paragon

Silverfox - she asked for opinions. Which I have given. I think Tallulah did the right thing in telling the person about picking up litter. However I don't think that comment she made that I quoted was productive and clearly resulted in further degeneration of the conversation. If you tell someone off in public there will be two outcomes 1. They are embarrassed and apologise 2. They argue with you In situation 2. I doubt you are going to be able to rationalise with the person. So it is probably best to walk away. There was nothing knee-jerk about the response.

Sarcastic comment with potentially sinister undertones depending on how you interpret it or deliver it. No excuse for his response to you at all which was ridiculous but I don't think you helped the situation with that comment.

I think you lost the moral high ground when you said "Don't you have bins where you come from?"

Wow - Tarot, you are quite bitter. Talk about generalising. I'd be interested to know what it is like as I've a load of stuff I need to sell.

Pencil Test = put a pencil under your boob. To pass the pencil should not stay in place, it should drop to the floor.

Sounds like a case for constructive dismissal. You can't force people to resign, if they are not good enough they should go through formal disciplinary procedures and then be sacked. It is difficult as he is probationary period so I believe they can get rid of him anyway without real reason.

They may be preferable but deciding based just on that basis is illegal.... If their own employee would be made redundant if they didn't get the job then it MAY be objective justification but this is not yet backed by tribunals...

Otta, If you want to argue the case with HR email them with this... "I'm confused about your decision to not allow XXX XXX to apply for this role. My understanding was that under the Agency Workers Regulations of 2010 temporary workers had equal access to vacancies as permanent members of staff. I understand there is a provision for objective justification to not allow equal access. Are you saying that there is objective justification in this instance?" Obv.. you'll sounds like a bit of a t1t and not always the best people to argue with. but it should make them show their hand. EDIT for their/there

I don't think there is a hard and fast law answer to this as the law changed in December 2011. There won't be enough case-law to back up any argument. The Agency Workers Regulations stemmed from the EU Agency Workers Directive. Essentially they give the same rights to facilities and vacancies (from Day 1) and pay equal to an internal permanent person in the same role (after Week 12). The law means that agency workers should be given the same visibility and right to apply for Permanent jobs as people working on perm contracts. There is a clause that gives "objective justification" for not allowing equal treatment and there has been some industry speculation that this may include redundancy situations. Ultimately the Agency won't have a clue as they are mostly muppets who are after a temp to perm fee. I think HR probably have a strong case on this one, but case law may prove this wrong. The acid test, is that if you mate doesn't get the job and someone less experienced does then they would have a case to go to tribunal. But not everyone wants to do that.

I heard something on the Radio last night from Goose Green. Fairly sure it was 5 Live. They were interviewing people about whether they agreed with Hague's comments that businesses should stop moaning and there were 2 or 3 people given short sound bites... I was half listening so could be wrong.

OMG, who can believe such a force for good in this world has come under the Apple spell. I don't know what to think if EVEN Hollywood is corrupted. Hold the front pages everywhere.

Good for you Alan. I spend far too much money on food and waste too much. I am going to improve!

Sorry, I am missing something. you want to involve the police because the train station is closed? Surely speak to the train people!

Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To give a different perspective to your question, > is the life of horses less important than your > entertainment? Yes it is. In the same way that the life of a Cow is less important than me enjoying a steak.

There is loads of free fitness activities on the what's on in East Dulwich. You don't need someone else to get you out of the house, JFDI. If you rely on other people if they lose motivation then so will you. We are blessed with nice parks round here. Walk, Jog, Cycle get your heart pumping. You only need to make the change for a couple of weeks then you'll see the benefits.