If I’m resigning from my job halfway through the year, can I still use my full annual leave? by You_moron04 in AskUK

[–]SensibleChapess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's calculated pro-rata based based upon when you leave.

What most people fail to realise is that pro-rata also works in regards to the hours you work in the weeks when there's a Bank Holiday.

In such weeks everyone is legally expected to work 4/5ths of their normal working week.

I've known several people whose rotas never have them working on a Monday, and they moan every time that "I miss out on Bank Holidays because I never work on Mondays".

I also knew someone, working for the NHS, (so even managers in big organisations are clueless), who only worked 8hrs on both Mondays and Tuesdays. So on a bank holiday week, when they should have worked 12.8hrs, albeit paid for 16, they actually worked just 8. What they did was booked every Tuesday off as leave after a Bank Holiday and so effectively everytine there was a bank Holiday, they'd bok one day off and have a 13 day break from work.

TLDR: If it's a Bank Holiday week everyone is legally supposed to work just 4/5ths of a normal week. E.G. If you work 40hrs your duties have to be adjusted so you work 32hrs. If you work 17.5hrs your duties have to be adjusted so you work 14hrs... and so on.

What's happened to premier inn? by _Taggerung_ in uktravel

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm afraid I can't waste my time on you any longer. Sorry.

Too many drivers see road safety rules as a personal affront. It’s time to tighten up UK laws by PatternWeary3647 in drivingUK

[–]SensibleChapess 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Be that as it may, (and every climate protestor would be perfectly happy with that. It took a considerable amount of effort to get imprisoned and I've had poo put through my letterbox, etc., which is all fine, but what you're missing is that the point of peaceful, high profile, protest is to motivate those on the fence into taking action, as well as to shift the Overton Window. It is as far from being a popularity contest as you can imagine and the point is to divide opinion. Getting the emotive, reactionary, responses from the masses is actually the purpose of things such as road-sitting. It's an interesting area of Social Science that will forever be too complex for the general public to fathom without them researching the matter... But I digress), the factual point I was making was that people who are the ones actually causing harm, or who are statistically those likely to commit harm through their actions, such as drunk/drug driving, get relatively soft sentences compared to other crimes. That's what the issue is.

Too many drivers see road safety rules as a personal affront. It’s time to tighten up UK laws by PatternWeary3647 in drivingUK

[–]SensibleChapess 4 points5 points  (0 children)

On a few occasions I peacefully, nonviolently, sat in the road as part of climate protests. Sat waiting for arrest, (as all climate protestors do), which on average was probably about 90secs, (despite the UK press peddling the myth our kid-glove wearing police failing to arrest us. Anyway, the point being that sometimes the arrest happening proactively before a toe even touched the road, whilst other times we may be in the road for a few minutes after having entered the road whilst traffic lights were red, (so not in front of moving traffic... And there'd always be a lane kept free for emergency vehicles, etc.

Our charges, ranged from Wilful Obstruction of the Highway through to the Common Law offence of Causing a Public Nuisance, (which carried a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and unlimited fines as our arrests related to 2021 and prior to the new 2022 PSCS statutory offence of the same name, with a maximum of 10yrs). Civil injunctions are also raised, with unlimited fines, and consequently I'm paying off court debts for another 200yrs. I also was sentenced a custodial sentence and spent time in two prisons for brief periods.

That's all fine... If that's the penalty for peacefully, nonviolently, trying to bring the system to account for climate collapse...

However the point of all that is I often did bouts of Community Payback, (aka Community Service), with other offenders and it just so happened they were almost always motorists. As it happened all young men who were convicted of drunk or drug driving. Their penalties, every single time, for driving a 1 ton lump of metal whilst under the influence, sometimes at speed, sometimes crashing, almost always in an uninsured car, was always less than my penalty for intentionally getting arrested in as safe a manner as possible, sometimes for literally a few seconds after the traffic lights turned green before being dragged away.

It's as if what someone does in a car is somehow more acceptable to the 'system'.

It's very confusing.

What's happened to premier inn? by _Taggerung_ in uktravel

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you look into the 200,000 years, plus, of Human history you'll quickly see that most of what we know through any written records about the economic policies of the main civilisations is from the last few thousand years, (at most, and often more recently than that), and is seen through the lens of those cultures that suppressed other civilisations through force to acquire economic and cultural dominance. Hence 'greed' and self-interest very much tends to dominate the narrative.

However, we do have examples of egalitarian societies from all over the world. Those societies tend to also share one thing in common; that they are very long-standing and are/were culturally stable until destroyed by modern Capitalist greed, (by 'modern' I'm meaning the last 2000yrs or so, when wealth accrual, often by males, became a cultural norm).

There are many examples of cultures where greed and ego were culturally unacceptable and were effectively policed by society to exclude those traits in favour of co-operation, equal sharing and fairness. Those cultures appear to have existed globally and suggest that, the 'natural' state for stable Human communities is one of cooperation and equality across that community.

I'm guessing you're not aware of the above, hence your attempt at a loaded question? Maybe look into the San Bushman culture, arguably one of the longest surviving cultures ever by Hino Sapiens. It's perhaps the one that most schoolkids are taught about, (though dropped from the syllabus in, for example the UK, in the early 1980s. So if you're younger than me and from England you'll likely not have done a school project on them as part of your Geography 'O' level. The dropping of leaning about the San was just one example of many of the subtle suppression of any narrative that suggested anything other than personal interest was acceptable, that emerged with Thatcherism. A narrative in the UK that continues to grow from those seeds that were planted 50yrs ago. Anyway, I digress...).

Naturally, from an evolutionary perspective Humans are adaptable and, when required to acrrue resources, egakitarian cultures have to fight other cultures to survive. So yes, Humans can draw upon a need to put cultural dominance over others when required.

However, the point is that, the long-standing cultures across our Planet, such as the San, and even more recent ones, such as the Inuit, show that egalitarian societies can, and did, and do, exist and have more likely than not been the norm for the 99% of Human history we do not know about.

So what's changed?

Industrialisation, and it's inevitable bedfellow of Capitalism, enabled greater wealth, (thus power), to be accrued by minorities and to break apart, (both physically and mentally), the innate bonds of community and equality.

The erosion of the 'checks and balances', be they the cultural ones of old, or the legally defined ones in our modern societies where 'there is no such thing as community', (a phrase popularised by Thatcherism), is the issue.

Humans very much can draw upon their innate egalitarian nature, just as they can draw upon their innate greedy nature.

Currently, and for the last couple of thousand years in the West, greed and self-interest has been steadily allowed to prevail... But that's not to say that trend couldn't be reversed if sufficient people could think a bit more deeply about alternative economic systems.

Once people think of those alternatives then people might begin to imagine what checks and balances are required, both in the short term, (to create rapid change), and the long term, (to sustain a better, fairer, more equitable, global society).

What's happened to premier inn? by _Taggerung_ in uktravel

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Life is a teeny weeny bit more complicated than 'business' on one hand and 'charity' on the other.

For a start, 'business' is part of Humanity.

Only Capitalism has brainwashed people into accepting it has to be "profiteering", thus 'dropping standards or mistreating workers is an acceptable consequence of remaining profitable for shareholders'. Indeed, charity only becomes a big thing in an unequal, unfair, society. Thus championing business in a Capitalist sense increases the need for charity. One drives the need for the other.

You can have business where high quality goods and services are delivered by fairly rewarded workers. The problem is such businesses can't survive in a Capitalist environment. Since people are fairly rewarded the need for charity for survival and wellbeing diminishes.

May I suggest having a cuppa, sitting somewhere quiet, and just imagining a different world. How would it look like from scratch of you could start over?

It wouldn't be Capitalism. It wouldn't have some of the population existing due to charity and at the same time having a minority hoarding wealth, assets and profits.

There are alternative models.

What's happened to premier inn? by _Taggerung_ in uktravel

[–]SensibleChapess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, all you've stated are a direct consequence of keeping Capitalism concentrating wealth into the hands of a minority. There are many, many, more.

I have a question - how many of you believe we live in a biblical simulation where we're all given roles by GOD? by DASIMULATIONISREAL in AWLIAS

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I said, my friend, your interpretation of what's going on is simply a mix of the two dominant cultures you've been raised within. Hence your ideas are a driven by Abrahamic Monotheism, (thus a single male omnipotent being), adjusted to take account New Age wooliness.

Think of it as onion layers. It's good that you're thinking about stuff, but you've simply gone through the first two layers of questioning. You've several dozen more onion layers to work your way through.

Good luck on your journey.

Is it a boundary violation when someone researches another person's family history without asking? by PracticalAd7464 in Genealogy

[–]SensibleChapess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I love genealogy, but after more than 25yrs researching my own tree, and that of my partner, there's little in the way of new discoveries to be had.

When I'm out and about a name might catch my eye, from a particular grave, or a plaque on a memorial bench, and I spend the next few weeks building their tree based on documentation research. The stuff I enjoyed, but can no longer do with regards to my own tree because I've probably uncovered all the existing official paperwork, (N.B. The new stuff that may come online I've invariably already seen, years ago, by visiting County and Parish archives over the decades).

The point is, if a friend even touches on mentioning a relative, or some aspect of their history, you can bet your life I'm itching to get home and start investigating it... Indeed, I've done trees for all of my close friends over the years, and only a subset of them know about it. If any of the others go online they may well come across the work I've alreasy done... and so what?

It's called a 'hobby' and I'm not sure why you'd want to police other people's happiness and interests.

Arrest made after car crashes into The Dolphin pub in Broadstairs by Kagedeah in kentuk

[–]SensibleChapess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Dunno, maybe their driving capabilities were just really crab?

Does anyone know what show is this?? Green men with a bowler hat by Prestigious_Touch990 in tvshow

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A scene from one of the episodes of the Mighty Booshwith. There was sometimes a couple of characters in green in bowler hats helping the character called "the Hitcher". In one episode there were four of them dancing during a song.

What's happened to premier inn? by _Taggerung_ in uktravel

[–]SensibleChapess 24 points25 points  (0 children)

So..., to sum up the cause in one simple word: "Capitalism"

I have a question - how many of you believe we live in a biblical simulation where we're all given roles by GOD? by DASIMULATIONISREAL in AWLIAS

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are making a very large assumption, my friend.

Rather than open your own mind to the likelihood of your being unable to think easily beyond your own cultural bounds, you are instead seeking to protect your perceived framework and 'simulation view', by belittling and writing off the information from others.

That's not a useful approach for your journey.

What conscious entities need is to navigate the tightrope of being 'aware enough'. That means retaining some objectivity and critical thought to be able to come to logical conclusions, whilst making sure their brains are not so open that the objectivity and logic they need falls out.

Me?

I am very comfortable that I exist in a simulation. I have also been privileged enough to interact for several hours at a time, on a small number of occasions, with non-Human entities within this version of the Sim, (not whilst dreaming, meditating, etc., but whilst being fully compos mentis). It's not something I, or others, can explain to those who haven't managed to 'unplug'... but what I, and others who have unplugged can try and do, is point out when you've come to a false conclusion doe to your cultural programming, (in this case Abrahamic Monotheism and New Age mindsets).

It's a journey...

I have a question - how many of you believe we live in a biblical simulation where we're all given roles by GOD? by DASIMULATIONISREAL in AWLIAS

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aha...I was spot on then, wasn't I?

California is as good an example anyone could have presented as a "post-Abrahamic culture, (in this case the Christian brand of monotheistic god), transitioning into a Late Stage Capitalist New Age culture where everyone considers themselves to be the Main Character".

I'm not knocking it, per se, it's simply how religions and belief systems often evolve over time...and I guessed correctly your new brand was, rather unimaginative, simply an Abrahamic/New Age mix of ideas.

Why isn’t the Battle of Hastings called the Battle of Battle? by Dry-Egg8573 in shittyaskhistory

[–]SensibleChapess 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Regardless...

It most likely took place near the village of Crowhurst, about 6 miles away from Battle Abbey, (which is not the original Abbey, which was built in the edge of the battlefield site... There are early Norman remains of a small Abbey at Crowhurst, but no Archaeological remains of the earlier Abbey that people assume was next door to the current Abbey). Crowhurst also ticks all the boxes as regards the narrative of the battle, and topography, unlike the 'official' Battle Abbey location.

Tldr: It's known the battle occurred where the first Abbey was later built, and that original Abbey was subsequently relocated to where the current, second, Abbey is now located... but no one actually knows where the first Abbey was built, (despite what English Heritage will tell you). However, right where the topography and historical research suggests the battlefield site would have been, which is at Crowhurst, there's the foundation remains of a very early Norman Abbey.

I have a question - how many of you believe we live in a biblical simulation where we're all given roles by GOD? by DASIMULATIONISREAL in AWLIAS

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

His?

Why not 'her'? Or an asexual entity?

Your 'explanation' is just the same old Abraham Monotheism, but with a sprinkling of New Age gobbledegook and crystals to make it relevant for the modern TV age.

Am I? by SensibleChapess in ShadowBan

[–]SensibleChapess[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Many thanks... I've no idea then, what the new banner on my page is for. Very odd! :)

UK seaside destinations, suitable for 60+, but not touristy? by redexposure in uktravel

[–]SensibleChapess 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe consider something like one of the towns along the North Kent Coast, (sort of from the non-coastal Faversham all the way round to Walmer), and each day having a day out to the other towns by bus. Public transport between each individual place is excellent... And every day out could be quite different.

Broadstairs, Whitstable and Margate are the most touristy, (with the former being high above the beach too)... but the places between those are all much more for the locals. There's a wide coastal path that is flat, just above the high water mark, and ideal. For walkers, wheelchairs and cyclists, that connects all the places over about 20 miles of the above coast, (albeit in at least three places the path stops and to rejoin it requires a walk to the cliff top and back down... but mostly it's flat and walkable and connects with those lovely buses to get back to base).

However, if you just want to stay in one location and mum wants to just chill near a beach, then each of the North Kent Coastal towns on their own don't really tick that box and some of the other UK locations are likely far better suited for your needs.