SeanMacGabhann

Until you mentioned that I'd forgotten I had the same initial thought As to whether this is a sign that hooliganism is starting up again - I doubt it I was there in 2005 when Milwall last came to West Ham and the scenes that day were pretty grim as well - the sky on the street I was on was black with missiles and a genuine atmosphere of grim violence - but it wasn't the precursor to anything But if they end up playing against each other in the future the authoratays are going to be veerrrrry visible

I know Huguenot is being tongue in cheek, I'm pretty sure Steve isn't but I can't make up my mind about Jeremy's post...

David Games normally get discussed on this thread to save the place getting clogged up I've read mixed reports on the game in question tho - Metacritic hasn't much of a range of opinions to average for the wii version - so 6/10 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/ashescricket2009?q=ashes%202009 the 360 version has many more sources but as I say they differ widely, with an average of just over 7/10 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ashescricket2009?q=ashes%202009

I forgot quids was there - glad to hear you're ok fella I don't normally feel anything for Phil Thommo on Sky Sports but I thought he was very good last night as events unfolded

Monica I do hope no wasteful, une-eco-friendly plastic products are used...

Sounds like the result is the least of it tonight

Nope - I read that as it has some people on very long-term sick leave

I think I passed my copy on ages ago Rosie - soz. Looks like Jah has it covered tho... It's not ALL whisky drinking with Banks - he manages to get a fair few curries down his neck as well

Good book isn't it Jah? I only drank bourbon whiskeys before I read that i did a 10 day road trip in Scotland a few years back - one of my favourite holidays that was - right through the midlands. By the time I got to Oban I felt I had reached Gotham City we had been so isolated

Pestival is on at the Southbank this year isn't it? When I first heard about it (a group of entomologists having a festival ?) it was on the Stewart Lee DVD and I didn't believe it was real. But there it is.. Robin Ince this year I believe options 1 and 4 are perennials, whereas 2 or 3 are here and now - so I would go with either 2 or 3. Bordering on 3

Quids - yeah I had many of the same thoughts when I re-read it too Anyway to answer your questions, in order 1) I would say yes 2) Not necessarily, and to me personally in this particular case no. But depends on who you ask. In the case of the NHS report at the beginning I'm not especially bothered because it doesn't set any alarm bells ringing/ 50% more sounds like a lot but when it's 5 days a year versus 10, in that environment I don't conclude that those extra days are easy-living skives. What would matter more is that about the same, worser or better than previous decades? 3) Why are they different - several of the earlier posters from the NHS have given plenty of reasons - anything I add would be speculation but I'm sure others can add more. As for the back office staff MrBen has experienced I'm willing to believe there is a fair bit of that goes on - but not so sure it's worse than anywhere else. Many places will have a much lower absence rate but in and of itself that doesn't strike me as simply a definite goal. Presenteeism is as bad as absenteeism and often makes people miserable - the old maxim, noone looks back at their life and wishes they spent more time in the office holds true In front-line roles, be they doctors, nurses or Helpdesk staff in an office, turning up and being there is critical. In other back-office roles, the jobs can be cyclical - several big projects with a looming deadline is not the same as post-deadline and a few new projects kicking off. If people were absent in the latter case I would be far less bothered for example. My main beef with slack employees is not knowing what their job is and not getting it done. If you get it done then 9-5/5 days a week rules don't seem as important. To me anyway

reason # 573

wow - I've just noticed there have been edits and everything? Truce? Well it looks like the conversation is going to be more possible. I still don't think I misrepresented anyone tho, so if I am clueless on that score and anyone remains hacked off with me then maybe PM me and I'll try and straighten it out I think a lot of interesting stuff has been overlooked in the pages to date - Annaj in particular has posted at length making some good points and fair play to quids he has said he will digest further Some people like brum dipped their toe in the waters as well with some salient points - When I reread the whole thread this morning (just to reboot my head), it occurred to me how few of the points have been addressed, so there is a risk of people repeating stuff that others have gone to the trouble of already pointing out

potential me +1 as well

or the Chair stepped in when Hal suggested something was amiss and clarified a point of order? a shame you have taken to fictionalising my mornings as well now. My contact with anyone "behind the scenes" has been zero. Nice post btw quids..

no worries Hal - I didn't feel picked on

Ok, I've re-read the thread again now and it still vexes me when I'm accused of misrepresenting and/or misquoting, when I have found several instances of being misquoted, have played back verbatim the exchange of words and not had a single nod to that effect So before going back on topic a brief digression to clarify: Firstly Hal's point about mentioning PMs as bad form is spot on. I even knew at the time I probably shouldn't have done that so apologies to all concerned there Quids - the "I pay your wages love" wasn't attributed to you. It was in the context of a Friday night, frontline staff dealing with drunken punters who take that line of reasoning. If I led people to believe then I apologise on that score as well. I tried to make some small connection between that attitude and the tone on here from some about the waste and the skiving. Because some on here are (and I think it's fair to say this?) focused on that aspect - which essentially does boil down to accusing others of stealing our money? So for clarity, quids never said that, I don't think quids ever would even think that and if my argument suggested he would, I hold my hands up the "where my money you slaaaaags" thing was intended to be a bit more pastiche. Duly noted, you have now written that you are thinking about all the posts made by NHS staff on here but for a long period there it didn't feel like they were getting proper responses and the refrain about waste, skiving, pensions, PS staff have it easy, coppor-bottomed pensions etc etc and so I allied that with a clcihed east end refrain. Was that so offensive? I can't see it but I'll bear it in mind mrBen - when have I ever "instead portraying me as some fat, rich non-dom right winger " - I have said several times you have adopted a tone which is antagonistic (deliberately so) and therefore I said I thought you are out of order. In fact, after bignumber5's initial reply to you I believe I partially defended you? But when I accused you of misquoting me, you denied it so I posted evidence to the contrary, which you ignored. This hacks me off. If I pointed out that you are well off it wasn't to portray you in a negative light at all - it was just pointing out that quite often the peolpe who complain most about being hard done by are the ones with the least reason to complain. Does that mean I think you are complaining about being hard done by? A little bit perhaps - I could be wrong. But it was you who said "why should I pay for somebody to lie in bed on a Monday morning?" for example . I take your point about the office staff you encountered in your year but I genuinely think that that exists across the board in large offices... Do I wish I hadn't used the "racist" example when saying "still it caused a debate" was a poor argument?? yeah probably - but it's fairly clear I wasn't equating or comparing you to a racist - just merely pointing out that if you come on, deliberately antagonise people, admit you are going to take flack, then please don't get upset when that's what happens Nice stereotyping of me as well btw

There is nothing I can say is there. A room for serious debate? I have suggested you address the people who have made serious debating points. But you seem determined to just reply to whatever I type and not anything the people involved type I repeat - the initial poster said the NHS "throw 50% more sickies than their private sector" - you haven't once suggested that that is a gross overstatement - so how am I making offensive statements? How is that a "straightforward without innuendo" question? It is so loaded it renders all further discussion moot...unless you question it I don't have any assumptions about you (apart from positive ones having met you) but based on your posts on this thread you don't have a lot of time for the people who have bothered to answer in full, the questions raised. They have posted LONG, DETAILED, rebuttals but have seen scant recognition. Me, with my like-for-like polemic has drawn all the attention. That can't be right? Now I could be wrong - I don't want further a futile slanging match - so if the general viewers think i have been out of order I'll hold my hands up, apologise, buy you a pint and all the usual..... But my impression, based on your posts, is that you, in essence agree with the statement in the OP. And that any testimony to the contrary has not been addressed by you I HOPE that is a slightly less offensive way of stating things... So I might yet go and scrub all my posts on here - which will leave the others - so answer them

Hmmmm abacab and mama I quite like (genesis in the 80s I mean) I can't dance tho ??

Quids I'm not smearing - you are You are in mega denial that you have an agenda wherby you are accusing the NHS staff of skiving. And more importantly pissing those staff off Several of them have, far more rationally that I, posted, at length on here. for the most part you have ignored them and focused on my posts - predictably. Answer THEIR points , not mine. I'm enjoying pricking the "we in the private sector" sanctimonious bullshit but I'm just a sideline here.... answer the staff Apart from you and MrBen, there is no big accusations of skiving on the NHS. You HAVE accused people of skiving right? You are, essentially saying the private sector has a harsher line on "absence" than the public sector or NHS? I'm not wrong about that am I? So from that premise you have ignored (by and large) all the postings from annaj, bignumber5, buggie and all the other people who know what they are talking about and focused on my, tit-for-tat-you-start-a-thread-in-shrill-manner-and-I'll reply responses You haven't in any way addressed the very sane, clear, cogent replies from those people who deal with this shit daily. People who are FURIOUS with you asinine, plucked from the pages, anger Ignore me and answer them But if you are asking where I get "where's my money you slaaaaaags" (and those repeated vowels are SO important!!) how about "So why still such a sigbificant gap in sickness accross all the public sector compared to the private sector? Added to that the better job security and copper bottomed guaranteed final salary pensions and perhaps you can see why we in the private sector are asking these questions especialy" for starters. there is moere You and MrBen have continually said "you (as in Annaj et al) do a more important job than me" so how about a little trust when they say they are pissed off at the continual innuendo. If their colleagues ARE letting them down with constant sickies would they not be as pissed off as you?? I think they would I am not some Fox/Murdoch smear merchant - this thread was started in a FOX fashion, you have joined in and I am giving as good as I get. But if you want serious debate, like I say, ignore me and address the points made by NHS staff One final point - when you say "don't put up unpleasant made up verbatims such as "I pay your wages love" into your replies" - trust me that isn't my opinion alone. I received several replies from NHS staff thanking me for pointing out that obviousness - (not aimed at you btw - MrBen is as, if not more, culpable) - but that subtext was noted by several people. if you didn't mean it, by all means clarify - but don't pin the shock on me

Hal. You're a grown man

Slim pickingsat the moment although I have my eye on 2 threads in the main section

here we go read my post again - it specifically goes out of its way to say its not comparing racism with spending NHS money or the OP - what it deliberately does is deny the case that "hey ho sorry if I upset anyone bit at least I caused a debate" is a valid debating point. The reason I mentioned it is because racists (be it stand up comics, journalists or crappy phone ins) use it, it's a really really shitty and cheap get out clause - and whether it's racism, the worth of Mott the Hoople or the NHS is besides the point. As for the "less than accepted report" - well neither you or I have read it but there is a discrepancy between people who have (reporters and Annaj) so the jury isn't in. I'm not in any way calling the report Mickey Mouse but I am calling the reporting (and taking up by you) as poor Let's be clear here - the OP stated "50% more sickies than their private sector" which is not what the report say at all. If people are willing to accept a discrepancy in rates between public and private that's cool - I'm just saying in my experience it's not that clear cut yes there is a debate - something I have repeated many times - but not on the terms dictated to by the OP and, sadly, you - which seems to be "guilty of skiving until proven innocent." The report (from what I have read) accuses noone of skiving - but asks legitimate questions about the effects of health on NHS staff and what can be done to improve it. That seems fair and reasonable - but you and MrBen have piled in with "where's my money you slaaaaaags" type debate. No. Shush. you have... It;s not about sacred cows - it;s about respecting people around you. And the fact that all of the NHS people have responded so well in the face of provocation speaks 10 times more about them than it does you. This is not fair debate, this is a public hanging As with the baby P outcry, the damage done will far outweigh any "money saved" - if I had to deal with the drunken public every Friday night, abusing me, feeling me up and when I protest, I hear the words "I pay your wages love", it's disrespect of people that does that. And you are giving currency to it. Not by questioning, but by the tone you take (took me a while to get the "the..." ref)

funnily enough I almost appended "happy days" to my post but I though that would be a bit "old timerish" It wasn't all barrels of laughs mind - the very same CWALD nearly caused civil war when she joined initially - all about dogs? I'm getting all misty eyed now... and no it's not because she.. oh never mind

Well I have just spent the last 3 hours trying to (partially sucessfully) beat Mockney Piers and Ratty's scores on xbox live so nah Guilty pleasure doesn't begin to describe it actually as the pleasure was only partial but the guilt was almost non-existent!