Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
Rory McIlroy is the LeBron James of golf, a supremely gifted nice guy without killer instinct. Bryson DeChambeau is the Jake Paul of golf who isn't afraid to do it HIS way and who beat Rory with an amazingly clutch long bunker shot at Pinehurst.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
And that is betting without endless objections and reviews on infrastructure projects, and appeals against deportation on the grounds that every other country is worse than Britain which is why they came here in the first place.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
You might be interested in the percentage taken from the large settlements. The R4 docu on this subject interviewed a partner from a Scottish firm who dealt with a billion+ settlement. He claimed they initially were taking 25% but now 10% will suffice.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
Judges and the legal profession are a good deal less sensible than they once were, but I think I need some substantiation that the Equality Act merely 'consolidated' the Equal Pay Act. The latter seems to be the legal basis for these grotesque judgements.
You won't believe who I spotted in London on Friday afternoon: Michael Portillo, wearing one of his colourful jackets.
I saw him at Ely Station way back in 2016, filming his railway show!
That would be even more interesting, to see him filming one of those programmes.
They're very ill advised those jackets. He'd look a lot lot better in the Tory uniform of navy jacket and chinos, and confine the lary colours to a tie. I don't remember him being got up that way on This Week. Perhaps they didn't allow it.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
When I become unDictator, one of the first laws will be that all legal work is equal. So top lawyers will get the paid same as the secretaries. In the interests of equality.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
When I become unDictator, one of the first laws will be that all legal work is equal. So top lawyers will get the paid same as the secretaries. In the interests of equality.
It used to be a truism that barristers earned less than their clerks, although I gather that arrangement is a thing of the past.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
When I become unDictator, one of the first laws will be that all legal work is equal. So top lawyers will get the paid same as the secretaries. In the interests of equality.
It used to be a truism that barristers earned less than their clerks, although I gather that arrangement is a thing of the past.
I suspect that salary and income may be involved in a game of definitions there.....
You won't believe who I spotted in London on Friday afternoon: Michael Portillo, wearing one of his colourful jackets.
I saw him at Ely Station way back in 2016, filming his railway show!
That would be even more interesting, to see him filming one of those programmes.
They're very ill advised those jackets. He'd look a lot lot better in the Tory uniform of navy jacket and chinos, and confine the lary colours to a tie. I don't remember him being got up that way on This Week. Perhaps they didn't allow it.
I didn't think he wore them outside the making of the programmes, but there he was strolling along the pavement in the Rotherhithe area. I was on a bus at the time, the C10.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
Commiserations and best wishes.
Dunelm is fantastic. John Lewis for those of us who can't afford John Lewis.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
Been there. Too many times. All best wishes etc.
Chelsea & Westminster has a good A&E. And a great children’s one.
St Andrews Community Hospital A&E also rates.
At least the police are there. Had A&E experiences where the loons were in and the fuzz were out.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
Commiserations and best wishes.
Dunelm is fantastic. John Lewis for those of us who can't afford John Lewis.
Dunelm rocks! I discovered it last year, and was so pleased because it is ultra-uncool and it rocks - what a combination! - so basically everyone can fuck off, and what is better than being able to say that? It's one of the few places that stocks Dylon clothes dye, although admittedly John Lewis does too, but if there's a Dunelm nearer...
Oliver Wendell Holmes supposedly once said that FDR had a "second class" intellect, but a "first class" temperament. (I'd agree with that conclusion.)
A good case can be made for Abraham Lincoln as the president with the highest IQ. He had a few years of grade school, but taught himself to be, first a surveyor, and then a lawyer. (He was good at both.)
He read and studied every book he could get his hands on, and was famous for his ability to lean by listening.
You don't think it's nuts to say he might have had the highest "IQ" when "IQ" was invented a long time after he died then? Did he have a high CelebDAQ score too? Maybe he did well in YouGov polling?
Jefferson thought black people were incapable of understanding Euclid ... at a time when it was unlawful in several states for black people to read books or for someone to teach a black person to read and write. Punishments for writing including having your finger cut off. That's if you were black. Sometimes the law applied even if you were free. You just had to be black.
That's where IQ comes from. "We're better than you. That's why we're right to stop you bettering yourselves. Because we were BORN better, okayyy?" It's the most moronic crap out.
For a benchmark: before the 1960s adult literacy was a minority thing in the world...
Someone here a few days ago said Trump had the IQ of a toddler. I didn't bother responding, but people who love IQ sometimes don't even know what it means. They know it's good, though.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
And that is betting without endless objections and reviews on infrastructure projects, and appeals against deportation on the grounds that every other country is worse than Britain which is why they came here in the first place.
So basically you are saying that if we introduced the death penalty for lawyers then all would be right with the country?
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
You might be interested in the percentage taken from the large settlements. The R4 docu on this subject interviewed a partner from a Scottish firm who dealt with a billion+ settlement. He claimed they initially were taking 25% but now 10% will suffice.
Absolutely fucking bonkers that lawyers should be on any sort of % for stuff like this. Birmingham council should not offer more, and the binmen should not accept less here. The consequences of this bonkers bit of lawfare need to be played out to the fullest extent and explained to all who observe.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
Best of luck.
In A&E you see all the rich tapestry of human experience. There are no private ones, so it's in all our interests that they function well.
Acute Psychiatic services are very thin in a lot of the country, so the police often wind up involved.
Glad to see that McIlroy and Rose have been doing their bit for our balance of payments overnight. Wonder if Reeves has spent her cut already. Probably.
We still urgently need to cancel the carbon capture nonsense and get back to the North Sea before the infrastructure deteriorates. A resignation as a matter of principle would be welcome.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
Well now I am being admitted. And they seem to have found some lumps and fluid.
Sitting in a working class area of Singapore having traveled there on the driverless Metro and wondered who all these famous names were - Napier, Erskine, Caldecott. Were they adventurers or merely simple Travel Correspondents who helped found the Singaporean tourist industry?
We seem to have lost our sense of exploration of new trading relationships leaving it to the Chinese.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
Well now I am being admitted. And they seem to have found some lumps and fluid.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
Well now I am being admitted. And they seem to have found some lumps and fluid.
Bugger!
Hope you can make a quick and full recovery, Miss Cyclefree.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
Well now I am being admitted. And they seem to have found some lumps and fluid.
Bugger!
Sorry to hear that @Cyclefree. Hope things go better for you.
The speed of the collapse of the rule of law in a country supposedly founded on it is simply astonishing to watch in real time. There were signs in the complete failure to hold Trump to account for his many criminal acts during the Biden years but the increase in pace since January is jaw dropping.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
That doesn't surprise me and is a feature of what they do and what you come in for.
Stroke is second to heart attacks for priority - although I'm surprised you actually went to A&E round here you would be immediately off to a specialist department to attempt to minimise damage.
The sacroiliac tear will be painful but delays won't impact eventual recovery so it's a lower priority while anything of higher priority is sorted out first - and that's where the random delays come from.
Another long night in A&E - this time with acute chest pain when breathing, probably pleural. But may be an embolism.
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
That sounds nasty. All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear). Same A&E.
That doesn't surprise me and is a feature of what they do and what you come in for.
Stroke is second to heart attacks for priority - although I'm surprised you actually went to A&E round here you would be immediately off to a specialist department to attempt to minimise damage.
The sacroiliac tear will be painful but delays won't impact eventual recovery so it's a lower priority while anything of higher priority is sorted out first - and that's where the random delays come from.
Not everywhere can run acute stroke interventional radiology services. I think you need 9 on the rota in order to have 24 hour services.
Labour don’t appear to appreciate that lawyers in cahoots with judges have levered the Equality Act as a backdoor way to implement socialism in one country.
Different jobs have different pay rates? No problem: claim that one job has a different male:female ratio & wield the Equality Act to force the employer to pay them both the same hourly rate! Bonus points if you can point to racial differences, although so far only gender differences have been necessary to win in court.
When the employer goes bankrupt due to being unable to pay the legally enforced back pay that isn’t the lawyers problem, is it? When one side of the pair of jobs goes on strike because their employer is forced to change their terms & conditions to make the two jobs match that isn’t the lawyers problem either. When the basis of market forces for labour break down & it becomes impossible to recruit for certain jobs which are now mandated to be paid the same as other, completely different ones that definitely isn’t the lawyers problem.
(I exaggerate only slightly - but this is a real issue that the government is going to have to face up to somehow, because the lawyers are not going to stop now that they’ve got the bit between their teeth. Judges should not be setting pay rates for radically different jobs - that’s the job of the market &/or the government.)
Don’t blame us. Blame Barbara Castle. She introduced the EqPA
The principle is fine. Some recent decisions seem absurd though.
What is interesting is that we are are following some of the worst ideas from the US.
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
The lawyers get a look in because Parliament makes shit laws or delegate to the (judicially reviewable) executive. However the EqPA (now consolidated into the Equality Act) has not changed. It’s just been sitting there, rarely used, for half a century. It’s only recently people have woken up to it.
It's not the law, it's the judgments. Equal value is fine but lawyers' arbitrary decisions on knocking off when the round ends, or customer-facing retail versus warehouse is bordering on the absurd.
And that is betting without endless objections and reviews on infrastructure projects, and appeals against deportation on the grounds that every other country is worse than Britain which is why they came here in the first place.
So basically you are saying that if we introduced the death penalty for lawyers then all would be right with the country?
Shakespeare put it even more succinctly in Henry VI part 2. We are much misunderstood.
Comments
De Niro and Pacino in the restaurant scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUy2Wx_r0_w
The judicial branch starts legislating, because the politicians are frit or whatever. This is awesome, because all lawyers are progressive…. Aren’t they?
I wonder what the U.K. counterpart to the Federalist Society is?
ETA nerve broke. Have cashed out some for a profit.
Altitude sickness seems to be affecting everyone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7v0dFCWH7k
"Peter Cat Recording Co. - We're Getting Married". Really rather lovely.
Duchambeau in the water again.
Rory McIlroy is the LeBron James of golf, a supremely gifted nice guy without killer instinct. Bryson DeChambeau is the Jake Paul of golf who isn't afraid to do it HIS way and who beat Rory with an amazingly clutch long bunker shot at Pinehurst.
https://x.com/RealSkipBayless/status/1911194373783728451
Pachino chewing all the scenery gets wearing after a while.
I remember enjoying it.
Inevitable....
I like to go to bed early on Sundays.
Maybe.
Many congratulations on winning the grand slam
https://web.archive.org/web/20150825161524/http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/31/entertainment/ca-25films31
Areas in North Yorkshire will be able to grow cabernet sauvignon grapes by 2100, new analysis predicts, as rising temperatures dry out southern France
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/environment/article/hull-new-bordeaux-climate-change-wine-rtzjqsv8v (£££)
Unlike in genteel Hampstead, there has been an insane woman shouting and swearing for the last 2 hours about some domestic dispute to two extraordinarily patient policemen. She's breached a restraining order and also has some issues with Dunelm along with a number of people whose names she's been broadcasting to us all. Quite what she's doing in hospital God only knows.
At the rate I'm going I'll be writing a guide to A&E departments round the UK.
Dunelm is fantastic. John Lewis for those of us who can't afford John Lewis.
Chelsea & Westminster has a good A&E. And a great children’s one.
St Andrews Community Hospital A&E also rates.
At least the police are there. Had A&E experiences where the loons were in and the fuzz were out.
Jefferson thought black people were incapable of understanding Euclid ... at a time when it was unlawful in several states for black people to read books or for someone to teach a black person to read and write. Punishments for writing including having your finger cut off. That's if you were black. Sometimes the law applied even if you were free. You just had to be black.
That's where IQ comes from. "We're better than you. That's why we're right to stop you bettering yourselves. Because we were BORN better, okayyy?" It's the most moronic crap out.
For a benchmark: before the 1960s adult literacy was a minority thing in the world...
Someone here a few days ago said Trump had the IQ of a toddler. I didn't bother responding, but people who love IQ sometimes don't even know what it means. They know it's good, though.
Birmingham council should not offer more, and the binmen should not accept less here.
The consequences of this bonkers bit of lawfare need to be played out to the fullest extent and explained to all who observe.
All the best, Cyclefree.
Recent A&E experiences range from excellent (took someone in with a suspected stroke) to abysmal (sacroiliac tear).
Same A&E.
Trump administration overrode Social Security staff to list immigrants as dead
A senior executive who objected was marched out of his office and put on leave, while earlier warnings about the agency’s deaths database were ignored.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/12/trump-immigrants-dead-social-security/
F1: seems Russell's avoided a penalty. Bit surprised but I'll read past the headline shortly.
Mildly irked having a bet fail by 0.7s but there we are.
In A&E you see all the rich tapestry of human experience. There are no private ones, so it's in all our interests that they function well.
Acute Psychiatic services are very thin in a lot of the country, so the police often wind up involved.
https://bsky.app/profile/aoc.bsky.social/post/3lmqfpz4kc22r
We still urgently need to cancel the carbon capture nonsense and get back to the North Sea before the infrastructure deteriorates. A resignation as a matter of principle would be welcome.
Bugger!
We seem to have lost our sense of exploration of new trading relationships leaving it to the Chinese.
And these driverless Metros are great .
https://bsky.app/profile/youranonjd.bsky.social/post/3lmqlaubhwc2s
Totally normal country.
The problem was that the Democrats didn't want to run a primary..
Stroke is second to heart attacks for priority - although I'm surprised you actually went to A&E round here you would be immediately off to a specialist department to attempt to minimise damage.
The sacroiliac tear will be painful but delays won't impact eventual recovery so it's a lower priority while anything of higher priority is sorted out first - and that's where the random delays come from.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-trump-says-cbs-60-035040999.html
The 1st Amendment only has value if the institutions which sustain it continue to function.
That increasingly hangs in the balance.
We are not totally immune - only this weekend we had a respected journalist and travel writer advocating dictatorship here...
NEW THREAD