Toonpack

What a surprise. There's degrees of flexibility and then there's taking the piss. Coming in 15 mins late and then chatting for 5 minutes is taking the piss. That 20 minutes is the thick end of 5% her working day, given most people work at around 80% utilistation that's 25% of her day gone for nothing. No, chatting is not frowned upon in the private sector, if the work is getting done, if the work is not getting done, then there is a problem, quite rightly. Defending such behaviour is crass stupidity in todays climate. Given anything that does happen in the public sector is usually late and costs more than it should have . BTW if that scenario is repeated in a private sector environment it leads to business failure and lost jobs, not another huge bucket of government cash. The lack of accountability is staggering. Tit. So having a 5 minute chat in the morning is taking the piss, but spending work time to bitch about a colleague on a football message board isn't? I've just finished 9 years working for a private company on a public tender. During that time I could pretty much do what I liked, including post on here all day, which you would have known if you were around here a few years back. I could work at home when I liked, come and go as I pleased, and wear what I liked. I was however incredibly productive because my career was part of my life and my morale was great - I loved my job. I now work in the public sector proper, and although I have some flexibility in my work times (I still, and always have, work far longer than my contracted hours), which is usual for most professionals, my work conditions are much stricter, including this place being blocked. I am allowed to chat like. Am I more productive? Am I fuck. Before you point out wyki was complaining about his colleagues poor work standards, do you honestly believe her work quality is down to her 5 minute chats? What a load of bollocks. There might be some truth in it if she worked on the factory floor, but that's clearly not the case here. If what wyki says is true, it sounds she's not up to the job, end of. Fwiw, I've had similar problems with a colleague work before. When I failed to manage it directly, and when it got to the stage I was worried it was damaging our companies reputation, I pointed out my concerns to the boss. Simple, the guy in question resigned the next week and I got a shit load of brownie points to boot. Wyki, just do what you think feels right, use your judgement and not the collective knowledge of this board ffs! No, but coming in late and THEN having a chat before doing anything else, is. I would also add, I never said "her" work quality was down to her chats btw. The job itself is "in trouble" do you think her lateness and chats help ??

What a surprise. There's degrees of flexibility and then there's taking the piss. Coming in 15 mins late and then chatting for 5 minutes is taking the piss. That 20 minutes is the thick end of 5% her working day, given most people work at around 80% utilistation that's 25% of her day gone for nothing. No, chatting is not frowned upon in the private sector, if the work is getting done, if the work is not getting done, then there is a problem, quite rightly. Defending such behaviour is crass stupidity in todays climate. Given anything that does happen in the public sector is usually late and costs more than it should have . BTW if that scenario is repeated in a private sector environment it leads to business failure and lost jobs, not another huge bucket of government cash. The lack of accountability is staggering. By the same token you want to see how much private sector firms take the piss when they've got their snouts in public sector contracts. Wanting to renegotiate contracts every five minutes too after they've pitched tenders too low just to get their snouts in said trough. And that's coming from someone who's largely very cynical of the public sector. Oh undoubtedly, but that's because it has been a soft touch, a big private sector company would rarely get away with it on another, they'd be told "tough shit, fuck off". The Public sector needs to grow a pair, at all levels. Aye, I agree fwiw. There's more holding to ransom goes on though with public sector contracts though because it has a moral imperative to deliver, unlike the private sector. Which is the essential difference. Private sector workers will bust a gut to save their jobs, it's just pure self interest and survival instinct, they're not higher beings. Don't think you can instill the same in the public sector because it's patently obvious that isn't a commercial reality of the job. People aren't thick so you can't artificially manufacture that, you can only weed out the dickheads. People will always be more motivated to protect themselves (their jobs) ie private sector before they start doing 'altruistic' things for others ie public sector. There is no bigger motivator than self interest, but it simply can't exist in the public sector in anywhere like the same way. It needs to be though. Not all the Public Sector is "alturistic" which is the problem. Doctors, Nurses, Police, Fire, and the like, deserve a hell of a lot more than they get and should be protected. The more "departmental" environments are where reality needs to bite, if a department is failing, outsource it and shut it down. The country cannot afford the waste.

I never said it was You accept that in a working day, you're likely to get about 80% productivity, as a general rule,which allows for "chatting time"etc. coming in late and then chatting for additional time, before even looking at your work is undoubtedly "taking the piss". Especially if the job is behind/in trouble as Wiki described.

What a surprise. There's degrees of flexibility and then there's taking the piss. Coming in 15 mins late and then chatting for 5 minutes is taking the piss. That 20 minutes is the thick end of 5% her working day, given most people work at around 80% utilistation that's 25% of her day gone for nothing. No, chatting is not frowned upon in the private sector, if the work is getting done, if the work is not getting done, then there is a problem, quite rightly. Defending such behaviour is crass stupidity in todays climate. Given anything that does happen in the public sector is usually late and costs more than it should have . BTW if that scenario is repeated in a private sector environment it leads to business failure and lost jobs, not another huge bucket of government cash. The lack of accountability is staggering. By the same token you want to see how much private sector firms take the piss when they've got their snouts in public sector contracts. Wanting to renegotiate contracts every five minutes too after they've pitched tenders too low just to get their snouts in said trough. And that's coming from someone who's largely very cynical of the public sector. Oh undoubtedly, but that's because it has been a soft touch, a big private sector company would rarely get away with it on another, they'd be told "tough shit, fuck off". The Public sector needs to grow a pair, at all levels.

What a surprise. There's degrees of flexibility and then there's taking the piss. Coming in 15 mins late and then chatting for 5 minutes is taking the piss. That 20 minutes is the thick end of 5% her working day, given most people work at around 80% utilistation that's 25% of her day gone for nothing. No, chatting is not frowned upon in the private sector, if the work is getting done, if the work is not getting done, then there is a problem, quite rightly. Defending such behaviour is crass stupidity in todays climate. Given anything that does happen in the public sector is usually late and costs more than it should have . BTW if that scenario is repeated in a private sector environment it leads to business failure and lost jobs, not another huge bucket of government cash. The lack of accountability is staggering.

You in the public sector by any chance ???? Wiki, on the surface, you HAVE to escalate it, if the job turns to shit, you're in the shit anyway, best raise it and get it sorted. At least you'll be "in control of the shit" going off so can manage the situation better. I take it you have a diary/log of all the previous attempts at fixing it ?? But, you need to balance the ramifications on you of sorting it out, against the ramifications on you of the job turning to shit. Therein will lie your answer.

Nailed on it's true. As I said at the time, Joey (and McKay) "played a blinder". That said, I suspect he was hoping that it would be someone "higher" than QPR who would come in for him when it became apparent no-one would pay a fee.

The place goes to the league I believe, not the loser.

Really ?? Those poor downtrodded footballers, eh? From what I've read/heard the players don't get the traditional "win" bonuses anymore, the bonus is an end of year thing based on league position and is on a sliding scale for ALL staff.

The black Obertan. A cheap punt v a £10 Million punt. One word of caution though Thiery Henry looked utter cack for a lot of his first season.

2nd'ed (on the no vote as well, just for clarity)

Thanks for the messages gents, much appreciated.

Am gutted, our black lab Maggie (she was 15) was put to sleep yesterday

How the fuck was that not handball by Reina, outside the box, spread himself and it shouldn't matter if it's ball to arm.

Terrible and shocking news RIP

Outstanding result, great spirit. Please don't let this easy start ever finish.

If there's a doubt over Colo, I'd leave him out anyway, take the obligatory defeat and save the fucker for Chelsea. Although I did originally fancy us to get something today (other than the obligatory defeat).

it isn't me who is stupid enough to think a minority shareholder runs the football club single handed. Meanwhile in the real world. Shareholding (without a seat on the board) is irrelevant to involvement in running anything, the Chairman/CEO and the board run the club (or any other business for that matter) with the chairman making, and being responsible for, day to day decisions and policy etc. Meanwhile, in the real world, what [about the 6th request, you're becoming as evasive as the grey man], what is your Re-assessment of Mike Ashley and his intentions for the club since September 1st, particularly in view of your recent post where you expressed the hope that he "builds on this" [words to that effect] ? Take your time Why should I type it out again ??? You patently can't read. We at last have a sustainable platform, and yes we will build upon it, may be slow, but we will build. Bookmark this if you wish.

it isn't me who is stupid enough to think a minority shareholder runs the football club single handed. Meanwhile in the real world. Shareholding (without a seat on the board) is irrelevant to involvement in running anything, the Chairman/CEO and the board run the club (or any other business for that matter) with the chairman making, and being responsible for, day to day decisions and policy etc. That was his original point though, Shepherd wasn't the chairman back then. The original point was about the demarcation between SJH and FS, see bolded bit. I meant Leazes' original point. And I didn't

it isn't me who is stupid enough to think a minority shareholder runs the football club single handed. Meanwhile in the real world. Shareholding (without a seat on the board) is irrelevant to involvement in running anything, the Chairman/CEO and the board run the club (or any other business for that matter) with the chairman making, and being responsible for, day to day decisions and policy etc. That was his original point though, Shepherd wasn't the chairman back then. The original point was about the demarcation between SJH and FS, see bolded bit.

it isn't me who is stupid enough to think a minority shareholder runs the football club single handed. Meanwhile in the real world. Shareholding (without a seat on the board) is irrelevant to involvement in running anything, the Chairman/CEO and the board run the club (or any other business for that matter) with the chairman making, and being responsible for, day to day decisions and policy etc.

Welcome to the mug-club

exactly Hhhmm agreeing with Leazes Don't worry about it, your argument/analogy was seriously flawed and utter bollocks, that's why he agreed, probably. Maybe the Greek PM should try a similar argument with the Eurozone And why don't you fuck off you smug unintelligent prick. Firstly try spotting a humerous tangent when you see one. Secondly when you spout off about analogys try not using ione about a country in the shit because no one paid their taxes. Fucking internet forums let any dozy prick on these days. So you didn't mean it then ??

exactly Hhhmm agreeing with Leazes Don't worry about it, your argument/analogy was seriously flawed and utter bollocks, that's why he agreed, probably. Maybe the Greek PM should try a similar argument with the Eurozone And why don't you fuck off you smug unintelligent prick. Spot on and so was your analogy. The bloke is a mug, and inside his heart he knows he is. Pish

Thats absolute rubbish statement and you know it is but as usual you attempt to back up your argument by not giving anything valid back and coming up some spurious statement. The amounts involved are irrelevant. A million pound to Ashley is probably the equivalent of a £100 to me so everything is relevant. At the end of the day the argument is that buying something "to have fun" (and its clearly not a tenuous statement Chez as it was in numerous interviews with Mort) should mean that you either pay up for that "fun". If you can't see the difference between a multi million pound business and a car, what's the point of explaining it in detail. It's laughable and not worthy of a longer response. As for my "banks comment", how is it any different. Many lower league clubs use the banks to "keep going" we use a billionaire, if we don't owe the billionaire, why shouldn't those clubs tell the banks to "stick it" ???? Especially given that a significant wedge of the "debt" was inherrited from existing bank lendings, so if not Ashley, it would have had to be paid back to the bank. I would also take issue with your "by not giving anything valid back and coming up some spurious statement" bit. I often research and post (sometimes lengthy) responses, which usually get ignored, particularly if they show up a previous argument as piffle. I am tired of doing it to be honest. I'll maybe stick with "pish" from now on a'la Stevie. It's his fault he bought a financial nightmare, it's not fair he wants his money back, boo hoo hoo, like a bunch of pathetic bairns at times.