10 Comments »

1. Hello – I believe that we should make every effort to reduce the amount of cars on the roads – but I don’t think the government is very serious about this object. I’m willing to bet that at least 50% of the working population could work from home at least a couple of days per week without any impact on the economy (as a very high percentage of the workforce work on PCs now). Introducing business tax laws which encourage corporations to implement home working schemes would both save businesses money (ie less desk space) plus will go a long way to cutting traffic on our roads… Cars are all about taxes for the government hence no effort to reduce traffic…

   Comment by Paul — 12 Sep 2005 on 2:30 pm | Link

2. "Asked if the Prime Minister has sympathy for the protestors, the PMOS said that we fully understood why people were concerned"…

   …but we really don’t give a shit anyway! get out and walk you bloody paupers…

   Comment by PapaLazzzaru — 12 Sep 2005 on 4:25 pm | Link

3. yes, I’ll just bring my checkout/lathe/class/delivery vehicle/ prisoner/fire engine / war in Iraq, home for a couple of days shall I? that is a typical idiotic statement made by someone on a three day week.

   Comment by Colonel Mad — 12 Sep 2005 on 11:31 pm | Link

4. Obviously Colonel Mad can’t read. As said above – At least 50% of the work force are office workers (ie their work is done through computers) They can work just as easily from home as from work.

   Even most technicians/engineers can investigate and resolve issues remotely because most industrial machinery/robotics/communications/IT/ is computer controlled/driven.

   What is needed is tax incentives to encourage businesses to investigate what percentage of their workers can work from home.

   Comment by Paul — 13 Sep 2005 on 10:56 am | Link

5. Its not the poor sods who have to sit in a car for 5 hours a day who are resisting working from home – its the managers and directors who no longer have the essential tools to manage a dispersed workforce.

   Technology has advanced whilst the ability to manage has retarded.

   In the 1980’s when I employed programmers they were free to work anywhere – anywhere – that they chose. I treated them as responsible adults and all I asked was that work was turned in on time and to quality.

   The problem is all the legislation that has crept in over the past 10 years which makes it impossible to discipline home workers who ‘take the piss’.

   When I was letting folk work from home I could, vary their contracts, fire them, re assign them, make life rewarding or miserable – depending on what was needed to manage them.

   Nah – it aint going to happen – we have too much employment law preventing effective [wo]man management. the technology is there but it is inhibited by legislation.

   Comment by Roger Huffadine — 20 Sep 2005 on 5:09 pm | Link

6. I’m sorry Roger but most of what you have said is nonsense. I agree with what you say about the general lack of management abilities but that is borne out by the rest of your comment.

   I can’t think of a single piece of ‘legislation’ that interferes with good mangement. If you are treating staff like responsible adults then you shouldn’t need to threaten them. Good managers don’t need to be able to ‘make life….miserable’ for their staff, whether through reassigning them or changing their contracts or firing them.

   Managers are still able to discipline and sack staff if that is required. The only change is that Managers are now required to justify that action and follow agreed procedures. I think that preventing Managers acting like little gods, acting on whims and treating their staff like slaves is a good thing. To be honest good mangers have been unaffected by changes in labour laws because they already treated their staff like human beings.

   Comment by Uncarved Block — 21 Sep 2005 on 9:26 am | Link

7. I’m sorry Roger but most of what you have said is nonsense. I agree with what you say about the general lack of management abilities but that is borne out by the rest of your comment.

   I can’t think of a single piece of ‘legislation’ that interferes with good management. If you are treating staff like responsible adults then you shouldn’t need to threaten them. Good managers don’t need to be able to ‘make life….miserable’ for their staff, whether through reassigning them or changing their contracts or firing them.

   Managers are still able to discipline and sack staff if that is required. The only change is that Managers are now required to justify that action and follow agreed procedures. I think that preventing Managers acting like little gods, acting on whims and treating their staff like slaves is a good thing. To be honest good mangers have been unaffected by changes in labour laws because they already treated their staff like human beings.

   Comment by Uncarved Block — 21 Sep 2005 on 9:32 am | Link

8. I’d also go so far as to suggest that modern management is inherently bad because it uses up far too much energy seeking to justify it’s own existence.

   We see this at all levels, from government down. I see it at work every day. Management has become so arrogant that it no longer listens to advice, and instead works to forestall the need for advice in the first place. Consider almost any problem you care to think of, and look at the "solutions" that "management" have come up with. Most of the time they do nothing. Sometimes they’ll pretend to listen and do something – but only if the wording of the suggestion has been changed sufficiently that the original suggester can no longer claim any credit for it. This has the drawback, or course, of changing the original idea to the point where it once again becomes no solution. Or, they’ll initiate a "committee" or "working group" or "thinktank" or whatever to "examine" the problem and come up with no solution anyway.

   Modern management is quite simply a set of rules specifically engineered to keep the money-men in cash and protect them from responsibility or accountability. As I say, I see this on a daily basis. New initiatives or procedures are never designed to ease the workflow or make the company more efficient – as much as they claim to do exactly that, and even when that is the ONLY thing necessary. Rather, additional safeguards, rules, watchdogs, procedures etc are added to make it even more difficult for the man at the bottom to pin the blame for anything on someone further up the line. This is true from the government all the way down to people who clean public bogs.

   In recent times management started to get bogged down in things like Health and Safety and up to a point it is easy to see why the workplace has changed so drastically. However, the not-so-gradual assumption of the American corporate culture into everyday life in the UK seems to me to have had a huge effect on direction of modern British business management. Results now no longer matter; now the PERCEPTION of efficiency is the all-important thing, and results are completely irrelevant.

   I suppose it’s just another example of how "unreal" life is getting where perception of reality is more important than reality itself.

   Comment by PapaLazzzaru — 21 Sep 2005 on 3:25 pm | Link

9. Quite a mouth full by PapalLazzzaru. To summarise, modern business management, and government is all about empire building which is inherently wasteful.

   In the west we live in a Judaeo-Christian competitive environment that is all about "us and them", "good and bad", "legal and illegal citizens", "rich and poor", "workers and managers" even within the same company there are competing factions.

   An alternative is a more communist approach which has proven unsuccessful also. – Primarily, I would suggest, because control has always remained in the hands of a small number of individuals.

   I would suggest a more consensus approach. Rather than "them and us" we should explore a more "just us" approach. Rather than major decisions (which affect the nation) being made by a small government body, why can’t they be voted on by the British people? Substantially more people will vote in shows such as the "X-Factor" than will ever think about voting in an election – So government bodies do NOT represent the views/wishes of the nation.

   I’m sure some consensus voting will sort out the health care system, the education system, the fuel issue, traffic congestion, pension, the gulf war, etc. It will also make a lot more interesting television viewing as competing points of view are debated (for example for best approach to health care). The nation could vote on a selection of options/opinions.

   The next question to ask is: Are people generally ethical and will they vote for the best option for "us" (the nation) or will we maintain a "them and us" view-point?

   Comment by Paul — 22 Sep 2005 on 2:45 pm | Link

10. I think the point was missed. The question is – Is it NOW time for action following the increase in fuel prices? I think it is time for action again to show this goverment we won’t except yet more tax.

    Britain the most Taxed Country in the World.

    Comment by Sandy Beach — 10 Nov 2007 on 2:45 pm | Link

---

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.