.g. my understanding was that ‘man hole’ essentially meant a cover in the road/pavement that you had to lift up with your own hands to open, i.e. a contraction of “manual hole”, rather than saying it was something only guys could go down?
We are talking about straightforward industry language. In the Control office I work in we used "manned up" several times a day or even a shift. Example is 5Z22 (special ECS) manned up ? There is no diagram for it as it is a VSTP special so Route controllers, Traincrew Controls and Dtuy Manager use "manned up" as the most succinct way of establishing a movement is covered.Nobody has suggested that they were insulting, derogatory or offensive. The reason for it is stated to be to make a working environment more inclusive and to remove the risk of deterring applications for employment or promotion - why don't you like those things?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Indeed. It's difficult to see how revising the documents in this way uses up any extra resources that could have been used for anything else. They do have to be reviewed anyway and it doesn't cost anything extra to go through these processes.
manned up
To be honest I don't think it is sexist derogatory or offensive - it is simply a term which the industry have traditionally used - just like "bobby" for a signaller. Another one we use is "round the houses" which in our Control is a train running around the Birmingham suburbs to free a platform whilst doing a set swap. It is a traditional industry phrase which we know and understand.
We are talking about straightforward industry language. In the Control office I work in we used "manned up" several times a day or even a shift. Example is 5Z22 (special ECS) manned up ? There is no diagram for it as it is a VSTP special so Route controllers, Traincrew Controls and Dtuy Manager use "manned up" as the most succinct way of establishing a movement is covered.
Indeed it is. Mersey tunnels changed the signs on the pay booths some years ago from 'manned' to 'staffed'. Common sense really.I've never heard of "manned" being considered a gendered term.
I suspect you also remember when it was signal man not signaller yet you have accepted that change?To be honest I don't think it is sexist derogatory or offensive - it is simply a term which the industry have traditionally used - just like "bobby" for a signaller.
Crewed is indeed used in most other control offices"Crewed" might be a better alternative. I'll electronic message the RSSB forthwith.
I'm not female but if I was I think I would object to being excluded, or treated as an honorary man. It seems insulting to my mind.Why are you pleased?
The words are not insulting, derogatory or offensive.
Plenty of more important things to worry about.
The English language has done that since at least the time of Chaucer.referring to individuals as “they” always grates with me, as it’s a plural form.
Not a question of accepting or not accepting at all. It is what it is, but while we are at it what do preserved railways call the person who shovels the coal into the fire on a steam loco ?.I suspect you also remember when it was signal man not signaller yet you have accepted that change?
This is just another one of those type of things, if it offends one less person or discourages one fewer applicant then it’s worthwhile.
I’m not sure why me agreeing with removing one gender specific term means that I have to solve all the others or accept none of them.Not a question of accepting or not accepting at all. It is what it is, but while we are at it what do preserved railways call the person who shovels the coal into the fire on a steam loco ?.
Just curious