Jobs-worth LOLs
Discussion
AbarthChris said:
ok, let me break this down for the tiny minds on here. If he out his little bike into a massive van, they'd be ok with that, but if he wanted to cut out the van and save them some space, they wouldnt let him do that. Where is this different to the guy not wanting the pack of crisps with the meal deal?
The ferry deal was targetted at specific customer types (they said that), presumably the ferry company wanted to introduce more car drivers to their service, so took a hit for a while by making the offer with the hope of securing more *future* car business. They maybe felt that the bike demographic was already fully aware of their service / fully saturated, so no point taking any sales hit and making the offer to that category, if they felt that to do so would not have improved future business from that sector. Alternatively, maybe it was about subsequent sales of meals and other stuff once on board the ferry, two car customers might spend more on board than one bike customer might.The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
kev1974 said:
The ferry deal was targetted at specific customer types (they said that), presumably the ferry company wanted to introduce more car drivers to their service, so took a hit for a while by making the offer with the hope of securing more *future* car business. They maybe felt that the bike demographic was already fully aware of their service / fully saturated, so no point taking any sales hit and making the offer to that category, if they felt that to do so would not have improved future business from that sector. Alternatively, maybe it was about subsequent sales of meals and other stuff once on board the ferry, two car customers might spend more on board than one bike customer might.
The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
There is a saving, as the company could put more than one bike in a car slot.The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
More likely the person setting up the deal didn't mention bikes as they forgot/assumed they were being generic and everyone below them just used the offer word for word.
Zoobeef said:
kev1974 said:
The ferry deal was targetted at specific customer types (they said that), presumably the ferry company wanted to introduce more car drivers to their service, so took a hit for a while by making the offer with the hope of securing more *future* car business. They maybe felt that the bike demographic was already fully aware of their service / fully saturated, so no point taking any sales hit and making the offer to that category, if they felt that to do so would not have improved future business from that sector. Alternatively, maybe it was about subsequent sales of meals and other stuff once on board the ferry, two car customers might spend more on board than one bike customer might.
The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
There is a saving, as the company could put more than one bike in a car slot.The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
More likely the person setting up the deal didn't mention bikes as they forgot/assumed they were being generic and everyone below them just used the offer word for word.
Rich1973 said:
Your company is as bad as mine then. In the guidance notes, it states quite clearly that a COSHH assessment doesn't have to be done if the substance isn't harmful. My gaffer still makes me do them just to show that we have....
This 
One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a f
king clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly. This is the best example of HSSE fkwittery i know of. banning triangular flapjacks because when thrown they are more dangerous than square ones.
At least the H&S Executive called this one as a bks decision.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-2192321...
kwittery i know of. banning triangular flapjacks because when thrown they are more dangerous than square ones. At least the H&S Executive called this one as a b
ks decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-2192321...
The BBC report said:
A school's decision to ban triangular flapjacks after a pupil was hurt has been labelled "half-baked" by the Health and Safety Executive.
It follows an incident at Castle View School in Canvey Island, Essex, when a boy was hit in the face by a flapjack.
Catering staff at the school have been told only to serve square or rectangular flapjacks.
The school said the "isolated accident" had led to a review of "the texture and shape of the flapjacks" provided.
A spokesman for the Health and Safety Executive said: "We often come across half-baked decisions taken in the name of health and safety, but this one takes the biscuit.
"The real issue isn't what shape the flapjacks are, but the fact that pupils are throwing them at each other - and that's a matter of discipline, and has got nothing to do with health and safety as we know it.
"We're happy to make clear that flapjacks of all shapes and sizes continue to have our full backing."
Health and safety advisor Ray Hurst said he could not understand why triangular flapjacks had been banned, but not those cut into squares or rectangles.
"Anything that is thrown is likely to cause injury if it hits somebody, especially in the face or the eye," said Mr Hurst, former president of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health.
"It does seem a little over the top to ban triangular flapjacks," he said.
Essex County Council said it did not give schools guidance on the shapes of foodstuffs.
It follows an incident at Castle View School in Canvey Island, Essex, when a boy was hit in the face by a flapjack.
Catering staff at the school have been told only to serve square or rectangular flapjacks.
The school said the "isolated accident" had led to a review of "the texture and shape of the flapjacks" provided.
A spokesman for the Health and Safety Executive said: "We often come across half-baked decisions taken in the name of health and safety, but this one takes the biscuit.
"The real issue isn't what shape the flapjacks are, but the fact that pupils are throwing them at each other - and that's a matter of discipline, and has got nothing to do with health and safety as we know it.
"We're happy to make clear that flapjacks of all shapes and sizes continue to have our full backing."
Health and safety advisor Ray Hurst said he could not understand why triangular flapjacks had been banned, but not those cut into squares or rectangles.
"Anything that is thrown is likely to cause injury if it hits somebody, especially in the face or the eye," said Mr Hurst, former president of the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health.
"It does seem a little over the top to ban triangular flapjacks," he said.
Essex County Council said it did not give schools guidance on the shapes of foodstuffs.
OpulentBob said:
H+S isn't to cause people a pain in the arse. It's to stop people being hurt or killed. I've known people break legs from falling down open manholes, fracture skulls from hose joints bursting, seen a guy crushed by a 20T 360 excvator, seen a colleague hit by a car at 50mph. All could have been prevented/mitigated.
When it happens to you, and you then realise how important good H+S/PPE/staff protection is, it stops being jobsworth.
A couple of years ago one of our labourers was on site. He wasn't on a part of the site where works at height were taking place, but was headed towards it. He was wearing PPE as required by the site rules. The lamp fitting came off a lamppost and hit him on the head. It didn't do his hard hat much good, and he had a bad headache for a couple of days, but if he hadn't had his hard hat on he'd have been killed.When it happens to you, and you then realise how important good H+S/PPE/staff protection is, it stops being jobsworth.
omgus said:
This
One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a fking clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly.
Yep. If H&S rules are implemented in a silly way - people lose respect for them overall and so instead of making the situation safer, by over egging the pudding, people may actually be making things worse.One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a f
king clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly. The application of H&S rules should be commensurate with the risk.
I'm still waiting to find the fist example of a "Caution - Wet Floor Sign" sign. Such a sign would be placed next to the actual "Caution - Wet Floor" sign - in response to somebody tripping over said "Caution - Wet Floor" sign.
mister_ee said:
I got a parcel delivery note from City Link ,so Icalled in at the depot on my way home from work to collect it (as I had done several times before) only to be told I couldn't have it without ID (never having been asked for any before), not having my wallet on me this was a bit of a pisser. What really made me want to kill the jobsworth bd was when I went back the following day I was just handed the parcel without any mention of ID
They all do that.d was when I went back the following day I was just handed the parcel without any mention of ID If you don't take ID they won't let you have the parcel
If you do take ID they know, and don't ask for it.
Stopped at Burger King for a quick snack of 6 chili cheese bites. Got in the drive-thru queue and made my order at the remote speaker box thingy. There was a big line of cars in front of me. As a result, 15 mins after placing my order, I still wasn't even at the payment window.
Noticed the restaurant was completely empty inside, so swung out of the queue, parked up and ran in. Told the gormless student behind the till that the queue was too long and that i'll just pay in here and collect them. I could actually see them sitting on the rack behind him.
"Sorry, I can't do that. You'll have to go back in the queue outside."
"But they're right behind you there?" (me pointing)
"I know, but I'm not allowed to take payment in here for a drive-thru order."
"Oh ok then. I'd like to make a new order then please. I'll have 6 chilli cheese bites."
He takes payment and hands them over. Absolutely ridiculous!
Noticed the restaurant was completely empty inside, so swung out of the queue, parked up and ran in. Told the gormless student behind the till that the queue was too long and that i'll just pay in here and collect them. I could actually see them sitting on the rack behind him.
"Sorry, I can't do that. You'll have to go back in the queue outside."
"But they're right behind you there?" (me pointing)
"I know, but I'm not allowed to take payment in here for a drive-thru order."
"Oh ok then. I'd like to make a new order then please. I'll have 6 chilli cheese bites."
He takes payment and hands them over. Absolutely ridiculous!
Zoobeef said:
kev1974 said:
The ferry deal was targetted at specific customer types (they said that), presumably the ferry company wanted to introduce more car drivers to their service, so took a hit for a while by making the offer with the hope of securing more *future* car business. They maybe felt that the bike demographic was already fully aware of their service / fully saturated, so no point taking any sales hit and making the offer to that category, if they felt that to do so would not have improved future business from that sector. Alternatively, maybe it was about subsequent sales of meals and other stuff once on board the ferry, two car customers might spend more on board than one bike customer might.
The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
There is a saving, as the company could put more than one bike in a car slot.The meal deal is not targetting specific customer sectors, it's open to all-comers, there is the difference.
Further, not giving out the crisps or the hash browns or the mushrooms etc (breakfast stories) represents an opportunity for the vendor to save money, in the ferry example there is no saving to be made if a bike or car occupies the space, either way the ferry still sails so their costs are the same, the difference in mass between a car and a bike is not enough to make any kind of fuel difference when compared to the mass of the entire ferry being moved.
More likely the person setting up the deal didn't mention bikes as they forgot/assumed they were being generic and everyone below them just used the offer word for word.
(as the offer is for a couple in a car)
My view, offer is for car+2. If you're not a car+2 then you don't get the offer. Simple.
nick s said:
Stopped at Burger King for a quick snack of 6 chili cheese bites. Got in the drive-thru queue and made my order at the remote speaker box thingy. There was a big line of cars in front of me. As a result, 15 mins after placing my order, I still wasn't even at the payment window.
Noticed the restaurant was completely empty inside, so swung out of the queue, parked up and ran in. Told the gormless student behind the till that the queue was too long and that i'll just pay in here and collect them. I could actually see them sitting on the rack behind him.
"Sorry, I can't do that. You'll have to go back in the queue outside."
"But they're right behind you there?" (me pointing)
"I know, but I'm not allowed to take payment in here for a drive-thru order."
"Oh ok then. I'd like to make a new order then please. I'll have 6 chilli cheese bites."
He takes payment and hands them over. Absolutely ridiculous!
In a similar vein, drive-thru places that won't let you order on foot when you're in something too big to physically fit down the lane, such as a truck. McDonalds are particularly random for this - some branches they start chanting the "company policy" about why they're not allowed to serve you and yet other branches just get on with it and don't care.Noticed the restaurant was completely empty inside, so swung out of the queue, parked up and ran in. Told the gormless student behind the till that the queue was too long and that i'll just pay in here and collect them. I could actually see them sitting on the rack behind him.
"Sorry, I can't do that. You'll have to go back in the queue outside."
"But they're right behind you there?" (me pointing)
"I know, but I'm not allowed to take payment in here for a drive-thru order."
"Oh ok then. I'd like to make a new order then please. I'll have 6 chilli cheese bites."
He takes payment and hands them over. Absolutely ridiculous!
(Of course this is only when the restaurant side has already closed, before some smart-arse says).
In my teens I did a bit of work as a man-with-a-van and I remember once going to a pub to deliver some boxes (I've no idea what was in them). At the time they were discussing refitting it so they had a shopfitter, a designer and someone from the brewery walking around and talking.
The brewery man told me that I wasn't allowed to bring the boxes in without a hi-viz because it was now a worksite. I pointed out that there were still customers eating lunch and having drinks as the pub was still fully open and they weren't forced to wear hi-viz jackets. He told me that they weren't at risk because they weren't working. Wtf.
The brewery man told me that I wasn't allowed to bring the boxes in without a hi-viz because it was now a worksite. I pointed out that there were still customers eating lunch and having drinks as the pub was still fully open and they weren't forced to wear hi-viz jackets. He told me that they weren't at risk because they weren't working. Wtf.
All that jazz said:
nick s said:
Stopped at Burger King for a quick snack of 6 chili cheese bites. Got in the drive-thru queue and made my order at the remote speaker box thingy. There was a big line of cars in front of me. As a result, 15 mins after placing my order, I still wasn't even at the payment window.
Noticed the restaurant was completely empty inside, so swung out of the queue, parked up and ran in. Told the gormless student behind the till that the queue was too long and that i'll just pay in here and collect them. I could actually see them sitting on the rack behind him.
"Sorry, I can't do that. You'll have to go back in the queue outside."
"But they're right behind you there?" (me pointing)
"I know, but I'm not allowed to take payment in here for a drive-thru order."
"Oh ok then. I'd like to make a new order then please. I'll have 6 chilli cheese bites."
He takes payment and hands them over. Absolutely ridiculous!
In a similar vein, drive-thru places that won't let you order on foot when you're in something too big to physically fit down the lane, such as a truck. McDonalds are particularly random for this - some branches they start chanting the "company policy" about why they're not allowed to serve you and yet other branches just get on with it and don't care.Noticed the restaurant was completely empty inside, so swung out of the queue, parked up and ran in. Told the gormless student behind the till that the queue was too long and that i'll just pay in here and collect them. I could actually see them sitting on the rack behind him.
"Sorry, I can't do that. You'll have to go back in the queue outside."
"But they're right behind you there?" (me pointing)
"I know, but I'm not allowed to take payment in here for a drive-thru order."
"Oh ok then. I'd like to make a new order then please. I'll have 6 chilli cheese bites."
He takes payment and hands them over. Absolutely ridiculous!
(Of course this is only when the restaurant side has already closed, before some smart-arse says).
They caved when I said "I've queued, I ain't moving till you serve me"Moonhawk said:
omgus said:
This
One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a fking clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly.
Yep. If H&S rules are implemented in a silly way - people lose respect for them overall and so instead of making the situation safer, by over egging the pudding, people may actually be making things worse.One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a f
king clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly. The application of H&S rules should be commensurate with the risk.
I'm still waiting to find the fist example of a "Caution - Wet Floor Sign" sign. Such a sign would be placed next to the actual "Caution - Wet Floor" sign - in response to somebody tripping over said "Caution - Wet Floor" sign.
matchmaker said:
Moonhawk said:
omgus said:
This
One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a fking clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly.
Yep. If H&S rules are implemented in a silly way - people lose respect for them overall and so instead of making the situation safer, by over egging the pudding, people may actually be making things worse.One of the company sites was marked down for an audit in April for having no COSHH on hand soap and then in June a different audit pulled aside the manager and told him that he was going a bit OTT on the HSSE and used the example of the hand soap COSHH sheet he'd been told to make 10weeks earlier.
Some H&S is brilliant but so many (normally jobs-worthy) people have managed to create jobs for themselves because of 'elf'n'safety and they don't have a f
king clue about how to actually implement or use it sensibly. The application of H&S rules should be commensurate with the risk.
I'm still waiting to find the fist example of a "Caution - Wet Floor Sign" sign. Such a sign would be placed next to the actual "Caution - Wet Floor" sign - in response to somebody tripping over said "Caution - Wet Floor" sign.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff