This is what is wrong with this country ?

Originally Posted by Hugh

Because silence/lack of reply would imply (imho) acceptance/acceptability of the whinging carp he posts, which then encourages those of a similar bent to carry on regardless.

So what.The world will not end and the sky won't fall in and the fact that no one of any rationality can be ars...bothered to reply will speak volumes.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

I think Hugh's point is not to change the opinion of the the OP, but to inform (and reassure) those who view the thread that other views exist.

Yep. it's all about opinions and points of view. it's called debating.

the only downside is, some with a different opinion or point of view resort to name calling and insults. which is really annoying to see.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

So what....

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Attributed to Edmund Burke.

Originally Posted by Gary L

Yep. it's all about opinions and points of view. it's called debating.

the only downside is, some with a different opinion or point of view resort to name calling and insults. which is really annoying to see.

Originally Posted by Gary L

Because they're just as crazy as he is?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Attributed to Edmund Burke.

at what point did Arthur's posts become evil ?

what's needed here imo is a chill pill - chill-axe people its not the end of the world it just our Arthur

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Nutter

Absolutely - it's not the end of the world, just that Arthur thinks it is.....

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 ----------

Originally Posted by Gary L

Nutter

You may think that - I couldn't possible comment.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Absolutely - it's not the end of the world, just that Arthur thinks it is.....

I think he reminisces over a time when the world was a much larger place and the UK a wealthier nation - even if it was following generations' 'inheritance' that was being spent.

That and wanting a rather more 'controlled' economy. Very sterotypical actually, in common with most wanting a more socialist and controlled economy as he will be a beneficiary.

Anyway on that note back to work

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

the fact that no one of any rationality can be ars...bothered to reply will speak volumes.

Nice dig must remember that one

Originally Posted by Stuart

They do advertise these jobs at the local job centre if they can.

I know they do ,but that isn't what i meant .I mean since the jobs on offer weren't applied for why can't the job center phone up the first 50 long term unemployed and tell them that the job is theirs like it or not, no choice about it .After all in theory 50 vacancies in an area with 3000 long term unemployed (example figures to illustrate my point) should be taken almost immediately .

[alferret]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

And for comments like STFU, is very typical of the people that haven't seen life.

Oh I have seen plenty of life Arfur. I would put money on it I have had a harder life, seen more, done more than you!
But I just get on with it rather than bang on about crap like you do. It wouldnt be so bad if there was some consistency to your ramblings. (aside from blaming everything on the Tories like you seem to do)

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by mertle

I had brother in law work in chemical company 600+ workers then after 12 hour shift introduced less than 200.

About time we had government with bottle to take industry on.

I have to wonder: Assuming they were working eight hour shifts before, how busy were they that the a third of the workforce were able to do the same work in shifts that were just half as long again?

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Stuart

I have to wonder: Assuming they were working eight hour shifts before, how busy were they that the a third of the workforce were able to do the same work in shifts that were just half as long again?

yes four shifts at 8 hours. With 3 on 1 shift off.

In the end lot of the workers became ill through over working my brother in law too simply you cant expect 12 hour shifts in punishing job.

The company had more errors too as tiredness crept in due to the shift changes.

My brother in law said he was effectively doing three man jobs for little more pay. All because profits was put before safety.

I would not be suprised this happened throughout the country as firms moved to a system which is dangerous.

Infact they still expected them to work overtime if your relief failed to turn up they expected them to stay at least 6 hours he did over the years 18 hour shifts. With the plant a 24 hour 365 day operation shutting down cost ing millions the shift system and staff cuts was too much. The union was toothless to help them.

The expected to drive home afterward with company not providing transport home or work the next shift. The company for chemical plant was disgusting how it operated.

There was a case in lincoln where an acident happened due to 12 hour shifts where the person fell asleep at the wheel. Killed someone its ludicous issue.

So there is a safety aspect why 12 hours practices should be banned.

I am surprised that, if the practices are dangerous, H&S aren't all over them (as they apparently are if you try to use a ladder to put a sign up anywhere).

[Wayfair]

Originally Posted by mertle View Post
I had brother in law work in chemical company 600+ workers then after 12 hour shift introduced less than 200.

About time we had government with bottle to take industry on.

What company was it mertle?