LondonMix

Most streets do not have a front door at the junction. Most streets have two junctions. Its entirely possible to do this for virtually every road that requests it without running out of space. rupert jones Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are only so many junctions with space to use > safely, most of ED have houses on the end of > roads.

Isn't it the opposite? Council tax is in father's name only but the child has the mother's surname. Bring proof that your husband is the child's father and his council tax bill and you should be fine I imagine. I imagine only one parent needs to prove their address and it should be either mom or dad. Good luck edited to fix my own typos! Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I understand it, birth certificate is ok. If > your name is on birth certificate as his mother I > can't see that they would have a problem with > council tax bill being in your name.

And all of the ones I've seen in ED so far are at junctions away from front doors / windows so that is clearly possible

I was basing my statement on Sue's comment who has actually been through the process for the one being installed near her street following her request.

I never asked those questions by the way, that was someone else. I don't think the hangers should be located in front of front doors but at junctions away from front doors. If other people want them in front of their front doors then great for them. I'm glad siting them is done via consultation so that people can get what they want / makes sense for them. If that is NIMBYism to you so be it, you clearly are just spoiling for a fight

Talking about the best place to put them isn't NIMBYism. Its just discussing the practicalities and understanding the strategies in place to reduce the impact. If you can't see the difference between discussing policy and NIMBYism then I'm afraid you don't know what the term means (or any of its alternative acronyms).

Yes, a resident I know who works in the NICU abstained and she said most of the residents in NICU did the same. She says NICU residents always ignore bank holidays as well and always keep a full rota despite their entitlement for the day off. I'm not sure anyone working with babies in intensive care could do anything but without feeling terribly responsible if something went wrong due to a staffing shortage.

Its hardly NIMBY to say you wouldn't want one in front of your house. I wouldn't want a big tree in front of my house either but equally I wouldn't campaign to stop it going forward. Honestly, its an obvious enough point that the council have already clearly thought about citing them in a way that makes sense away from front doors. What exactly is your problem? fruityloops Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LondonMix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > That's good the hear Sue. I've noticed they > tend > > to be at the side of end of terraced properties > so > > they aren't in front of any individuals house. > I > > think that's a smart approach and was going to > > suggest that. I think its a great idea but I > > equally think there are a lot of people who > while > > supporting the scheme in general wouldn't want > it > > directly in front of their own house. > > > > > > NIMBY's - this forum is full of them. > > Stick one right in front of my front door. I'd be > happy to take it (car owner - and not currently a > cyclist).

That's good the hear Sue. I've noticed they tend to be at the side of end of terraced properties so they aren't in front of any individuals house. I think that's a smart approach and was going to suggest that. I think its a great idea but I equally think there are a lot of people who while supporting the scheme in general wouldn't want it directly in front of their own house. Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DulwichFox Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Sue Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > You're lucky, to the best of my knowledge all > > we > > > have in Ulverscroft Road so far is a barrier > > which > > > has been leaning against a wall for ages with > a > > > scrappy bit of paper on saying the space is > > > reserved for a bike hangar. > > > > > > Which is rather frustrating when I've been > > waiting > > > for it for around two years now and getting > > older > > > and older :)) > > > > Well that's is fine if you are happy to have it > > placed directly outside your house.. where you > > normally park your car. > > > > Foxy. > > > As you well know, Fox, residents were consulted - > presumably including you! - and it is being placed > at the end of the road where nothing will look out > onto it apart from a wall. > > ETA: But yes I would be happy to have it outside > my house if it was that or not have the hangar at > all.

The BBC always disclosed all of those facts. Did you want them to spell all of that detail out in the headline? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34859860 Anyway, the mortality rates at the weekend and at bank holidays is far too high. The rota needs more doctors (junior and consultants) during these times but its absurd to think you can force people to do so without additional compensation.

No one's salary is determined in this way. Train drivers make a lot because the job is soul-destroyingly dull. A broadway actor makes less than a hollywood movie star and talent and effort have nothing to do with it. People choose to do what they do based on not just how much effort it is or how much skill is required but how the feel about the work. The salary should be set to attract just enough people into the industry and no more. Every other consideration is just noise. Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > uncleglen Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Otta- you cannot say that doctors are 'worth > more' > > than teachers ffs....how would kids get into > > medical school without a decent bunch of > teachers > > along the way? > > > "Worth more" was bad wording on my part. But lets > be honest, it's not really that difficult to > become a teacher. > > That's not to say teachers don't work bloody hard, > and a lot more hours (often at home in the > evenings) than people realise. But a teacher can > quickly work their way up to a very healthy > salary, and they certainly don't work the unsocial > hours that doctors do. > > People don't have to agree with me, but in my > opinion a doctor should be paid more than a > teacher.

Except the having it in front of your house doesn't guarantee you access to it. Personally, I wouldn't want one directly in front of my house. I'm glad there are people who do though as hopefully the council will take individual preference into consideration when selecting the precise location. fruityloops Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > edhistory Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > How will estate agents photograph the property > > frontage? > > > They could use it as a selling point of the house. > Small flat, with no bike storage, or small flat > with bike hangar outside. Easy choice

They don't deny that some people will be worse off without a top up. What they are saying is that they will guarantee the current earning levels of compensation for those doctors. This has nothing to do with impact assessment, its a formal salary guarantee. I think current estimates are the 20-25% of junior doctors might be worse off without the guarantee so that's entirely clear. The problem is this guarantee / pay protection is temporary (2019) and won't apply to new recruits. If you already can't recruit the staff numbers you need, reducing pay inclusive of bonuses and increasing the amount of evening and Saturday work (as is very likely) will only exacerbate the problem. That's why I support the junior doctors- its simply a bad long term policy. No one can make a specific argument about what someone is 'worth'. People decide what to do with their skills based on not only the salary but also working conditions as well as the personal fulfilment (or lack thereof) a job provides. The market rate is set at the level where you can recruit all the people with the skills you need. By that measure and that measure alone, junior doctors are underpaid. Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is the same government that claimed tax > credit cuts wouldn't leave people worse off and > tried to hide deaths of people found fit to work > by their flawed work capability assessments. I > wouldn't place any credability on government > claims. They are very poor on impact assessment.

The government are guaranteeing that no one will be worse off (even if technically they should be under the new rules, their pay will be topped up). However, this is only good until 2019. Also, as you rightly point out, it will be a disaster for recruitment and retaining staff.

The demand for doctors has increased and like with anything, that results in increased cost. I'm not sure if junior doctors work longer or earn less in the past but today's reality is what it is. There are lots of reasons the demand for medical professionals is so high-- we are living much longer, we are much less healthy (obesity resulting in co-morbidities that make treatment more complex and expensive), the EU directive restricting junior doctor hours to 48 hours (to keep rota fully staffed you now need more junior doctors than before). There really needs to be a cultural shift where maintaining good health is seen as a civic duty as well as a personal good. Exercising should be as normal as brushing your teeth.

I don't disagree with Sirsky-- the up to 100k is definitely a consultant as I stated not a junior doctor and applies to a rather senior consultant at that. I was just providing the final potential salary as part of the discussion as people had brought up the 'end game'. I get that the NHS is a blackhole of costs that is eating up more and more of the budget but this isn't a feasible solution. We can't run the NHS with no doctors willing to work in gynecology, A&E etc. Something else has to give and if I had to guess its one of 3 politically suicidal options; 1. Raise taxes on everyone (not just upper tax payers) 2. Make pensions means tested disqualifying most except the extremely poor OAP from receiving it 3. Increasing the retirement age dramatically.

Otta-- its not the total hours as much as the weekend and evening hours and that will vary be specialty a lot. I'm not sure what the average amount of evening and weekend work is across all doctors but that's where it comes out to. There are two big issues with the proposal. Even though Hunt is guaranteeing no one who works a normal 48 hour week will be worse off, this is only possible by guaranteeing certain junior doctors' salaries through to 2019- its estimated that a quarter of doctors would be worse off due to receiving less supplements for weekend and evening work if this wasn't included in the proposal. The doctors' concerns are: 1.) what happens after 2019; 2.) that because hours formerly classified as unsociable won't be classified as such anymore, it will be cheaper for those hours to be allocated to the roster and there will be an increase overall in evening and weekend work in the NHS; and 3.)as the pay guarantees don't apply to new doctors, this is going to have a negative impact on recruitment, particularly to specialties that already require lots of unsociable hours like A&E. There is already a shortage of junior doctors in the acute care professions so its a ridiculous long term strategy. Salaries have to be set based on what's needed to recruit and retain staff and its already too low for that so the governments' proposal is idiotic and is just going to result in long term shortages in emergency care and the labor ward.

The salary scales do not reflect total compensation of junior doctors. The whole argument they are making is that they want to keep their bonus pay for evenings and weekend work rather than lose them and get an 11% pay rise on the base pay. My figures are based on the department of health estimates of total compensation. Of course, depending on the exact hours worked it will vary for each junior doctor. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/11887308/How-much-are-junior-doctors-paid-and-why-are-they-threatening-to-strike.html

Junior doctors do make a lot more than their base pay. On average junior doctors make 40k including the bonus pay for weekend and evening work in the early years of training and on average 56k in the later years of training including bonuses and supplements. Junior doctors in certain specialties make between 53k and 70k including bonus pay and as seniority progresses. Consultants make up to 100k. Regardless of how much doctors make though, the pay isn't enough to retain and recruit appropriately so lowering it by reducing the hours that qualify for bonus payments is a bad long term strategy by the government. Hunt is offering an 11% pay rise to help offset the loss of bonus payments for certain unsocialable hours; however, its obvious that given junior doctors nearly double their base pay rate through the supplements and bonuses an 11% payrise will still leave many of them worse off.

Pay doesn't really have anything to do with how much training or how much skill is involved with the work someone does. Its set based on what it takes to recruit and retain people with the requisite skills. If the NHS has a shortage of junior doctors and is struggling to recruit, they need to adjust their pay scales. If not, then there is no issue irrespective of what train drivers or anyone else makes. The fact is there is a shortage of junior doctors so worsening their existing working conditions both with respect to overtime pay and expected overtime work per person will be damaging. I support the governments efforts to rain in costs but in this circumstance it simply won't work long term.

London Bridge is fine but with because of the works currently underway, service (in my experience last year) was very spotty with trains being cancelled frequently. Normally the service is absolutely fine and they may have sorted it out by now but my alternative route is actually faster. I thought the trains from London Bridge to Charing Cross aren't running at the moment due to works? If so, it will be faster for you to just take any train going to Elephant and Castle and catch the Bakerloo line to Charing Cross. Alternatively, you can go into Blackfriars and catch the district and circle line to Embankment. The 176 that runs along Lordship Lane also goes directly to the strand but in rush hour that won't be your fastest journey.

Where do you need to go for your commute. London Bridge is more than a pain. I've totally abandoned ship and am using Denmark Hill for my commute, which works well anyway as I go into to Blackfriars which is 1o minutes from my office. Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill have a lot of alternative routes and are relatively easily accessible for most people living in ED.

Exactly Rahrahrah. If they are buying a flat and hoping to make enough money to buy a house elsewhere, fair enough but if its your family home, I'd definitely prioritize someplace I like over investment potential

Another hidden gem is Captured on the Rye on Pellatt Road in East Dulwich which is run by local Lou. He makes the items in his studio in Peckham and lives in ED. http://capturedontherye.com/about/

I agree with Dulwich fox. Northcross Road has a green grocers (Pretty's currently closed for work) that's been there for over 100 years. That combined with the fish van and the fishmonger (Moxons), the organic green grocer (Franklins) and the organic butcher (William Rose) on Lordship Lane would make having a farmers type market here a bit redundant. Some locals swear up and down that the butch further up Lordship Lane near the part is actually better than William Rose. The shop doesn't look like much so I suppose that could be seen as a hidden local secret if true. I've tried to go but its always closed!