To think that Olympics people going to work are not more important than anyone else going to work?

[AKMD]

Seb Coe on R4 this morning was justifying the Olympics Lanes, sayign how important it was for:

• IOC members to be able to get to the venues on time, because they will be getting there very early in the morning.

• Athletes to be able to rely on exact travel times between the athletes' village and venues so that they can time their warm-ups and get to races on time.

• Broadcasters to be able to get to venues on time to set.

Please tell me I am not the only one thinking "Eh? Why can't they get up a bit earlier like everyone else trying to get to work? I'd love my employer to set up special traffic lanes for me because I am just soooo important and I'm sure everyone else would too but fat chance." and imagining the roads if we had a lane for each company :o

I don't live in London btu this has irritated me. AIBU?

The majority of people working at the Olympics are making their own ways to the venues, which allowing for going through security, can mean leaving home at 4.30 am for a 6 am shift.

For two weeks though, it'll be worth it!

Olympia please declare your special interest :o

Yes, this is a big event but I am still puzzled as to why the people involved can't just get up early. Instead of thinking, "Hey, wot, I have a special lane and it will take me exactly 31 minutes to get from my villarrrrge to the stadium," how about, "Google says 40 minutes but here's my useful Olympic guide to travel times that says it will take 3 hours."

Most of the spectators will be planning to travel by tube (bus, train & walking) but the tube is RAMMED most days between 8-10 and 5-7 without the extra people. Tfl reckon we'll need half an hour to interchange at most stations so a "normal" 1 hour commute will take 2+.

Do people really not think that the Olympics is worth a couple of weeks of inconvenience?

Bearing in mind that we are a nation that has created a whole host of entirely talentless z-list celebrities, who trade purely on their looks or their connections, is it not worthwhile for our children and young people to see a high-profile alternative "celebrity"? To see people who have dedicated their lives to being the best they can be at something that is important to them, at being fit, strong and healthy?

And the vast majority of the Olympians won't be overpaid and famous. Many of them, particularly from poorer nations, will be here because of sacrifice on the part of themselves and their families. Some of them may have years of failure and near-misses behind them before finally getting here this year. Some of them may have fought their way back from serious injuries or really soul-destroying defeats. For some of them, just standing on the start-line is going to be the most memorable moment of their lives. Some of them will have families watching from home, who couldn't afford to travel to see them, but are almost exploding with pride at just being able to catch a glimpse of their non-medalling son or daughter.

And we're not just hosting the Olympics. We also have the Paralympics as part of the package. We are going to see people who have overcome serious disabilities and potentially life-limiting conditions competing in the biggest celebration of the abilities of those traditionally considered disabled. Children with disabilities are going to see what it is possible for them to achieve.

And we invited these people to come to our country and participate in this massive celebration of sporting achievement. If we don't do our utmost to ensure that they have the best possible experience then we are incredibly grudging. It would be like your DP inviting some people round for dinner when you wanted a quiet evening, and then you behaving like an arse to the entirely innocent guests, refusing to give them a drink and making them sit on the floor!

Beautifully said kingfupannda!

Shame that the media (and some people) only focus on the negatives.

Thanks wimblehorse , I didn't know about TfL's advice. I still think that alot of people (VIP's included) seem to think that walking shouldn't have to feature in their mode of travel. People often overstimate the distances within London and often don't consider walking when it can be much quicker than using the tube or bus. When I lived in London, I lived in Stockwell and worked near Oxford Steet or in Knightsbridge. There were a number of tube strikes back then so often I would walk. It would take me one hour - not the end of the world.

I could be wrong, but I have a memory of athletes and officials being late to events at the Los Angeles Olympics because of traffic/travel issues. And how it came across that LA should have organised it better.
Maybe the organisers here are just trying to avoid that?

am with kungfupanda on this. That said, hear what angeltattoo is saying too - a compromise would be that anyone working in emergency services etc gets access to the Olympic lanes too.

I don't think it's worth it, no. I haven't looked into it in great detail but it seems ludicrous to me that we are willing to disrupt normal working conditions in our capital city for 8 weeks just to put on a sporting event.

I actually have tickets and as a private person I'm quite excited about it but it still seems ridiculous to me.

Olympia - yes, there are a lot, because Canary Wharf and London City Airport are in east London. there aren't 'famous' hotels like Claridges, the Ritz or Browns, but there are good quality hotels serving business people travelling to Canary Wharf. They could have been booked up years in advance for the officials, instead, the 'famous' hotels were booked up for officials in advance. They would require very few roads being reserved.

I really don't understand why lanes are needed on days other than event days.

I actually have little problem with things been made easy for competitors, but most of the distruption isn't for them, it's for the rest of the 'officials' and tourists.

Btw Msrantsalot, Scottish bank notes are NOT legal tender, even in Scotland.

and a lot of the 'handwringing' about the lanes is that we've been told the tube will be rammed and basically be out of action for commute times (as most tourists will use the tube, it's by far the easiest way to get round the city if you don't know London, very clear network compared to buses/walking - most venues are close to tube stations) - however for most people who need to cross London for their commute have buses as their 'fall back' plan, but these lanes mean that the buses aren't going to be a viable alternative either.

Walking is fine if say, you need to get from one point in Zone 1 to another point in Zone 1, but a lot of people use the tube to come into London from Zones 3 or further out to another point in Zones 2-3 the otherside of London, those aren't really 'walking friendly' - before you even think about people with mobility issues.

i Beautifully said kingfupannda!

Agree. Beautifully put.

I am not remotely a sports fan and have no idea what my journeys to work will be like in London, but I am fed up with people focussing on the negatives. Yes, there will be glitches, but overall, things will probably be fine. We won't see this again in our lifetimes.

If someone invited people round to my house without asking me then they would be told to leave.

Kungfupanda - if it was only distruption for the games themselves, you'd get a lot less complaints. Its the fact it's started already that's annoyed alot of people, there's no justification for it, beyond "big jolly for rich people".

Well said KungFu Panda.

Actually panda I agree with what you are saying about the non celebrity Olympians. But I do not agree that we should make celebrities out of sports stars. Or reality stars.

So who should we make celebrities out of? I agree not reality stars but top athletes are generally fantastic role models who have dedicated a large part of their lives to achieving excellence, making many sacrifices along the way.
What's not to celebrate in that?

Why not? Sportsmen and women work hard..... They are celebrities!

kungfu, most of us have no argument with the athletes, it's the army of jumped up twatty officials and corporate idiots shoving everyone else out of the way. My journey to work will be hellish - not just an extra half an hour but probably two hours EXTRA each way. And probably more as tubes and trains will be so rammed I bet people start fainting and the trains are stopped for them to be taken off.

I have to through three likely hotspots - no choice as I have to go to work and put money on the table. Thank God, in way, that dh is unemployed so I don't have to panic about letting down my childminder. It's a bit much that I have to be grateful for not being able to pay our bills - if I had to get home for the childminder I don't know what I'd do. Can't take time off due to work deadlines and inflexible employer who won't allow working from home at all. And I'm sure there are many other people in the same boat.

I may as well put a sleeping bag in my office - travel + work already take nearly 12 hours out of my day (no choice, with dh being out of work, I had to take a job 35 miles away from home). God only knows if I'll actually get home at all before it's time to get up again the next morning.

This is not trivial, the Games organisers themselves are making my life hell just so jumped up twatty officials can stay in West End hotels. Tossers.

I have complete and utter respect, and indeed awe for the athletes most of whom undergo years of privations, live a near-monastic lifestyle and survive on tiny grants from lottery funds. My heroines are people like Vicky Pendleton, Rebecca Romero (sadly not selected) and Shanaze Reade.

I have nothing but contempt for the utterly corrupt IOC and the corporate sponsors like Coca-Cola, MacDonalds and Visa. The Zil lanes, the tax-free zones (did you know that all the sponsors are exempt from paying VAT on anything sold in the game zones? Not that those savings will be passed on to purchasers of course), the bullying of small businesses over supposed brand infringement, the utterly cynical corporatism that is completely at odds with the Olympic ideal, and of course the gagging of any athlete who might have an opinion on the matter.

FWIW, I am working at the Olympics and will be leaving home in the middle of the night to make my way there.

My DH works in the vicinity of the Games and has sensibly taken two weeks off to avoid it all.

I am getting fed up of the Olympics nay-sayers criticising everything, then wanting tickets. Like the "lady" who, at a recent torch relay event, stood behind me and my DCs criticising the whole thing for 20 minutes and then elbowed us out of the way so that she could take photos! WTF?

If you don't like it, go on holiday or take some time off.

The fact is, there is a week to go. Not hosting the Olympics is not an option. So let's do it properly and give everyone a great impression of our country, eh?

Well said poppywearer!!

Being able to run fast is a genetic trait. I was always last at everything at sports day and the shame and embarrassment haunted me for life so much so that I keep DD's off on sports days, not everybody can be the fast kids. I think sports that use a skill such as synchronised swimming, F1, horse riding things like that, yes OK thats a skill that people can learn and is fine to ask people to aspire to. Running fast is not, neither is kicking a ball and running fast.

"taking time off", well in our place, out of the 25 people in my role, only 3 can be off at the same time. In order to make it 'fairer' only one week of the olympics could be booked - so 6 of us get one of the 2 main weeks of, but the rest of us have to be in. I'm going to have to work through lunch as I'll be late every day, I can't drop DS at childcare any earlier. Most companies have insisted on the majority of staff being in...

Personally, I think it could have been managed in a way to have a much smaller effect on central London, events could have been kept to further out areas, the 'Zil lanes' could have been kept just for competitors going to/from events (so no need to cross most of London for the full period). The priority could have been "how can we make this have the minimum impact on Londoners who are going to work?" not "how can we make this look the most impressive for visitiors?"

But then, I never thought having it in London was a good idea. It's not going to help 'promote' London (it's already a tourist destination, it's already a business destination, if anything, people visiting seeing it gridlocked is not going to encourage them to want to open offices in London if they don't already). There are many UK cities who could have done with the boost of the world turning up.

But we've got it now, I do think it should be as low impact as possible.