Loz

Anyone can have a full employment policy. The bugger is in actually achieving it.

Applespider Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I believe that statistically more pedestrians are > hit on roads by drivers than cyclists are but > there's no campaign to make them wear hi-viz and > helmets... although hmmmm, now I think on it... > ;-) Is that in absolute numbers or as a percentage. I suspect the former.

A speed limit is a speed limit. It is there for a reason and applies to you. Cyclists that consider laws are there to be ignored give all cyclists a bad name. > I wish people would just grow up and get along I'm pretty sure it's not everyone else that needs to do the growing up, just you.

Wearing a football shirt when you aren't actually playing football.

Legal issue aside, I disagree. I really like it when cyclists wear hi-viz stuff; I can see them from a distance and I know what they are and can react accordingly to their generally slower speed. Those little lights, especially the ones that don't flash, really just fade into the background with every other light on the streets of London, especially when it's raining. Take it from a driver - hi-viz vests make *lots* of difference.

Chippy Minton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It wasn't pointless from the RMT's point of view > as they had to strike to in order to keep the > mandate valid and therefore to allow the strikes > to happen next week. Is there a minimum? Could they have gone on strike for an hour at 2am in the morning or some such? That would have saved commuters the pain and the drivers some money.

Chippy Minton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >> I'm really hoping that all the train drivers, tube >> drivers and bus drivers go on strike that day. > > Is that because you're Bob Crow's MI5 handler? ;-) Nope. President of his fan club.

I bet we now hear Bob Crow prattling on about the need to listen to the independent tribunal's opinion ... Oh, well. Nine hours worth of wages saved by LU on Monday then. Pointless.

Considering that men are most likely to use heavier dumbbells, you could argue that the management are directly discriminating against a specific gender group by this policy. I'd ask to see Fusion's sex discrimination policy.

Don't forget the ?2m per year programme to feed middle class and rich kids. Quite possibly the stupidest recession-time policy in the UK (and that's against some pretty stiff competition.)

So drivers shouldn't put their lights on in urban areas because everyone else does it? This person sounds like a candidate for a Darwin award.

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Some of the writing's a bit, well you > know.. improbable. So a lot like 24 then. Suspension of disbelief was a major ingredient in enjoy Jack Bauer's escapades.

Sandperson Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LadyDeliah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I'm confused. > > > > I need someone to tell me who I should be hating > > as I own a dog, cycle, drive and have kids! > > > > Help! > > Your husband? ;) Yourself.

I don't do fashion. Fashion is for people who miss having their mummy dress them. ;-)

Ha! Cyclists v dog owners. Makes a nice change from the regular cyclists v car drivers. :))

The question one of them asks is: "Any accidents or losses, whether there was a claim or not and regardless of blame, in the last 5 years". Insurers like to cover all bases...!

womanofdulwich Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > loz, you are a very honest person. :)) Not really. :)) But it is worth bearing in mind as to whether you will get away with not telling the insurance company. Coz if they do find out...

womanofdulwich Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but why would you? Because insurance contracts are governed by the doctrine of utmost good faith - meaning that you are obliged to make a full declaration of all material facts. Should you have an accident and insurers find you have not declared something then they may decline to pay out on that basis. Warning: I am not a lawyer. Or an actuary, for that matter.

I imagine that saved all parties a lot of heartache and a lot of money, Jessie. If only all separated parents could be that mature about their children's well-being.

Check your policy - there may be a clause that means you must inform them of such incidents even if you are not claiming.

Have you free weight guys checked out Hamlets Health Club? I'm not a big free weight person myself, but they seem to have a good selection there and some rather big guys using them.

tommyt Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I cycle round the park at a speed that is c15-20 > mph (but not one of the triathlon nutters who seem > to constantly lap me). Never had any problems with > dog walkers, runners, roller bladers, kids. I > think people just need to use some common sense. > > I would say that there is an aweful lot of park > where cyclists dont go, so I dont think the > tarmaced part should be a 5mph limit..... Why do you somehow think that rules just don't apply to cyclists? And where does common sense come into speeding?

Being a big fan of pure cheese... September - Earth, Wind and Fire Reach - S Club 7 It's Raining Men - Weather Girls (joker) Edited to play my joker... hmmm, only 'September' isn't a 'wrong song', but I think the Weather Girls have it.

From a base of, what, single figures not too many years ago? Give it another few years and it will equalise even more. Social change in the area of parenting is happening fast. Fathers are demanding equal roles. The courts are way behind on the reality. Because even if that stat is true, for those one-third of families where the parenting is equal you would still start with the assumption that the mother is the best custodial parent and then let the father prove otherwise (as happens at the moment). Even in case where the prime carer is the father, mothers still have the upper hand. If a couple splits and the father is stay-at-home dad, courts generally demand they get a job if they want to be even considered for custody. No court would ever demand that of a mother. I can dig out cases from the UK where a father has stayed at home and been primary carer for years, but still lost custody. The family court has an inbuilt bias, and your arguments show that their not alone in this awful, dated attitude.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Because I'm making the point that when it comes to > who does the bulk of childcare within most > families very little has changed. If men want the > law to consider them on an equal par to women (all > other things being equal) then they need to see > the role of childcare within the family unit as > one of equality too. Truth is that most men still > struggle even to change a nappy let alone cook > meals and take the kids to school and everything > else. Hello? 1985? Is that you? I don't know I it's a middle class thing, but this little caricature is so far away from reality of the families that I know as to be unrecognisable. These days it is a completely joint effort.