Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

Lost Login

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Lost Login last won the day on May 2 2018

Lost Login had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,487 Excellent

About Lost Login

  • Rank
    So long and Thanks for All The Fish

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Regretfully it did. The student union bar was also used as a common area and could be accessed any time and the viewing area for the sports hall was just along the corridor from it. After getting high the guy I knew through the rugby club decided he could walk along the top of the balcony wall and lost his balance. He was not drunk and if posters want to argue that it was not the drugs that caused this then I will accept that as I will accept that it cannot be said with 100% certainty what impaired his judgement that night. But from being their I am convinced it was what he was smoking and yes he was chilled but it was case that he thought it would be really cool thing to do. It still haunts me we did not stop him but a lot of crap was being spoken and the toilets were down the same corridor so when he went off and did it he basically when straight from the toilet rather than return to the bar.
  2. Unfortunately yes and watching them try and prey on young kids disgusts me. I am very anti drugs as I had a mate at university who basically whilst high basically decided he could fly and jumped off a balcony and smashed up both his legs and will never walk again. I also knew somebody who got hit by driver who was high so I am slightly prejudiced and get narked when soft drugs are basically made out to be harmless.
  3. But are existing workers really striking so that future workers get a better deal by existing workers getting a worse one?
  4. Why should existing management take a pay cut when from what The Central Scrutiniser says existing workers at lower levels are not being targeted. The proposals according per the The Central Scrutiniser are that new employees will be on a lower salary and be on a defined contribution pension scheme. I struggle to see how that latter change is anything else but sensible. Yes there might be some redundancies if they stop Saturday deliveries but I presume they will be from natural retirements. It may be great that they are trying to protect future employees but this strike seems to being sold by the Unions as they are trying to stop cuts to existing members income. From what The Central Scrutiniser says that is not the case. In due course we presumably get to know if the proposed terms have been pitched at the right level as if to low they will not get people applying for jobs when positions come up.
  5. In this day and age no I doubt any reputable business can afford to continue to offer defined benefit pensions, certainly not with any sensible level of benefit. If the post office workers are having the DB scheme maintained for current members with new members going to a DC scheme I think they should be grateful. Expecting there to be a DB scheme for new members in this day and age is cloud cuckoo land.
  6. Maybe, but I can have a great time without having to take mind altering drugs and I would prefer not to have pushers trying to push drugs on my kids and risk ruining their lives.
  7. I agree. The law and punishment should be stricter/harsher with leniency only given if they shop their suppliers etc. If people want to take "drugs" fine, go and move somewhere what that is allowed.
  8. It depends what those 40 managerial grade staff actually due. In many cases staff may have managers title or been a be in a managers grade but really they are just slightly senior workers. I know a couple of posties, one who got a promotion to a manager but they were not much better off after the "promotion". They got a pay raise but that was largely offset by the overtime etc they lost as they were not entitled to overtime. Yes they moved to a five day working week rather than six days but they stopped having every six days off. It may have been set out somewhere and I have missed but I have not seen it set out clearly what are the current terms and conditions for postman and what are the new proposals for existing postman. I understand there are to be changes for new workers and proposals to stop deliveries at weekends and the Union say they are fighting against cuts in service, changes to terms and conditions, that they are fighting to protect the future of the post office but it seems nobody sets out is detail what the changes are. I would like to know now what the basic wage will be before and after, what the working hours and holidays will be, pension contributions, pension rights, six pay, overtime, etc. Without these it is hard to understand the merits of either sides argument. Often there is too much smoke and mirrors. e.g. it is common for your basic wage not to be your actual basic wage as on top of that there are other "standard" payments such as guaranteed minimum overtime, allowance for X&Y etc. Really these are part of a person's basic pay but have been introduced over many years so that it can be argued that basic pay rises have been constrained whist at the same time ensuring the staff get more money. I don't think many of us really care how something is described if it means we get more money. We saw the above with the bus drivers, but it happens in the private sector. It is why many people in the banking, financial sector have "guaranteed" minimum bonuses. It just means businesses can report lower standard wage figures etc whilst ensuring the staff member still get paid a higher amount As I said I know a couple of posties and it appears that that in many large work force you have a range of staff across all levels some of whom are really good hard working guys whilst others are just there to basically milk the system and get as much out of it as they can because they are "entitled"
  9. I was wandering down Athol Street earlier in the week and there was a foreign film crew filming outside the Appleby's office
  10. I'm not. Just next time there is a case reported that people think should have been kept quiet about remember you can not have it both ways. I will accept that whilst I felt really sorry for the person in the previous case (and I never thought there was a case that was worth going to trial) I thought the media was right to report as I do not think the media should be banned from reporting unless an individual is found guilt so have been waiting for a case where people are more than happy to comment and even question the decision even if the impact may be very different
  11. Possibly because by dressing up in such a garb they were not questioned by marshals and could go and stand where they wanted to watch the races. That seems to be the case why many dress up as marshals. Alternatively he is bit short up top. Yes there may well be some dodgy reason for it but if you want to you can find a more innocent, but probably unlikely, explanation.
  12. No they not on the same scale but if posters want a rule in one case stating there should be no reporting they should apply the same parameters to "less serious" cases. I do not agree with picking and choosing as and when it suits. I have no issue with the reporting in either case, which I believe is consistent. I am not sure if it was you but one post asked if the guy had been sentenced yet, which presumably implied he was guilty. I am not a lawyer so no idea if that is potentially sub judice but it seems odd that post like that can go unmentioned when in other cases in the past there is almost a blanket ban on mentioning a person's name if they are in a trial.
  13. I agree with both your points. I just think if people have such concerns about the destroying of somebody's reputation in one cases, I totally understand and agree, then maybe they should be careful how they post in others
  14. Yes but there has to be a standard rule across the board with regard to reporting or where do you draw the line?
  15. In your view. I have no idea who the guy is and whether he is "all there", delusional, a Walter Mitty character etc but I find it very hypocritical that because many seem to think this guy was guilty then even after he is found not guilty that is questioned but in other cases some posters are screaming that it is wrong to report a case unless a person is found guilty. I don't agree with that later view.
  • Create New...