During my enforced sojourn, I managed to jot down a few memos and links for future reference.
Time to uncork the bottle methinks.
First off, has anyone seen the fruits of their labours? Or have the apples still to fall from the trees?
The next time the other half asks that question, the one there used to be no answer for, just refer her to this ... adding of course, "No, it's always been that size."
Speaking of size. They used to say the Polis are getting younger, now it seems they are getting smaller.
On a positive note I was glad, given ongoing matters, to read this. I just don't believe it!
My next post will concentrate on the daft, stupid and frankly ridiculous happenings up here in God's country. We need his help you see!
The little world of Toytowner's™ most 'famous' inhabitant has been in upheaval and continues to be so. As such I've had little time to update the blog, but here goes with some catch up.
This decision passed with a worldwide whisper once again!
It seems Mrs 'T' was not always a Unionist - well we knew that this side of our border!
I found this article from the Beeb professionally amusing if only for the completely non-diverse nature of the report. Easy now, having a dig at Poles and the Irish all in one article - naughty Auntie.
Certain constituents know just where they are not going to put their 'Y' at the next election.
The nanny state continues unabated with such classics (sic) as this. Keeping on the food tack, this is genuinely more worrying, if of no great surprise.
Equally I worried a bit about the degeneration in what used to be the pillars of society when I read this blurb. Role models? Perhaps they should look no further than the impressive Eddie Izzard.
Finally, for all acrophobics out there this made me wibble and wobble.
There is a story that the derivation of the Scots word 'Piece' comes from the old rural habit of drying oatmeal gruel, not unlike a slab of dried porridge, and leaving it to go hard in the bottom of a kitchen drawer and then cutting off a bit (piece) to take as part of a packed lunch.
Nowadays, a piece is more generally a sandwich or one's packed meal taken to work (even if it's not a sandwich any more and more likely a microwave lasagne from Tesco). You keep your nosh in piece box.
In the Polis, our refreshment break is known as "piece time." It is an unintended, but amusing play on words. However, as I will elucidate, increasingly rarely do I really get some peace or even my piece, and even less often at what might be considered a reasonable time of the day or after a reasonable duration of duty.
But if you think I have a problem, consider the guid folk over at the SAS.
Now, presupposing you have the time, go and have a keek at these links.
There can be no doubt that in the case of the ambulance service, and indeed the Polis, the public expect, quite rightly, that they have a 24 hour service. However, despite frequent drunken abuse to the contrary, we are human and need our downtime and food. Our welfare must not be ignored. Long term, regularly interrupted or non-existent breaks do nothing for our health.
Having said that, I find it inconceivable not to respond to genuine calls for our skills and presence, even when my fork is about to be raised to my mouth. I will come back to this later, but a little ancient history first.
When I was fresh out of the wrapper, I recall that our skipper would routinely advise the shift who was piecing when as part of his briefing. On a night shift (then just 8 hours duration) half the shift would break at 1am and the other half at 2am for a fry up at HQ in the 24 hour canteen (i.e. before even the canteen staff went onto a 9-5!). Life was good and I didn't miss many of my appointments with the crew. Moreover, the Gaffers would turn up too and it was a good opportunity for shift bonding and the inevitable moaning!
Like the canteen, the booked break soon disappeared down the black hole of reorganisation. Along came the divide of response/neighbourhood policing, variable shift patterns and what I will term 'departmentalisation.' Now shifts are longer, break cover is apparently non-existent and the general demand on response teams is such that a piece time is no longer regarded as a necessity of a briefing or even in the mind of skippers as the shift progresses. Fellow troops will know we now 'grab' a piece when we can. Often this is at a desk as we update databases or fill in forms, sometimes it is in the cars as we hurtle from one job to another. Admit it, you'll all have been clocked by Joe Public with a Ginster's pastie in your mouth as you whizz by. I even suspect Inspector Gadget has been seen devouring a doughnut on the move!
I have known all too often what appears to be the unwritten rule that we must wait for the next shift to come in to get a break, because calls are ‘piling up.’ That can mean an eight hour haul till 10pm! Now that’s a long time for my belly to be empty and an even more daft time to eat. In simple terms it ain’t healthy. Particularly as there is the temptation to sneak in that Mars bar to keep you going!
It seems to me that the same problem presents itself to the Paramedics, particularly those in rural areas where there is no cover at all. It is hardly surprising then that they have called for established breaks to be mandatory and undisturbed. Surely it is for Management to arrange for suitable resourcing to obviate this problem of lack of cover.
I may be described as getting old in the tooth when I grumble about being disturbed on my admittedly paid for break for the same old dross, even if it is a ‘Grade 1’ call. Purely in welfare terms, the dross calls of a routine day and the invariable lack of resources to cover same bites my arse as that lasagne goes back in the micro for the umpteenth time as I leg it out the door to find on arrival at the call that Joe and Josephine Public are telling each other what a respective waste of space they are.
Now, when it’s a genuinely important non-routine call, where my services are really required and rapid response is the call of the day, I don’t mind. That’s what I’m paid for, even during my break and I accept that willingly.
Strictly speaking, I am entitled to 20 minutes break at some undefined time in a shift and by break that means completely away from my work environment, with no interruptions. When was the last time your skipper, gaffer or SMT asked you if you got that? Answers on a postage stamp please.
Now back to the SAS.
But hey, have a cuppa first and switch the phone/radio off.
In the Unionised world, breaks are stipulated and it appears that the ambulance service, as far as Paramedics are concerned anyway, have been run ragged for too long and have 'settled' for one or other option of single payments per disruption, yearly bonus for same or to be paid for the break time to always be available, whilst other have accepted their breaks are unpaid and as such cannot be asked to 'work.'
Given that the Paramedic concerned chose to be unpaid and if he did attend a call there would be all sorts of ramifications therein. Would the SAS 'cover' his backside if he responded and things went Pete Tong? You go guess!
"Publicly, the ambulance service insists MrPark was within his rights. Let’s hope that, privately, it is embarrassed and ashamed."
It only needed one word to be changed from the third person to the first and poor old Alfie would be the target of derision.
To me the simple issue is resources. There needs to be some compromise in rural areas were staffing is understandably thin. It seems ludicrous and palpably unworkable in such circumstances, were there is no relief that a Paramedic can be off duty during a tour of duty. Needs must and I would say the option to be unpaid is a non-starter, but Management must then take their staff’s welfare into account and assure there is cover for breaks.
In the world of the poor Polis, that would mean closer supervision and filtration of the nature of calls responded to by munching moaners and attention to ensuring staff get a reasonable, and reasonably timed, break each and every shift, even when the brown stuff really hits the fan.
Aye noo, ye ken a' yon folk doon in Follyrood fa are iywiz on aboot new ideas, the latest een being takkin the age of imbibing up tae 21, weel the Daily Mash has a gae guid tak on it.
Following hard on the heels of the European Community'scallfor a Europe wide ban on smoking,herecomes the hard evidence that it won't be getting full support.
When the Working Time Regulations arrived most of us Polis must have thought that the bureaucrats in Strasbourg and Brussels had, for once, come up with a blinder what with enforced 11 hour breaks between shifts.
Well, I've just endured (and I use that term intentionally) a week of what's called Step Down shifts from my rostered nightshifts to ensure that my poor body was allowed adequate rest between bouts of work. I now wonder if the writers of this legislation actually envisaged (or tried out) what was implicated. All this disruption was caused by my need to appear in court as a witness. Here's my shifts:
Day 1 - Work 9pm to 6am Day 2 - Work 5pm to 2am Day 3 - Work 1pm to 10pm Day 4 - Work 9am to 6pm
The upshot of it all was that no one was the winner out of this i.e.
The polis probably had to pay for someone to come in and work my nightshift on days 2, 3 & 4, and get double time to boot. Good for them, but not for the Polis budget or the general public's purses.
The family at home were deprived of my company and assistance with domestic upkeep (which to be fair is minimal anyway according to she who must be obeyed).
Mr Plod was heard repeatedly to say between snores both at home and at work, "I'm awake honest."
She who must be obeyed was her usual sympathetic self as I tried to explain the situation in a manner she might understand (I resisted drawing pictures), but I offered her this scenario around a 'normal' person's work day:
Day 1 - Work 8am to 5pm Day 2 - Work 4am to 1pm Day 3 - Work Midnight to 9am Day 4 - Work 8pm to 5am (note however that this would actually be on the third day)
I think I lost her on day two, but I'm sure you get the point. I'm no Doctor, but if this was meant to safeguard and improve my health and welfare, then please can I see the evidence.
p.s. You can probably guess what happened when the trial date arrived.... yep.... sent away at 11am as not required to give evidence.
Next it will be health warnings and adults banned from eating Chocolate Bars etc......
Junk food ads to be banned from kids' TV
By SEAN POULTER, Daily Mail 08:06am 27th March 2006
TV watchdogs aim to ban junk food adverts during children's programmes.
Ofcom will outline plans tomorrow to stop unhealthy foods being advertised on children's television.
This will prevent firms from targeting children by using cartoon characters and celebrities such as Gary Lineker, David Beckham and Britney Spears.
Health and consumer groups criticised the proposals, insisting they do not go far enough.
It is expected Ofcom will ban advertising foods high in fat, salt and sugar from early morning - before children go to school - through until 6pm, and possibly 7.30pm.
Banned products would include takeaway burgers, chicken nuggets, fries, sugarcoated puffed oats, such as Sugar Puffs, Corn Flakes, which are relatively high in salt, crisps, cola and other sugary drinks. Health campaigners want ads for all foods that are high in fat, salt and sugar banned until after the 9pm watershed.
This could outlaw Cadbury's from continuing its sponsorship of Coronation Street.
The ban would also affect McDonalds, Kellogg's, Walker's crisps, Pepsi and Coca-Cola.
Cartoon characters, pop music and images of youngsters tucking into the snacks are all used in adverts.
Promotions or competitions involving computers games, pop music, theme parks and films are also used.
Brands such as Kelloggs' Coco Pops have been successful pitching their adverts at children. Coco Pops are fronted by the cartoon character Coco the monkey, who sings the advertising jingle and leads children through games on the cereal's website.
Ofcom has been told by the Government to draw up a regime that will control the advertising of unhealthy food.
But the watchdog has previously indicated it believes there is little value in controls and supports minimum regulation.
The proposals would be based on voluntary regulation with the industry. Government ministers have threatened to force a crackdown with a change in the law if changes are not implemented.
Groups such as the National Heart Forum and food and health lobbyists Sustain believe controls must go beyond children's programmes.
Richard Watts of Sustain said: "The statistics show that about 70 per cent of commercials during children's viewing are for food. Of these, something like 80-100per cent are for junk.
"These are the wrong messages to send children at a time when we are seeing an increase in weight problems."
Over the past 10 years, obesity among six-year-olds has doubled and trebled among 15-year-olds. And obesity diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, are now being seen for the first time in children.
Jane Landon, deputy chief executive of the NHF, said: "The watershed for allowing the advertising of foods high in fat, salt and sugar should be 9pm."
Programmes targeted at children tend to be broadcast in the morning, at lunchtime and in the afternoon when pupils have returned home.
The ban would also apply to the entire output of dedicated children's television stations including the Disney Channel and Nickelodeon.
Ofcom has described a 9pm watershed as the "nuclear option", warning it would have a disastrous effect on the income of some commercial TV channels.
Another possibility would be to outlaw all food advertising - even healthy products - before a watershed. This would stop junk food manufacturers being singled out for a ban.
National Consumer Council food expert Sue Dibb said: "Anything less than full restrictions on all TV ads and promotions for high fat, salt and sugar foods before the 9pm watershed will be extremely disappointing."
The British Medical Association and backbench Labour MPs also support a total ban on junk food adverts.
Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the BMA, said: "Children and parents are surrounded by the marketing of unhealthy cereals, snacks and processed meals. This has to stop."
The Food & Drink Federation rejected the need for restrictions. A spokesman said: "Any simplistic scheme that demonises products does-n't take into account the complexity of people's lifestyles and the way they eat."
The UK boss of McDonalds, Peter Beresford, has made clear that he rejects TV advertising restrictions. He says McDonald's is not to blame for rising obesity, adding: "There is no good food or bad food, only bad diets."
