Look them up on the internet and find out what they do. Consider how your skills and experience fit with the company and how you would apply those skills within the role. Then tell them.

Its what I'll be doing, I've an interview on Wed.

Best of luck 🙂

Was having an argument with my mum when I was in my late teens and my Grandad (mums dad)was present. He just quietly said to me "walk away lad, she can't argue with herself"

Mum then turned on him. Without saying a word he turned on his heels and walked away.(he went out for half an hour). Mum was purple with rage!

I love his wisdom. He is more of a man than I will ever be.

My dad : You've got two ears and one mouth, therefore you should listen twice as much as what you speak.

Mates Mum before we departed for nights out when we were 18: Hope you've got your little hats for your little fellas!

Other Half's dad has some crackin' ones: Don't p1ss down my back and tell me its raining! (when some one is trying to pull the wool over his eyes) 😆

Recruitment Consultants.

Shower of ****.
+1

Absolute charlatans.

Scrawled on a bin outside the local Grammar School(my Alma mater) were the words:

'Grammer Rules'

Proof if I ever needed it that teaching standards have dropped since I was there!

The problem is we pander to the lowest common denominator in this country. It doesn't make us any 'safer'. A sort of backward benchmarking of behaviour if you will.

thanks guys, the possibility of top totty never fails to get a response

My response is still subsiding!… Thanks for that! 😆

I think what you read and believe has distorted your view far more than mine as this quote would tend to support that

Thats another debate 😀 Although my view is arguably based on a larger knowlege base (re; legislation, law and its causes and effects at least). That quote was an example of applying some degree of critical analysis.

Apologies if my posts seem a little hazey, finding it difficult to condense my points from years worth of study to a consise paragraph 😆

jackson-pollock, what educational/professional area are you coming from with your points?

Criminology specializing in Criminal Law.

I am well aware of the severity & consequences resulting from child abuse. However the likelihood of it occurring is greatly less than mass media would have you believe. I do not think policy and legislation should be dictated by moral panic.

Again not even close to my definition of disproportionate.

That's because your definition and opinion is formed from the distorted picture you get from the mass media. Hence my points about moral panic(Stan Cohen & Jock Young). Googleing to find figures that seem to back up what you say. However apply some critical analysis. The nspcc figures you quoted:- they arguably have a financial incentive to 'talk up' the occurrence of child abuse and distort the picture.

It genuinely scares me how so many swallow the 'official line' hook line and sinker.

It's not compulsory now…, what happens in the future and mission creep is not unheard of in beaureaucracy circles?

Exactly. Hence my earlier point about where do we stop? Do we legislate against against shouting at childen? Abuse is a matter of perception.

I know of three separate people in positions of authority involving young people, who have been falsely accused. All were totally vindicated but all were suspended pending inquiry etc etc… one is now only a shadow of his former self and had his life turned upside down… anecdotal granted however there is a flip side to the crusade for 'child protection'

Children lie. To put all emphasis on the thought that all children are innocent, to the detriment of the authority of adults is dangerous.

To say it is only a form, is to miss the point.

Well said sofatester!

It brings me back to my point about disproportionate legislating in response to a perceived threat. Bad for law and bad for society, it glosses over the problem rather than addressing it.

I have never heard of Cohen or his work

Then you are also ignorant of the wider issues. Do some proper research (wiki only gives a general view).

See Folk Devils and Moral Panics.

What do your stats actually tell us taken completely out of context?

It is interesting that no one in the field is objecting only those of you who dont work in the field.

You don't know my credentials so you are assuming.

I have never mentioned 'knee jerk' BTW.

Nah your right they're not that bad. I'm indifferent really. 😆

Saw the word Coldplay, so watched the vid in silence!

Good vid, shame about the band! 😈

1. Occurrence and signification

An event occurs and, because of its nature, the media decide it is worthy of dramatic coverage ("Full Colour Pics of Satanic Abuse Site", "Razorblade Found In Babyfood" etc) and the event is signified as a violent, worrying one.

2.Wider social implications (fanning the flames)

Connections are made between one event and the wider malaise of society as a whole. After the initial event, the life of the story is extended through the contributions of 'expert' opinion makers, who establish that this one event is just the tip of the iceberg, and that it is part of an overall pattern which constitutes a major social menace ("Child abuse figures on the up" "Safety concerns at babyfood packing plants" etc etc). Thus public attention is focused on the issues

3.Social Control

Moral panics seek some sort of resolution and this often comes with a change in the law, designed to further penalise those established as the threatening deviants at the source of the panic ("New clampdown on devil-worshippers". "Strict New Safety Controls on Babyfood"). This satisfies the public who feel they are empowered politically by the media.

Seem familiar?

I think you should do some research. (Actual study rather than spurious spouting from google) Read some Stanley Cohen. Points for seeing if you can google and find his most well known works.

You obviously don't see the general cumulative effect of such legislation preferring to focus on the micro. That's your prerogative, however I feel this makes you ignorant. You, as I am also, are entitled to your opinion.

It is a reaction to a perceived threat unless you can prove that there is significant risk of abuse to a significantly large section of society. Otherwise it is pointless, needless and worthless overkill.

Spot on porterclough. It is madness to introduce legislation based on reactionary moral panic.

…basic risk assessment Ian: likelihood of occurence plus impact/consequences of it occurring. I think the shop one is at the other end of 'likely/damaging'. Try something a little bit more calamitous than the simple and everyday financial loss of shoplifting and then see how you feel about safety checks.

(Likelihood X severity) 😀

Shoplifting is far more likely (common) than child abuse. Athough the severity is higher for the latter.

Disproportionate legislating in response to a percieved threat makes a mockery of our legal system.

As to this legislation how would anyone know how many people would have been abused if it was not introduced? Incidents are underreported, abusers tend to abuse more than one and each person more than once etc.

Define abuse. There's mental abuse, verbal abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse. Its a matter of perception and this is where the issue gets cloudy. Its only a small leap to define shouting at a child as verbal abuse and legislate accordingly…

Or are you thinking of abuse as termed by the tabloid media?

Reactionary legislation such as this is bad for law and bad for society.

Then the staff have breached confidentiality.

clearly we disagree that this situation has already been adequately addressed.

What more do you want?(not being facetious,serious question, as said before what outcome are you expecting)? Write to ofsted about how you feel that it hasn't been dealt with adequately they will investigate. However they will probably find that the nursery took the necessary action.

How do you know this boy 'has previous'? It shouldn't have come from nursery staff and any other source is speculation and hearsay.

What are you angry about? Your child being bitten (it happens a lot when groups of young children are together) or how they have dealt with the issue. Seems to me that they have adequately addressed the situation.

My missus did that with a magnum of champagne… I was apoplectic! And we had the most expensive ice cubes. I'm getting raged just thinking about it! 👿

been said before but salespeople. When will you get it into your thick skulls that if I want to buy something, then I'll go and find the best spec. for the lowest price…on my own…I'm quite capable thank you very much…now **** off… oh and I'm better at psychology than you so I can see your 'tricks' coming a mile off.

we seem to have lost an OP?

Haven't we just!? Behind all redundancies is a story. I was supposed to get married two weeks ago (proposed at xmas) but sh1t happens! Close shave eh?!

We all just have to get on with it…

I'm not even going to dignify your thread with an answer… oh b*****S just did!

They lost it when they left Manchester for 'that london'. London turns the best of people into w@nkers! 😉 oh and cocaine!

Cui bono?

Consumers of wine, who read the Times I would have thought. Just like the OP!

Surely that should read 'What would you like AS your epitaph'

Therefore mine would be, Here lies a pedant…well not exactly here but 5.2cm to your left! 😉

Take it thats me? Twas a joke.

It seems that you have a 'can't do attitude'… 'can't do that cause of this, can't do this cause of that'. It won't inspire confidence from your pupils.

Hope your wife gets better. You obviously have a lot of respect for her.

Cliched it may be, you it seems can't even teach today because you don't have the first clue as to basic economics. Either way its to your own detriment. Dont see what your problem is.

Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach! 😉

IME sales is the same across the board, by that I mean that the only thing that differs is the product. Selling holidays requires largely the same skills as selling windows. So moving to another industry may lead to the same dissatisfaction?

Set up your own travel agency? Take all your customers, then tell them where they can stick their sales targets and commission!

I you fancy some proper English Fish n Chips, go to A Salt n Battery. Its run by my brother in law in a part of town known as 'Little England'. Its got an excellent reputation and is frequented by some famous faces in NYC.

He did a TV show couple of years ago where he was challenged by a 'celebrity chef' and ended up winning. Heres the first part, check it out!
A Salt & Battery

Just playing devils advocate to demonstrate my views on surveillance culture. The police do an excellent job in difficult circumstances. Please don't take my arguments personally, they are not aimed directly at you.

CCTV, demonstrably has not reduced crime. Arguably it has displaced it. I personally feel that its not working and would argue that we are getting to the point of surveillance for surveillance sake. I personally resent being watched and the amount of information that is held on us.

Yes, but what isn't clear to me is how you think NOT displacing those resources (i.e. more bobbies on the beat rather than CCTV rooms) would solve any domestic violence cases?

?

My point is that statistically assaults happen away from the glare of CCTV. Therefore the crime is displaced rather than reduced.

catching criminals and enforcing the law?

When has dropping litter, dog fouling, having things delivered repeatedly to neighbours been against the law? (I'd have loved to have been at that interview – You've been arrested on suspicion of delivering pizas)!! :-)Antisocial yes, illegal no. Thats what I meant in my earlier post about the dilution of the definition of crime. It adds to peoples misunderstanding of the law.

And in some local authorities god forbid if you want to move house to get your child into a good school.

I personally feel we have gone far too far.

Thats my point how far do we go?

I'd rather see a police presence rather than someone in a room pawing through 'hours and hours' of CCTV footage. Like I said, displacement of resources.

i have viewed hours and hours of CCTV tracing offenders

I'd rather you were out on the street doing your job.

So as well as displacing crime (what about violent crime in the home? statistically more likely than a random street assault), it is also displacing resources.

The west midlands BMX rider 'Chicken' (rides john deer green BMX) is a very close family friend!?

So its open to abuse? Seems to me that its not 'working' both in a general sense and in specific examples!

If it cannot be relied upon then whats it for?

You'd struggle to gain a criminal conviction in court based upon surveillance evidence alone.