OV9

V8Granite wrote: Wed Nov 05, 2025 12:31 pm I've seen 6 policeman on 1 train from Gatwick to Peterborough today.

They might have been strippergrams on the way back from doing a hen party in Magaluf.

Jobbo wrote: Wed Nov 05, 2025 1:27 pm

V8Granite wrote: Wed Nov 05, 2025 12:31 pm I've seen 6 policeman on 1 train from Gatwick to Peterborough today.

They might have been strippergrams on the way back from doing a hen party in Magaluf.

That certainly explains the cowboy and the the indian.

Oh dear

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c5ylvz217ept

GG. wrote: Wed Nov 05, 2025 1:43 pm

Jobbo wrote: Wed Nov 05, 2025 1:27 pm

V8Granite wrote: Wed Nov 05, 2025 12:31 pm I've seen 6 policeman on 1 train from Gatwick to Peterborough today.

They might have been strippergrams on the way back from doing a hen party in Magaluf.

That certainly explains the cowboy and the the indian.

Then they missed out on the large group of elderly women heading to Sandy

Dave!

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-lat ... eblog-body

Interesting

Another day, another u-turn

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-lat ... eblog-body

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 7:08 pm Another day, another u-turn

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-lat ... eblog-body

It was a crap idea, they’ve consulted with businesses and come up with a more sensible option including some of the rights.

It’s exactly what everyone shouts about what they wish the government would do! Listen to the right people before making big decisions.

Not really a U-turn at all, more watered-down.

It’s such a contrast when we have a Tory press; they’d tell us that shit tastes of steak when the previous government did anything.

Just for clarity, I’ve never voted Labour and don’t support the party. But I no longer support the Tories and could never support Reform.

Jobbo wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 7:22 pm
Just for clarity, I’ve never voted Labour

Same, i just find this blind determination by the press and opposition to bring the country down, just to prove a point as bizarre.

I chose to be objective, but i’d chose Starmer over Badenoch or Farage any day of the week.

I’d rather they didn’t pledge in a manifesto whilst trying to be elected to carry out a policy that either had zero research beforehand or was known to be incompatible and was still spouted.. either option isn’t exactly who I want running the UK Government

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:22 pm I’d rather they didn’t pledge in a manifesto whilst trying to be elected to carry out a policy that either had zero research beforehand or was known to be incompatible and was still spouted.. either option isn’t exactly who I want running the UK Government

Do you not think that the proposal is an improvement over both the existing and manifesto ideas though?

Rich B wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:39 pm

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:22 pm I’d rather they didn’t pledge in a manifesto whilst trying to be elected to carry out a policy that either had zero research beforehand or was known to be incompatible and was still spouted.. either option isn’t exactly who I want running the UK Government

Do you not think that the proposal is an improvement over both the existing and manifesto ideas though?

Interesting question!… I think the idea of day one protection isn’t great and their solution is better for the employer, but the people who it will affect are not happy (according to Unite and a sitting Labour MP anyway)..

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:51 pm

Rich B wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:39 pm

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:22 pm I’d rather they didn’t pledge in a manifesto whilst trying to be elected to carry out a policy that either had zero research beforehand or was known to be incompatible and was still spouted.. either option isn’t exactly who I want running the UK Government

Do you not think that the proposal is an improvement over both the existing and manifesto ideas though?

Interesting question!… I think the idea of day one protection isn’t great and their solution is better for the employer, but the people who it will affect are not happy (according to Unite and a sitting Labour MP anyway)..

I don’t think i’ve ever seen a Union rep happy with anything tbh!

Rich B wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:55 pm

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:51 pm

Rich B wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:39 pm Do you not think that the proposal is an improvement over both the existing and manifesto ideas though?

Interesting question!… I think the idea of day one protection isn’t great and their solution is better for the employer, but the people who it will affect are not happy (according to Unite and a sitting Labour MP anyway)..

I don’t think i’ve ever seen a Union rep happy with anything tbh!

Erm.. their DB pension scheme!?

2 years was terrible, but day 1 was unworkable. I think the proposal was day 1 protections but with a 9 month probation? Now it's 6 months for both, which to be fair makes a lot more sense from both parties. Some peoples CVs are a work of fiction and they make stuff up. This policy allows for that.

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:22 pm I’d rather they didn’t pledge in a manifesto whilst trying to be elected to carry out a policy that either had zero research beforehand or was known to be incompatible and was still spouted.. either option isn’t exactly who I want running the UK Government

You'd best not vote for anyone, there's never been a single opposition manifesto in recent history that's 100% founded on well-researched policy - the process of elections and government is utterly stacked against it.

It takes a huge amount of time and manpower to conduct consultations, deal with the lobbies, develop a white paper, then create well-researched, pragmatic, and effective policies. That's what you need to do to check if something might work. Once your party is in power and you have the civil service behind you, then yes, it's a reasonable ask.

To suggest that an opposition party would have the resources to complete anywhere near the amount of research and consultation, prior to election, to ensure their manifesto's policy pledges are properly stress-tested prior to the election is a completely untenable position.

I think a lot of these outcomes are obvious to perhaps anyone who has worked a regular job or owned a small business. Everyone was talking about the day 1 unfair dismissal and concerned about it. Not everything needs a consultation but just a real world experience is often more than enough.

Another good example of how detached politicians are is the pay per mile - we were discussing on here months ago about how it would be implemented/monitored. Rachel Reeves came out with the idea and seemingly doesn’t even know that new cars don’t need MOTs.

Looking from the outside in its as if the majority of them have never worked outside of politics or integrated in society.

Simon wrote: Fri Nov 28, 2025 9:39 am 2 years was terrible, but day 1 was unworkable. I think the proposal was day 1 protections but with a 9 month probation? Now it's 6 months for both, which to be fair makes a lot more sense from both parties. Some peoples CVs are a work of fiction and they make stuff up. This policy allows for that.

Yes there needs to be some period where on the job suitability is addressed without people threatening to bring legal redress if you let them go.

Obviously most labour backbenchers haven't dealt with recruiting and development of employees and have no idea about the practical realities. As you say, some people are economical with the truth on CVs or at interview, may be simply unsuited to the job even if qualified and/or vexatiously invoke employment law or allege discrimination as a first line defence, however unjustified.

Gavster wrote: Fri Nov 28, 2025 10:20 am

IanF wrote: Thu Nov 27, 2025 8:22 pm I’d rather they didn’t pledge in a manifesto whilst trying to be elected to carry out a policy that either had zero research beforehand or was known to be incompatible and was still spouted.. either option isn’t exactly who I want running the UK Government

You'd best not vote for anyone, there's never been a single opposition manifesto in recent history that's 100% founded on well-researched policy - the process of elections and government is utterly stacked against it.

This 100%. If anything, history teaches us that manifesto pledges are made to be broken.

Mito Man wrote: Fri Nov 28, 2025 10:40 am Looking from the outside in its as if the majority of them have never worked outside of politics or integrated in society.

Sums it up nicely.