WTF is happening

Who is keeping an eye on this country

41 to 60 of 458 messages
18/06/2013 at 15:37
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)
Marty101 wrote (see)
I suppose you assume they start work at 9am and are home at 3.30pm as well?


That would be mostly my reasons to be a teacher, yes

The point Marty is making is that they don't.

18/06/2013 at 15:41

True, I wouldn't fancy it myself, and wouldn't be all that good at it either probably, but I don't think it is quite the hard done by profession of old and isn't necessarily quite the "labour of love" that it may have been in the past.

Probably wouldn't be able to contribute to this forum though if I was a teacher as I would be too busy!

18/06/2013 at 15:49

Where is this class of angels in rural Devon you are talking about? I can assure you there are some right little f***ers round here Screamapillar...

And

If you compare a teachers salary with average earnings it looks OK ish; but if you compare their earnings with average earnings of a person with a post-graduate qualification (which they all should have) it does not look so good

18/06/2013 at 16:42
Screamapillar wrote (see)

The point Marty is making is that they don't.

They would say that wouldn't they, I know others who do

18/06/2013 at 18:59
SideBurn wrote (see)

Where is this class of angels in rural Devon you are talking about? I can assure you there are some right little f***ers round here Screamapillar...

 

What I'm saying is that there are nice schools with nice kids where it's a pleasure to teach and nasty schools with nasty kids where it isn't.

 

Runnin man wrote (see)
Screamapillar wrote (see)

The point Marty is making is that they don't.

They would say that wouldn't they, I know others who do


It sn't a teacher making that claim, it's Marty, who lives with one and sees what she does at first hand.

 

Edited: 18/06/2013 at 19:02
18/06/2013 at 20:58

You know what people, if you're so fucking piously knowledgeable about modern day teaching, give a go.  No more of the 'if I could, I would' bollocks - actually put yourself forward to be an assistant of any kind working with children and see what is involved.

And Nick, I got my facts from reading THE FACTS.  I can assure you that my facts have come from the base reasoning behind 'modern' established punishment guidelines - it's called a library.  As opposed to the back of a fag packet.  You really are a nippy wee sweetie, aren't you?  Would you like another lime to sook? 

18/06/2013 at 23:30

Well do not f**k about as you only have 28 days from the date of the sentence to appeal; I suggest an online petition or contact your MP.

"the Attorney General may also be contacted directly, by MPs, peers, pressure groups or members of the public, or may respond to media coverage. In those cases, the AGO (Attorney Generals office) will request papers from the Area with casework responsibility for the case"

(From http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/unduly_lenient_sentences/#a1)

Come on Nick stop blowing off hot air and nail that kiddie feeling b****rd

 

 

Edited: 18/06/2013 at 23:33
19/06/2013 at 07:53

You seem to be rather pleased by the thought of that Nick, something you want to share ? 

19/06/2013 at 08:21

I thought of another good example of an institutional, target-led bit of nonsense last night. 

When you go to your GP he/she has to ask you about your smoking. So:

1. If you are a lifelong non-smoker, like me, you get asked the same question to which there is and has only ever been one answer every time. OK this doesn't take long but it's a waste of time nevertheless.

2. If you are a smoker, presumably you end up having a discussion about your smoking even if you have gone to the doctor with something unrelated. If that's what you're there to discuss, fine, otherwise your appointment is being extended while someone else's is being eaten into. No wonder they are always runing late!

They look inefficient and we get p*ssed off but it isn't their fault. 

 

Edited: 19/06/2013 at 08:22
19/06/2013 at 09:02

The role of a GP is to look after the health of their patients. This includes deciding whether various tests are appropriate. So if you go to your GP with symptoms for which the diagnosis could be cancer, the GP has to decide whether to sent you for the appropriate test. One of the factors to consider is whether the patient smokes; you could argue this both ways;

(a) it is better to say you are a smoker, so you get the test

(b) it is better to be honest so you do not get an unnecessary test

Believe it or not some people get smoking related conditions even when they have never smoked; say if you worked behind a bar pre smoking ban (or were a regular bar drinker) can you say you were not a smoker? But I digress..

Bearing in mind a GP's job is to make themselves less work and the human body is not an exact science, can you really judge them as being inefficient when they are being thorough? And of course judge them as efficient if they care more about going home on time....

But government targets have crept their way into the GP's surgery... they actually get a bonus now if they find certain medical conditions (isn't that their f*ing job) but I digress (again)

19/06/2013 at 09:05
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

The attorney general's office has already had requests to review the sentence so I'm sure he'll get what he deserves, and if you can't trust justice at one end of the scale it will likely be dished out at the other, by the time he gets out he'll have an arse like the Japanese flag

That is right Nick; leave it to someone else. I thought you were the man who wanted to be part of the new world order?

seren nos yn canu    pirate
19/06/2013 at 09:05
Runnin man wrote (see)
Screamapillar wrote (see)

The point Marty is making is that they don't.

They would say that wouldn't they, I know others who do

 

 

I'm sure that you will find a few crap ones who do the minimum they can get away with for the job.................but you get those in every job in the country.crap people who do half as much as everyone else but make it look like they are doing the same or more.............they are usually the good liars and blaggers who then get promoted...........they are in the private sector as mich as the public one

19/06/2013 at 11:08
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

The attorney general's office has already had requests to review the sentence so I'm sure he'll get what he deserves, and if you can't trust justice at one end of the scale it will likely be dished out at the other, by the time he gets out he'll have an arse like the Japanese flag

Wow, all that knowledgeable shouting about the inadequacies of everyone around you, yet you can't even be arsed either putting yourself forward to work with children in some capacity or submitting official objections that you apparently feel so strongly about you would condone gang rape.  And I thought you were the 'go to man' in terms of the public good.  Have you been this disappointing all your life?

19/06/2013 at 12:15
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

If I was not able to work in my current role, which I enjoy, I'm sure teaching would be a decent fill in, and I would never rule it out.

 

But now you're saying you don't want to work with children.  Kids kinda go with the teaching territory, as does heavy deadlines, tight schedules, deep scrutiny, cost controlling, extensive forward planning, excellent time management skills (their own and the children's) and being answerable to the plethora of uneducated twunts that think their own child's education should come above and beyond everyone else's, with little in the way of support from the people who impose all the stress filled targets upon our teaching population.  I actually know of teachers who have left state education to go to private, because the conditions and expectations placed upon them are so much easier. 

19/06/2013 at 12:44
SideBurn wrote (see)

The role of a GP is to look after the health of their patients. This includes deciding whether various tests are appropriate. So if you go to your GP with symptoms for which the diagnosis could be cancer, the GP has to decide whether to sent you for the appropriate test. One of the factors to consider is whether the patient smokes; you could argue this both ways;

(a) it is better to say you are a smoker, so you get the test

(b) it is better to be honest so you do not get an unnecessary test

Believe it or not some people get smoking related conditions even when they have never smoked; say if you worked behind a bar pre smoking ban (or were a regular bar drinker) can you say you were not a smoker? But I digress..

Bearing in mind a GP's job is to make themselves less work and the human body is not an exact science, can you really judge them as being inefficient when they are being thorough? And of course judge them as efficient if they care more about going home on time....

But government targets have crept their way into the GP's surgery... they actually get a bonus now if they find certain medical conditions (isn't that their f*ing job) but I digress (again)

You miss my point. Regardless of how you reply, if they have already asked you and it is on record from umpteen times before it is on your medical record along with everything else. They don't need to keep asking you, epecially if you are a non smoker or one who has permanently quit. 

A GP was on the news the other day saying the same thing - if a patient comes to her with depression she doesn't want to waste her precious ten minutes asking them about their smoking habits.

 

19/06/2013 at 13:17

That's ok, Nick, I object to pretty much every narrow minded, disrespectful sentiment you've displayed towards people who work in the public sector.

Edited: 19/06/2013 at 13:26
19/06/2013 at 14:57
Screamapillar wrote (see)
SideBurn wrote (see)

 

 

A GP was on the news the other day saying the same thing - if a patient comes to her with depression she doesn't want to waste her precious ten minutes asking them about their smoking habits.

 

My GP has never lectured me about my smoking habits?

Surely any GP without the (metaphorical) balls (because my favourite GP is a she) to tell the powers that be to shove stuff like that up their arse is in the wrong job?

19/06/2013 at 15:10
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

It's fine to disagree, that's what debate is all about, when it turns to insults to illustrate a point it tends to undermine your argument, clearly you ackowledge this error of judgement now so thank you.

You need to listen to yourself Nick.....

Edited: 19/06/2013 at 15:11
19/06/2013 at 15:41
SideBurn wrote (see)
Screamapillar wrote (see)
SideBurn wrote (see)

 

 

A GP was on the news the other day saying the same thing - if a patient comes to her with depression she doesn't want to waste her precious ten minutes asking them about their smoking habits.

 

My GP has never lectured me about my smoking habits?

Surely any GP without the (metaphorical) balls (because my favourite GP is a she) to tell the powers that be to shove stuff like that up their arse is in the wrong job?

All GPs are expected to do it, the same as paramedics are expected to reach emergencies in an unreasonably fast time and the police are expected to achieve certain clear up rates and crime prevention targets that bear no relation to reality.

It's why I mentioned it in the first place. Are they all in the wrong job? No, but they are working for a goverment for whom targets are important than people.

19/06/2013 at 15:58

Not all Paramedics choose to drive unreasonably fast; any who do are dickheads.

Speed kills; it does not matter how good or well trained a driver you are. Paramedics know or should know this better than most.

If they feel the need to drive too fast to meet targets; they are in the wrong job...

And are you saying that the Police fit people up....?  Controversial

Edited: 19/06/2013 at 16:03
41 to 60 of 458 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums