Politics3 mins ago
Political Correctness/ 'elf &Safety
12 Answers
Although the two are separate issues they are often clubbed together in promoting idiotic and stupid laws, rules and regulations in foul-Labour Great Britain.
We have heard that Muslims have banned Christmas up north and kids can not play conkers without safety specs and gauntlets etc.
But at the same time we hear these are fabrications of the truth and such rules and PC is not actually that prominent.
My question, therefore, is can anybody give me a personal example how either political correctness or Health and Safety has effected their social, domestic or work life since this stinking Government took control?
Thank you.
We have heard that Muslims have banned Christmas up north and kids can not play conkers without safety specs and gauntlets etc.
But at the same time we hear these are fabrications of the truth and such rules and PC is not actually that prominent.
My question, therefore, is can anybody give me a personal example how either political correctness or Health and Safety has effected their social, domestic or work life since this stinking Government took control?
Thank you.
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Abdulmajid. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
When I worked for a council there was an employee, whose official title I do not recall, whose job it was to guide people in how we should respond to disabled folk.
Up on the wall went a poster directing us all in her new pc ideas.
No one paid much attention, but I took objection to one line and said I wouldn't take any notice of it. Rather than complain about it, most said they would just ignore it.
The line read that as disabled people found the description 'able bodied' upsetting, in future we who could describe ourselves as such would now be using the phrase 'non-disabled'.
I left shortly afterwards but wonder if this is still the guidance there and if it was her own idea.
Up on the wall went a poster directing us all in her new pc ideas.
No one paid much attention, but I took objection to one line and said I wouldn't take any notice of it. Rather than complain about it, most said they would just ignore it.
The line read that as disabled people found the description 'able bodied' upsetting, in future we who could describe ourselves as such would now be using the phrase 'non-disabled'.
I left shortly afterwards but wonder if this is still the guidance there and if it was her own idea.
-- answer removed --
"We've more to do than ban conkers"
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/business /businesslatest/3651771._We_ve_more_to_do_than _ban_conkers__/
No ones trying to ban Christmas
http://blog.newhumanist.org.uk/2007/12/polly-t oynbee-no-ones-trying-to-ban.html
Since the 'elf and safety at work act fatal accidents at work have fallen by 78%.
I've an idea Let's repeal it eh?
After all who needs 'elf and safety?
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/business /businesslatest/3651771._We_ve_more_to_do_than _ban_conkers__/
No ones trying to ban Christmas
http://blog.newhumanist.org.uk/2007/12/polly-t oynbee-no-ones-trying-to-ban.html
Since the 'elf and safety at work act fatal accidents at work have fallen by 78%.
I've an idea Let's repeal it eh?
After all who needs 'elf and safety?
Indeed, jake, I'm with you on this one - let's bring back the old days. ;o)
After all, Abdul, 'Elf an' Safety never existed before 1997 did it? It is a totally new addition by this Labour Government.
Back in the good old days, we would be made to go up a 15' ladder with a screwdriver and forced to poke around in the electrics for merely mentioning that the ceiling light above your office desk seemed a bit dim. Electric knowledge? Ladder training? No, it was a P45 if you didn't.
Still, this Elf & Whatever, is obviously just about a controlling Labour Government, and not about the safety of employees / members of the public in the work / public place, is it?
Any suggestion that it may be companies / institutions / public services etc. reacting to incidents such as this, this, or this are also totally unfounded.
After all, Abdul, 'Elf an' Safety never existed before 1997 did it? It is a totally new addition by this Labour Government.
Back in the good old days, we would be made to go up a 15' ladder with a screwdriver and forced to poke around in the electrics for merely mentioning that the ceiling light above your office desk seemed a bit dim. Electric knowledge? Ladder training? No, it was a P45 if you didn't.
Still, this Elf & Whatever, is obviously just about a controlling Labour Government, and not about the safety of employees / members of the public in the work / public place, is it?
Any suggestion that it may be companies / institutions / public services etc. reacting to incidents such as this, this, or this are also totally unfounded.
Brachiopod, I can't tell if you're being ironic or not - do you really think it's got nothing to do with avoiding lawsuits?
When someone drops a grape in Tesco's and they cone off the area with a big sign saying 'DANGER WET SURFACE', do you suppose that's just concern for their customers? Might it not also be that they're worried that where there's a blame there might be a claim?
When someone drops a grape in Tesco's and they cone off the area with a big sign saying 'DANGER WET SURFACE', do you suppose that's just concern for their customers? Might it not also be that they're worried that where there's a blame there might be a claim?
As with all of these things, it tends to be the drones who moan about health and safety regulations who are the first to phone Claims Direct when they fall over and hurt their knee.
Health and safety regulation doesn't strike me as an issue worth getting worked up about. Whether it's companies protecting themselves from legal action or companies protecting their staff/customers, the result's the same. And the inconvenience it causes it's barely perceptible.
Health and safety regulation doesn't strike me as an issue worth getting worked up about. Whether it's companies protecting themselves from legal action or companies protecting their staff/customers, the result's the same. And the inconvenience it causes it's barely perceptible.
There is a whole world of difference between what suitably qualified Health & Safety consultants deal with and those who just simply use Health and Safety as an excuse for penny pinchinig, bone idleness and/or a misunderstanding of the H&S issues likely to arise.
Right, a personal example - I have an elderly relative who lives in a warden controlled block, which is surrounded by a dwarf wall.
They have a problem with a number of the local scum underclass sitting on the wall at all hours, drinking, shouting, swearing, throwing their empties all over the place and pi55ing over the wall into the gardens.
It was suggested that a way to solve the problem was to fit railings on the wall - this would solve the problem at a stroke.
The housing authority in charge of the block refused on H&S grounds as (seriously) a resident might fall from their window on to the railings.
Ignoring the fact that a resident falling from a window is so unlikely as to be an irrelevence, the railings would have been a good 10 feet from the nearest window.
This decision had nothing to do with H&S and everything to do with money, but as is so often, H&S appears to be catch-all excuse.
Right, a personal example - I have an elderly relative who lives in a warden controlled block, which is surrounded by a dwarf wall.
They have a problem with a number of the local scum underclass sitting on the wall at all hours, drinking, shouting, swearing, throwing their empties all over the place and pi55ing over the wall into the gardens.
It was suggested that a way to solve the problem was to fit railings on the wall - this would solve the problem at a stroke.
The housing authority in charge of the block refused on H&S grounds as (seriously) a resident might fall from their window on to the railings.
Ignoring the fact that a resident falling from a window is so unlikely as to be an irrelevence, the railings would have been a good 10 feet from the nearest window.
This decision had nothing to do with H&S and everything to do with money, but as is so often, H&S appears to be catch-all excuse.
Muslims have not "banned" Christmas anywhere that I know of. What has happened is that various councils and other public bodies believe that non-Christian ethnic minorities will be offended by the mention of Christian celebrations and so introduce ridiculous edicts.
This has recently been extended and whilst Muslims follow their religion (as in the current fasting period of Ramadan) some public bodies have suggested that non-Muslims should not eat or drink during the daytime in front of Muslims in case it upsets them.
I have a number of Muslim friends and can say categorically that they are not offended by the events celebrated by Christians (in fact some of them celebrate the Christian festivals as well as their own so that their children will feel included among their friends). And they are not offended by anybody eating or drinking whilst they are fasting.
It is the Left-leaning Metropolitan Guardianistas who dominate schools and Town Halls who are promoting this sort of ridiculous claptrap and it is causing more division that it will ever heal.
This has recently been extended and whilst Muslims follow their religion (as in the current fasting period of Ramadan) some public bodies have suggested that non-Muslims should not eat or drink during the daytime in front of Muslims in case it upsets them.
I have a number of Muslim friends and can say categorically that they are not offended by the events celebrated by Christians (in fact some of them celebrate the Christian festivals as well as their own so that their children will feel included among their friends). And they are not offended by anybody eating or drinking whilst they are fasting.
It is the Left-leaning Metropolitan Guardianistas who dominate schools and Town Halls who are promoting this sort of ridiculous claptrap and it is causing more division that it will ever heal.
It is galling when a few well-meaning - but misguided/dopey - Left-leaning people overdo political correctness and create the confusion that New Judge refers to.
By the same token, I'm sure he'd agree that it's the Right-leaning Daily Mailers who wrongly or wilfully misinterpret incidents as part of their war of political correctness.
They read guidelines as rules or one-off incidents as blanket bans and give these stories a life of their own by getting themselves frothing at the mouth with mis-directed rage.
It would be great if both sides could calm down a bit. Political correctness in itself isn't a bad thing.
By the same token, I'm sure he'd agree that it's the Right-leaning Daily Mailers who wrongly or wilfully misinterpret incidents as part of their war of political correctness.
They read guidelines as rules or one-off incidents as blanket bans and give these stories a life of their own by getting themselves frothing at the mouth with mis-directed rage.
It would be great if both sides could calm down a bit. Political correctness in itself isn't a bad thing.
YesQuinlad, you will be surprised to learn that I do agree.
The Daily Mail and its like are just as culpable in stirring up divisions by the sort of actions you describe as the Guardian and its ilk are.
What is needed is a sense of proportion from those framing the legislation, and a bit of common sense from those implementing it.
Sadly this seems to be lacking and we have badly drafted if not entirely unsuitable legislation introduced as a knee-jerk reaction to fairly rare if not one-off incidents (e.g. the Control of Handguns in response to Dunblane and the Dangerous Dogs Act). And we have over-zealous police and local councils using powers in a way Parliament never intended to address minor problems (e.g. terrorism legislation used to evict hecklers from the Labour Party Conference and to persecute amateur photographers, and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act to tackcle fly-tippers and people falsely claiming to live in a school�s catchment area).
It is the town hall jobsworths that particularly worry me and the proposal to give ordinary council officers far-reaching powers is a particular concern.
The Daily Mail and its like are just as culpable in stirring up divisions by the sort of actions you describe as the Guardian and its ilk are.
What is needed is a sense of proportion from those framing the legislation, and a bit of common sense from those implementing it.
Sadly this seems to be lacking and we have badly drafted if not entirely unsuitable legislation introduced as a knee-jerk reaction to fairly rare if not one-off incidents (e.g. the Control of Handguns in response to Dunblane and the Dangerous Dogs Act). And we have over-zealous police and local councils using powers in a way Parliament never intended to address minor problems (e.g. terrorism legislation used to evict hecklers from the Labour Party Conference and to persecute amateur photographers, and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act to tackcle fly-tippers and people falsely claiming to live in a school�s catchment area).
It is the town hall jobsworths that particularly worry me and the proposal to give ordinary council officers far-reaching powers is a particular concern.
1 to 12 of 12
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.