General things that Annoy you

T_C_E said:

People that send messages like, Stay away from The Valley you boring c***
It seems people dont want bullying highlighted at their football club, so I'm listening.
Thats me done.

As most have said before, we agree, and pleased you are highlighting it. As I have found out, there are always some who can only curse you behind a keyboard

T_C_E said:

People that send messages like, Stay away from The Valley you boring c***
It seems people dont want bullying highlighted at their football club, so I'm listening.
Thats me done.

@T_C_E
I don’t know what sort of person says that sort of thing to you, but I’m certain you can rest assured there are many many more Charlton fans (and other people too) who appreciate your efforts, not just on the bullying issue, but your work with your dogs. You put so much in to your community and society in general that, to my mind, you’re a genuine inspiration. I’ve never met you, but whenever I read any of your posts about your work in the community, I’m left in awe of your dedication and selflessness.
Ignore the haters. There are plenty who appreciate you.

MrOneLung said:

Raith_C_Chattonell said:

Socks with motifs on one side. 

If it's not enough of a struggle putting them on in the first place, then having to do it again to get them the correct way round.  Please don't say leave them then, because that would not be possible.  Also one of my sons had a set of socks with the day inscribed and he'd quite blatantly wear say Monday socks on a Thursday.  This reflects very badly on me, but sometimes you just get a bad one and there's nothing you can do about it. 

This is weird as the other day I was going to start a thread asking which side should the sock logo go or does it not matter.

Should it be the inside of the ankle so it shows when you have legs crossed or the outside of the ankle so shows when feet are flat on the floor...

Let’s take this one step further - everyone should wear their socks inside out!
This means the seam at the end doesn’t rub against your toes. Makes zero sense for that seam to be on the inside. Just turn them inside out and they’re more comfortable. The motifs on the side can do one. 🤓

No updates, reception piss off as and when they want, even the staff are arguing amongst themselves.

Macronate said:

No updates, reception piss off as and when they want, even the staff are arguing amongst themselves.

How many people are shuffling back and forth at snail's pace carrying one small piece of paper or a mop, but not actually doing anything? This seems to be a particular NHS phenomenon.

Working for NHS albeit as an independent I’m only too aware of the pressure and stress staff are under in trying to do their job.

Underfunded, Understaffed and Under resourced, staff are expected to work ridiculously long hours, juggle more than one role in their job descriptions and paid very poorly considering the tireless and under appreciated work they do. The self sacrifice is to be commended and they need support.

I always say this but I really don’t understand our society, when we pay people more money to entertain us than potentially save our lives.

I know none of this helps when we’re waiting in A&E as I was for 6hrs a few weeks ago but considering the tests they had to do to reassure me that I was ok, quite incredible really and if only I/We could remember this when we’re getting pissed off re waiting time, I too get pissed off and really should know better.

MrOneLung said:

Raith_C_Chattonell said:

Socks with motifs on one side. 

If it's not enough of a struggle putting them on in the first place, then having to do it again to get them the correct way round.  Please don't say leave them then, because that would not be possible.  Also one of my sons had a set of socks with the day inscribed and he'd quite blatantly wear say Monday socks on a Thursday.  This reflects very badly on me, but sometimes you just get a bad one and there's nothing you can do about it. 

This is weird as the other day I was going to start a thread asking which side should the sock logo go or does it not matter.

Should it be the inside of the ankle so it shows when you have legs crossed or the outside of the ankle so shows when feet are flat on the floor...

Outside. Anyone wearing them on the inside is a wrong 'un and not to be trusted. 

cantersaddick said:

IdleHans said:

Macronate said:

No updates, reception piss off as and when they want, even the staff are arguing amongst themselves.

How many people are shuffling back and forth at snail's pace carrying one small piece of paper or a mop, but not actually doing anything? This seems to be a particular NHS phenomenon.

SporadicAddick said:

It's always the underfunding, never the inefficiency...

sometimes the answer isn't throw more money, but get better at it.

Clueless.

You misunderstand me, @cantersaddick, in my recent hours of waiting room time, amidst the bustle there has often seemed to be one person shuffling slowly about without any great purpose.

I've had more NHS attention in the last few weeks than in the rest of my life put together. I've found the clinical staff of all levels to be absolutely excellent despite the clear stresses that they are subject to for every minute of their working day.
The shortcomings in the NHS clearly relate to under resourcing, and it's evident this has been allowed (engineered) over the course of years.
The number of times the nurses have had to swap kit around because of the number of broken machines is frightening, and clearly points to lack of investment. I could not do their job and keep a lid on my frustrations but they manage it, to my great admiration.

SporadicAddick said:

You don't misunderstand me Canters. I don't kneel at the high altar of the NHS. 

I believe that there is material inefficiency in the NHS. This isn't a criticism of clinical excellence, but of the enormously inefficient behemoth the NHS is. No organisation of such scale, with such complexity, and in the public sector can be anything other than inefficient. If the NHS is a well oiled machine without waste, I'm sure you'll put me right.

Yes the NHS could do with more funding, as could defence, energy (nuclear as well as other renewables), transport etc etc. On top of that, everyone wants higher salaries (35% anyone?). Every department needs more money, but taxing non doms isn't going to provide the spare cash to sort everything. So therefore general taxation needs to be higher. But the redistribution of wealth has never been a strapline that results in election victory, which is why the NHS is "underfunded" by every government of whatever hue.  

The good news is that even the incoming (?) Labour government has signalled the need for reform in the NHS because they know its not sustainable in its present form.  


ps If I recall correctly, you were advocating a 4 day week not so long ago so that you could cope with the pressures of modern life. I'm sure that would make the NHS even more efficient...

As before - I would still love to know what experience you have that has informed your view? Assuming its not all from the daily mail.

Few points:

35% is an opening negotiating position. no one is expecting to get that but to negotiate a settlement between there and the governments equally extreme position. But the government wont even come to the table so that negotiation is impossible. 

By the way the 35% only restores pay parity with 2010 levels so really isn't that ridiculous. It would still leave practitioners well below their comparators in much of Europe, in Australia, Canada, US in fact every developed nation. Which is why we struggle so much to recruit and retain. Goodwill can only last so long and put up with so much abuse.

No one would claim the NHS is perfect, of course an organisation of its size isn't going to be able to run as lean as a small org. You cant expect to run a national health service or any national service that lean. It needs support teams and functions. 

What reforms are you advocating? Very interested to hear any ideas or suggestions that will solve the problems without costing money upfront. 

Putting money into health now actually saves money in the future (at a scarily good cost benefit ratio) But governments are unable to think beyond a single election cycle. The first things to get cut are prevention services, these were always underfunded but have been absolutely decimated by this government. The majority have stopped completely. This has a direct impact on the waiting lists we have now. 

We have a government that are deliberately pushing pressure from one part of the health system onto another so that they can say that they have met the targets they have set for themselves. They aren't interested in actually solving problems.

As for the 4 day week its not even closely related to this issue but you bring it up every time I comment despite it not being relevant and was a discussion as part of a thread about that particular issue more than 2 years ago, so you clearly have a little bee in your bonnet. I'll respond to keep you happy. All research into it shows they are more efficient including higher output, better quality output, less days lost to sick leave, less burnout/stress, less time loss due to churn as staff are more likely to stay in job longer. The recent trial in the UK (96 big companies) showed exactly that. Settings where shift patterns are in place are actually perfectly set up for the 4 day week.  Wont happen any time soon in the NHS but it is the future. 

Famous economist JM Keynes wrote that by the year 2020 we should all be working 2 day weeks due to the advancement of technology and the massive efficiencies it brings and the savings that come as a result. He did caveat it with the only thing that could stop this happening is if large corporations are given too much power and so they take the efficiencies and savings and bank them as massive excess profits rather than sharing any benefits with workers. Thats exactly what has happened. But you continue to stick to the view that the working week as designed in the 1800's is still relevant to the modern word. The view that is drilled into us and reinforced by the large corporations that dictate to our societal, political and economic systems as well as the media. 

cantersaddick said:

SporadicAddick said:

You don't misunderstand me Canters. I don't kneel at the high altar of the NHS. 

I believe that there is material inefficiency in the NHS. This isn't a criticism of clinical excellence, but of the enormously inefficient behemoth the NHS is. No organisation of such scale, with such complexity, and in the public sector can be anything other than inefficient. If the NHS is a well oiled machine without waste, I'm sure you'll put me right.

Yes the NHS could do with more funding, as could defence, energy (nuclear as well as other renewables), transport etc etc. On top of that, everyone wants higher salaries (35% anyone?). Every department needs more money, but taxing non doms isn't going to provide the spare cash to sort everything. So therefore general taxation needs to be higher. But the redistribution of wealth has never been a strapline that results in election victory, which is why the NHS is "underfunded" by every government of whatever hue.  

The good news is that even the incoming (?) Labour government has signalled the need for reform in the NHS because they know its not sustainable in its present form.  


ps If I recall correctly, you were advocating a 4 day week not so long ago so that you could cope with the pressures of modern life. I'm sure that would make the NHS even more efficient...

As before - I would still love to know what experience you have that has informed your view? Assuming its not all from the daily mail.

Few points:

35% is an opening negotiating position. no one is expecting to get that but to negotiate a settlement between there and the governments equally extreme position. But the government wont even come to the table so that negotiation is impossible. 

By the way the 35% only restores pay parity with 2010 levels so really isn't that ridiculous. It would still leave practitioners well below their comparators in much of Europe, in Australia, Canada, US in fact every developed nation. Which is why we struggle so much to recruit and retain. Goodwill can only last so long and put up with so much abuse.

No one would claim the NHS is perfect, of course an organisation of its size isn't going to be able to run as lean as a small org. You cant expect to run a national health service or any national service that lean. It needs support teams and functions. 

What reforms are you advocating? Very interested to hear any ideas or suggestions that will solve the problems without costing money upfront. 

Putting money into health now actually saves money in the future (at a scarily good cost benefit ratio) But governments are unable to think beyond a single election cycle. The first things to get cut are prevention services, these were always underfunded but have been absolutely decimated by this government. The majority have stopped completely. This has a direct impact on the waiting lists we have now. 

We have a government that are deliberately pushing pressure from one part of the health system onto another so that they can say that they have met the targets they have set for themselves. They aren't interested in actually solving problems.

As for the 4 day week its not even closely related to this issue but you bring it up every time I comment despite it not being relevant and was a discussion as part of a thread about that particular issue more than 2 years ago, so you clearly have a little bee in your bonnet. I'll respond to keep you happy. All research into it shows they are more efficient including higher output, better quality output, less days lost to sick leave, less burnout/stress, less time loss due to churn as staff are more likely to stay in job longer. The recent trial in the UK (96 big companies) showed exactly that. Settings where shift patterns are in place are actually perfectly set up for the 4 day week.  Wont happen any time soon in the NHS but it is the future. 

Famous economist JM Keynes wrote that by the year 2020 we should all be working 2 day weeks due to the advancement of technology and the massive efficiencies it brings and the savings that come as a result. He did caveat it with the only thing that could stop this happening is if large corporations are given too much power and so they take the efficiencies and savings and bank them as massive excess profits rather than sharing any benefits with workers. Thats exactly what has happened. But you continue to stick to the view that the working week as designed in the 1800's is still relevant to the modern word. The view that is drilled into us and reinforced by the large corporations that dictate to our societal, political and economic systems as well as the media. 

I'll be brief as we have opposing views which wont reconcile (and answering this is making me very inefficient at work).

1. Very close relatives working in NHS (not front line), healthcare and education (both secondary and pre-school). Its clear that operational efficiencies (and expectation around operational efficiencies) are very different. 

2. "Opening extreme" is a valid negotiation start point, but it also needs to be realistic. I'd suggest 35% headline is an own goal. 

3. Decentralisation and privatisation. Absolutely viable without losing the provision of free at the point of use. 

4. The 4 day week might work in the short term for a few lifestyle businesses but will only last until the competition eats their breakfast.

5. There's a reason Keynesian economics was binned in the 70's....

Edit - meant to add that I don't get my views from the Daily Mail. As with most people, their choice of newspaper tends to reflect their views and leanings, rather than influence them per se. I find The Telegraph to be most aligned with my outlook. I also read The Guardian to validate why I'm aligned with The Telegraph. 

cantersaddick said:

1) Not sure I understand

2) Don't see how pay parity with 13 years ago and still well below all international comparators is really extreme at all

3) Decentralisation would lose the massive purchasing power advantages we have and privatisation is a shockingly terrible idea. Look at the railways, or water, or energy, or basically every other example when it was supposed to solve all the public sectors problems and guess what - it hasn't. 

4) Thats what they said about not sending children down the mine, and the 1 day weekend, the 2 day weekend, sick pay, paid time off, maternity pay, paternity pay, shared parental leave etc. etc. All the evidence says the contrary. Much like flexible working and wfh post covid the companies that do it are able to recruit and retain much better staff and get more output from them for less time off sick (much more efficient which you seem obsessed with - or is that only when it comes to privatisation? and not actually helping people?)

5) sure his theories generally have been but a lot of his research is still considered top notch and empirically applies today. this is one such area.

Blimey - Each time we speak I become more certain you are my Dad coming on here just to ruin another aspect of my life (kidding but you share the same views and newspaper) 

Also don't know where you got 35% from but I've double checked and they're asking for 19%. So below pay parity with 13 years ago and less than MP's pay has gone up by in that period.

cantersaddick said:

1) Not sure I understand

2) Don't see how pay parity with 13 years ago and still well below all international comparators is really extreme at all

3) Decentralisation would lose the massive purchasing power advantages we have and privatisation is a shockingly terrible idea. Look at the railways, or water, or energy, or basically every other example when it was supposed to solve all the public sectors problems and guess what - it hasn't. 

4) Thats what they said about not sending children down the mine, and the 1 day weekend, the 2 day weekend, sick pay, paid time off, maternity pay, paternity pay, shared parental leave etc. etc. All the evidence says the contrary. Much like flexible working and wfh post covid the companies that do it are able to recruit and retain much better staff and get more output from them for less time off sick (much more efficient which you seem obsessed with - or is that only when it comes to privatisation? and not actually helping people?)

5) sure his theories generally have been but a lot of his research is still considered top notch and empirically applies today. this is one such area.

Blimey - Each time we speak I become more certain you are my Dad coming on here just to ruin another aspect of my life (kidding but you share the same views and newspaper) 

Your dad is a wise man... 

SporadicAddick said:

cantersaddick said:

1) Not sure I understand

2) Don't see how pay parity with 13 years ago and still well below all international comparators is really extreme at all

3) Decentralisation would lose the massive purchasing power advantages we have and privatisation is a shockingly terrible idea. Look at the railways, or water, or energy, or basically every other example when it was supposed to solve all the public sectors problems and guess what - it hasn't. 

4) Thats what they said about not sending children down the mine, and the 1 day weekend, the 2 day weekend, sick pay, paid time off, maternity pay, paternity pay, shared parental leave etc. etc. All the evidence says the contrary. Much like flexible working and wfh post covid the companies that do it are able to recruit and retain much better staff and get more output from them for less time off sick (much more efficient which you seem obsessed with - or is that only when it comes to privatisation? and not actually helping people?)

5) sure his theories generally have been but a lot of his research is still considered top notch and empirically applies today. this is one such area.

Blimey - Each time we speak I become more certain you are my Dad coming on here just to ruin another aspect of my life (kidding but you share the same views and newspaper) 

Your dad is a wise man... 

He certainly thinks so!