21st February 2006, 02:00 PM
No Tile-man, I don`t agree with you.My experiences are obviously vastly different from yours.As are the majority of those with whom I have worked on the circuit.
Well my experience, and those of the majority of the people I have worked with over the last 20 odd years is rather different to yours.
The structures in place that you mention are inadequate. The standards are optional and not policed.
Yes they are inadequate- but they exist, and so use them, and lobby for improvements.
The IFA seriously expects short-term contracted temporary and casual workers to report their employers?
Every complaint I have made for people I have worked for has been taken seriously, and I can?t say have adversely effected my career, in the case of the IFA, Well the new disciplinary procedures allow identities to be protected. Of course the traditional way to over come ?the power of the boss? was collective action joining a union, and so have such things as union representatives who could put problems to management, and also have access to legal resources if things were that bad. And of course if everyone makes a complaint you can?t sack the entire workforce and get your job done on time?.
Very clever.Maintains an overwhelming atmosphere of silence does`nt it? Very clever.Tell you what, I`ll make you a deal;stop throwing this "prove it or shut it" attitude at me and I promise I won`t involve the public in this dialogue via the mass media.
Actually I will take you up on your offer: please put up or shut up ? and please involve your allegations with as much public scrutiny as you can - to allow fair representations by all parties. You may want to consider putting your allegations on a blog? This link is quite useful
http://www.blogger.com/start?hl=en
The more public scrutiny the better because it brings out what is clearly a hugely under-recognised problem out into the open. Give the public something to scrutinise. It would be an excellent way of getting something down that we can move on.
As it happens, I feel that the public are indeed the "proper authorities".Who I work for is irrelevent.With the exception of one notable occurance, I discuss general concepts on here.I also listen to the views of others and learn from them.I have chosen not to go to the IFA with details of transgressions for my own reasons-one of which is that I feel that any transgression of standards is for the curators to deal with. They are the public representatives-not the IFA.
Well good so you have taken your evidence to the relevant curatorial bodies ? I?m glad to hear it. How are proceedings developing?
Well my experience, and those of the majority of the people I have worked with over the last 20 odd years is rather different to yours.
The structures in place that you mention are inadequate. The standards are optional and not policed.
Yes they are inadequate- but they exist, and so use them, and lobby for improvements.
The IFA seriously expects short-term contracted temporary and casual workers to report their employers?
Every complaint I have made for people I have worked for has been taken seriously, and I can?t say have adversely effected my career, in the case of the IFA, Well the new disciplinary procedures allow identities to be protected. Of course the traditional way to over come ?the power of the boss? was collective action joining a union, and so have such things as union representatives who could put problems to management, and also have access to legal resources if things were that bad. And of course if everyone makes a complaint you can?t sack the entire workforce and get your job done on time?.
Very clever.Maintains an overwhelming atmosphere of silence does`nt it? Very clever.Tell you what, I`ll make you a deal;stop throwing this "prove it or shut it" attitude at me and I promise I won`t involve the public in this dialogue via the mass media.
Actually I will take you up on your offer: please put up or shut up ? and please involve your allegations with as much public scrutiny as you can - to allow fair representations by all parties. You may want to consider putting your allegations on a blog? This link is quite useful
http://www.blogger.com/start?hl=en
The more public scrutiny the better because it brings out what is clearly a hugely under-recognised problem out into the open. Give the public something to scrutinise. It would be an excellent way of getting something down that we can move on.
As it happens, I feel that the public are indeed the "proper authorities".Who I work for is irrelevent.With the exception of one notable occurance, I discuss general concepts on here.I also listen to the views of others and learn from them.I have chosen not to go to the IFA with details of transgressions for my own reasons-one of which is that I feel that any transgression of standards is for the curators to deal with. They are the public representatives-not the IFA.
Well good so you have taken your evidence to the relevant curatorial bodies ? I?m glad to hear it. How are proceedings developing?