blueb

Resident Members
  • Content count

    1,825
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

blueb last won the day on May 28 2016

blueb had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

41 Excellent

2 Followers

About blueb

  • Rank
    Regular User
  1. So makes you wonder why they were going to hand over ANY addresses to aANY direct mail marketing company whether they were gun owners or any other group on their databases. Will the Met be advertising for anew media manager?
  2. There are "box cutters" that suit cutting wrapping etc, but not sure there is any knife For the SPECiFIC use of opening boxes.
  3. There are pretty much two certainties - that initially the grass IS always greener on the other side, and you probably noticed that when you left your prev job to join the police. Secondly, by default, once you ave settled into the new job (Whatever it may be), the grass becomes less green and you start to find reason for fault or discontent. It reads as if you had a desire to join the job and then found it wasn't what you wanted - doesn't that remind you of choosing a new car, wallpaper, pretty much anything that you absolutely craved and then found reason to decide it wasn't for you after all. Its a bold, brave and in my view, sensible and brave person who has the opportunity and chooses their work to match the life/work balance. By the sounds of it there is no loss financially. In local government you may find opportunities for development / promotion in the future. within reason its a fairly secure, financially sound and structured place to work. There are lots of saying along the lines of regretting what you didn't do is greater than the loss of not doing it etc. What's the worst that can happen? Stay and get locked into 35 years in the hope of a pension and being miserable, leaving and getting "locked" out of the police. Do a quick internet search of SWOT analysis and do it for this decision. PM if you want
  4. Its entirely up to you / RAYNET what you wear, what I was trying to say but you seemed to miss, is to ask if you saw someone wearing the kit, would you see them as a police office or just someone wearing a hi-viz. Once you have decided on that, you can use that view if asked. The reason to ask, is if you align too closely with one of the emer services then you may cause confusion at a time when clarity is needed. Personally, its the label on the front/back that says what organisation you belong to rather than the fact its yellow or not. At least by opting for another colour you make yourselves immediately identifiable as well as compliant in terms of safety. If your wearing at an incident the chances of you being confused with being a police officer are truly minimal - lots of people have a radio/radios. As you say, its more to do with your actions and your actions are most unlikely to be interpreted as police either. Are you sure colour is a requirement? Consider how you can make yourselves stand out or differentiate from the rest. Nothing worse than trying to find someone amongst a horde of yellow hi-viz and having to rely on looking at their backs - just think, if you as RAYNET/other even had green collars, red hats or something, that reduces the confusion. Just a hi-viz could mean anything from someone from the media, street cleaning team or 'another' organisation.
  5. AFAIK there is no legislation about the blue/silver reflective markings on clothing , otherwise no issues. Put it another way, if you were to see someone in the kit your proposing, would you think it was a) a police officer, b) an ex-officer with old kit or c) someone who chose to buy/use second hand kit rather than buy what may be more appropriate kit? Out of interest, if your involved in RAYNET and likely to be outside, why not think of going for orange rather than yellow - yellow attracts flies & bugs whilst orange doesn't!
  6. Avoid using too many sir/ma'am etc you can have a healthy, respectful conversation without using either their 'rank' or name. As the applicant is not yet a member of the thayer, using sir/ma'am can be a little squirmy in the conversation unless you're used to it. Be natural.
  7. Why not go back to that same lawyer and ask how to go about getting it removed?
  8. equally, a USP or niche part of the market is a provider selling not to companies, big players etc, rather they sell to the small scale consumer, with a law that is far from clear cut and clearly set out with opportunities for all involved to get it wrong.
  9. There isn't even a need as a purchased to pretend to be a catering company. No reason why I/they can't buy it for catering purposes (for example) and yet have no need to be a business, I may well want to have fluffy cream for a private function, I have absolutely no need to prove I'm a business/ catering company. Pretty slim requirements on the retailers to remain legit but it looks like our OP knows that already! Alas that can also mean pretty easy to circumvent those requirements.
  10. So, in brief, your looking to start your own business, not sure of the legalities which may DIRECTLY result in the loss of your business or be personally subject to fines, and whether its worthwhile getting your on, independent legal advise? Your supplier could/should provide some guidance, if nothing else, what are their T&Cs to you, if they don't have any or your thinking of buying from a less than legit source then perhaps your business plan is in need of a full review. The polite suggestion is to seek your own legal advise as it will affect you and your future business.
  11. If its anything like most allotments you see, the ability to drive any vehicle between the plots seems quite limited. You would e hard pushed to say its anything other than private land as far as car Ins goes (MOT doesn't apply at all on your allotment). If it gets taken onto the road then perhaps you might like to make a note of when that happens and inform the local police - that then is quite clearly public for MOT & Ins. Most allotments have a long list of rules they must comply with - is your tenant breaking any of them by having his/her car on there?
  12. Thanks. However you look at it, as the Nat H&S rep it sounds like your being asked to do something that puts you/others at a greater risk than needed, and in some ways the risk your being put to and that of others is higher than the potential risk your attending.
  13. Working traffic census has its highs and lows but surprisingly they often have an important role in decision making that can only be achieved by asking the actual road users. That the people asking the questions may have looked like students doesn't mean the questions have any less value. As you didn't partake, you'll never know! As a result all drivers when so directed are required to go through the census check but do not have to participate with failure to go as direct by the officer is an offence. Out of interest they way your intro read of trying to get to an incident swiftly in your van suggests it was either an unmarked one or perhaps had a company logo on the side. There can be quite a few motorists who are not always keen to pass through a census and ask not to. It gets to a point where you says "yes you do have to go" almost irrespective of the reason / excuse given by the driver. Perhaps your eagerness to go to a vague place some distance away put over an attitude that buffed the officer and you both came to a frosty solution. The suggestion of arrest is sometimes a fast and succinct way of getting over a message, in the same way as you may have said 'I'm going to see about some kids on the line' Out of interest, presumably this was reported as a 'near miss'event to your supervisor and management to progress so as to identify any needs / shortfalls in your current systems. Perhaps as a National health & safety rep you could progress the matter with your management to review the current method of dealing with people on the rails which is not always working as well as it could and therefore compromising your/their safety. Similarly, on reflection as a National H&S rep does the risk assessment and method statement within your company's safe system of work really come unto the mark by asking you to undertake, what you perceive as an urgent task, in that vehicle, in that condition and with your current level of driver training. Perhaps, and I suggest this to you as the National H&S rep that had you had an accident/collission enroute, were you operating within your training, was your supervision sufficient, were the controls in place and being applied. Overall you could use this incident as a significant real world event to overhaul how you and your colleagues may be exposed to avoidable risks. Of course, and I put this as a final caveat, perhaps your eagerness to respond was over and above what was being expected of you under the circumstances and had an accident / collision occurred that you were not fully within your safe system of work? I apologise as the latter part is all off topic of the census
  14. Absolutely agree. One of the thing to think about when wanting to specialise in 3 quite diverse roles even before getting a uniform is realising if you go for the full time then 30 plus years is a longtime. And at some stage you would come away from that speciality. The other thing to think about is how disappointed or prepared you would be to take an alternative career route if you didn't get one of the specialisms
  15. So we're you in the driving seat or was the girlfriend? If it wasn't you, then why did they deal with you who was neither the driver or owner? What was the reason They issued the S59 or was it all directed to the girlfriend? Oops, not sure why your upset at being disturbed. Had you been the rapist (as per your example) then your girlfriend would have been most grateful for the police interest! Or did you have a sign saying "consenting adults" in the window?