Lets have, why do people hate the public sector?

Monkeypump

DonDaddyD wrote:

You may have a problem with it but it is simply a fact if I say so.

Fixed that too.

Monkeypump

Okay Mr Admin, no more insults from me.

Wrists considered slapped.

W1

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1, I'm not going rise to your petty insults they are frankly beneath me. It is easy to hurl insults from behind a PC and play the keyboard warrior. :roll:

Like threatening two posters on here to wind their necks in? Or is OK if you do it?

And there was nothing insulting - your understanding of contract law is evidently poor.

Oh please, that's just ridiculous. There are far worse things that could be said or done to imply threat than to tell someone to wind their neck in when they have clearly overstepped the mark and crossed the line.

Lets try to keep our feet on the ground here.

Indeed, so please don't throw the "keyboard warrior" tag around when you are guilty as sin.

As an aside, no-one overstepped the mark nor crossed the line with you unless you are a particularly sensitive type - in which case it may be sensible not to go looking for arguments. You started a thread with a purposefully emotive title and didn't like the answers you got nor the fact that people were pointing out the irony of a public worker spending all day on the internet arguing about efficiency in the public sector!

DonDaddyD wrote:

Needless to say that I don't believe my understanding of employment is poor. A contract fixed term may have written into it a notice period. This is seperate to the end date of the contract.

"May" is the key word here. Only you have said that it does.

A 12 month contract is a 12 month term. Ignoring a presumed notice period (because, unless expressly provided for, there won't be) that provides a 12 month period of job security. Now if you want to presume a notice period, then that is your presumption.

I could argue all day (by adding in various presumptions and qualifications, as you have done) that they are comparable, better/worse (depending on my perspective) etc but that wouldn't be legitimate because I'd be making assumptions and implications to evidence my own arguments. That doesn't achieve anything.

Suffice to say, in summary, that "job security" is not a particularly strong argument against giving the public sector 12 month (fixed) contracts. There may be other arguments, but that's a poor one.

DonDaddyD

Amazing that I stopped engaging with this guy 3 pages (and a couple days) ago but they still feel fit to harrass me four times today (one deleted) on this page alone. Two in succession of the administrators post.

Just to drum the point of harrassment and being singled out home. Frankly I'm sick of it.

If the member Monkeypump could leave me alone that would be great!

So to your request, yes, M.Cole.

Monkeypump

DonDaddyD wrote:

Amazing that I stopped engaging with this guy 3 pages (and a couple days) ago but they still feel fit to harrass me four times today (one deleted) on this page alone. Two in succession of the administrators post.

Just to drum the point of harrassment and being singled out home. Frankly I'm sick of it.

If the member Monkeypump could leave me alone that would be great!

So to your request, yes, M.Cole.

The point of my posts was not to harrass you - apologies if you feel this was the case, but as pointed out above, perhaps you're being oversensitive.

Not having the time to write such long threads as you, my posts were merely reactions to what I saw as some absurd points in your arguments (most of which were more explicitely addressed by others).

Again, as others have pointed out, if you're going to react so strongly to people questioning your viewpoints, perhaps you shouldn't ask provocative questions. Or perhaps web forums aren't the place for you? You are well-known for your strong opinions (and long may that remain), but debate is a two-way street. Throwing around sighs, ho-hums, rolly-eyes and various insults won't win you many supporters, and undermines the strength of your argument.

Or, put simply, lighten up - surely none of us take each other THAT seriously on here?

DonDaddyD

And on....

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1, I'm not going rise to your petty insults they are frankly beneath me. It is easy to hurl insults from behind a PC and play the keyboard warrior. :roll:

Like threatening two posters on here to wind their necks in? Or is OK if you do it?

And there was nothing insulting - your understanding of contract law is evidently poor.

Oh please, that's just ridiculous. There are far worse things that could be said or done to imply threat than to tell someone to wind their neck in when they have clearly overstepped the mark and crossed the line.

Lets try to keep our feet on the ground here.

Indeed, so please don't throw the "keyboard warrior" tag around when you are guilty as sin.

Your aggressive posts, attempts at ridicule ("employment law for dummies") is nothing more than an attempt to playout the role of the keyboard warrior. Despite that, today I have attempted to simply respond to you in a constructive manner.

You overstepped the mark, with me, earlier in this thread. I now, in light of the admin, do not wish to go over that.

For five years my efficiency in my job has never been questioned and I haven't always worked in the private sector. I have a system that works for me and my life. I do not need your or anyone elses approval. Anything more on me personally, my job or my salary is personal to me and not up for open discussion. I shouldn't be the victim of flaming and whatever yours or anyone elses thoughts on me are I think that is fair enough.

W1 wrote:

"May" is the key word here. Only you have said that it does.

A 12 month contract is a 12 month term. Ignoring a presumed notice period (because, unless expressly provided for, there won't be) that provides a 12 month period of job security. Now if you want to presume a notice period, then that is your presumption.

I could argue all day (by adding in various presumptions and qualifications, as you have done) that they are comparable, better/worse (depending on my perspective) etc but that wouldn't be legitimate because I'd be making assumptions and implications to evidence my own arguments. That doesn't achieve anything.

Suffice to say, in summary, that "job security" is not a particularly strong argument against giving the public sector 12 month (fixed) contracts. There may be other arguments, but that's a poor one.

I'll make this short.

I am not presuming a notice period. Contracts I have had either fixed or permanent have had them one or three year notice periods. These do not really factor in determining job security over and above the length of the contract. I am aware that contracts may or may not have a notice period. That isn't what is being discussed here.

What is being discussed is this:

DDD wrote:

W1 wrote:

Being asked to be on a 12 month contract actually gives more job securtiy than being subject to 3 months notice!

Makes no sense.

If you have 3 months notice and are on a permanent contract you have more job security than a person on a fixed term contract regardless of their notice period. Why? Because the person on the fixed term contract understands that it is going to end. Hence less security.

You wouldn't compare the period of notice against the length of the contract.

simonaspinall

Sooooo....bikes...they're great, aren't they?

Clever Pun

Have we done the If you don't like your pay/conditions etc get another job?

I'm sure we have but it really should be the end of the thread

W1

DonDaddyD wrote:

And on....

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

W1, I'm not going rise to your petty insults they are frankly beneath me. It is easy to hurl insults from behind a PC and play the keyboard warrior. :roll:

Like threatening two posters on here to wind their necks in? Or is OK if you do it?

And there was nothing insulting - your understanding of contract law is evidently poor.

Oh please, that's just ridiculous. There are far worse things that could be said or done to imply threat than to tell someone to wind their neck in when they have clearly overstepped the mark and crossed the line.

Lets try to keep our feet on the ground here.

Indeed, so please don't throw the "keyboard warrior" tag around when you are guilty as sin.

Your aggressive posts, attempts at ridicule ("employment law for dummies") is nothing more than an attempt to playout the role of the keyboard warrior. Despite that, today I have attempted to simply respond to you in a constructive manner.

You overstepped the mark, with me, earlier in this thread. I now, in light of the admin, do not wish to go over that.

It's a shame that you can see keyboard warriors in everyone but yourself. It's equally a shame that, having had a taste of your own medicine (and evidently not liking it) you engage in exactly the sort of behaviour which you now complain of (including aggressive posts [threats], attempts at ridicule [roll eyes] etc etc).

If you think I overstepped your particularly sensitve "mark" then perhaps you shouldn't encourage threads where you're going to take personal offence? I have no sympathy for victim culture.

DonDaddyD wrote:

I am not presuming a notice period. Contracts I have had either fixed or permanent have had them one or three year notice periods. These do not really factor in determining job security over and above the length of the contract. I am aware that contracts may or may not have a notice period. That isn't what is being discussed here.

Erm, that's exactly what's being discussed here - whether a 12 month fixed term contract provides more job security than a three month notice period.

DonDaddyD wrote:

What is being discussed is this:

DDD wrote:

W1 wrote:

Being asked to be on a 12 month contract actually gives more job securtiy than being subject to 3 months notice!

Makes no sense.

If you have 3 months notice and are on a permanent contract you have more job security than a person on a fixed term contract regardless of their notice period. Why? Because the person on the fixed term contract understands that it is going to end. Hence less security.

You wouldn't compare the period of notice against the length of the contract.

That's only your opinion, it's certainly not a fact as you present it to be.

I don't agree - knowing that something is going to end in 12 months time is not the same as constantly being aware that it could end in three months. I would argue it gives knowledge over a longer period of time and that is more secure than the unknown.

Job security is obviously subjective - I'd be surprised (bearing in mind the proposed cuts next month) if public sector employees didn't jump at fixing a year long contract now in order to have better job securitiy....

W1

Clever Pun wrote:

Have we done the If you don't like your pay/conditions etc get another job?

I'm sure we have but it really should be the end of the thread

We did that in the Union bashing thread.

sc999cs

I'd be interested to know what sector some of the contributors to this thread work in. They obviously have far too much time on their hands...

DonDaddyD

Monkeypump wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Amazing that I stopped engaging with this guy 3 pages (and a couple days) ago but they still feel fit to harrass me four times today (one deleted) on this page alone.  Two in succession of the administrators post. 
 
Just to drum the point of harassment and being singled out home.  Frankly I'm sick of it.
 
If the member Monkeypump could leave me alone that would be great!
 
So to your request, yes, M.Cole.

 
The point of my posts was not to harrass you - apologies if you feel this was the case, but as pointed out above, perhaps you're being oversensitive.
 
Not having the time to write such long threads as you, my posts were merely reactions to what I saw as some absurd points in your arguments (most of which were more explicitly addressed by others).
 
Again, as others have pointed out, if you're going to react so strongly to people questioning your viewpoints, perhaps you shouldn't ask provocative questions. Or perhaps web forums aren't the place for you? You are well-known for your strong opinions (and long may that remain), but debate is a two-way street. Throwing around sighs, ho-hums, rolly-eyes and various insults won't win you many supporters, and undermines the strength of your argument.
 
Or, put simply, lighten up - surely none of us take each other THAT seriously on here?

 
Well thank you for that loaded reply complete with backhanded apology.
 
OK so I'm being oversensitive and do not understand the art of debating.  Let us take a look at your art of debate and constructive contribution in this thread…
 
This was your first post in this thread:  (It was a response to another member)
 

Mokeypump wrote:

Doesn't seem like it (despite the repeated "wind you neck in" comments). It's obviously because DDD is at work, feet up on the desk, populating this thread. That's gotta be calming... very calming...

 
Here's another, again about me but addressed to another member:
 

Gimme a chance - I am at work and don't have the same amount of free time as DDD.

 
At this point I’ve yet to respond to you yet.
 
This was your first post directly aimed at me. My post that you are quoting was in a response to another member:
 

Monkeypump wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

A recipe
 
A touch of presumption
A dash of arrogance
Add a little sprinkle of condescension
Add a splash of patronisation
 
You have no cluie what my income depends on.

 
A recipe you've not been unfamiliar with in the past...

 
Oh and then there is this:
 

Monkeypump wrote:

Any chance of you being able to justify this apparently-made-up-and-completely-anecdotal comment?
 
I'm sure you've got time whilst on your day off/putting your feet up/wasting our taxes/whatever-the-man-of-mystery-says-he's-up-to, and I shouldn't imagine you want to leave yourself open to personal attack.

 
Yes, I'm seeing some friendly, wonderful and delightful examples of conversation in the above examples.  They are completely insightful and absolutely not an attack on any one individual or an attempt to harass or flame. 
 
It’s pathetic to take up issue with someone spend days doing so and then hide and claim innocence behind backhanded comments.  It’s not clever it does not impress anyone.  It’s easy to hide behind a PC and hurl insults.
 
You can accuse me of being oversensitive and that I basically do not know how to debate.  The evidence is there, you've done nothing but attack, harass and make thinly veiled attempts to flame me in this thread.  You actually hardly engage with anyone else and certainly, of the times you do you aim a pointed attacks at myself (examples above)  – This in itself is trolling.
 
Dude, you’re hiding behind a PC.
 
I really don’t think there is anything more to say.

tailwindhome

Always Tyred & Porgy wrote:

Walk towards the light

jonginge

TailWindHome wrote:

Always Tyred & Porgy wrote:

Walk towards the light

Seriously, guys, step away from the thread. Let it go

Monkeypump

DonDaddyD wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Amazing that I stopped engaging with this guy 3 pages (and a couple days) ago but they still feel fit to harrass me four times today (one deleted) on this page alone.  Two in succession of the administrators post. 
 
Just to drum the point of harassment and being singled out home.  Frankly I'm sick of it.
 
If the member Monkeypump could leave me alone that would be great!
 
So to your request, yes, M.Cole.

 
The point of my posts was not to harrass you - apologies if you feel this was the case, but as pointed out above, perhaps you're being oversensitive.
 
Not having the time to write such long threads as you, my posts were merely reactions to what I saw as some absurd points in your arguments (most of which were more explicitly addressed by others).
 
Again, as others have pointed out, if you're going to react so strongly to people questioning your viewpoints, perhaps you shouldn't ask provocative questions. Or perhaps web forums aren't the place for you? You are well-known for your strong opinions (and long may that remain), but debate is a two-way street. Throwing around sighs, ho-hums, rolly-eyes and various insults won't win you many supporters, and undermines the strength of your argument.
 
Or, put simply, lighten up - surely none of us take each other THAT seriously on here?

 
Well thank you for that loaded reply complete with backhanded apology.
 
OK so I'm being oversensitive and do not understand the art of debating.  Let us take a look at your art of debate and constructive contribution in this thread…
 
This was your first post in this thread:  (It was a response to another member)
 

Mokeypump wrote:

Doesn't seem like it (despite the repeated "wind you neck in" comments). It's obviously because DDD is at work, feet up on the desk, populating this thread. That's gotta be calming... very calming...

 
Here's another, again about me but addressed to another member:
 

Gimme a chance - I am at work and don't have the same amount of free time as DDD.

 
At this point I’ve yet to respond to you yet.
 
This was your first post directly aimed at me. My post that you are quoting was in a response to another member:
 

Monkeypump wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

A recipe
 
A touch of presumption
A dash of arrogance
Add a little sprinkle of condescension
Add a splash of patronisation
 
You have no cluie what my income depends on.

 
A recipe you've not been unfamiliar with in the past...

 
Oh and then there is this:
 

Monkeypump wrote:

Any chance of you being able to justify this apparently-made-up-and-completely-anecdotal comment?
 
I'm sure you've got time whilst on your day off/putting your feet up/wasting our taxes/whatever-the-man-of-mystery-says-he's-up-to, and I shouldn't imagine you want to leave yourself open to personal attack.

 
Yes, I'm seeing some friendly, wonderful and delightful examples of conversation in the above examples.  They are completely insightful and absolutely not an attack on any one individual or an attempt to harass or flame. 
 
It’s pathetic to take up issue with someone spend days doing so and then hide and claim innocence behind backhanded comments.  It’s not clever it does not impress anyone.  It’s easy to hide behind a PC and hurl insults.
 
You can accuse me of being oversensitive and that I basically do not know how to debate.  The evidence is there, you've done nothing but attack, harass and make thinly veiled attempts to flame me in this thread.  You actually hardly engage with anyone else and certainly, of the times you do you aim a pointed attacks at myself (examples above)  – This in itself is trolling.
 
Dude, you’re hiding behind a PC.
 
I really don’t think there is anything more to say.

My dear DDD, irony really is lost on you, isn't it?

At the risk of further warnings or being banned, I will bait, harrass or insult you no more....

greg66_tri_v2.0

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

rjsterry

Indeed. DDD, go and watch some Antiques Roadshow on iPlayer, let Ms Bruce work her magic, or whatever. But stop reading this thread, for everyone's sake.

cee

i ordered a nasal hair trimmer on amazon today.

that is all.

sc999cs

cee wrote:

i ordered a nasal hair trimmer on amazon today.

that is all.

I didn't need to know that but it is still more interesting than most of this thread...

lost_in_thought

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

jonginge

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

Argh. Don't make me go back and read through the thread!

greg66_tri_v2.0

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

cjcp

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

Surely a giant squid is much harder.

andyrm

Did we ever work out who would win out of Optimus Prime and Jesus?

rjsterry

On the basis that they actually exist - the Giant Squid, that is.

Clever Pun

cjcp wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

Surely a giant squid is much harder.

depends if it's still frozen

cjcp

Clever Pun wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

Surely a giant squid is much harder.

depends if it's still frozen

Who's gonna catch it to freeze it? Megashark certainly ain't, and Giant Octopus is a big girl.

Clever Pun

cjcp wrote:

Clever Pun wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

Surely a giant squid is much harder.

depends if it's still frozen

Who's gonna catch it to freeze it? Megashark certainly ain't, and Giant Octopus is a big girl.

Both Megashark and Giant Octopus were frozen millions of years ago and were thawed by reasearch in the arctic... is Giant Squid still there as I'm pretty sure they've have mentioned it if it got out too

cjcp

Clever Pun wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Clever Pun wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

Surely a giant squid is much harder.

depends if it's still frozen

Who's gonna catch it to freeze it? Megashark certainly ain't, and Giant Octopus is a big girl.

Both Megashark and Giant Octopus were frozen millions of years ago and were thawed by reasearch in the arctic... is Giant Squid still there as I'm pretty sure they've have mentioned it if it got out too

Nope. He punched his way out of the ice. He's that hard.

greg66_tri_v2.0

cjcp wrote:

Clever Pun wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Megashark and the Giant Octopus wrote:

Can we get back in the water?

Wait, I thought Giant Octopus was already in the water, holding Megashark aloft for an indefinite period of time?

It was.

But then everyone stopped watching, and wandered off to watch the argument. So Megashark and Giant Octopus agreed a time out, and have been sunning themselves on the pier ever since, sipping margaritas (they *love* the salt around the edge of the glass. Reminds them of home).

It's not like they fight for fun, you know.

Surely a giant squid is much harder.

depends if it's still frozen

Who's gonna catch it to freeze it? Megashark certainly ain't, and Giant Octopus is a big girl.

I have a feeling that I may regret this, but the only thing on this planet which is a match for Giant Squid is ...

MEGASPERM WHALE!

I'm already regretting the introduction of any concept of "megasperm".