As people commenting BTL are squeezing in their usual hobbyhorses (@Alanbrooke's linkage to Brexit was particularly epic, I thought ) may I take this opportunity to introduce you to the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU) at Oxford. Its UK Perinatal Mortality Surveillance detected the increased mortality rate caused by Lucy Letby and gave an objective foundation on which subjective suspicions could be developed.
Harold Macmillan was a fan of the Gilbert and Sullivan lyric "Quiet calm consideration will untangle every knot". I submit that it is structures like this that may provide the way forward. Management involves people and people are flawed. Graphs are much simpler.
Yes, and every death or near miss should go via the departmental Morbidity and Mortality meeting. I don't know what happened in these cases in Chester concerning M and M.
Gundecking a problem, I’ll bet.
“If you report those deaths that way, the monthly PowerPoint will look terrible. Have you no loyalty?”
Make death and problem reporting an independent arm, with no reporting to anyone in the trust.
Incidentally - Google throws up three Karen Reeses who work in healthcare. One at Warwick, one in Birmingham and one in Manchester.
I think we can all feel sympathy for them today as idiots will be sending them nasty messages in confusion with *that* Karen Rees.
The Daily Mail may have done a rare public service in revealing her change of name and new occupation.
The recreated face of Bonnie Prince Charlie is also worried he might be mistaken for Lucy Letby.
Didn't he have a part in the Vicar of Dibley?
Unionist plot to make him look pot ugly, looks nothing like the pictures of him.
Pretty sure BPC was a Unionist too?
He just wanted The Union under the House of Stuart, not the Hanoverians.
He did. Culloden was a dynastic squabble of two kings' sons on behalf of their respective paters.
Ironically if he'd been contented with Scotland and consolidated, he might have lasted rather longer and maybe even made it to KCIII major.
I don't know why republicanism has taken off in Scotland the last 10 years or so in the nationalist fraternity.
A vibey/ anti-British state thing?
It's a bit weird because the monarchy is more Scottish than it is English, the late Queen was literally half-Scottish, KCIII loves it and Queen Vic loved it, and the oath the monarch takes give special protection to the Kirk - I recall that went on for ages at KCIII's proclamation.
Bit odd. Surely the real nationalist take would be to resurrect a purely Scottish line of monarchs, possibly finding a tenuous Stuart branch again.
On that basis, I was reflecting on who might have been the most recent monarch of England who could be considered mostly English.
I keep coming back to Queen Anne, whose mother was English although on her father's side her grandmother was French and her father was Scottish.
If we discount her (and presumably also her sister) then I think it would have to be Elizabeth I.
Of course, most English monarchs from 1066 to certainly 1399 were hardly 'English' in that sense...
Weren't the Tudors Welsh? Tudors of Penmynydd.
Owain ap Maredudd was Welsh.
His wife (if they were married) was not. She was French (with a strong dash of German).
Henry VII was their grandson, and his mother could reasonably be called English (any French ancestry she had on either side was distant, despite the 'Beaufort' name). He may have spoken Welsh, but it would be stretching it to call him Welsh.
His wife had one Burgundian grandparent but otherwise her ancestry going back three generations on each side was emphatically English.
That would make Henry VIII as near as dammit English.
His eldest daughter's mother was Spanish, but his two next wives were both English.
So, to conclude this interesting and utterly pointless exercise in xenophobic stereotyping, the Tudors may have been given a Welsh name by later antiquarians (note, they never referred to themselves as the Tudors) but they were English.
You could even make a credible case they are the nearest thing to a fully English dynasty to occupy the throne of England since the death of Edmund Ironside in 1016.
For all my issues with the series, this episode of “You’re dead to me” gives a good and lighthearted background to the Tudors.
Nothing, saw Mikslovar had changed his profile pic and I liked it and copied it. It’s the simple but effective grey and white imagery with its pro wearing of seatbelts message that works for me.
Perhaps we should all be required to follow Doug Seal's example, and put up a photo of ourselves.
Have just completed 12 days continuously working (kerching) so was too tired to read or post last night or wake up this morning.
On topic - this is a great example why HR needs to have policies and processes. In any organisation you will get individuals who are jealous of others and make spurious complaints. You will get people who are horrified by what they see but don't feel empowered to act. You will get managers who just want the problem to go away. And occasionally you get a monster.
Its easy for people to dismiss HR teams and policies, but they are there for the protection of all. I've used HR policy to manage a problematic team member. To defend myself and my team against a mendacious and incompetent boss. And to ensure that I took the business to the cleaners when new boss decided to bring his own people in and we needed to go.
I once worked for a monster. Not a baby-killer, but someone whose business and interpersonal practices were increasingly horrendous. The initial reaction is denial, then horror, then fear. Even when other colleagues with the same boss come to the same conclusion there is no sanctuary, if anything it was worse. What do we do about this person? About their allies? And who can we trust to raise our concerns? We did have one very senior manager utterly dismissive of any complaints - the business would look Bad (to say nothing of the people who hired the monster) if the complaints were true.
In the end, a robust HR policy did the job. A trip wire was tripped, the monster was suspended, a formal investigation launched. And that was the end of them. The HR policies and processes did their job. For the protection of the organisation and its people.
HR is a bit like unions - you need them (or something like them) to prevent exploitation or ensure some very reasonable processes are followed, but the image of them is dominated by the very worst examples of self important interfering busy bodies with irrelevant political (internal or external) agendas and box ticking irrelevance.
It's a shame because done right it's very necessary.
I once worked in a school which didn't have HR processes. Or bother with them.
The politest thing I could say about its management structure was that the people involved were a serious risk to everyone around them including the children.
I can't say the rudest thing I'd like to, but suffice to say it sounds a bit like the second word of this sentence...
It's the same with a lot of things in life - a simple good idea gets picked up and carried to extremes until it becomes a whole light industry, beneficial mainly if not wholly to those who are employed in it.
Health and Safety is a classic. Long ago I lost an uncle to a building site accident. He was struck on the head by an oxygen cylinder. No hard hats in those days. Now you are not allowed on a site without one and this is a very good thing, but the Elf 'n Safe Tea industry has grown to the point where the small local fountain in my local park has a large yellow sign stating 'Caution; slippery when wet'.
Somewhere there is an employee thinking of these things and putting them into practice, at our expense.
I am involved with assessing the implementation of the Health and Safety etc. at Work Act and associated regulation. I still see workplaces where one ponders there is an accident waiting to happen here, and invariably it does despite advice on precautions to prevent an accident occurring; a few fatalities, but mainly youngsters losing arms, legs, hands or feet.
The HASAWA isn't the reason for excessive H and S precautions, it is the threat of litigation for financial gain; "I am suing you because I climbed over your fence and your dog bit me, and you had no "beware of the dog" signs displayed"
Incidentally - Google throws up three Karen Reeses who work in healthcare. One at Warwick, one in Birmingham and one in Manchester.
I think we can all feel sympathy for them today as idiots will be sending them nasty messages in confusion with *that* Karen Rees.
The Daily Mail may have done a rare public service in revealing her change of name and new occupation.
The recreated face of Bonnie Prince Charlie is also worried he might be mistaken for Lucy Letby.
Didn't he have a part in the Vicar of Dibley?
Unionist plot to make him look pot ugly, looks nothing like the pictures of him.
Pretty sure BPC was a Unionist too?
He just wanted The Union under the House of Stuart, not the Hanoverians.
He did. Culloden was a dynastic squabble of two kings' sons on behalf of their respective paters.
Ironically if he'd been contented with Scotland and consolidated, he might have lasted rather longer and maybe even made it to KCIII major.
I don't know why republicanism has taken off in Scotland the last 10 years or so in the nationalist fraternity.
A vibey/ anti-British state thing?
It's a bit weird because the monarchy is more Scottish than it is English, the late Queen was literally half-Scottish, KCIII loves it and Queen Vic loved it, and the oath the monarch takes give special protection to the Kirk - I recall that went on for ages at KCIII's proclamation.
Bit odd. Surely the real nationalist take would be to resurrect a purely Scottish line of monarchs, possibly finding a tenuous Stuart branch again.
On that basis, I was reflecting on who might have been the most recent monarch of England who could be considered mostly English.
I keep coming back to Queen Anne, whose mother was English although on her father's side her grandmother was French and her father was Scottish.
If we discount her (and presumably also her sister) then I think it would have to be Elizabeth I.
Of course, most English monarchs from 1066 to certainly 1399 were hardly 'English' in that sense...
Weren't the Tudors Welsh? Tudors of Penmynydd.
Owain ap Maredudd was Welsh.
His wife (if they were married) was not. She was French (with a strong dash of German).
Henry VII was their grandson, and his mother could reasonably be called English (any French ancestry she had on either side was distant, despite the 'Beaufort' name). He may have spoken Welsh, but it would be stretching it to call him Welsh.
His wife had one Burgundian grandparent but otherwise her ancestry going back three generations on each side was emphatically English.
That would make Henry VIII as near as dammit English.
His eldest daughter's mother was Spanish, but his two next wives were both English.
So, to conclude this interesting and utterly pointless exercise in xenophobic stereotyping, the Tudors may have been given a Welsh name by later antiquarians (note, they never referred to themselves as the Tudors) but they were English.
You could even make a credible case they are the nearest thing to a fully English dynasty to occupy the throne of England since the death of Edmund Ironside in 1016.
For all my issues with the series, this episode of “You’re dead to me” gives a good and lighthearted background to the Tudors.
Nothing, saw Mikslovar had changed his profile pic and I liked it and copied it. It’s the simple but effective grey and white imagery with its pro wearing of seatbelts message that works for me.
Perhaps we should all be required to follow Doug Seal's example, and put up a photo of ourselves.
Oh, that's a shock. You don't have the intelligence and application of a Border Collie?
Hmm. Struck by the multilayered, Swiss cheese slice holes lining up in a row (as Sandpit reminded us) 'faults' in those examples and the F-35 on the carrier - in the latter case, for instance, the government would indignantly deny blame, but they imposed the situation in which the assorted service and civilian roof rats and the jet jockey screwed up massively.
I actually don't hold the government culpable for this as they are civvie shitc*nts who know fuck all about fuck all. Being told by politicians do things for which preparations are grossly inadequate is an expected and recurrent theme in military life.
Ultimately, Cdr Air should hang for it as they failed to create a culture in which safety was even a consideration never mind a priority. The handling pilot should walk the plank as well because there is zero extenuation or excuse for not properly conducting the pre-flight.
One would have thought that a pilot’s sense of self-preservation, or at least not wanting membership of the Martin-Baker tie club, would be incentive enough to walk around your own aircraft before getting in!
State Sixth form accused of wokeness has got 43 kids into Oxbridge.
Is not calling Sixth Form tutors Sir or Miss what passes for woke these days?
I dunno, it seemed to generate a brief spasm of rage among the anti woke when it was first reported. I've never really got the Sir and Miss thing anyway, when I was at school in Scotland we always called teachers by their names, eg Mrs Smith etc, which seems a bit more normal. I totally get the school's thinking on it anyway, and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm.
Never got this either. For a start. How do you distinguish which teacher you are referring to if you don't?
We used "Sir" or "Miss" when talking directly to and addressing the teacher, ie instead of using a first name or full name when speaking to them.
We used surnames, eg Mrs Smith, when speaking about them third party.
My eldest intends to go into teaching. English in high schools. Is non-binary and insists that Mx is not just fine, but anyone refusing is transphobic.
We're trying to patiently (and increasingly less patiently) saying that they are mad, and it will be "Mr" or they won't have a job in most schools. Hopefully their long term gf will straighten their head out.
Its the "transphobic" thing that winds me up. Non-binary is nothing to do with being transgender. I entirely understand the desire to not conform to societal norms. But as my understanding is that they're intending to get engaged to the gf, that is a direct application of societal norms...
The typical British response to a military aviation mishap is "How we can stop anybody else finding out about it?" There isn't really a great deal of energy expended trying to find out who was responsible. If it can't be covered up then the search for extenuating circumstances starts and the responsibility is generally laid at broader systemic issues than any individual. The F-35 to the bottom of the Med is a classic example of this. The gingers didn't do a proper handover of the a/c at shift change and the pilot didn't do a walkaround (he must have thought he was a Blue Angel) but apparently the root cause was crewing issues caused by Covid.
The US, in my experience, operate a ruthless blame culture. Though it's often the CO of the unit that hangs, not the mishap pilot.
Ddin’t that F-35 take a bath because of an engine cover left in place, that any one of a dozen or more people should have noticed between the start of the shift and the plane heading down the runway?
If you ignore the attempted coverup bit at the start, an accident is almost always a series of broad systemic issues, the day when the holes in the cheese all line up, which is why it’s important to both investigate accidents, and investigate near misses.
I bet those engine covers now have extra-long and extra-wide red streamers on them, and a requirement for someone on the desk to physically hold them up so the pilot can see they’ve been removed!
Shouldn't the plane know if its engine covers are on? They don't have sensors where the covers clip in?
Have just completed 12 days continuously working (kerching) so was too tired to read or post last night or wake up this morning.
On topic - this is a great example why HR needs to have policies and processes. In any organisation you will get individuals who are jealous of others and make spurious complaints. You will get people who are horrified by what they see but don't feel empowered to act. You will get managers who just want the problem to go away. And occasionally you get a monster.
Its easy for people to dismiss HR teams and policies, but they are there for the protection of all. I've used HR policy to manage a problematic team member. To defend myself and my team against a mendacious and incompetent boss. And to ensure that I took the business to the cleaners when new boss decided to bring his own people in and we needed to go.
I once worked for a monster. Not a baby-killer, but someone whose business and interpersonal practices were increasingly horrendous. The initial reaction is denial, then horror, then fear. Even when other colleagues with the same boss come to the same conclusion there is no sanctuary, if anything it was worse. What do we do about this person? About their allies? And who can we trust to raise our concerns? We did have one very senior manager utterly dismissive of any complaints - the business would look Bad (to say nothing of the people who hired the monster) if the complaints were true.
In the end, a robust HR policy did the job. A trip wire was tripped, the monster was suspended, a formal investigation launched. And that was the end of them. The HR policies and processes did their job. For the protection of the organisation and its people.
HR is a bit like unions - you need them (or something like them) to prevent exploitation or ensure some very reasonable processes are followed, but the image of them is dominated by the very worst examples of self important interfering busy bodies with irrelevant political (internal or external) agendas and box ticking irrelevance.
It's a shame because done right it's very necessary.
I once worked in a school which didn't have HR processes. Or bother with them.
The politest thing I could say about its management structure was that the people involved were a serious risk to everyone around them including the children.
I can't say the rudest thing I'd like to, but suffice to say it sounds a bit like the second word of this sentence...
It's the same with a lot of things in life - a simple good idea gets picked up and carried to extremes until it becomes a whole light industry, beneficial mainly if not wholly to those who are employed in it.
Health and Safety is a classic. Long ago I lost an uncle to a building site accident. He was struck on the head by an oxygen cylinder. No hard hats in those days. Now you are not allowed on a site without one and this is a very good thing, but the Elf 'n Safe Tea industry has grown to the point where the small local fountain in my local park has a large yellow sign stating 'Caution; slippery when wet'.
Somewhere there is an employee thinking of these things and putting them into practice, at our expense.
I am involved with assessing the implementation of the Health and Safety etc. at Work Act and associated regulation. I still see workplaces where one ponders there is an accident waiting to happen here, and invariably it does despite advice on precautions to prevent an accident occurring; a few fatalities, but mainly youngsters losing arms, legs, hands or feet.
The HASAWA isn't the reason for excessive H and S precautions, it is the threat of litigation for financial gain; "I am suing you because I climbed over your fence and your dog bit me, and you had no "beware of the dog" signs displayed"
Yes, I can see that, MP. Maybe we should start by killing all the lawyers.
Tory poll lead cut by a third since last week, according to Omnisis:
Omnisis polls
data collected
20-21 Jul +24% 28 Jul +23% 3-4 Aug +22% 10-11 Aug +24% 18 Aug +16%
Why?
Splish, splosh. Gangplank. Prison's too good for 'em. If they don't like it here, let 'em FAAAAK ORRFFF. Right back where they came from, the ungrateful foreign toerags. That's why. Lee Anderson won't be buying his own drinks for a while.
Kind of hilarious that so many supposedly interleckshual Tories don't understand what their own brand is all about. I mean they understand that their approach to the world is nasty and brutal, and not at all about "virtue", but they're prone to peeing themselves if Halifax tell them house prices went up 0.034% less this month than last month, or if they saw a black man go into a house three doors down from them.
The Tories are going to win the next election with a majority of seats. If you want it in financial markets speak, the fundamentals are all in their favour.
Small boats week was a success and there will be more.
Tory poll lead cut by a third since last week, according to Omnisis:
Omnisis polls
data collected
20-21 Jul +24% 28 Jul +23% 3-4 Aug +22% 10-11 Aug +24% 18 Aug +16%
Why?
Splish, splosh. Gangplank. Prison's too good for 'em. If they don't like it here, let 'em FAAAAK ORRFFF. Right back where they came from, the ungrateful foreign toerags. That's why. Lee Anderson won't be buying his own drinks for a while.
Kind of hilarious that so many supposedly interleckshual Tories don't understand what their own brand is all about. I mean they understand that their approach to the world is nasty and brutal, and not at all about "virtue", but they're prone to peeing themselves if Halifax tell them house prices went up 0.034% less this month than last month, or if they saw a black man go into a house three doors down from them.
The Tories are going to win the next election with a majority of seats. If you want it in financial markets speak, the fundamentals are all in their favour.
Small boats week was a success and there will be more.
'Labour lead' in first line, shurely? Or is this BJO type postmodernist irony?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
Incidentally - Google throws up three Karen Reeses who work in healthcare. One at Warwick, one in Birmingham and one in Manchester.
I think we can all feel sympathy for them today as idiots will be sending them nasty messages in confusion with *that* Karen Rees.
The Daily Mail may have done a rare public service in revealing her change of name and new occupation.
The recreated face of Bonnie Prince Charlie is also worried he might be mistaken for Lucy Letby.
Didn't he have a part in the Vicar of Dibley?
Unionist plot to make him look pot ugly, looks nothing like the pictures of him.
Pretty sure BPC was a Unionist too?
He just wanted The Union under the House of Stuart, not the Hanoverians.
He did. Culloden was a dynastic squabble of two kings' sons on behalf of their respective paters.
Ironically if he'd been contented with Scotland and consolidated, he might have lasted rather longer and maybe even made it to KCIII major.
I don't know why republicanism has taken off in Scotland the last 10 years or so in the nationalist fraternity.
A vibey/ anti-British state thing?
It's a bit weird because the monarchy is more Scottish than it is English, the late Queen was literally half-Scottish, KCIII loves it and Queen Vic loved it, and the oath the monarch takes give special protection to the Kirk - I recall that went on for ages at KCIII's proclamation.
Bit odd. Surely the real nationalist take would be to resurrect a purely Scottish line of monarchs, possibly finding a tenuous Stuart branch again.
On that basis, I was reflecting on who might have been the most recent monarch of England who could be considered mostly English.
I keep coming back to Queen Anne, whose mother was English although on her father's side her grandmother was French and her father was Scottish.
If we discount her (and presumably also her sister) then I think it would have to be Elizabeth I.
Of course, most English monarchs from 1066 to certainly 1399 were hardly 'English' in that sense...
Weren't the Tudors Welsh? Tudors of Penmynydd.
Owain ap Maredudd was Welsh.
His wife (if they were married) was not. She was French (with a strong dash of German).
Henry VII was their grandson, and his mother could reasonably be called English (any French ancestry she had on either side was distant, despite the 'Beaufort' name). He may have spoken Welsh, but it would be stretching it to call him Welsh.
His wife had one Burgundian grandparent but otherwise her ancestry going back three generations on each side was emphatically English.
That would make Henry VIII as near as dammit English.
His eldest daughter's mother was Spanish, but his two next wives were both English.
So, to conclude this interesting and utterly pointless exercise in xenophobic stereotyping, the Tudors may have been given a Welsh name by later antiquarians (note, they never referred to themselves as the Tudors) but they were English.
You could even make a credible case they are the nearest thing to a fully English dynasty to occupy the throne of England since the death of Edmund Ironside in 1016.
For all my issues with the series, this episode of “You’re dead to me” gives a good and lighthearted background to the Tudors.
Nothing, saw Mikslovar had changed his profile pic and I liked it and copied it. It’s the simple but effective grey and white imagery with its pro wearing of seatbelts message that works for me.
Perhaps we should all be required to follow Doug Seal's example, and put up a photo of ourselves.
Is Rishi Sunak hiding in plain sight in this thread?
State Sixth form accused of wokeness has got 43 kids into Oxbridge.
Is not calling Sixth Form tutors Sir or Miss what passes for woke these days?
I dunno, it seemed to generate a brief spasm of rage among the anti woke when it was first reported. I've never really got the Sir and Miss thing anyway, when I was at school in Scotland we always called teachers by their names, eg Mrs Smith etc, which seems a bit more normal. I totally get the school's thinking on it anyway, and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm.
Never got this either. For a start. How do you distinguish which teacher you are referring to if you don't?
We used "Sir" or "Miss" when talking directly to and addressing the teacher, ie instead of using a first name or full name when speaking to them.
We used surnames, eg Mrs Smith, when speaking about them third party.
My eldest intends to go into teaching. English in high schools. Is non-binary and insists that Mx is not just fine, but anyone refusing is transphobic.
We're trying to patiently (and increasingly less patiently) saying that they are mad, and it will be "Mr" or they won't have a job in most schools. Hopefully their long term gf will straighten their head out.
Its the "transphobic" thing that winds me up. Non-binary is nothing to do with being transgender. I entirely understand the desire to not conform to societal norms. But as my understanding is that they're intending to get engaged to the gf, that is a direct application of societal norms...
The typical British response to a military aviation mishap is "How we can stop anybody else finding out about it?" There isn't really a great deal of energy expended trying to find out who was responsible. If it can't be covered up then the search for extenuating circumstances starts and the responsibility is generally laid at broader systemic issues than any individual. The F-35 to the bottom of the Med is a classic example of this. The gingers didn't do a proper handover of the a/c at shift change and the pilot didn't do a walkaround (he must have thought he was a Blue Angel) but apparently the root cause was crewing issues caused by Covid.
The US, in my experience, operate a ruthless blame culture. Though it's often the CO of the unit that hangs, not the mishap pilot.
Ddin’t that F-35 take a bath because of an engine cover left in place, that any one of a dozen or more people should have noticed between the start of the shift and the plane heading down the runway?
If you ignore the attempted coverup bit at the start, an accident is almost always a series of broad systemic issues, the day when the holes in the cheese all line up, which is why it’s important to both investigate accidents, and investigate near misses.
I bet those engine covers now have extra-long and extra-wide red streamers on them, and a requirement for someone on the desk to physically hold them up so the pilot can see they’ve been removed!
Shouldn't the plane know if its engine covers are on? They don't have sensors where the covers clip in?
More to go wrong, more to stick out and appear on radart, I expect.
One would think F/Lt Prune would notice something funny when he tried the throttle, but perhaps doing the equivalent of a mag drop test in a Lanc isn't possible in a F-35. In any case the main engine has split L and R intakes, so maybe it just got enough air till he firewalled it and was committed in any case.
Must find that report - will make good Saturday afternoon reading.
Twitter or X or whatever it is, is soooo shite now. I really mourn the loss of little pools of expertise on any given topic. My timeline is just crowded with utter crud.
Elon Musk is a giant tit.
Nah, he's a super genius, and if you dare suggest that even if he is a genius in one fieldhe might still be a boorish self aggrandizing fool acting out a midlife crisis in others, you are just a hater with Musk derangment syndrome.
As a non user I am fascinted to learn people's timelines were not always crowded with crud though.
He's trying to remove the block button as his next move.
As of yesterday I have sold all my remaining Tesla stock. I made a nice-ish profit since 2016 but I just cannot support Elon anymore when he is so unpredictable.
I think Musk is gambling on a big uptick in Stupid. I mean this seriously. It's an important fact about Trump that for many US voters a large part of his image was created by wrestling and The Apprentice. Imagine if US culture falls to unprecedented levels of stupid over the next year or so, associated with Trump's antics and in particular his insistence on the truth of utterly stupid propositions (in particular, that he was cheated out of the election), shouted with an innocent and furious look on his face. (This is why, as few have noticed, that for the rabid right in the US it's always "President Trump" and mere "Biden".) Then consider the Musk-Zuckenberg planned contest in that light. Musk says he's talked to Meloni about renting the Coliseum. I can believe that. Musk is essentially hanging on to Trump's coat tails. He'll fall off, but the question is when, and the answer isn't necessarily soon.
As for Tesla, it was always clear that the bottom would fall out of that brand. They're the gayest cars out. A week's outage on a national grid in any of about 20 countries and the penny drops and the brand is finished.
State Sixth form accused of wokeness has got 43 kids into Oxbridge.
Is not calling Sixth Form tutors Sir or Miss what passes for woke these days?
I dunno, it seemed to generate a brief spasm of rage among the anti woke when it was first reported. I've never really got the Sir and Miss thing anyway, when I was at school in Scotland we always called teachers by their names, eg Mrs Smith etc, which seems a bit more normal. I totally get the school's thinking on it anyway, and it doesn't seem to have done them any harm.
Never got this either. For a start. How do you distinguish which teacher you are referring to if you don't?
We used "Sir" or "Miss" when talking directly to and addressing the teacher, ie instead of using a first name or full name when speaking to them.
We used surnames, eg Mrs Smith, when speaking about them third party.
My eldest intends to go into teaching. English in high schools. Is non-binary and insists that Mx is not just fine, but anyone refusing is transphobic.
We're trying to patiently (and increasingly less patiently) saying that they are mad, and it will be "Mr" or they won't have a job in most schools. Hopefully their long term gf will straighten their head out.
Its the "transphobic" thing that winds me up. Non-binary is nothing to do with being transgender. I entirely understand the desire to not conform to societal norms. But as my understanding is that they're intending to get engaged to the gf, that is a direct application of societal norms...
It's a look at me phase. The whole point of using a single title like Sir or Miss or Ma'am is that we are not looking at you as an individual, but you as a professional. That's not transphobic.
Irritatingly the trans extreme movement is reinforcing gender norms by suggesting if you don't want to comply with norms then you are somehow other or non binary or trans.
A boy who doesn't want to confirm with gender norms is a boy. A girl who doesn't want to confirm with gender norms is a girl.
Suggesting that any girl who doesn't want to confirm with gender norms is not a real girl is setting back feminism 70 years.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
.
We will apply that same principle to your drivel. Cyclefree is a far better writer and thinker than you could ever hope to be.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
.
We will apply that same principle to your drivel. Cyclefree is a far better writer and thinker than you could ever hope to be.
I think both posters have interesting things to say.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
.
We will apply that same principle to your drivel. Cyclefree is a far better writer and thinker than you could ever hope to be.
I think both posters have interesting things to say.
That may be the case. But one says it in an articulate and intelligent manner and the other has posted a couple of inarticulate rants.
I known which one is more valuable to both the site and to debate in general
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
.
We will apply that same principle to your drivel. Cyclefree is a far better writer and thinker than you could ever hope to be.
I think both posters have interesting things to say.
That may be the case. But one says it in an articulate and intelligent manner and the other has posted a couple of inarticulate rants.
I known which one is more valuable to both the site and to debate in general
I think they are as valuable to the site as each other, just as you and I are. I don't however condone ranting at people for what they post.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I don't see any BMA/GMC propagandists here, unless you mean my trying to keep the murderer's anonymity secret so the media can't go after her family and friends?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I don't see any BMA/GMC propagandists here, unless you mean my trying to keep the murderer's anonymity secret so the media can't go after her family and friends?
I’m as sorry for the perpetrator’s parents as I am the parents of the victims.
One of the problems in this case was that managers refused to carry out or order any sort of investigation into the concerns raised.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned by management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I don't see any BMA/GMC propagandists here, unless you mean my trying to keep the murderer's anonymity secret so the media can't go after her family and friends?
I’m as sorry for the perpetrator’s parents as I am the parents of the victims.
Far too sensible OKC, they are guilty by association.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
A sense of humour.
And who said anything about Leon?
The one who writes for the Spectator? That is Leon.
He's not funny or witty though, he's just unpleasant and nasty. There's no sense of humour needed, your post was ironically more funny than anything he's ever posted.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I don't see any BMA/GMC propagandists here, unless you mean my trying to keep the murderer's anonymity secret so the media can't go after her family and friends?
I’m as sorry for the perpetrator’s parents as I am the parents of the victims.
The parents got involved in the investigative procedure. Understandable maybe but morally dubious in hindsight.
Have just completed 12 days continuously working (kerching) so was too tired to read or post last night or wake up this morning.
On topic - this is a great example why HR needs to have policies and processes. In any organisation you will get individuals who are jealous of others and make spurious complaints. You will get people who are horrified by what they see but don't feel empowered to act. You will get managers who just want the problem to go away. And occasionally you get a monster.
Its easy for people to dismiss HR teams and policies, but they are there for the protection of all. I've used HR policy to manage a problematic team member. To defend myself and my team against a mendacious and incompetent boss. And to ensure that I took the business to the cleaners when new boss decided to bring his own people in and we needed to go.
I once worked for a monster. Not a baby-killer, but someone whose business and interpersonal practices were increasingly horrendous. The initial reaction is denial, then horror, then fear. Even when other colleagues with the same boss come to the same conclusion there is no sanctuary, if anything it was worse. What do we do about this person? About their allies? And who can we trust to raise our concerns? We did have one very senior manager utterly dismissive of any complaints - the business would look Bad (to say nothing of the people who hired the monster) if the complaints were true.
In the end, a robust HR policy did the job. A trip wire was tripped, the monster was suspended, a formal investigation launched. And that was the end of them. The HR policies and processes did their job. For the protection of the organisation and its people.
HR is a bit like unions - you need them (or something like them) to prevent exploitation or ensure some very reasonable processes are followed, but the image of them is dominated by the very worst examples of self important interfering busy bodies with irrelevant political (internal or external) agendas and box ticking irrelevance.
It's a shame because done right it's very necessary.
I once worked in a school which didn't have HR processes. Or bother with them.
The politest thing I could say about its management structure was that the people involved were a serious risk to everyone around them including the children.
I can't say the rudest thing I'd like to, but suffice to say it sounds a bit like the second word of this sentence...
It's the same with a lot of things in life - a simple good idea gets picked up and carried to extremes until it becomes a whole light industry, beneficial mainly if not wholly to those who are employed in it.
Health and Safety is a classic. Long ago I lost an uncle to a building site accident. He was struck on the head by an oxygen cylinder. No hard hats in those days. Now you are not allowed on a site without one and this is a very good thing, but the Elf 'n Safe Tea industry has grown to the point where the small local fountain in my local park has a large yellow sign stating 'Caution; slippery when wet'.
Somewhere there is an employee thinking of these things and putting them into practice, at our expense.
I am involved with assessing the implementation of the Health and Safety etc. at Work Act and associated regulation. I still see workplaces where one ponders there is an accident waiting to happen here, and invariably it does despite advice on precautions to prevent an accident occurring; a few fatalities, but mainly youngsters losing arms, legs, hands or feet.
The HASAWA isn't the reason for excessive H and S precautions, it is the threat of litigation for financial gain; "I am suing you because I climbed over your fence and your dog bit me, and you had no "beware of the dog" signs displayed"
Yes, I can see that, MP. Maybe we should start by killing all the lawyers.
Can we wait until my Mercedes diesel claim is concluded?
The typical British response to a military aviation mishap is "How we can stop anybody else finding out about it?" There isn't really a great deal of energy expended trying to find out who was responsible. If it can't be covered up then the search for extenuating circumstances starts and the responsibility is generally laid at broader systemic issues than any individual. The F-35 to the bottom of the Med is a classic example of this. The gingers didn't do a proper handover of the a/c at shift change and the pilot didn't do a walkaround (he must have thought he was a Blue Angel) but apparently the root cause was crewing issues caused by Covid.
The US, in my experience, operate a ruthless blame culture. Though it's often the CO of the unit that hangs, not the mishap pilot.
Ddin’t that F-35 take a bath because of an engine cover left in place, that any one of a dozen or more people should have noticed between the start of the shift and the plane heading down the runway?
If you ignore the attempted coverup bit at the start, an accident is almost always a series of broad systemic issues, the day when the holes in the cheese all line up, which is why it’s important to both investigate accidents, and investigate near misses.
I bet those engine covers now have extra-long and extra-wide red streamers on them, and a requirement for someone on the desk to physically hold them up so the pilot can see they’ve been removed!
Shouldn't the plane know if its engine covers are on? They don't have sensors where the covers clip in?
I don’t think they have sensors for the covers themselves, as sensors add weight and complexity, and are prone to fail at least as often as they catch something. They do have sensors for things that might fail, but not for things that are just stupid mistakes by supposedly well-trained humans!
Have just completed 12 days continuously working (kerching) so was too tired to read or post last night or wake up this morning.
On topic - this is a great example why HR needs to have policies and processes. In any organisation you will get individuals who are jealous of others and make spurious complaints. You will get people who are horrified by what they see but don't feel empowered to act. You will get managers who just want the problem to go away. And occasionally you get a monster.
Its easy for people to dismiss HR teams and policies, but they are there for the protection of all. I've used HR policy to manage a problematic team member. To defend myself and my team against a mendacious and incompetent boss. And to ensure that I took the business to the cleaners when new boss decided to bring his own people in and we needed to go.
I once worked for a monster. Not a baby-killer, but someone whose business and interpersonal practices were increasingly horrendous. The initial reaction is denial, then horror, then fear. Even when other colleagues with the same boss come to the same conclusion there is no sanctuary, if anything it was worse. What do we do about this person? About their allies? And who can we trust to raise our concerns? We did have one very senior manager utterly dismissive of any complaints - the business would look Bad (to say nothing of the people who hired the monster) if the complaints were true.
In the end, a robust HR policy did the job. A trip wire was tripped, the monster was suspended, a formal investigation launched. And that was the end of them. The HR policies and processes did their job. For the protection of the organisation and its people.
HR is a bit like unions - you need them (or something like them) to prevent exploitation or ensure some very reasonable processes are followed, but the image of them is dominated by the very worst examples of self important interfering busy bodies with irrelevant political (internal or external) agendas and box ticking irrelevance.
It's a shame because done right it's very necessary.
I once worked in a school which didn't have HR processes. Or bother with them.
The politest thing I could say about its management structure was that the people involved were a serious risk to everyone around them including the children.
I can't say the rudest thing I'd like to, but suffice to say it sounds a bit like the second word of this sentence...
It's the same with a lot of things in life - a simple good idea gets picked up and carried to extremes until it becomes a whole light industry, beneficial mainly if not wholly to those who are employed in it.
Health and Safety is a classic. Long ago I lost an uncle to a building site accident. He was struck on the head by an oxygen cylinder. No hard hats in those days. Now you are not allowed on a site without one and this is a very good thing, but the Elf 'n Safe Tea industry has grown to the point where the small local fountain in my local park has a large yellow sign stating 'Caution; slippery when wet'.
Somewhere there is an employee thinking of these things and putting them into practice, at our expense.
I am involved with assessing the implementation of the Health and Safety etc. at Work Act and associated regulation. I still see workplaces where one ponders there is an accident waiting to happen here, and invariably it does despite advice on precautions to prevent an accident occurring; a few fatalities, but mainly youngsters losing arms, legs, hands or feet.
The HASAWA isn't the reason for excessive H and S precautions, it is the threat of litigation for financial gain; "I am suing you because I climbed over your fence and your dog bit me, and you had no "beware of the dog" signs displayed"
Yes, I can see that, MP. Maybe we should start by killing all the lawyers.
Can we wait until my Mercedes diesel claim is concluded?
One of the problems in this case was that managers refused to carry out or order any sort of investigation into the concerns raised.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
Does the CQC have a separate investigations unit ?
Such a thing would tick all your boxes: it would be more efficient than trying to run it in house at every hospital trust, could maintain the required expertise, and could be truly independent with regard to taking whistleblowers seriously.
The typical British response to a military aviation mishap is "How we can stop anybody else finding out about it?" There isn't really a great deal of energy expended trying to find out who was responsible. If it can't be covered up then the search for extenuating circumstances starts and the responsibility is generally laid at broader systemic issues than any individual. The F-35 to the bottom of the Med is a classic example of this. The gingers didn't do a proper handover of the a/c at shift change and the pilot didn't do a walkaround (he must have thought he was a Blue Angel) but apparently the root cause was crewing issues caused by Covid.
The US, in my experience, operate a ruthless blame culture. Though it's often the CO of the unit that hangs, not the mishap pilot.
Ddin’t that F-35 take a bath because of an engine cover left in place, that any one of a dozen or more people should have noticed between the start of the shift and the plane heading down the runway?
If you ignore the attempted coverup bit at the start, an accident is almost always a series of broad systemic issues, the day when the holes in the cheese all line up, which is why it’s important to both investigate accidents, and investigate near misses.
I bet those engine covers now have extra-long and extra-wide red streamers on them, and a requirement for someone on the desk to physically hold them up so the pilot can see they’ve been removed!
Shouldn't the plane know if its engine covers are on? They don't have sensors where the covers clip in?
I don’t think they have sensors for the covers themselves, as sensors add weight and complexity, and are prone to fail at least as often as they catch something. They do have sensors for things that might fail, but not for things that are just stupid mistakes by supposedly well-trained humans!
Those sensors don't exist but, if they did, the first thing that would happen is that somebody would disable them to eliminate annoying false positives. See also; chip detectors in the Lynx gearbox.
One of the problems in this case was that managers refused to carry out or order any sort of investigation into the concerns raised.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned by management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
Yes definitely. But what should happen in cases where the concerns or allegations turn out to be nonsense? Should there be blowback on those who raised them and in the process wasted resource and maybe damaged other people?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
One of the problems in this case was that managers refused to carry out or order any sort of investigation into the concerns raised.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
Does the CQC have a separate investigations unit ?
Such a thing would tick all your boxes: it would be more efficient than trying to run it in house at every hospital trust, could maintain the required expertise, and could be truly independent with regard to taking whistleblowers seriously.
They do with Care Homes at least. Mrs Roberts is required to report any safeguarding concerns where she works directly to CQC and not just to Management.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I don't see any BMA/GMC propagandists here, unless you mean my trying to keep the murderer's anonymity secret so the media can't go after her family and friends?
I’m as sorry for the perpetrator’s parents as I am the parents of the victims.
Their only child, who they loved and were proud of. Unimaginable how they must feel.
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
Nope. I just type what sounds right. Seems to work for me although I will never be a Sean Thomas.
On titles: In John Gunthers 1947 "Inside U.S.A.", he describes the way Southern whites called blacks by their first names, "John", rather than "Mr. Smith". And now I am struck by how many US companies do the same to their customers. Not, I hope, for the same reasons.
In her old age, that practice annoyed my mother. So far it mostly amuses me. So far.
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
I wish you well in your career as a grammar pedant.
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
I wish you well in your career as a grammar pedant.
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
I wish you well in your career as a grammar pedant.
This from the poster who fulminated against confusing the words 'cog' and 'sprocket'! (Great distinction by the way. Couldn't wait to explain it to my family and friends.)
One of the problems in this case was that managers refused to carry out or order any sort of investigation into the concerns raised.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned by management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
Yes definitely. But what should happen in cases where the concerns or allegations turn out to be nonsense? Should there be blowback on those who raised them and in the process wasted resource and maybe damaged other people?
No. You need to take the poison out of it.
If you spot an unusual thing, there are many possible reasons for it. It might be a real thing, it might be random chance, whatever. Here is how you handle things like that
The death of a baby is not difficult to record. It's a spacetime event: baby X, aged Y, was pronounced dead at time Z in location Q. You can track that remotely
The presence or absence of staff are (if memory serves) also spacetime events. You can track them via their badges. You can track that remotely too
If you can track both datastreams remotely, now you have a chance
If an anomaly occurs - Nurse X is unusually present during deaths of Babies A,B,C... - then you note the occurence and continue to monitor. If after a certain time the phenomenon continues, then the possibility of a false positive recedes and you now have an evidence base for more thorough investigation (concealed cameras, etc)
And that's how you track and keep safe tens of thousands of babies and tens of thousands of nurses nationwide at cheap cost whilst minimising false positives and false negatives.
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
I don't condone what he has said but I think banning him is quite ridiculous.
It might have one one of our Saturday morning friends whose alarm failed to go off, or their apartment was attacked by a Ukrainian drone, hence their tardiness.
The problem with several of these proposed solutions for public sector safety is that they are exactly the sort of setups that are demonised as back office paper pushers diverting funds from the frontline. And therefore easy targets for savings.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
On titles: In John Gunthers 1947 "Inside U.S.A.", he describes the way Southern whites called blacks by their first names, "John", rather than "Mr. Smith". And now I am struck by how many US companies do the same to their customers. Not, I hope, for the same reasons.
In her old age, that practice annoyed my mother. So far it mostly amuses me. So far.
Good afternoon everyone. It has taken me most of the day so far to read all the posts following @Cyclefree’s excellent thread header. It is a complement to her, as well as to the importance of the topic, that most of the posts have been on topic. The only thing I wish to add to the conversation is that this case, together with others in such organisations as the Post Office, DoE, and MoD, show a lack of accountability of Senior Managers in large public organisations. This is a nationwide issue that needs to be addressed. Failings in the NHS are particularly concerning because failings can make a difference between life and death. Are some organisations just too big to be managed?
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
I think PB overuses the word "bully/bullying": everything on PB is written, not actioned, and everybody can respond back to everybody else in the same manner. So no, I don't think Leon is a bully[1]. He does have a long list of negative characteristics[2], but not that
Interestingly, the most negative behavior on PB (at least IMHO) is when people gang up on people, an activity sometimes called "brigading". It happens to @HYUFD a lot. Since @HYUFD is the individual most able to cope with it, it's not necessarily a problem, but it's not good to watch.
[1] Although he may or may not be in real life: how would I know? [2] Long list. Loooong list.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
As I mentioned previously, just because somebody is a bit antagonistic/rude doesn't make them a troll or a stooge. And yet they happily allow Leon to post and don't call him out.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
His opening caricature of the working class as universally thick and prejudiced was a bit of a tell. As was gayest as a pejorative.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
Oh, I thought it was someone currently on a self imposed flounce who is named after a Seat hatchback car.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
I don't condone what he has said but I think banning him is quite ridiculous.
It's Mike's site and he literally said earlier in this thread that anyone insulting Cyclefree over her thread header will be banned. In bold.
And then "Dave" insulted Cyclefree. After others had been banned for doing so. And after the warning.
A ban was inevitable. Suicide by cop for the account.
It was hardly an "I'm Spartacus" moment, and people kind of forget that everyone who said they were Spartacus was crucified.
That’s kind of the point of the “I am Spartacus” moment surely? They stood up for what is right (in this case group loyalty) regardless of the personal cost
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
Is 'regarded' sometimes misused? I've noticed sentences such as 'She regarded him.' which seems incomplete to me. Shouldn't it be, for example, 'She regarded him critically.'? In the first sentence, is regarded being incorrectly substituted for another word, such as 'observed'?
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
Oh, I thought it was someone currently on a self imposed flounce who is named after a Seat hatchback car.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
Oh, I thought it was someone currently on a self imposed flounce who is named after a Seat hatchback car.
The Balearic island known for beaches and nightclubs?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
I wouldn't say atrocious as such, but it did often feel like reading the output of a student on a creative writing course.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
Oh, I thought it was someone currently on a self imposed flounce who is named after a Seat hatchback car.
The Balearic island known for beaches and nightclubs?
We can have a good laugh at that one, as no-one was killed, so it was just the inordinate waste of money both for the plane itself, which is very much scrap, and the massive operation to fish it out of the drink, lest the Russkis or Chinese tried to fish it out first.
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
Is 'regarded' sometimes misused? I've noticed sentences such as 'She regarded him.' which seems incomplete to me. Shouldn't it be, for example, 'She regarded him critically.'? In the first sentence, is regarded being incorrectly substituted for another word, such as 'observed'?
The difference between a transitive and intransitive verb is still worth knowing.
[grits teeth. swallows pride.]
OK, explain please
Transitive verbs can take a grammatical object. 'Stop' is a transitive verb, so you can say 'I stop the bus' ('the bus' being the object). Intransitive can't take a grammatical object. 'Cease' for example. You can't say 'I cease the bus'. 'Wish' is also an intransitive verb. You can't say 'I wish a referendum'. (You can say 'I wish for a referendum' but then 'a referendum' becomes an indirect object introduced by the preposition 'for'.) I hope that's clear!
Is 'regarded' sometimes misused? I've noticed sentences such as 'She regarded him.' which seems incomplete to me. Shouldn't it be, for example, 'She regarded him critically.'? In the first sentence, is regarded being incorrectly substituted for another word, such as 'observed'?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
If you're bothered about writers who can't write for toffees but think they're great then stick around. You are new to the site but there's much worse offenders, there's one who serially writes for the Spectator the most atrocious stuff but thinks they're the bee's knees.
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
Leon is a rather atrocious writer, bully and just generally unpleasant. Can someone explain what I am missing?
I think PB overuses the word "bully/bullying": everything on PB is written, not actioned, and everybody can respond back to everybody else in the same manner. So no, I don't think Leon is a bully[1]. He does have a long list of negative characteristics[2], but not that
Interestingly, the most negative behavior on PB (at least IMHO) is when people gang up on people, an activity sometimes called "brigading". It happens to @HYUFD a lot. Since @HYUFD is the individual most able to cope with it, it's not necessarily a problem, but it's not good to watch.
[1] Although he may or may not be in real life: how would I know? [2] Long list. Loooong list.
[1] I've met him and know more about him than I believe he supposes. No, he is not a bully. He does like a verbal spat, but that's hardly bullying.
[2] Agreed, but he has a lot of positive ones too, and on the whole I think the site is better with him than without.
I too dislike the 'brigding' of Hyufd, but he seems to handle it well and I don't think he feels the need for any special protection.
One of my reported decisions that I am most proud of was the successful appeal against the decision of the Nursing and Midwifery Council. It had some similarities to the Letby case, albeit it was a lot less serious. Quite large quantities of drugs were disappearing from a hospital. The hospital staff did an analysis of who was on duty on the 11 times the pills went missing and she was the only one on duty on every occasion. She was sacked and then struck off.
On the face of it the case looked pretty open and shut and things got much more complicated when a solicitor who had taken a fair chunk of money to prepare a case then dropped out before the hearing. The nurse was not allowed an adjournment and had to represent herself.
What became clear when you looked into the evidence, however, was that things were much more complicated. The analysis reflected the times nurses were on duty. But nurses didn't leave when they finished their shifts, they stayed on to complete their paperwork. Nurses arrived early as well so they could catch up on where their patients were and what was needed for their shift. None of this was recorded (or indeed paid for) but the result was that the analysis was a lot fuzzier than it first appeared and other potential candidates came back into view. There was also some evidence that the pills, which were anti sickness, were routinely taken by paramedics when they went out to prevent any travel sickness when working on patients in a moving ambulance.
The case is reported in 2015 SC 282. I was particularly assisted by the presence of Lord Drummond Young on the appeal bench who is highly numerate. The case showed me that this kind of modelling is problematic when relying upon records that are being kept for entirely different purposes. The decision to strike her off was quashed.
One of the problems in this case was that managers refused to carry out or order any sort of investigation into the concerns raised.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned by management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
Yes definitely. But what should happen in cases where the concerns or allegations turn out to be nonsense? Should there be blowback on those who raised them and in the process wasted resource and maybe damaged other people?
No. You need to take the poison out of it.
If you spot an unusual thing, there are many possible reasons for it. It might be a real thing, it might be random chance, whatever. Here is how you handle things like that
The death of a baby is not difficult to record. It's a spacetime event: baby X, aged Y, was pronounced dead at time Z in location Q. You can track that remotely
The presence or absence of staff are (if memory serves) also spacetime events. You can track them via their badges. You can track that remotely too
If you can track both datastreams remotely, now you have a chance
If an anomaly occurs - Nurse X is unusually present during deaths of Babies A,B,C... - then you note the occurence and continue to monitor. If after a certain time the phenomenon continues, then the possibility of a false positive recedes and you now have an evidence base for more thorough investigation (concealed cameras, etc)
And that's how you track and keep safe tens of thousands of babies and tens of thousands of nurses nationwide at cheap cost whilst minimising false positives and false negatives.
Ok but I wasn't thinking of this case, just more generally about the possible pitfalls of going too far the other way, eg over-investigating things. Because sometimes in the wake of a disaster you overshoot and build processes which do more harm than good.
Imagine somebody in an organization has concerns or allegations which are actually bullshit (eg because they've got the wrong end of the stick or because they have it in for somebody). This does happen. It happens quite a lot.
If they are able (unfiltered) to go straight to a well resourced, powerful Investigations Unit and unleash them on it, you could be looking at much resource wasted and at people who've done nothing wrong being put through the ringer and stressed to high heaven.
So, my question is, how do you discourage misuse of such a system?
I didn't bother reading the header because I don't read contributions by that author, whom I believe to be a classic case of someone who can't write or think for toffees but who thinks they're a great writer and thinker.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
What do you think about Ukraine/Russia?
Don't change the subject. I made some Ukrainian-style courgette fritters yesterday and they were delicious.
I don't see any BMA/GMC propagandists here, unless you mean my trying to keep the murderer's anonymity secret so the media can't go after her family and friends?
I’m as sorry for the perpetrator’s parents as I am the parents of the victims.
Their only child, who they loved and were proud of. Unimaginable how they must feel.
One suspects a deep sense of denial, the like of which is not uncommon amongst parents.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
If that was today's Russian troll, it was innovative but not in a particularly sensible way.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
It was clearly DJ41PeckYestt. Not a Russian troll just a bit anti everything.
Oh, I thought it was someone currently on a self imposed flounce who is named after a Seat hatchback car.
One of my reported decisions that I am most proud of was the successful appeal against the decision of the Nursing and Midwifery Council. It had some similarities to the Letby case, albeit it was a lot less serious. Quite large quantities of drugs were disappearing from a hospital. The hospital staff did an analysis of who was on duty on the 11 times the pills went missing and she was the only one on duty on every occasion. She was sacked and then struck off.
On the face of it the case looked pretty open and shut and things got much more complicated when a solicitor who had taken a fair chunk of money to prepare a case then dropped out before the hearing. The nurse was not allowed an adjournment and had to represent herself.
What became clear when you looked into the evidence, however, was that things were much more complicated. The analysis reflected the times nurses were on duty. But nurses didn't leave when they finished their shifts, they stayed on to complete their paperwork. Nurses arrived early as well so they could catch up on where their patients were and what was needed for their shift. None of this was recorded (or indeed paid for) but the result was that the analysis was a lot fuzzier than it first appeared and other potential candidates came back into view. There was also some evidence that the pills, which were anti sickness, were routinely taken by paramedics when they went out to prevent any travel sickness when working on patients in a moving ambulance.
The case is reported in 2015 SC 282. I was particularly assisted by the presence of Lord Drummond Young on the appeal bench who is highly numerate. The case showed me that this kind of modelling is problematic when relying upon records that are being kept for entirely different purposes. The decision to strike her off was quashed.
That’s very impressive, well done.
I wonder how many people have their lives ruined in similar circumstances? The Post Office scandal immediately springs to mind, where the computer evidence was erroneously (to be very polite) held up to be absolute truth.
Comments
“If you report those deaths that way, the monthly PowerPoint will look terrible. Have you no loyalty?”
Make death and problem reporting an independent arm, with no reporting to anyone in the trust.
The HASAWA isn't the reason for excessive H and S precautions, it is the threat of litigation for financial gain; "I am suing you because I climbed over your fence and your dog bit me, and you had no "beware of the dog" signs displayed"
Please can we have @MrEd and @StuartDickson back? What about @IshmaelZ?
[Incidentally, @SandyRentool doesn't actually look like Yannis Varoufakis. I was shocked!]
Omnisis polls
data collected
20-21 Jul +24%
28 Jul +23%
3-4 Aug +22%
10-11 Aug +24%
18 Aug +16%
Why?
Splish, splosh. Gangplank. Prison's too good for 'em. If they don't like it here, let 'em FAAAAK ORRFFF. Right back where they came from, the ungrateful foreign toerags. That's why. Lee Anderson won't be buying his own drinks for a while.
Kind of hilarious that so many supposedly interleckshual Tories don't understand what their own brand is all about. I mean they understand that their approach to the world is nasty and brutal, and not at all about "virtue", but they're prone to peeing themselves if Halifax tell them house prices went up 0.034% less this month than last month, or if they saw a black man go into a house three doors down from them.
The Tories are going to win the next election with a majority of seats. If you want it in financial markets speak, the fundamentals are all in their favour.
Small boats week was a success and there will be more.
But on the story that it's about - I see the BMA/GMC's propagandists are out in strength today. Mustn't blame any "doctors" or the "professional" collectivity of "doctors" for anything, right? Mustn't let the whole stinking profession fall into the disrepute it so richly deserves.
[boom-tish]
Yay or neigh?
One would think F/Lt Prune would notice something funny when he tried the throttle, but perhaps doing the equivalent of a mag drop test in a Lanc isn't possible in a F-35. In any case the main engine has split L and R intakes, so maybe it just got enough air till he firewalled it and was committed in any case.
Must find that report - will make good Saturday afternoon reading.
As for Tesla, it was always clear that the bottom would fall out of that brand. They're the gayest cars out. A week's outage on a national grid in any of about 20 countries and the penny drops and the brand is finished.
Irritatingly the trans extreme movement is reinforcing gender norms by suggesting if you don't want to comply with norms then you are somehow other or non binary or trans.
A boy who doesn't want to confirm with gender norms is a boy. A girl who doesn't want to confirm with gender norms is a girl.
Suggesting that any girl who doesn't want to confirm with gender norms is not a real girl is setting back feminism 70 years.
I known which one is more valuable to both the site and to debate in general
I'm sure you won't be impressed there either.
You really need to have an independent investigation unit which is responsible for investigating concerns raised and which cannot either be stopped by or only commissioned by management. That is how my team worked. We had responsibility for all investigations so staff knew to raise concerns directly with us. And we investigated them all. Managers could not stop us.
Also, one of the first issues to be discussed at the start of any investigation was whether people needed to be suspended and that was determined in line with the risk to the firm, regulatory obligations etc. Of course you need strong processes around this. But that independence is crucial - both in avoiding cover ups and in giving staff confidence to speak up knowing that they'll be listened to.
And who said anything about Leon?
He's not funny or witty though, he's just unpleasant and nasty. There's no sense of humour needed, your post was ironically more funny than anything he's ever posted.
OK, explain please
Such a thing would tick all your boxes: it would be more efficient than trying to run it in house at every hospital trust, could maintain the required expertise, and could be truly independent with regard to taking whistleblowers seriously.
I'm glad I missed the earlier contretemps.
Some posters attitudes to being presented with uncommon good sense seems to me close to pathological.
Well the good news, is that it still stands, after nearly 1,000 years.
No idea how it works with the NHS.
Maybe don't make one of your first posts an insult of the thread headed writer next time? Just a thought.
In her old age, that practice annoyed my mother. So far it mostly amuses me. So far.
And then "Dave" insulted Cyclefree. After others had been banned for doing so. And after the warning.
A ban was inevitable. Suicide by cop for the account.
It was hardly an "I'm Spartacus" moment, and people kind of forget that everyone who said they were Spartacus was crucified.
If you spot an unusual thing, there are many possible reasons for it. It might be a real thing, it might be random chance, whatever. Here is how you handle things like that
- The death of a baby is not difficult to record. It's a spacetime event: baby X, aged Y, was pronounced dead at time Z in location Q. You can track that remotely
- The presence or absence of staff are (if memory serves) also spacetime events. You can track them via their badges. You can track that remotely too
- If you can track both datastreams remotely, now you have a chance
- If an anomaly occurs - Nurse X is unusually present during deaths of Babies A,B,C... - then you note the occurence and continue to monitor. If after a certain time the phenomenon continues, then the possibility of a false positive recedes and you now have an evidence base for more thorough investigation (concealed cameras, etc)
And that's how you track and keep safe tens of thousands of babies and tens of thousands of nurses nationwide at cheap cost whilst minimising false positives and false negatives.I have noticed their punctuation is improving.
#pedanticbetting.com
And therefore easy targets for savings.
If they want to blend in, they should start with their favourite pizza choices, throw in some guff about polls, then move on to the view on Brexit and only then think about Ukraine.
The only thing I wish to add to the conversation is that this case, together with others in such organisations as the Post Office, DoE, and MoD, show a lack of accountability of Senior Managers in large public organisations. This is a nationwide issue that needs to be addressed. Failings in the NHS are particularly concerning because failings can make a difference between life and death. Are some organisations just too big to be managed?
Interestingly, the most negative behavior on PB (at least IMHO) is when people gang up on people, an activity sometimes called "brigading". It happens to @HYUFD a lot. Since @HYUFD is the individual most able to cope with it, it's not necessarily a problem, but it's not good to watch.
[1] Although he may or may not be in real life: how would I know?
[2] Long list. Loooong list.
As was gayest as a pejorative.
Potted Exsumm: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35b-lightning-crash-inquiry-reveals-factors-involved/
Thing itself: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/service-inquiry-into-the-loss-of-f-35b-lightning-zm152-bk-18
[1] I've met him and know more about him than I believe he supposes. No, he is not a bully. He does like a verbal spat, but that's hardly bullying.
[2] Agreed, but he has a lot of positive ones too, and on the whole I think the site is better with him than without.
I too dislike the 'brigding' of Hyufd, but he seems to handle it well and I don't think he feels the need for any special protection.
On the face of it the case looked pretty open and shut and things got much more complicated when a solicitor who had taken a fair chunk of money to prepare a case then dropped out before the hearing. The nurse was not allowed an adjournment and had to represent herself.
What became clear when you looked into the evidence, however, was that things were much more complicated. The analysis reflected the times nurses were on duty. But nurses didn't leave when they finished their shifts, they stayed on to complete their paperwork. Nurses arrived early as well so they could catch up on where their patients were and what was needed for their shift. None of this was recorded (or indeed paid for) but the result was that the analysis was a lot fuzzier than it first appeared and other potential candidates came back into view. There was also some evidence that the pills, which were anti sickness, were routinely taken by paramedics when they went out to prevent any travel sickness when working on patients in a moving ambulance.
The case is reported in 2015 SC 282. I was particularly assisted by the presence of Lord Drummond Young on the appeal bench who is highly numerate. The case showed me that this kind of modelling is problematic when relying upon records that are being kept for entirely different purposes. The decision to strike her off was quashed.
Imagine somebody in an organization has concerns or allegations which are actually bullshit (eg because they've got the wrong end of the stick or because they have it in for somebody). This does happen. It happens quite a lot.
If they are able (unfiltered) to go straight to a well resourced, powerful Investigations Unit and unleash them on it, you could be looking at much resource wasted and at people who've done nothing wrong being put through the ringer and stressed to high heaven.
So, my question is, how do you discourage misuse of such a system?
I wonder how many people have their lives ruined in similar circumstances? The Post Office scandal immediately springs to mind, where the computer evidence was erroneously (to be very polite) held up to be absolute truth.