agg221

I disagree with your comment concerning job security - until recently it was true but the school I'm referring to is the one my wife works at, and is state sector. The county has declined to honour its service agreement, on the grounds that it's run out of budget, so the school has made redundancies three years running, and if you look at the overall intention announced yesterday to scale up redundancies in the public sector to 710,000 that's hardly secure. Also speaking from personal experience, family time isn't really a major factor - we try to get half an hour a day - nursery shuts at 6.00, half an hour to get the children home, then half an hour until bedtime - which I try to make. I am also salaried, hence in the same position as you with regard to ability to increase earnings - i.e. working harder/longer hours is done because it's needed, not because it earns more. I am, however, in the unusual position of working for an organisation which performs exceptionally well in recessions. I am therefore flat-out busy to keep things running for my staff and clients. However, for many on this forum, in the self-employed category, this is not the case. The most informed source I can find on economic viability of state sector pensions is the Hutton report. It does not say they are uneconomic, or unaffordable - it's online and searchable for any word you care look for and those words are not there. What is undoubtedly true is that they are no longer the norm, but then what's the norm these days, and what should be? As a government, you make the rules. You can treat your employees however you like - they can enforce the pension terms they're proposing, and probably will, so whether it happens or not is a moot point. However, if you take away the incentives to stay you'll lose the able members of a profession. In the grand scheme of things, this is a short-term economic situation. Pension payments will not be altered in the lifetime of this recession. It's not a solution to the economic crisis - it's a convenient badge to slip through a political philosophy. If you really want to solve the economic situation, you need confidence, which will only come on a global scale. You need something to export - goods or services, to rectify the balance of trade deficit by either making things cost effectively in the UK for local use to ameliorate the need for imports, or to export. Anyone with skills to contribute to this is part of the solution. Anyone who peripherally contributes to support those people (educators, health professionals etc) is beneficial. Anyone who only creates UK internal redistribution of wealth is parasitic. How's this for a controversial thought, why don't people in the arb sector (excluding forestry and firewood which are products rather than services), the construction sector, retail sector and the other sectors which are currently over-staffed stop whinging about how it's all the public sector's fault and go and re-train to do something more valuable that makes a contribution to the recovery..... Alec

I'm well aware of TLRs. I'm well aware of the reality of how available they are when your school is broke, and in a county that is doing well, so doesn't get national average budget. I'm aware of 'Years' being turned into 'Houses' because there's a HOY role but not an HOH role, so all the HOYs lose their managment role and go back to classroom teachers, but still do the same job. I'm well aware of starting in a school, and gaining experience, and taking on more responsibility, and being paid less. I know quite a few people in this position. I'm well aware of redundancies three years in a row in a school, which has reduced its headcount by 20%, to pay to mend the roof. I'm not complaining, merely observing. For reference, I'm in the private sector. I have the odd situation of an ongoing final salary pension scheme, via massive corporate contributions for a bizzare series of tax reasons; my contribution to it is also significant, but may well go down eventually. Due to hereditary life expectancy, I don't anticipate retiring, but it will pay a good income to my wife. I gave up lunch breaks longer ago than I can remember and got home early today, before 7 - youngest daughter goes to bed at 7 and I try to see her to say goodnight. My wife beat me home by half an hour, which is reasonable as she had left half an hour before me, and had to pick up the kids on the way home. I haven't had to start again tonight as I got ahead of things on a deadline today. My wife is still working and will stop when she goes to bed at midnight. She will be doing lesson planning on Saturday and Sunday while the kids have their naps. I will be writing collaborative funding proposals to the EU for submission on Tuesday, interspersed with building our extension, as it's the only way we'll afford to make the house big enough for the children to each have their own rooms. I wouldn't say either of us are slacking - if anyone thinks differently that's their business! I get to compare public and private sector pay changes directly. We've both been working ~15yrs. Private sector, I've had pay rises of >5% in good times, 0% in bad times. Teaching, biggest rise I've seen my wife get was 3%, now 3yr pay freeze, followed by 2yrs at 1%. If I take the best equivalent entry grade people, just based on service type rises, then in my industry it will be +150% overall. In teaching it will be +80%. Threads like this start with 'them and us'. The press start with 'them and us'. Only those of us who live 'both of us together' are ever going to grasp that it's not all down to the other camp. There are pros and cons - if you work more hours in an hourly paid job, you get paid more. If you work harder to keep a company going in bad times, you may well be recognised and rewarded for your contribution in better times. If you are in a public sector role, you won't, and you will still be resented. If you take your argument about the customer being right to its logical conclusion, perhaps the teachers, nurses, binmen etc. should all leave if they don't like it. Trouble is, nobody would actually like it if they did. Alec

Really? So you're suggesting that every time I hire someone to do something for me at an agreed price I should shaft them halfway through the contract by telling them I'm not paying what I originally agreed, and they'll be happy? Those with private pensions which went bust have now been given up to 90% of the original pension back, even those whose pension pots went under before the government bale-out was put in place. Try looking at the Lister-Petter situation for example: Notified, Qualifying and Non-Qualifying Schemes It's not universal, granted, but it's not as black and white as you suggest. Really? So if the PS has been such a fantastic and cushy number all these years, so easy to get in to, so little to do, such fantastic pay, brilliant benefits etc. why aren't you in it? Alec

Please check the calculation I gave. It's not the wage, it's what they're left with as a gross after the obligatory costs of getting in to the profession, and getting the benefit of the pension. If the pension goes, they take home more (based on £20k gross instead) but have no pension contribution from their employer. And for reference, what teachers earn is a matter of public record: Teaching salary scales - TDA Yes, you can read the inner London superhead figures if you want, but the 'real' scale is the main pay scale, which ranges from £21,588 to £31,552. It's a progression over 7yrs. Note, these figures are before you've serviced your debt or made any pension contribution. The reason for the discrepancy in figures for my original calculation is that the terms of the loan do not require that you start making repayments before you cross the threshold. Alec

The problem is that some of them have been paying pension contributions all their working lives, while others have not. The ones who've been paying at top level have been making a contribution sufficient to cover the pension cost, but are being penalised to make up the difference in the ones who haven't been paying, and to cover this fact up the relevant pension pot is now 18months overdue on revaluation - which in the private sector would see the trustees in court. Same employer, different terms. How's this for an analogy - you take on a major contract on agreed terms. It's full time for 2yrs, guaranteed, and you need to make an investment in some kit to deliver it. The contract is big enough that there's another company delivering a different part of it at the same time, who have agreed their own terms with the same employer. 6months in, your employer comes to you and says that, because he's only got a total budget available, and he's got to pay the other company more, he's going to cut your rate by 5%. You say, 'but I've got a contract'. He says, 'yes, but I'm big enough to re-write the contract and there's nothing you can do about it'. You could leave, but you've got not orderbook to fall back on and a whole load of debt to service on the kit, or you can stay, accept it, tighten your belt and carry on. In either case, are you happy with your employer? If so, are you suggesting that it's fine for anyone employing you to do a job to announce partway through the job that they'll only pay you a reduced amount for the remainder of the job, and your alternative is to stop and walk? Alec

Which particular aspect of my calculation (earlier post) do you disagree with? Alec

1. With regard to nurses, agency staff cost more than permanent staff, both in salary and agency fees, so no hospital with an eye to costs (as they all do in these days of hospital managers) is going to voluntarily take on agency staff rather than permanent staff. If you paid to have a private assessment, I take it you are not living on the bread line? 2. For reference, my wife is a teacher, my mother was a teacher, as was my aunt. I therefore have close connection with the figures. £17.5k is not the overall salary, it's the gross base you are left with on your starting salary after servicing your obligatory debt, and deducting your pension contribution (unlike other bits of the public sector, they pay for it!). Yes, it goes up on a service basis. It tops out at £30k gross, which after pension deduction and servicing your debt leaves you with £22k gross before tax and NI. You also need to take into account the years of not earning while getting qualified. I'm not trying to portray teachers as having a marginal, poverty driven existence, merely to correct some of the portrayals of gold-plated lifestyles at the taxpayer's expense. Yes it is taxpayer's money, but the alternative is to either require everyone to educate their children privately, or down-rate the standard of teachers, which is fine for some ultimate professions, but a little tricky if we still want to give children an education able to produce engineers, scientists, doctors or any other highly skilled professionals with the ability to contribute to our national ability to do anything worthwhile on either a social or economic level. 39 weeks is another simplification. Try calculating it as hours instead, taking into account break, lunchtime and after school duties (do you get a lunch break? my wife doesn't 3 days a week) planning time and marking time, not just time spent in front of a class. What are you doing at the moment? My wife is currently marking, which is normal for this hour in term time. 3. In 2007, teachers recognised the need for financial change with regard to their pension provisions. They increased their contributions and pension age, in a deal which was agreed with their employers to be sufficient to meet the ongoing investment requirement in their pension fund. Their pension fund has (illegally) not been revalued since, and the contribution they're making may well be sufficient that, when invested wisely, as it has been over the past 40yrs, it will grow to meet the needs of the scheme's members. As such, increasing the contribution they make achieves only one end - allowing the government to pay more into the schemes of other public sector workers, most notably civil servants, who currently receive their pension directly from the state. I'd say that would be a bit annoying, wouldn't you? Alec Alec

Oh and Clarkson, very funny when not taken out of context, and the Unions were particularly stupid in their reaction. Only problem with Clarkson is that he's a friend of David Cameron apparently, which shows very poor taste! Alec

The second comment illustrates the error in the assumption made with the first. The nursing profession is a very good example of what things would be like if private companies ran it. It has now been made sufficiently unattractive as a profession that in high cost areas, such as the South East, it is impossible to attract or retain permanent staff in sufficient numbers. So, the shortfall is made up by (privately supplied) nursing staff, who now in some cases make up 80% of ward staff. They're temporary, they don't care, and they are better paid. How do I know this? Because my Mum spent 6months in hospital in Dartford in 2008 and during her stay the (private, agency) nurses managed to give her medicine which her notes clearly stated she was allergic to, so she nearly died (again), and to send her home with deep vein thrombosis, resulting in a her being rushed to hospital again, having nearly died for the third time. Think I'm exaggerating? You'll be able to get the court case notes sometime around next April (which is why I won't go into any further details). Did you read my analysis of how 'incredible' the teachers package really is? Do you believe a salary based on a taxed £17.5k to be 'incredible' (in a good sense or a bad sense), or do you not believe me? Or is there some other 'benefit' that you think teachers have? Alec

Really? Care to quote some references on that, or did you read it in the Daily Mail? Can you actually quote any average salaries for these jobs in private and public sectors? Not a personally directed comment, but there is a lot of rubbish talked, by a lot of people with no, or very little, knowledge, derived from biased sources. Some facts: Why do public sector workers still have final salary pensions while the private sector ones collapsed? Simple - in the 1990s when the markets were performing well, a lot of private sector schemes took pensions 'holidays' where they didn't pay in for a few years. When the markets dipped, they were very short on funds, so collapsed. It was also legal to invest the pension fund back into your own company, which trustees often did, as a source of loan funds on favourable interest rates. Company goes under, pension pot's gone. The government of the day ended up bailing out company pension funds. To stop this happening again, they put very stringent requirements on the value of the fund, what it could be invested in, and the assumptions to be made on the liabilities to be met. For example, pension fund 'hole' valuations now assume that the life expectancy for a 40yr old man is 93 for liability purposes. Would be nice, but a bit optimistic perhaps? Funds were also required to hold enough value to meet their future liabilities, rather than, as had always previously been the case, to allow their future employees to cover the current liabilities, and so on ad infinitum. The first two factors resulted in the collapse of funds, the latter two factors resulted in schemes finding they couldn't meet their massively revised, predicted liabilities and closing. So what were public sector workers doing in the meantime? Well, it varies, but in the case of teachers, steadily paying in from Paycheque 1 to their very last paycheque, at 6%. No pensions holiday, no dodgy investment practice. It is a legal requirement (government legislation) to carry out a valuation of the fund liabilities every 3yrs. It's 4.5yrs since the Department of Education last conducted one. Given the position it was in at the last one, and the likely performance over the past interval, why do you think that might be? Simple, because probably it isn't costing anybody anything like as much as the government would like to apply as tax on pensions. And no, it's not unaffordable. The Hutton report does not contain the word 'unaffordable' at any point. Try searching it (it's on line). In fact, public pensions will drop in cost to the taxpayer after a peak in 2011, so we're already on the down slope. Another fact about teaching. Starting salary of £25k after a 4yr course, which is virtually impossible to come out of without a >£70k debt, to be serviced at £5k/year, straight off the gross, and will never be paid off, so is for life. To get their pension, take a further 6% of the £25k off, rising to 10% if the government get the current plan through, so that's a gross of £17.5k to work with. Rather different picture from that in the press, isn't it. Sub-inflation pay rise for 3yrs, pay freeze for 3yrs, 1% cap for 2yrs. Can't exactly just 'sell a few more loads of lessons (logs), work weekends, up their price a bit on the 'extras' can they? Or maybe, if the press are to be believed, teachers are just free childcare. Fine, so they don't need 4yr degree courses then do they, except the government says they do. Really? Most public sector workers are providing a service. You might think you don't want the service - fine. Imagine you could opt out. So, you don't have to pay NI or income tax, so you're maybe £8k per year better off on £30k gross? Do you think you can educate your kids for £8k? So you have an accident in a tree, or your parents are sick, how much hospital care do you get for £8k? If your house is burning down, do you want the fire brigade to turn up? If you're burgled, or your wife is mugged, or your kit is stolen, do you want to have to pay the police to turn up? Do you want your bins collected? Do you want your neighbour to build a massive wall outside your house, right against your windows, and not have any recourse to a planning system to get it taken down, or not built in the first place? Assuming you want these services, you have to pay tax to cover them. Or do you think the people who deliver them should do it out of the goodness of their hearts? Or maybe they should live on benefits and do it as volunteers - oh yes, there wouldn't be any benefits as they're paid for by tax. So, if you get injured you'd better have some very good insurance because you're not getting any healthcare or housing benefit or sickness benefits. Insurance would be priced based on risk, and arb is high risk... Or perhaps, if they want living wages they should all go and get 'real' jobs? If they do that, who is going to provide the services when you want them? Simple - the dregs and wasters who can't do anything else. Fine, if you want your parents nursed by monkeys, pay them peanuts. It's simple really. If you want public services, which most people do, then they need to be paid for. That includes paying people to deliver them, and if you want them delivered properly then you need to pay a good enough wage to get good people to do them. Yes, there has been a lot of waste, some of which could have been avoided, but lumping everyone whose wages are paid by the state into one bracket is only possible if you are very uninformed, very bigoted, or gullible enough to believe government propaganda (any colour of government) or gutter press (any political persuasion). Alec

I mix mine with the autumn leaves which really accelerates rotting. By spring it's broken down and ready to use as a mulch. Probably saleable, but all mine goes round the fruit trees (over a sheet of cardboard) to keep the weeds off. Alec

Don't think it's pissardii or myrobalan - they tend to have a stiff, dense upright habit. The height and habit look about right for St. Julien which is a common stock that suckers (so you get it if a purple leaved variety has been grafted on to it and it comes up from the roots). Alec

I think prunus, possibly St. Julien. Alec

Try some joiners - windows in particular. We should be using Douglas for some of our windows (listed) but will probably end up using sapele as it's cheaper! It would be interesting to know how much it would work out delivered to Essex. If you happen to have some ready in the nearish future, we could be persuaded..... Alec

I rate Sovereign - had things from them before which have worked well, e.g. they're the only people I know who supply a vapour permeable damp proofing additive for plaster, so you can use it with lime mortar. Having had a look at the MSDS, Sovaq may work well for kiln drying. It's designed to kill latent fungi, so should be persistent for the duration of the cycle. What it won't do is protect long-term in the way that borates do. It's gradually biodegradable, which from an environmental perspective is why it scores over borates, but from a practical perspective it's less effective as a long term preservative. Alec

If you only use this saw very occasionally, do you drain out the tank in between? If not, it's quite possible that you're getting fuel degradation - bad fuel can wreck a piston inside one tankfull. I would ask them to show you the damaged piston - if it's scored up then it's wrecked, which will explain why it won't start. It doesn't tell you the root cause though, and since it's done it before I would say they didn't find the cause last time and just cured the symptoms. At this point, I would be looking for air leaks. My 066 died without ever over-revving, so you can't always tell by what it sounded like. If you do only run it occasionally, may be worth considering Aspen as it can be left in the tank indefinitely so you don't have to drain off and waste fuel, or get damage if you forget. The high price per litre is less of an issue if the total consumption is low. Alec

Someone misinterpreted your avatar as a phallic symbol? Alec

Glyn Hall is a former colleague of mine - I've always thought his work to be excellent. Phone number on the picture on his web page. Untitled Document Alec

I haven't found anything categorical on different mix ratios. There are two schools of thought - one is that a higher oil mix is needed in line with the spec. on the kit. The other is that modern oils are much better designed, so the mix ratio can be changed over to the modern mix. I must admit that in the two older 2-stroke engines I have, I've just run straight Aspen. One is a Stihl 076, which was very much designed as a 25:1 engine, but they didn't change the design right up through to when they stopped making the TS760 a couple of years back, and that was fine on the 50:1, so seems logical to change mix to the modern spec. The other one is Geoff's old Allen Scythe - 1950s, 16:1 with Castrol marked up on the filler cap. I have run it on straight Aspen since I got it and it's been worked quite hard. No sign of problems so far - no weak running, difficulty idling or any other problems (well, other than the normal that it's an evil machine which tries to kill people, including me, anyway). Both have had a good 20l through, which would be more than enough "bad" fuel to ruin an engine. Not sure if this helps with your question, but I don't think you'll get a definitive answer - a case of deciding what you're prepared to chance, and seeing if it works. Alec

Some people seem to get away with it for years - others don't. I didn't, and developed a rather expensive barrel and piston habit. There were other factors, but this was one I could eliminate. To be honest, that was the main reason I switched, as you can buy a lot of Aspen for the price of a genuine Stihl pot and piston - the health benefits became apparent when I stopped coming in after a day's milling feeling sick with a bad headache. The fact that the carcinogens have been removed/excluded was a later, and very welcome discovery. Alec

Question on draining saws - because if you don't use them for a couple of weeks the fuel goes off and you risk seizing the piston and wrecking it. Question on why pump fuel is an issue - because in a 4-stroke engine you have separate lubrication, so in a car the fuel is effectively all burnt, and the remaining hydrocarbons are picked up in the catalytic converter. In a 2-stroke engine the fuel is also the lubricant. As such, approximately 1/3 of the fuel passes straight out of the exhaust unburnt. Pump unleaded is approximately 2% benzene, so your chainsaw exhaust contains approximately 0.66% benzene. Benzene is a known carcinogen. Question on how you get exposed to exhaust - the concentration depends on what you're doing - if you're milling, forestry type felling, cutting stumps low or using a hedge trimmer your head is very near the exhaust. Question on how long the effects take to show up - think of lung cancer - few smokers die in their 20s, not many in their 30s, more in their 40s, a lot in their 50s/60s cf. non-smoking population with a 15-20yr greater life expectancy. Alec

I like the fact that you don't end up draining tanks. I like the fact that I don't feel ill. However, in the long run what I really is the fact that I'm not exposing myself to carcinogens. Having watched my Dad die of cancer, this is particularly close to home - we would have paid anything for treatment, but there weren't any options. Compared to that, Aspen is cheap. Alec

I think it's an excellent idea, and an excellent syllabus. I agree that the majority of users may in theory just cut up firewood. However, this doesn't apply to all of them. I agree with Marka and Harvey B Davidson's comments - I'm totally unqualified, can't justify the cost of a CS course as I don't need tickets etc, but at the price quoted, with the syllabus proposed, would be really interested in going along. There are probably enough of us out there who fit this bracket - we're not out to take people's livelihoods away, but we do do a lot more than just cut up firewood! As such, please don't dumb down the content - amateur does not inherently equal idiot. The closest equivalent course I can think of is the small wood owners one, but it's a lot longer (and not very geographically convenient). Alec

It all makes my current 5 look very modest. Mind you, I'm hoping to go and get another one shortly, and if an 090G Super shows up, I know I won't be able to resist. Alec

Thanks for that, very informative. I know techniques like this aren't the first choice but they're very useful to know when they're the best available option. Alec