Loz

Hallelujah!

ClaireClaire Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Maybe this will help > > http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/15 > /faq-what?s-wrong-with-suggesting-that-women-take- > precautions-to-prevent-being-raped/ Dunno about the patriarchy, but the front page of that site has to be possibly the most toe-curlingly patronising piece of text I've seen in a long time.

binary_star Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 1 sachet Resolve Extra + 1 Berocca. Mix both in a > glass and drink. Repeat if necessary (never has > been). Tastes disgusting but it works!! This is my hangover cure too. I swear by it - 30 mins later you are a new person.

Sounds like me in the mornings.

Moos Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rapists do not rape for sexual gratification, but for a sense of power and > control. It is a crime of violence. Hence blaming the victims' clothing is both misdirection > of blame and simply inaccurate. I've never quite fully agreed with the "just power and control" idea, Moos. It's one of those things where feminist writers have created a theory that doesn't always quite match the reality. Granted, there are a significant percentage where it is purely an expression of control, but I also think that sexual desire/gratification (and, in some cases, a loss of control due to sexual arousal) most definitely play a part - especially in non-stranger situations.

Out of interest, Rosie, what's your thoughts on anonymity for both parties until the verdict?

What's the use of that? Given the MO, the thief will have your bag by then. All you are doing is arming the sod as well.

Which news programme was this? Dulwich is not necessarily East Dulwich, especially as we are in Southwark. West Dulwich is in Lambeth. Anyway - we are inner city, zone 2. We are going to have some crime. But, all things considered, ED is a pretty safe place to live.

I think you are getting me and Chippy mixed up, Trizza!

nashoi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Your second point is at best a disingenuous > interpretation of the evidence. Nowhere is he > trying to gain any 'exemptions' for being a > unionist, or for any other reason. Hmmm. That document is, admittedly, not completely clear. The primary reason for the appeal is on the grounds that his "dismissal is unfair by reasons of section 152 of the 1992 act. He relies on section 152(1)(b) of the 1992 act stating that his dismissal is unfair because the reason or principal reason was that he has taken part in the activities of an independent trade union at an appropriate time." Later in the document the person in question "admitted his wrongdoing, and was regretful". I suppose that leave the question of whether his actions that day actually amounted to gross misconduct, but he certainly abused other members of staff. So you could be right and you could be wrong. I guess that's why everyone should wait for the tribunals verdict.

Rosie, I don't disagree with your stats - and indeed those attitudes must change. I'm glad you showed all the stats - the Guardian only showed the male attitudes, even though the female ones are just as bad, if not worse. But then, the Gruin always does have a dodgy record in that area. Of course, where rape is difficult is establishing that a crime has actually taken place. If I've black and blue and bashed up, then it's highly probable that a crime has been committed. But in a lot of cases of rape accusations, all the evidence is that two people had sex. Yes, in the worst cases it's completely obvious, but they are a minority. That is the difficulty. That is why rape attrition rates will always lag slightly behind other crimes,but the fact that the accused is generally known, those cases that do get to court will have a pretty high conviction rate. Anyway, I've taken your thread off at a tangent. My apologies. I hope your walk goes well.

But is that an indication of low convictions in rape cases, indiepanda, or policing in general. Attrition rates for various crimes I can find are: Attempted murder - 14% Robbery - 10% Cruelty and Neglect of Children - 9% Rape - 6.5% / 12% Violence against the person - 4% There are two rates for rape - 6.5% of reports end up in a conviction of rape, but that figure goes up to 12% when you consider any conviction (i.e. sexual assault). Conviction rates for rape once it gets to court (both trial and pleading guilty) are quite high ? 59% in 2009. But, yes, France does indeed have a much higher conviction. I can't really dig up any explanation as to why that may be, whether they have a different policing/trial approach or different statistical methods. Though one thing is for certain, they have a different definition of 'rape', since 4% of rapists in France were women - an impossibility in the UK as rape, by statutory definition, is a male only crime.

nashoi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It maybe potentially unfavourable, but that is > unlikely. Attached is the summary of the > application for interim relief. For this to be > successful (and it was) you have to show the > interim tribunal you have a good chance of > success. OK, but I read the document and as far as I can see, LU have complied with the interim orders by paying him in full until the final tribunal decision is made. What exactly is RMT's complaint here? Why are they calling for strikes? The interim tribunal has made it's decision. Stop arguing with the referee. Interesting also was the fact that the person in question admitted a lot of the charges, but claims exemption is he was bullying, intimidating and abusing people on behalf of the union. Nice. > Bad industrial relations are the result of bad management. Sometimes. Rarely in the RMT's case.

Some good, some bad there, Chippy. relax the restrictions on pickets I disagree. Pickets are only strikers bullying non-strikers into not turning up for work. the need for industrial action ballots to be postal Only if the ballot remains secret and that all members have equal ability to turn up to the vote. Unfortunately, that generally means it has to be postal. reduce the employer notice period and look at the detail of how employers can take out injunctions on strikes based on technicalities Unions are supposed to be professionals. Unions will happily take an employer to a tribunal for not following employment law to the letter. Why should they not be held to the same level of correct procedure? Besides, the first BA injunction stopped the ridiculous Christmas strike. BASSA should have been ripped to shreds for that stupid move alone. I'd also increase access to tribunals Agreed. I'd rather see both sides forced to go to an independent tribunal than end up on strike. I'd also say that the tribunals decisions be legally binding on both sides. Especially as this strike is about the RMT trying to get around a potentially unfavourable tribunal decision. increase compensation for discrimination I have a general problem with discrimination compensation, as it tends to become an industry in itself. I'd like to see people compensated for actual loss, but any punitive damages go to charity. increase the currently weak TUPE undertakings. Agreed.

If it makes you feel better Indiepanda (if that is possible, considering the subject matter) the reporting to conviction rate for rape (the 'attrition rate') is really not much better or worse than most other major offences. Not that that is any reason to be complacent. I can dig out the stats if you like - I posted them a while ago during the Kenneth Clarke brouhaha.

Forgot to mention - our cleaner also does the ironing. Bliss.

Yep. ?25 for three hours plus the agency fee on top of that. We also pay four weeks hols (pro-rata) a year. We do go through an agency - it does have it's advantages, though if you can find someone via a trustworthy personal recommendation I'd go with that. The agency is good at providing replacements if needed, especially at short notice when the regular can't make it.

Exactly how does a slut walk?

Unions are like car drivers. 90% of them are well behaved and courteous. The other 10% need laws in place to curb their bad behaviour.

I can understand the 'dip in cold water' trick working. Onions, when cut, produce hydrophilic sulphur compounds that react with water to produce sulphuric acid. That's why you cry - you have a weak solution of sulphuric acid in your eye. Having water around the onion when you cut it would give the sulphur something to react with other than your eye tears. Cutting them underwater would probably work better, though. But is probably rather impractical.

Chippy Minton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Isn't the fact that they get paid this much an > example of one of the magnificent achievements? I am not denying that having Crow around is advantageous to RMT members. There is also no denying he is very good at his job. But I'd like to think that the term 'magnificent achievement' somehow relates to the greater good. And, I'm sorry, but there is no way that anything Bob Crow has ever done has been for the greater good. In fact, I could argue his 'achievements' have been quite the opposite.

david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm a kitchen equipment onanist. Ew. Never eat DC's white sauce.

DC - I would agree entirely. ?30K would be fair annual pay for the duties and responsibilities of being a tube driver. Which makes me wonder why the hell they earn ?42,424 to ?44,267 a year.

I had seen your lost post. I suspect the admin took umbrage at your tone and language and general unpleasant demeanour. PS Can we have Chippy back? We may disagree, but at least he makes a good argument.

Annette Curtain Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Coming soon: > > How to butter bread. > Given the "how to injure yourself" approach of those pictures, does this involve a chainsaw by any chance?