Fair play?

[corydoras]

He tried to talk his way out of it on Sundays 'Politics Show', and failed utterly IMO. Apparently "British jobs for British people" means there are jobs available in other countries....

 

I like the 'Incapability Brown' bit though

As I have already said there are many jobs in the European Mainland for those UK citizens who have the right skills.

 

http://www.jobserve.com/JobListing.aspx?sh...386B3A0790FC596

 

http://www.jobserve.com/JobListing.aspx?sh...FB0298C4FF5FD17

 

http://www.jobserve.com/JobListing.aspx?sh...87CA20B035ECA54

Edited February 2, 2009 by corydoras

[Vagabond]

Brown was a fool to make that statement. its legally unenforceable.

....and that is by no means his only piece of folly.

[Newt]

Ladies & gents - this topic is staying polite enough and all the combatants are regulars so I think I will quit watching it. No one will convince anyone of anything beyond what they believe now but it is probably a way to pass the long winter days and useful for that purpose.

 

If it starts getting out of hand, I'd appreciate someone using the 'report' button but otherwise, everyone enjoy themselves.

[captain cojones]

The question is what percentage of the new staff intake were British? If the answer is none, then the protesters are right!!! Then the company had decided NOT to employ British labour.

 

it wasnt "a new staff intake"where do you get this from??

seven companies applied to tender for the project.....5 were british,2 were foriegn.its a specialist job,they have their own teams.

the british companies were uncompetitive.one of the foriegn companies got the job.

its that simple.

what do you expect the winning company to do.sack its own specialists,and take on untried workers from other companies?

these companes,will be tendering and working all over europe,maybe worldwide,they will be going en block from job to job.

the british companies should be looking at WHY they didnt get the job,and trying to be competitive,to ensure THEY get the next one.

[kleinboet]

Rabbit & DavyR - Are you really this dense, or are you putting it on for this forum as I am sure if you had the same attitude as you have on this forum you must be self employed or not employed.

 

When I make a posting using similies as an example, the similies are either ignored or you ask "what has that got to do with the subject?" I am sure if your boss said for you to do something and used a similie to explain it, you wouldn't argue!!!

 

If a nurse, off her own bat and feeling sorry for the patient, OFFERS to pray for them (she didn't actually!) is then castigated for doing so, it is WRONG!! It is wrong, just as in the same way HSE rollocked a man for USING HIS LOVE FOR HIS FELLOW MAN jumped a fence and (probably) saved a womens life!! A policeman is there to uphold the law, but will help a lost person by giving directions, a bus driver is there to take bus fare and drive the bus, but will also give directions, get out of his cab to assist a frail person on to the bus etc. THEY don't get suspended, but a nurse OFFERS to pray for someone and you unbelievers, athiests or whatever you want to call yourselves, make a total issue out of it.

 

WHY!!!! Are you that paranoid that anyone or anything that doesn't fit your box HAS to be dealt with or youir cause will be lost. let me make a phrase like you have on the buses "there are religious people in this world, learn to live with it!"

Edited February 3, 2009 by kleinboet

[DavyR]

Newt, Thank you - a sane man making decisions based on FACT, not what you want!!

 

KB, you don't listen to what most people say (unless they're agreeing with you), but I've noticed that you usually do have regard for what Nurse Judy says. In view of her detailed posting about what is expected of a nurse on duty (a hell of a lot, I think you'll agree), will you now please accept that the "nurse in the news" does have a case to answer and that those of us who are trying to point this out are not just trying to score points because we're "anti-religious"?

 

Speaking for myself, I am both an aetheist and extremely interested in other people's beliefs (preferably ones that have been clearly thought out). I'm going to have a look at the Darwin thread now, to see if you've clarified whether the Bible says that Man is made in God's image, or whether it says that Man is on an evolutionary path towards a god-like state. Because I am genuinely interested.

[DavyR]

I now see that KB has posted while I was typing - There's really no answer to his rantings. I give up.

[Sportsman]

Rabbit & DavyR - Are you really this dense, or are you putting it on for this forum as I am sure if you had the same attitude as you have on this forum you must be self employed or not employed.

 

When I make a posting using similies as an example, the similies are either ignored or you ask "what has that got to do with the subject?" I am sure if your boss said for you to do something and used a similie to explain it, you wouldn't argue!!!

 

If a nurse, off her own bat and feeling sorry for the patient, OFFERS to pray for them (she didn't actually!) is then castigated for doing so, it is WRONG!! It is wrong, just as in the same way HSE rollocked a man for USING HIS LOVE FOR HIS FELLOW MAN jumped a fence and (probably) saved a womens life!! A policeman is there to uphold the law, but will help a lost person by giving directions, a bus driver is there to take bus fare and drive the bus, but will also give directions, get out of his cab to assist a frail person on to the bus etc. THEY don't get suspended, but a nurse OFFERS to pray for someone and you unbelievers, athiests or whatever you want to call yourselves, make a total issue out of it.

 

WHY!!!! Are you that paranoid that anyone or anything that doesn't fit your box HAS to be dealt with or youir cause will be lost. let me make a phrase like you have on the buses "there are religious people in this world, learn to live with it!"

 

 

KB as you obviously don't bother to read other peoples posts I have taken the liberty of copying the last couple of lines of Nurse Judy's post.

It seems it isn't quite as simple as "just offering to pray" for someone is it.

 

Acording to the article in the Guardian she has been in trouble before for giving out prayer cards and has said a patients urine infection cleared up a day after she said a prayer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! nothing to do with the power of antibiotics then...

[Guest Rabbit]

Rabbit & DavyR - Are you really this dense, or are you putting it on for this forum as I am sure if you had the same attitude as you have on this forum you must be self employed or not employed.

 

When I make a posting using similies as an example, the similies are either ignored or you ask "what has that got to do with the subject?" I am sure if your boss said for you to do something and used a similie to explain it, you wouldn't argue!!!

 

If a nurse, off her own bat and feeling sorry for the patient, OFFERS to pray for them (she didn't actually!) is then castigated for doing so, it is WRONG!! It is wrong, just as in the same way HSE rollocked a man for USING HIS LOVE FOR HIS FELLOW MAN jumped a fence and (probably) saved a womens life!! A policeman is there to uphold the law, but will help a lost person by giving directions, a bus driver is there to take bus fare and drive the bus, but will also give directions, get out of his cab to assist a frail person on to the bus etc. THEY don't get suspended, but a nurse OFFERS to pray for someone and you unbelievers, athiests or whatever you want to call yourselves, make a total issue out of it.

 

WHY!!!! Are you that paranoid that anyone or anything that doesn't fit your box HAS to be dealt with or youir cause will be lost. let me make a phrase like you have on the buses "there are religious people in this world, learn to live with it!"

 

Now I am really confused...I supported the nurse

FWIW I do work, and I am self-employed and have no boss as such apart from the wife of course

[Guest Rabbit]

Do you consider everyone who challenges your wildly inaccruate statements as being spiteful and personal?

 

In this case in how much more balanced and considered would you like to be told that secularism does not equal 'fanatical' communism, I think I get it though, you want to post unbalanced sweeping statements which can hardly have been 'considered' for very long, yet expect different in response?

 

Don't flatter yourself on the personal aspect. A short sharp reply to that silly statement would have been appropriate had anyone said it.

Wildly inanacurate Sooooo arrogant even for you Miss Emma