Priorities?

[mushroom25]

as above - children crossing the road safely, or emergency service vehicles?
http://www.lutontoday.co.uk/news/local/lollipop-man-under-investigation-for-blocking-on-call-fire-engine-1-6702255

[Buenchico]

Your question seems to assume that there's conflict between the two. However part of a crossing patrol's job (in ensuring the safety of children) is to prevent them from crossing the road when they shouldn't be attempting to do so (as well, of course, as enabling them to cross the road when it's safe to do so).

So holding up the children should be something that the crossing patrol does at some time every day and therefore something that shouldn't cause a problem when it's necessary to allow an emergency service vehicle to pass.

The only exception might be if the crossing patrol guy was concerned at the sheer volume of children arriving at the roadside, fearing that those at the back might push others out into the road. Then it would actually make sense to get rid of the congestion before allowing any vehicle to pass (even emergency service ones).

[woofgang]

What Chris said.....

[Svejk]

Emergency vehicle, of course. That lollipop man is either mentally ill or trying to make some insane political statement. (which amounts to the same thing)

[Canary42]

Political statement ? Now whose a bit mental ?

[-Talbot-]

What svejk said....

[yogi-bear]

What Chris, woofgang, Svejk and Talbot said

Emergency vehicle.....it is the job of the lollipop man to keep children safe, not get them to cross when a fire engine comes at them.

[Prudie]

I don't understand what the others said..man's a jobsworth, rather sad really

[yogi-bear]

Prudie,

Chris ( Buenchico ) has perfectly summed up what I would like to say and think about it and woofgangs opinion too.

Hope youre well, Prudie x

[murraymints]

give a man a uniform......wellllll..give the same uniform to a woman.....rest my case....

[Prudie]

Hi yogi xx I've re-read what Chris has said and follow it but don't see that he's concluding the obvious, a crossing patrol should never hold up emergency services, especially not repeatedly. I still think he's a jobsworth or nuts.

[yogi-bear]

I agree Prudie.....he could have got one or more of the children hurt due his behaviour and had to be removed by firemen after ushering the children on the crossing several times, so in my opinion he may not be trusted to look after children to the best of his ability, so there is a case for his sacking if the authorities think is appropriate.
There should be an investigation of the incident.

Chris's last paragraph saying about that sheer volume of children at the crossing could have lead to some being pushed into the road, is a valid point, in this instance

[mushroom25]

methyl, whatever the schools do will be ineffective. at the school near me, it had become the practice for parents to drive into the school yard, along an entry-way which is single track and doubles as the pedestrian entrance (the other entrance was sealed because it afforded dog walkers access to the playing field). this was clearly hazardous to the children so the decision was taken to close the gate to traffic. all this meant was that the parents then had to open the gates themselves. so the school started locking the gate. after the gates were vandalised several times to render them inoperative, and were expensively repaired each time, the parents began to realise they weren't going to win. the result was a free for all in the road outside, and frequent shouting matches due to parking rage, notwithstanding the yelow lines, hatching - and the regular attendance of the local PCSO. as a compromise the school negotiated a deal with the church nearby to use their car park, but the parents refused to use it as it was 100m away and it was "too dangerous for kids to walk to school".

so the situation persists. nightmare.