Bzzliteyr said:Isn't this called an "accident"?
I mean, unfortunate and all but if it is the one time this has happened in a long time, if ever, shouldn't we just say "crap happens" and carry on instead of planning for destruction of said manhole cover?
PuckChaser said:Seems like you're advocating Darwinism so we can cull the herd of the ceremonial guard.
PuckChaser said:And maybe the next guy to slip on it stabs himself in the chest or the guy in front of him in the kidney? Why not fix a problem which seems like a relatively simple fix to PREVENT injuries? Seems like you're advocating Darwinism so we can cull the herd of the ceremonial guard.
Dirt Digger said:Long term solution: Google "nonslip manhole cover." Buy result.
Dirt Digger said:Short term solution: One private, one brush, one can of black nonslip deck paint. (One Bioscience Officer to supervise ;D )
Dirt Digger said:Long term solution: Google "nonslip manhole cover." Buy result.
Haggis said:Is there an engineering study on file to justify this expenditure of public funds? Moreover, is this a proper and authorized use of government IT resources? The correct manner to solicit bids and then purchase a non-slip manhole cover (is "manhole" even politically correct?) would be to take the aforementioned engineering study, draft a stastement of requirements and post it on MERX.
Followed by a grievance and lawsuit by OPSEU aganst the DND/CF for taking work away from unionized city/NCC employees
ObedientiaZelum said:Get sued for not putting a tender out to various companies to allow them to bid on said manhole cover.
Come up with a set of tests the product needs to pass.
All products fail test.
Test is rewriten.
More bids, more testing. One company finally wins.
Company takes additional 6 years to design the product and deliever it.
Long term solution indeed.
cupper said:Problem solved.