Who do Leeds and indeed the rest of football think they are ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Well no harm can come to you when you're dead can it? :hehe:

---

I suppose not. :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

The company will need to make sure it is safe, or every precaution is met and the correct equipment is provided. I'm sure that there will be directive from the HSE and Unions although whether or not it'll be enforceable is another matter. I'm pretty sure that this fantastic government will have the correct directive in place before Furlough payments end!

---

That is key - if the companies are not meeting HSE rules then people can legitimately refuse to work. Not sure they will retain furlough for that purpose though. Some companies may say it is too expensive to adopt the new rules and use that as an excuse to cut back the workforce too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Don’t have strong feelings but in your usual condescending manner demand answers from those who have a different opinion to you.

---

:hehe: how insecure are you pal? Someone asking a question isn’t condescending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the rules in Wales, what with it being a Welsh-centric forum. In that case, you are right and xsnaggle is wrong - but he'll simply blame Drakeford.

---

I wasn’t aware they were that different tbh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

:hehe: how insecure are you pal? Someone asking a question isn’t condescending.

---

Reading this thread has made me think bringing the premier league back probably isn’t a bad thing. If they can do it safely why not, I also wouldn’t be against them just ended it and using average points though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

That's likely to happen, although it's going to be difficult to prove. Someone might have family with health problems or suffer with health problems themselves. Others may not feel safe to go back to work. Of course there will be those that have taken the piss. A word also to dodgy employers who may use this pandemic as a way of stripping back the work force and messing with pay and conditions, while those who keep their jobs become so grateful that they take it with a smile. Aint just employees who are going to pull a fast one.

---

But the thing is the employer won't have to 'prove' anything. He can put the guy on statutory sick pay and then lay him off. I don't think sick pay is £2,500 a month.
no one is going to condone a worker claiming "It's not safe" all the time. nothing in this world is 100% safe. we make risk assessments every minute of the day just walking down the street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

Reading this thread has made me think bringing the premier league back probably isn’t a bad thing. If they can do it safely why not, I also wouldn’t be against them just ended it and using average points though.

---

why did you you reply to / quote a post of your own ? ? ?

did you forget something ? ? ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

why did you you reply to / quote a post of your own ? ? ?

did you forget something ? ? ?

---

Is it a big deal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Is it a big deal?

---

just a strange thing to do, maybe not in your world ? ? ?, but most of us dont need to quote our own posts and reply like another person

I was informed last week that RCT council has 1600 employees on the sick. I am not sure if that is true, if it is it means that they are all picking up full pay and not limited to the furlough scheme. Maybe the information I was told is wrong? Can they furlough staff if they were already on the sick? I would imagine some people would take advantage of the system.

I do agree with some of the comments above, like we cannot stay like this forever. One chap on the tv the other day saying he has no money coming in as doesn't qualify for the furlough scheme and can't pay his bills. Mind you a lot of people may find their jobs will go after this crisis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

just a strange thing to do, maybe not in your world ? ? ?, but most of us dont need to quote our own posts and reply like another person

---

Same kind of people who later the wording of other people's posts o it fits the answer they want to give. :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

just a strange thing to do, maybe not in your world ? ? ?, but most of us dont need to quote our own posts and reply like another person

---

Sometimes it is a convenient way to reply to a thread. I was never aware that there was a rule book for internet forums. I would say it is less damaging than having cookies installed on your device even after specifically clicking on the reject all cookies button (in breach of GDPR laws). And, it is less damaging than having a site URL that reads "Not Secure". I use an old laptop to connect to this site and it is interesting how much stuff I've picked up directly from this site.

But, yeah, it's probably best to concentrate on someone replying to their own post. That's far more productive in your role as webmaster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Sometimes it is a convenient way to reply to a thread. I was never aware that there was a rule book for internet forums. I would say it is less damaging than having cookies installed on your device even after specifically clicking on the reject all cookies button (in breach of GDPR laws). And, it is less damaging than having a site URL that reads "Not Secure". I use an old laptop to connect to this site and it is interesting how much stuff I've picked up directly from this site.

But, yeah, it's probably best to concentrate on someone replying to their own post. That's far more productive in your role as webmaster.

---

If you are so concerned about the site security and web spying etc why do you log on to the site? Just leave it and you don't have to worry any more.
I cannot see the point of moaning if there is something you can do about the thing you moan about and you don't or will not do it. It's in your hands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

why did you you reply to / quote a post of your own ? ? ?

did you forget something ? ? ?

---

He probably meant to log in as Rudy Gestede

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

You really want that bloke to lose his job? That's not going to benefit anyone.

---

Yea, if there redundancies where he / they work then if there is any justice the work shy and piss takers will be first out of the door.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

But the point is that eventually furlough payments will cease. If someone doesn't think it is safe to go to work then should his company still pay him? Will he claim its not safe? Nothing in life is 100% safe except death.

---

After Furlough ends if they refuse to go to work they will probably be able to claim SSP 94 quid a week, but the likelihood is they could be made redundant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

If you are so concerned about the site security and web spying etc why do you log on to the site? Just leave it and you don't have to worry any more.
I cannot see the point of moaning if there is something you can do about the thing you moan about and you don't or will not do it. It's in your hands.

---

I use an old laptop to come on here, I have raised this question a few times, often it is deleted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Yea, if there redundancies where he / they work then if there is any justice the work shy and piss takers will be first out of the door.

---

That's usually the case anyway, unless the person is mates with the bosses. I still wouldn't want anyone to lose their job though, even if they're a twat. Got to feel for their missus and kids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

After Furlough ends if they refuse to go to work they will probably be able to claim SSP 94 quid a week, but the likelihood is they could be made redundant.

---

Not if unions are involved and the company hasn't been compliant with whatever HSE etc bring out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

That's usually the case anyway, unless the person is mates with the bosses. I still wouldn't want anyone to lose their job though, even if they're a twat. Got to feel for their missus and kids.

---

How do you know he's got a missus and kids? do you know this guy? :shrug: :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

why did you you reply to / quote a post of your own ? ? ?

did you forget something ? ? ?

---

I thought I edited it rather than quoted it. Apologies to the ccmb police.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

He probably meant to log in as Rudy Gestede

---

What? It’s clearly following on from it, the edit button is right by the quote button. Very easy mistake to make when you’ve got fat fingers like me :hehe:

Not everyone needs a second account to slag people off. We haven’t seen your one with the goodfellas photo for a while in fairness though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

What? It’s clearly following on from it, the edit button is right by the quote button. Very easy mistake to make when you’ve got fat fingers like me :hehe:

Not everyone needs a second account to slag people off. We haven’t seen your one with the goodfellas photo for a while in fairness though.

---

Whatever happened to Ronnie Bird? He seemed to become more and more desperate by the hour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Whatever happened to Ronnie Bird? He seemed to become more and more desperate by the hour.

---

He's still here. He's using a cloaking dexice! :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Whatever happened to Ronnie Bird? He seemed to become more and more desperate by the hour.

---

Once everyone realised it was wales bales everyone stopped responding to him too. No point having 2 accounts that everyone ignores :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

What? It’s clearly following on from it, the edit button is right by the quote button. Very easy mistake to make when you’ve got fat fingers like me :hehe:

Not everyone needs a second account to slag people off. We haven’t seen your one with the goodfellas photo for a while in fairness though.

---

Rattled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

How do you know he's got a missus and kids? do you know this guy? :shrug: :hehe:

---

He probably is the guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Not if unions are involved and the company hasn't been compliant with whatever HSE etc bring out.

---

They can and will still get rid of people under the guise of redundancy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Rattled

---

I’m being genuine, I meant to edit it. Reading yours and tuerto’s points make me think as long as it’s done safely there isn’t really a problem bringing it back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

I’m being genuine, I meant to edit it. Reading yours and tuerto’s points make me think as long as it’s done safely there isn’t really a problem bringing it back.

---

With the money the Premier League can throw at testing and keeping its players safe the risk will be minimal. Bundesliga have already started showing the way, La Liga next, so by end of June if PL is given the ok then we should have an idea of how safe it’s going to be.

Danny Rose likened himself and other footballers to guinea pigs but surely the Bundesliga players are the real guinea pigs.

And the fact most people are going to have to go back to work soon too as well. If someone has to go back to a factory, Danny Rose can go back to playing football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

And the fact most people are going to have to go back to work soon too as well. If someone has to go back to a factory, Danny Rose can go back to playing football.

---

This brings me back to the pub opening debate. If/when the government says it is safe to go back to work and furloughing ceases then a man will have to go back to work to support his family. No choice really. But the pubs cannot open because its not safe. There are several points in that.
If it is safe to go to work the average working man might ask why is it not safe to go for a pint, given that whatever social distancing measures which are required are maintained. The difference is that he must go to work but he can choose not to go to the pub. The inference a lot of people will put on that is that the government is telling me I have to put myself at risk to work but does not trust me enough to not put myself at undue risk doing other things.
The other point is the 10's of thousands of people who work in the pub restaurant and leisure trades that cannot work as a result of this. will their furlough be extended? The government has been asked that question but has not replied yet.
I don't want to get into the pub debate again but some of these things do seem like double standards.

They might just change the way a pub operates to make it safe. They are a hotbed of transmission in their current set up.

Until the full details are out there isn’t an answer to your question yet Snaggles but after July employers have to start sharing the burden of the furlough until end of October. What that burden is no one knows yet but the chancellor did indicate that they may need to tailor it differently for certain industry’s. By that I assumed he meant for industry’s like the hospitality industry they may get more help and not required to share as much of the burden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

They can and will still get rid of people under the guise of redundancy.

---

Then they'll have to pay out or reach a settlement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

They might just change the way a pub operates to make it safe. They are a hotbed of transmission in their current set up.

---

No question about that and it might be just those with gardens first, but to make a man do one and prevent him doing the other is a recipe for unrest. As the weather is good now restaurants may be permitted to spill out onto the stret more to accommodate enough folks to make it viable before the bad weather returns. But I think come the 4 July dame first muted something will have to give.

With these players testing positive it’s starting to make me think they should just scrap it again. If they start training and playing matches and more players test positive they’re going to have to start calling games off again. Makes me think the best thing to do is just finish this season and start again when it’s safe to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

With these players testing positive it’s starting to make me think they should just scrap it again. If they start training and playing matches and more players test positive they’re going to have to start calling games off again. Makes me think the best thing to do is just finish this season and start again when it’s safe to do so.

---

Strange how it’s only appearing at clubs who could well go down....:hehe:
Hull are so desperate for the season to be axed I’m sure they’d do almost anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

With these players testing positive it’s starting to make me think they should just scrap it again. If they start training and playing matches and more players test positive they’re going to have to start calling games off again. Makes me think the best thing to do is just finish this season and start again when it’s safe to do so.

---

Are you Boris in disguise? Change you’re mind whenever the wind blows a different direction.

As Andros Townsend has just said himself “We are in the safest workplace in the country” due to the rigorous testing they are getting. Let’s also not forget the games are played outdoors where there’s less chance of transmission. He said the players can’t wait to get back.

Well done to him for actually acknowledging they are not the only workplace being asked to get back to work, unlike that arrogant self entitled prick Danny Rose.