Submitted by Greyham on Tue, 24/07/2012 - 4:54pm.

[Grappling]

Submitted by Greyham on Tue, 24/07/2012 - 4:54pm.

""@Grappling I have been a little confused with your responses to my posts,""

You're a little confused with everyones responses - and reality.

""Now I have visited your group (I see you have alot of followers (not))""

It's private, it don't work like you think it does!

""Good luck with your campain,""

I'm not part of any campaign anywhere, you'll be pleased to know. But I do have to go shopping right now.

Ohh. You're too rude to bother replying to.

[Judi]

Hi Grappling and Gissajob

I'm Lazy Cow from the Indus Delta discussion forum. 

This new group is likely to attract LOADS of new members, I reckon.   If I'm right about that then Indus Delta will be able to return to its original and solo purpose - apparently the Indus Delta website only exists in order for W2W industry employees to swap messages with each other.   The idea of inviting the unemployed to join the discussions is one that the owners of Indus Delta don't like.  Their forum's focus is so narrow that the customers of the W2W industry are all subversives, it seems!  Continuous improvement does not seem to be one of Indus Delta's objectives. 

It is a waste of time to argue with people like Greyham on Indus Delta.  Greyham used to be employed in the W2W industry but then he was made redundant from that.  He mourns the loss because apparently he enjoyed lecturing other people. 

Having been made redundant, Greyham then got himself three part time jobs. The combined pay is less than he was earning in the W2W industry but he reckons that his three jobs pay him enough to get by on.  I pointed out that three jobs might be OK if one has a car - there is no way to do it if one is dependent on public transport instead - as I am.  Greyham has a car and he did not reply to my post on Indus Delta about these practical considerations but, in a later post, Greyham did comment that the idea of multiple jobs is not practical without one's own car. 

The whole W2W thing is daft.  The pollies who devise these stupid schemes refuse to admit that their own actions in wrecking the economy, encouraging mass economic immigration etc have caused massive damage from which UK PLC is unlikely to recover any time soon. 

Only today, an MP called David Gaulke, has been lecturing me about paying my window-cleaner in cash.  I give my window cleaner £5 in cash every four weeks when he comes to clean the windows.  Mrs Gaulke does the same because her only other option is to make Mr Gaulke clean the windows himself.......

[Grappling]

On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 18:07:57 UTC+1, Gissajob wrote:

Hi Grappling (and others).
Thought I'd join out of sympathy!
Another fugitive from ID (where I am currently writebetweentheeyes), am on my 4th incarnation there having been banned for speaking out on my previous 3.

OK. Gissa,
I've been online for over an hour, reading the newssites and watching newsnight, - and scared to look in here just in case a roit had broken out! I must admit I thought Gissa and writebetween were 2 different ppl. in there.

I've got a webshite somewhere called gissajob - just used it just so I had my bookmarks avalable on any PC when I was on 1 of these voluntary schames about 3 years ago.
Quickest way to get a job is to leave.

[Grappling]

Hi Grappling and Gissajob

I'm Lazy Cow from the Indus Delta discussion forum.

OK LC.
I don't post on any other sites either, under a different name, honest gov.

I was going to reply to your post in there. esp. with them being stitched up, I don't know but here how much they're expecting to "save" LOL on benefits.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9298663/Benefits-spending-blows-out-by-9bn.html

[Gissajob]

Hi Grappling,
Firstly thanks for your contributions over on ID.
Just to clear up:

"I thought Gissa and writebetween were 2 different ppl. in there."

you're right - on ID I'm not gissajob - but I use that name on a couple of other sites.
I find it hard to give up contributing on ID as the temptation to correct so many misconceptions becomes overwhelming.  I have been banned 3 times now (Consignment 400, Consignment 399 and consigna4ed-_to_oblivion).  In my opinion each time by an overzealous moderator - afraid to let free speech take its course especially when the message is "off message".
Thanks to to LC/Judi also for support and your postings.  Whatever's happened to VoP?  Do you think she's on another holiday!?

[Gissajob]

Hi LC/Judi,
Just a quickie!
It seems that ID has shut its doors to me.  Anything I post now (no matter how uncontroversial) does not see the light of day.  I suspect that this may be a deliberate policy (inspired/suggested by Voice) to exclude any off message contributions.

Are you having the same result with ID postings?

I guess the net effect of the policy of censorship (if it is such) will be to reduce the site to a moribund little backwater for W2W employees.

What's your legal opinion of the Cait ruling?  How likely is she to be allowed to appeal?

[Lazy Cow]

Hi Gissajob

I'm not sure what is happening with Indus Delta. 

On Monday, Voice copied and pasted (verbatim) one of the earliest newspaper articles that had been published concerning Cait Reilly and Jamie Wilson.  The title for the new thread was chosen by Voice herself and, predictably, the title gloats that the Judgement is a "Victory for Common-sense." 

I submitted a reply.  The ruling by Mr Justice Foskett is only the first round in proceedings that could go to the Court of Appeal, then the Supreme Court and eventually the European Court of Human Rights as far as the Human Rights aspect of the judgement is concerned.  As yet, we don't know what Miss Reilly and her lawyers might do so it is far too early for anyone to gloat about "victory." 

Predictably, my reply has not been published. 

So!  I've just submitted another reply to that same thread, this time in response to a comment from Paul Bivand.  Mkmky posted a comment earlier which has been published and Paul is a sensible bloke.   He wouldn't kill off Indus Delta and just reduce it to a rah-rah site for employees of the W2W industry but he doesn't seem to be the only person with Site Admin/Moderator controls over the discussion forum.  If Paul is not available to moderate the thing himself then I predict that the Indus Delta discussion forum will just descend into being nothing more than a sloppy heap of rah-rah rubbish.

Stephw2w or similar told one of the other W2W industry workers yesterday that writebetweentheeyes is just an "agitator."  She can't prove that allegation and I am amazed that any sensible moderator would have allowed that claim to be published - but it has happened, all the same.  Then again, I might be expecting a degree of professionalism from Indus Delta that they might not be able to supply. 

I don't think it is worth worrying about.  This "Inside the Black Box" group is much better anyway - one doesn't have to put up with irritating people like Voice, or with other W2W industry workers whingeing that they feel "hurt" because they imagine that people who attack inane comments from them are mounting personal attacks on them as well.   Who has either enough time or the inclination to put up with self-pitying nonsense like that? 

Going back to Cait Reilly, my feeling is that the Govt has won the legal battle with her but she has won the moral battle with the Govt.  Cait Reilly is a geology graduate and, presumably, the voluntary work that she was doing for the museum was the sort of thing that she would like to be paid to do full-time. 

Therefore if the DWP wanted to send Miss Reilly on a "Sector Based Work Academy" scheme, why on earth didn't they have the common-sense to use their own nous and clout in order to get the museum to take Miss Reilly full time for 8 weeks or however long the SWBA schemes last for?    Why on earth did they try to use this young graduate as a means to help Poundland to improve Poundland's profits instead? 

Similarly, what does an MP or a Senior Civil Servant do when his/her own child has just graduated with a degree in geology?  Pack their own child off to Poundland for 8 weeks for no pay?  I doubt that very much.  I would think that a company such as BP probably has a huge geology department because of things like offshore oil.  A young graduate working in their geology department wouldn't make any difference to BP's own profits.  It would just be some work experience that would have genuine relevance to the youngster's recent degree in geology.  I'll bet that the MP or Senior Civil Servant would use his/her own clout with BP in order to get BP to provide a six-month unpaid "internship" to the privileged child with the recent geology degree.  Miss Reilly does not have access to the Old Boys Network of privilege, so Grayling thinks that she can be condemned to Poundland instead when he would NOT do that to one of his own children, does he? 

It seems to me that Cait Reilly continues to occupy every inch of the moral high ground and that she is perfectly entitled to do so. 

[Lazy Cow]

Hi again, Gissajob

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/reilly-wilson-rulings-on-costs.pdf

It appears that both sides in the recent Cait Reilly & Jamie Wilson v IDS matter were granted leave to appeal by Mr Justice Foskett.  

This reinforces my own view that it is far too early for people like Voice to gloat.  In the document above, Foskett himself said that he realised that other people (ie higher courts) might interpret the relevant law in different ways from Foskett's own conclusions.

That said, I reckon it is easier to dig a tunnel to Australia than to get the bleedin' obvious into the skulls of some of the people who boast that they are employed in the W2W industry!

LC

[Gissajob]

HI LC
I'm heartened that leave to appeal has been granted.  It seems to be that the judgement was perverse and based upon one person's opinion as the what "contemporary thinking" is.  Personally I don't see it as the judiciary's job to guess at "contempoarary thinking" - to do so smacks of Simon Cowell and the modern day obsession with talent shows. Surely the judge should make judgements based on the facts of a particular case and the written law - still what would I know?

As for ID.  I agree with your interpretation.  I'm pretty sure that the excrable Voice has had a word in the ear of at least one of the moderators (Rose someoneorother?) and persuaded her to operate a blacklist of people whose posts will not see the light of day no matter what the content.  So much for the site becoming a means of adult debate for both sides of the discussion - no chance!  I'm sure that you are on the list as am I and probably odsset.  I know the latter has given up posting and I will now do the same.  There really is no point having a site if it only allows one set of opinions.  I predict that VP, Greyham et al will now indulge in an orgy of self congratulation and mutual admiration but will probably disappear up one another's orofices as the rest of the audience fall asleep from boredom.
Keep smiling!  The sun is out and the allotment beckons!

[Lazy Cow]

Hi Gissajob

I'm interested to hear that you disagree with Mr Justice Foskett.  He realised that loads of people would disagree with him - that is why he has given both sides very short deadlines for lodging their respective appeals, he has said that he believes it would be in the public interest for the Court of Appeal to act expeditiously, etc. 

Tyn - one of the ID contributors whose views and whose approach I respect - has just made an interesting point on the ID thread about Cait Reilly.  Tyn reckons that the workfare schemes can't really be called "slavery."  I agree - the word "slavery" has several traditional connotations - eg the slave is the legal property of the master.  These connotations are not present in the workfare schemes. 

However, Tyn likens these schemes to the concept of Serfdom, with the State as the Lord of the Manor.  (According to Tyn, serfdom became illegal in 1959.  I had imagined that the whole idea of serfdom had died out hundreds of years ago but apparently not.) 

I agree with Tyn.  I think that the Tories are trying to act like the Lord of the Manor and that they are trying to treat welfare recipients as if we were all their serfs.  I think Tyn's suggestion is much closer to the reality than calling the workfare schemes "slavery."

That said, the EU's Human Rights legislation talks about "slavery" and it does not mention "serfdom."   Mr Justice Foskett was in a bind.  What does EU law actually mean by the use when it uses the  the word "slavery"?   Does the concept include "serfdom"?  

Nobody knows, so the sensible way to proceed will be to ask the European Court of Human Rights to say what it means.  However that cannot happen unless the parties have first exhausted all the legal remedies that might be available in England & Wales.  This means going to the Court of Appeal next and then to the Supreme Court.  Mr Justice Foskett has said that he hopes all the higher courts will act promptly in order to deal with the matter.

I think the whole thing will need to go all the way up to the ECHR but the ECHR won't act quickly.  The ECHR has a huge backlog of existing applications, apparently.  Also, Miss Reilly and/or Mr Wilson might decide not to pursue their respective claims to the bitter end. 

As far as ID is concerned, you were right!  They won't tolerate me telling Voice where to get off!   That makes ID look pathetic, ill-informed and biased, imho.   However, Voice wants a tame rah-rah club and that's what she'll probably get.  She does seem to realise that the person who does the most screaming usually gets the lion's share of the attention!

[Gissajob]

Whether "slavery" or "serfdom" it's forced labour - the rest is pure semantics.