kevinjohnsonmbe

Every little counts.... Tesco pays out £900m to shareholders despite securing £585m tax break from government WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM The London Economic | The retailer said it would receive £585 million worth of taxpayer relief as part of the business... Can’t wait for HMRC to come knocking when it’s time to pay for this great cash give away bonanza.

Dreadful job today. Out of the blue, phone call to ask if I could dig a hole. Mate lost 1 of his Newfoundlands today. Got it done but 3 blokes blubbing like babies. ?

Just about to commence the C19 pseudo lock-down habitual excessive alcohol consumption myself! Coronavirus: Wine sales rise 'dramatically' as UK locked down NEWS.SKY.COM UK-based producer Chapel Down said sales online had multiplied "dramatically" at a time when pubs and other...

What was the SP on the van Egger?

Not these last 15 or so years since Mrs J arrived on the scene Mr C! Prior to that, maybe....

Prickly bastards more likely.....

I have a desperately sinking feeling that you choose your words carefully Mr C ??

If it were a choice of having a pint with him or the porcine, cnutish, Labour Mayoress of recent infamy - who would you choose K? I s’pose there’s always the chance of a knee trembler against the bins with miss piggy (assuming enough ale had been consumed to dull out her inevitable, whiny, BS and dull the senses enough to tolerate it til last orders.) On reflection...... Pass the parade gloss mucker I’m off to iron my black shirt ???

Man goes to the park to complain about how many people there are in the park NEWSTHUMP.COM Local busybody Simon Williams is looking forward to a trip to the park today, where he will post photos of other people...

I've rather struggled to understand and form a response to this post. The first point is a statement of the blindingly obvious. The second is a little bit more complex. As a registered charity and a limited company the AA are bound by certain laws, responsibilities and by their own constitution so it is not quite as simple as saying they can take any stance they like. It is entirely appropriate however for any entity to take, or leave, any advice or guidance provided by the AA - unless those entities are bound by membership to adopt and abide by such guidance. Herein lies a part of the problem. If an entity is associated by membership with the AA, they may be bound by their terms & conditions to abide by AA guidance on penalty of exclusion. It is, of course, an entirely voluntary membership. But it has more far reaching effect across the broader non affiliated profession since the AA presents itself as an independent voice, free to influence decision makers and challenge actions and policy and it DOES hold a position of influence within the industry. I have no doubt that much good work is achieved - my personal view is, however, that the position adopted with regard to C19 has, and remains, inconsistent with clearly stated government guidance. The third point, I guess it would be possible to agree that the 'confusion' has not been exclusive to this sector and as such, some leeway is appropriate. Point 4, brilliant, loving the fish example! But more seriously (and linking back to your previous post about 2 rope working) I have to agree, when something is obviously ridiculous, it gets ignored. If we combine the 2 rope issue and this issue (in such close succession) it doesn't provide as strong a case for new membership as might be hoped... Point 5, Again, agreed, I don't think it has ever been suggested as being simple. The guidance is simple, the implementation less so - but still entirely achievable. I certainly haven't (intentionally) suggested it is simple or business as usual in the points I've presented. I'm guessing most people are still taking the mail delivered to their house and opening it? I think it is a good deal easier to find reasons not to carry on working than it is to find means of doing so. And finally, 6, I think the joint HSE, TUC, CBI statement makes quite clear that business should be encouraged to continue where PHE guidelines can be achieved. They certainly didn't make any reference to essential / non essential works, neither has any official government statement that I've seen to date. These types of localised 'interpretations' of government statements are being made by, and reported in the media, by lower tier organisations and they are inappropriate. IMHO (removes fish from mouth to drink wine)

Similarly, respectfully, I’d suggest the main question, as per thread title, is the interpretation by many of the stance and guidance being presented by AA on the individuals’ decision making as regards work / not to work. Whilst AA advice appears to have swung, first one way, then the other, it still appears to retain an element of qualification (essential / non essential) which, can only be assumed to be, some form of organisational interpretation of very clear published government guidance and which, doubtless, has contributed to a widespread industry close down which is counter to government guidance. Agreed, how to work more safely is a useful approach. A clear and unequivocal acknowledgement of the “go to work if you absolutely can not work from home” would have been a better starting point perhaps.

I’d just suggest Paul, the premise above seems to proffer some form of qualification of the nature of works which might be undertaken ie safety / inf related = justified, routine = not justified. This appears to be directly at odds with published guidance: Firms that can safely stay open and support livelihoods should not be forced to close by misunderstandings about government guidance. Coronavirus: A joint statement between HSE, the TUC and the CBI - HSE Media Centre PRESS.HSE.GOV.UK This is an extremely worrying time for firms and workers. We know many workers, union reps and employers have...

Listen to the podcast above it is bang on the money and the fact that discussions such as that are wholly absent from all the mainstream media platforms should give us all pause for thought. The speed, the enthusiasm, the willingness and the whole hearted embrace of the current deviations from civic, government and libertarian norms are truly staggering. When did we start asking the police if we could go to work?

What? Had a look, can’t see anything too controversial??

How many Arb wholesale / retail outlets were selling pasta in December? ? (read to the end before chipping in - how many times do I have to tell myself?)

I’m increasingly of the mind that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is Inherently flawed and unsustainable. Of course simplicity has its advantages, but that’s not to say simple is easy, it’s been hard enough for some to grasp as simple as it apparently is. And I don’t, by any measure, want to be seen as trivialising the potential significance of the challenges facing us all, but metropolitan problems have different solutions to rural problems. I think we’re going to have to move towards a zonal approach if we’re gonna be in this for the long haul.

I understand that ‘some’ people will never be able to understand, or perhaps choose not to, implement recommended precautions. I fear the inability / unwillingness of the few, will manifest in punitive restrictions for the many. Ive seen builders vans & bin trucks (and police cars for that matter) with multiple occupants. But I don’t read that as meaning EVERYONE is stupid / incapable - just those few that I’ve seen.

I think you’ve got wrong end of the stick there. You can submit 19/20 SATR from about now but you must have it in by 31 Jan 21. That may change under current circumstances but has always been the way. If it’s likely you are due a rebate, get in early, if it’s likely a bill, leave it til later

The Becher’s Brook of this moral steeplechase is the (probably) innocent failure to realise that a sustained 6% drop in GDP is modelled to have a far higher deleterious effect upon life expectancy than the WORST predicted outcome of C19. Hence there has NEVER BEEN any government directive to stop work other than those businesses which are SPECIFICALLY listed as required to close. Anyone that wants to criticise a business for the ability to interpret and abide by government guidance rather than cower in fear of the condemnation of the media fed masses is perfectly welcome to do so. They are unlikely to be the type of client I’d be interested in anyway.

Get off the bloody MO thread digger boy! You've got the toys, go make your own sandpit! Only signed up MO aficionados are allowed in here ?

AA have executed a handbrake U turn from their 25 Mar position statement.

Bottom left is, er, like, Ops normal.... I have a little bit of an anxiety attack if someone picks up any my saws at the best of times.....

Not really, but the neighbours had Stone Roses on full blast ?

He'd been quoted £1600 for that task. I'm more than happy to chase the tiddlers around on a sunny day for a few hours AND give the homeowner a considerable saving over the other prices... ?

Coronavirus: A joint statement between HSE, the TUC and the CBI - HSE Media Centre PRESS.HSE.GOV.UK This is an extremely worrying time for firms and workers. We know many workers, union reps and employers have...