Support NeoGAF

[War Peaceman]

Ed's like a Labour John Major. Just completely unremarkable in every way.

I'd vote for him over all other Prime Ministers since Thatcher, maybe earlier.

EDIT: obviously you don't vote for PMs, but you get the gist.

 

[CyclopsRock]

I'm increasingly liking my MP's that way, keep the theatrics and showmanship bollocks for the yanks. They're not my mates, they're nothing like me and i sure as fuck ain't gonna call-you-Dave.

Everyone called Anthony Blair "Tony", so I don't see why not! I also call Osborne "Gidders".

Edit: Only when we're in the backroom of the clubhouse, obviously.

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

lol

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22039361

And by "better" I suspect he means "would have gotten a comfortable majority"(which is true)

Blair/Brown hatred still there I see

 

[Captain_Spanky]

This is the front page of Daily Mail Online today.
Stay classy Daily Mail

 

[PJV3]

lol

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22039361

And by "better" I suspect he means "would have gotten a comfortable majority"(which is true)

Blair/Brown hatred still there I see

I don't think he would have done any/much better.
Wasn't his polling bad at the end, which Brown initially turned around (until he fudged the early election buisness)

Blair would have lost 2010.
Brown would have lost in 2012 if he'd won the non election in 2008.

Blair is deluded about himself, odious shit.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Great face off (on C4 News) between Owen Jones, columnist at the Independent, and Ruth Porter - of the Institute of Economic Affairs over Gideon's ham-fisted wade in to the Philpott discussion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiEEwfikiVk

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

Ugh, Owen Jones talks such garbage. Can't even bring myself to watch

I don't think he would have done any/much better.
Wasn't his polling bad at the end, which Brown initially turned around (until he fudged the early election buisness)

Blair would have lost 2010.
Brown would have lost in 2012 if he'd won the non election in 2008.

Blair is deluded about himself, odious shit.

You really think so? Don't forget that Cameron's election pitch was mostly doom & gloom, constantly talking about austerity. I think Blair probably would have overcome that. I mean hey, it would have been lies about sunshine & lollypops, but it probably would have worked.

Hell, under Blair there probably wouldn't have even been a run on a british bank. Blair's not a good person, but he's a fantastic "leader". He would have given the political assurences to northern rock savers Brown dumbfoundingly never did to prevent a panic.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Ugh, Owen Jones talks such garbage. Can't even bring myself to watch

I don't follow his work, but he is SPOT ON in that video

 

[defel]

Great face off (on C4 News) between Owen Jones, columnist at the Independent, and Ruth Porter - of the Institute of Economic Affairs over Gideon's ham-fisted wade in to the Philpott discussion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiEEwfikiVk

Owen Jones also has a good rumble in this weeks Spectator podcast where him and some other dude go at it for 20 mins. Its worth listening to if you enjoy that sort of stuff.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Owen Jones is a good guy. One of those prats who think they can change Labour from the inside and can be a bit liberal at times, but he's better than most.

Y'all should read his book. I've heard great things about it and gave it a skim and it seemed good. Been meaning to pick it up myself but dat backlog.

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

Owen Jones is a good guy. One of those prats who think they can change Labour from the inside and can be a bit liberal at times, but he's better than most.

Y'all should read his book. I've heard great things about it and gave it a skim and it seemed good. Been meaning to pick it up myself but dat backlog.

I hope it's better then his obnoxious appearences on Question Time. :/

 

[PJV3]

I hope it's better then his obnoxious appearences on Question Time. :/

It is good, give it a watch.

 

[PJV3]

Ugh, Owen Jones talks such garbage. Can't even bring myself to watch



You really think so? Don't forget that Cameron's election pitch was mostly doom & gloom, constantly talking about austerity. I think Blair probably would have overcome that. I mean hey, it would have been lies about sunshine & lollypops, but it probably would have worked.

Hell, under Blair there probably wouldn't have even been a run on a british bank. Blair's not a good person, but he's a fantastic "leader". He would have given the political assurences to northern rock savers Brown dumbfoundingly never did to prevent a panic.

Yep, people were sick of Blair in 07, the tories were polling in the 40s and Cameron was more popular. and this is before the financial meltdown.

As soon as he announced his resignation labour retook the lead. Blairites live in a fantasy land.

Thatcher and Blair are two people with serious god complexes, they both went when their time was up, they just cant accept it.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Blair ain't serious, it's just a (quality) pop at brown from out of the blue.

 

[PJV3]

Blair ain't serious, it's just a (quality) pop at brown from out of the blue.

Who knows, I just wish Blair and Thatcher had been wiped out in an election.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Thatcher pretty much went dark after being PM, didn't she? None of this charity director, UN envoy bollocks.

Also, i think Cameron gets bonus points by dint of his already being PM and not fucking it up - in fact, in terms of international politics I think he has done a great job. From EU negotiations to Libya, he's had a fairly decisive and successful set of goals and aims.

 

[Jackpot]

Also, i think Cameron gets bonus points by dint of his already being PM and not fucking it up - in fact, in terms of international politics I think he has done a great job. From EU negotiations to Libya, he's had a fairly decisive and successful set of goals and aims.

Turning his tour of arab spring countries into a giant advertisement for British arms dealers wasn't.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Turning his tour of arab spring countries into a giant advertisement for British arms dealers wasn't.

Well, I was talking about whether he was successful at fulfilling his aims, and I think that - even if you don' think we should be selling guns - he was. As it happens, I have no problem at all with us selling guns.

 

[Acorn]

Thatcher pretty much went dark after being PM, didn't she? None of this charity director, UN envoy bollocks.

Also, i think Cameron gets bonus points by dint of his already being PM and not fucking it up - in fact, in terms of international politics I think he has done a great job. From EU negotiations to Libya, he's had a fairly decisive and successful set of goals and aims.

He has failed large sections of the population. He isn't a good PM, I suppose if you are conservative he is since has addressed every conservative bug bear.

So not a good PM but a successful PM if you are a tory.

 

[PJV3]

Thatcher pretty much went dark after being PM, didn't she? None of this charity director, UN envoy bollocks.

Also, i think Cameron gets bonus points by dint of his already being PM and not fucking it up - in fact, in terms of international politics I think he has done a great job. From EU negotiations to Libya, he's had a fairly decisive and successful set of goals and aims.

I think Thatchers health went pretty soon after leaving office, she was in the lords for a while but didn't do much.

I'm not seeing anything outside of Libya that Cameron has done of note. The EU stuff is more likely to impress sceptics, but I think he and the other leaders have let this crisis go on for too long, partly driven hy their own populations.


Domestically the only policy I like really is the idea of rebalancing the economy, if he and Cable pull that off, then he will at least leave one positive legacy. His greatest skill has been in framing the questions to be debated, he's blindsided the LibDems and took control of the Scotland question.

 

[CyclopsRock]

He has failed large sections of the population. He isn't a good PM, I suppose if you are conservative he is since has addressed every conservative bug bear.

So not a good PM but a successful PM if you are a tory.

I was talking about his international performance. You can tell this, because I said...

in fact, in terms of international politics I think he has done a great job.

I think Thatchers health went pretty soon after leaving office, she was in the lords for a while but didn't do much.

I'm not seeing anything outside of Libya that Cameron has done of note. The EU stuff is more likely to impress sceptics, but I think he and the other leaders have let this crisis go on for too long, partly driven hy their own populations.


Domestically the only policy I like really is the idea of rebalancing the economy, if he and Cable pull that off, then he will at least leave one positive legacy. His greatest skill has been in framing the questions to be debated, he's blindsided the LibDems and took control of the Scotland question.

I don't think you have to be a sceptic to like what he did in the EU budget talks. It's patently ridiculous to ask the member states to contribute more money to the EU when literally all of them are cutting budgets domestically. It's not really all that democratic, either, since the people elected to define the EU budgets - the MEPs - are not the same people responsible for actually paying for it, that being the national governments. In their rush to be more generous, MEPs could very well end up causing greater cuts (or borrowing) at home, neither of which they're responsible for. So I think what Cameron did there was pretty good, whether you're a fan of the EU itself or not.

 

[Acorn]

Foreign policy has been decent I suppose, I'm not a fan of the EU stand off crap though.

He's just mostly stayed out of shit, better than Blair or Brown in that sense.

 

[PJV3]

I was talking about his international performance. You can tell this, because I said...






I don't think you have to be a sceptic to like what he did in the EU budget talks. It's patently ridiculous to ask the member states to contribute more money to the EU when literally all of them are cutting budgets domestically. It's not really all that democratic, either, since the people elected to define the EU budgets - the MEPs - are not the same people responsible for actually paying for it, that being the national governments. In their rush to be more generous, MEPs could very well end up causing greater cuts (or borrowing) at home, neither of which they're responsible for. So I think what Cameron did there was pretty good, whether you're a fan of the EU itself or not.

Because he was cutting at home I also agreed he had to take that stance over the EU budget. But, and it's a big but, if we and the Eurozone had worked with the US stimulus plan, a lot of this bollocks could've been avoided.

It's a Europe wide lack of vision and chaotic austerity fetish that's to blame, so I'm not just blaming Cameron in that regard.

 

[Little Old Man]

Domestically the only policy I like really is the idea of rebalancing the economy, if he and Cable pull that off, then he will at least leave one positive legacy. His greatest skill has been in framing the questions to be debated, he's blindsided the LibDems and took control of the Scotland question.

There's two aspects to rebalancing the economy. Firstly there's the take that the coalition have, i.e. more high end manufacturing/production, less reliant on the service sector. What I want to see much more off is the start of efforts to have the economy less centred around London and the South East. A mammoth task for sure, but an important one.

 

[PJV3]

There's two aspects to rebalancing the economy. Firstly there's the take that the coalition have, i.e. more high end manufacturing/production, less reliant on the service sector. What I want to see much more off is the start of efforts to have the economy less centred around London and the South East. A mammoth task for sure, but an important one.

I think they are using Hestletine's plan to stimulate the regions, I still think you need real committed government strategy, but that's a bit too 1940s for this lot.

 

[Acorn]

If they truly can rebalance the economy away from the service industry it'd be fantastic. But it's almost an impossible task at this point in time and would require a lot of Govt effort, something which ideologically they are against.

I wish them the best in that regard though, because relying on the service industry as we do now is unsustainable and results in crappier jobs for most.

 

[PJV3]

If they truly can rebalance the economy away from the service industry it'd be fantastic. But it's almost an impossible task at this point in time and would require a lot of Govt effort, something which ideologically they are against.

I wish them the best in that regard though, because relying on the service industry as we do now is unsustainable and results in crappier jobs for most.

The EU is a real hindrance in this area, but as you say it's the same free market approach the tories believe in anyway.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

But we have to compete with India, China and Nigeria!!!

 

[Acorn]

The EU is a real hindrance in this area, but as you say it's the same free market approach the tories believe in anyway.

Indeed, I was for the eu wide bank transaction levy so hopefully some of the banks would fuck off to NYC.

Although it would shorten my employment prospect considerably as the financial industry is where I have worked for most of my working life.

 

[PJV3]

But we have to compete with India, China and Nigeria!!!

Yeah we better cut wages, oh shit the benefit bill just skyrocketed because we've flogged all the social housing.

 

[Acorn]

Thats another thing, if we are removed from the EU the right will destroy all employment laws currently in favour of the employee in the name of competing with states like china, india etc where employment rights are non existent.

Say goodbye to paid holidays, unfair dismissals and anything else remotely good.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Thats another thing, if we are removed from the EU the right will destroy all employment laws currently in favour of the employee in the name of competing with states like china, india etc where employment rights are non existent.

Say goodbye to paid holidays, unfair dismissals and anything else remotely good.

Or you could just vote in UKIP.

 

[Acorn]

The way the tories are reacting to the increasing presence of UKIP means they are essentially in govt by proxy anyway.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

The way the tories are reacting to the increasing presence of UKIP means they are essentially in govt by proxy anyway.

Well illegal immigrants aren't being interned in camps so not quite yet they aren't.

 

[PJV3]

Thats another thing, if we are removed from the EU the right will destroy all employment laws currently in favour of the employee in the name of competing with states like china, india etc where employment rights are non existent.

Say goodbye to paid holidays, unfair dismissals and anything else remotely good.

Erm

The government is still pushing through the employee share scheme.
£2000 of shares and companies can buy your employment rights. I think the Lords rejected it, but it's still gonna happen.

Everything is up for grabs except holiday entitlement, which is EU protected.

 

[Acorn]

Erm

The government is still pushing through the employee share scheme.
£2000 of shares and companies can buy your employment rights. I think the Lords rejected it, but it's still gonna happen.

Yeah I know, but it would get even worse without some employment laws being devolved to Brussels.

EDIT Also I'm absolutely disgusted by that law, hard fought rights are worth 2k in a worthless company. Every company will adopt this aswell so nobody has a choice, it'll be interesting if they dock job seekers allowance for refusing to go to a job that gives up your rights for 2k.

I suspect they will.

 

[CyclopsRock]

How do you "balance" an economy away from the service industry, though? What do you balance it towards? Not heavy industry - not with our labour costs and our insano energy costs. One of the main reasons why the US's manufacturing industry is actually on the rise is because of the massively cheap Shale energy. We're going in the opposite direction - businesses aren't exempt from green energy taxes (Which makes sense, since heavy industry is the overwhelmingly largest users of energy, but it does make it crazy expensive). If you think about the next 20, 40, 60 years, and ask yourself 'is the UK going to be more phyical-manufacture centric or less?', it's hard to answer that question with "more", in all honestly.

The only way that could become true, I think, is if India, China, Malaysia etc become dramatically more expensive to the point that their costs are no different to ours. I do think they'll become more expensive, by quite some way, but as expensive as ours? I can't see why they would, without extreme effort by their governments to do that, and I don't know why they'd do that. In fact, the Chinese government has been playing the monetary markets precisely to keep that from happening, so clearly their intent so far has been to keep Chinese exports as cheap as possible. From there, though, there's still South America and Africa, both of which have let to be leveraged by the West for cheap production in the same scale that Asia has. I just think that there are so many places with cheaper costs than us that it's going to take a long. long time before the world reaches an equilibrium where production and shipping costs make it financially viable to produce stuff here again. And this is also ignoring the fact that a lot of the work that China and India etc currently do is the type of work that's going to be "outsourced" more and more to robots, rather than being "insourced" back to the UK.

Of course, the other way this might happen is if the UK suddenly leaves the EU and puts up enormous tariffs and/or bombs the pound so as to make foreign imports unaffordable so as to stimulate domestic demand, but this would a) increase the cost of living enormously for everyone, hitting the poorest the hardest, b) risk a lot of our service industry which is healthy, profitable and exportable because suddenly we'd need all hands on deck just to ensure a lack of scarcity of certain resources (not to mention the fact that we'd hardly be self-sufficient, agriculturally, with 80+ million people) and c) condemn another generation to a similar lack of choice as they have now, only on the physical labour side rather than the service side.

The reality is that the low-end manufacturing jobs are gone, and they're never coming back. They'll filter around the cheapest corners of the world before being entirely automated. We have to look up, not down, to find jobs for the future. Massive tax cuts for engineering firms, robotics firms, pharmaceutical firms (Though we already have the 2nd largest pharma industry in the world) to encourage firms to set up offices here instead of yet another German or Japanese city. Let the private sector guide education more, at least at university level - One of the UK's largest industry is the creative industries, and it certainly isn't one that's come about through careful government planning. It only employs around 5% of people in the country, but represents 10% of our exports, because we're actually really good at it but, by and large, our educational institutions are pretty bad for it. It's only recently that they've generally been picking up, and it's almost entirely thanks to the private sector getting aggressively involved in them.

People say "we don't make anything anymore" - fuck that. I do! Our creative industry is one of the few that's kept growing for the last 5 years. In my ~5 years in the animation industry, I'd say around half of my clients are based overseas.

I mean, shit, we're the island that produced Genesis! And now it seems, I'm falling - I'm falling for her! She seems to have an invisible touch, yeah! It takes control, and slowly tears you apaaaart!

tl;dr - The government doesn't know what industries are going to be important in 20 years. No one does. As such, trying to specifically direct industry in direction X or Y is dangerous; They just need to get out of the way and listen to the private sector when it gives advice on how to education the population for specific jobs in the future.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/...f-3-yrs-to-get-a-job-not-satire-please-share/

 

[PJV3]

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/...f-3-yrs-to-get-a-job-not-satire-please-share/

No fucking way, I have very bad personal experience(wifes illness)with ATOS, I hate them with a passion.

Don't turn up for interview-fail
Turn up- fit for work.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/...f-3-yrs-to-get-a-job-not-satire-please-share/

Q: What have we become in this once great country that we turn our backs on people like Meena?

A: We are the children of Thatcher

Goddamn.

Despicable story. Hopefully it will be picked up by the mainstream medi...oh who am I kidding.

 

[Nicktendo86]

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/...f-3-yrs-to-get-a-job-not-satire-please-share/

There has to be more to this.. Surely? I mean, that is just too ridiculous. I've heard bad things about ATOS but bleeding hell.

 

[PJV3]

There has to be more to this.. Surely? I mean, that is just too ridiculous. I've heard bad things about ATOS but bleeding hell.

Even I did a double take, and I know what money grabbing cunts ATOS are.

I hope it's a mistake or something.

 

[Meadows]

http://tompride.wordpress.com/2013/...f-3-yrs-to-get-a-job-not-satire-please-share/

no way that's true

ATOS are generally way too strict, but there's obviously been some kind of clerical error or they just made it up.

Even ATOS aren't that incompetent

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Even ATOS aren't that incompetent

From another forum

My current job is writing ESA appeal submissions on behalf of DSD (Northern Ireland's equivalent of the DWP) outlining their case against the claimant. Yes, my job is horrible and yes, ATOS are incompetent beyond belief. Firstly, here are some of the more noteworthy medical reports from their 'healthcare professionals' which I've seen in the last few months:

- a claimant suffering from cerebellar ataxia, which is a really horrible illness which has even caused people to seek euthanasia, was passed fit for work on the basis that, and this is a direct quote from the healthcare professional's summary, "although he has major problems with speech, dexterity and gait, due to his extremely positive attitude he does not have a significant functional restriction".

- a drug addict was given zero points and passed fit for work on the basis that "he has no significant functional restriction provided that he is under the influence of cannabis". So yeah, not only is the healthcare professional implicitly endorsing illegal drug use, but he's also saying that someone who can't function properly unless he's stoned is fit for work.

- a healthcare professional recorded that a claimant could bend his right knee fully. His right leg was amputated at the mid-thigh. He doesn't have a fucking right knee! In a similar vein, another claimant had a couple of fingers amputated on her left hand. The healthcare professional apparently got mixed up; the report said that her left hand was normal and the amputated fingers were on her right hand.

- a claimant had Buerger's disease. The examining healthcare professional appeared to have had no idea what he was talking about, recorded something along the lines of "the client said he had been diagnosed with burglars disease" and didn't mention it again. Not only did she not know anything about the man's medical condition, but she honestly thought that there was a condition called Burglar's disease (or thought the claimant was making it up).

On that note, and with all respect to nurses, claimants should be assessed by a doctor. ATOS doctors make their fair share of fuckups too, but at least they theoretically have the requisite medical knowledge to assess someone. It would also be nice if we had mental health specialists too, but one step at a time.

- a claimant was judged by a healthcare professional to have completely normal 'mental state findings' and was awarded zero points. Ten days after the decision was made that he was fit for work, he was admitted to a psychiatric ward. He was still there when I looked at the case seven months later.

- one customer was assessed for 9 minutes. Another customer (who was previously in the Support Group) was assessed for 11 minutes. Now, it's not exactly a well-kept secret that ATOS give bonuses to their healthcare professionals for seeing x amount of 'clients' (I really hate seeing them use that term) in a day, but that is really taking the piss. How on earth can you fully consider the effects of someone's conditions in under ten minutes?

- I've legitimately lost count of how many times I've seen contradictory evidence in these reports. Stuff like "the client walked 10 metres normally to the examination room" and then on the very next page "used a walking stick and had a right-sided limp". It happens in like 30% of my cases. Additionally, the amount of typos in the report is incredible. Someone highlighted all the spelling errors in their medical report in a recent appeal. There were over 30 in the space of two pages.

I also see ATOS healthcare professionals misinterpret the legislation all the time. I had a case two weeks ago where the nurse recorded "[the claimant] needed to be helped out of the chair, and I found this consistent". The 15 point descriptor for standing and sitting applies if you're unable to transfer between seats without physical assistance. The claimant was awarded 0 points for that activity. Either the healthcare professional didn't understand the legislation or she didn't want to get 'audited' for putting someone in the Support Group (probably the latter as the information was buried at the back of the report which hardly anyone reads). It's a shambolic state of affairs either way. It's hard enough for someone to meet the scoring criteria without healthcare professionals fucking up or deciding to ignore evidence.

By the way, I'm sure that the ridiculously harsh scoring criteria has already been discussed in these threads previously, but there's recently been a brilliantly illogical development in Northern Ireland. A commissioner's decision (only binding in NI) has decreed that the department can't take a claimant's ability to propel a wheelchair into account for the mobilising activity unless they meet the criteria to be prescribed a wheelchair. Over here, you're only eligible for a wheelchair if you "cannot walk or can only walk a few metres unaided". In summary, we now have a scoring system where a man who can walk 150 metres will score 6 points, but a man who can't walk at all is to be assessed as if he's using a wheelchair (assuming he can propel one) and will score 0 points. You couldn't make it up.

The vast majority of ATOS reports I see are substandard, incomplete and generally unfit for purpose. And in most cases, they're the only medical evidence I have to go on. I have the option of sending the report back to ATOS and asking for a re-examination of the customer (I've sent four reports back in the last month alone), but this only happens if the report contains a major, major fuckup. Usually they'll make a minor alteration to the report and tell me to get on with it.

By the way, I am not allowed to use my common sense to pass somebody. If there isn't enough medical evidence to indicate that you meet the arbitrary descriptors, there isn't a lot I can do. Every time I want to pass someone, I have to get it approved by my line manager and random checks are also carried out. At least I have enough time to actually look through the case and think about it; decision makers on the other hand have to meet ridiculous targets. I believe they're required to make eight determinations a day, in addition to phoning each unsuccessful claimant and giving them the delightful news that they're fit for work. This is why they miss obvious stuff, they've barely got enough time to copy and paste the healthcare professional's summary into their determinations.

Regarding the government's policy of depicting benefit claimants as scroungers (and bearing in mind that I only see cases of people who don't pass the first time round) I would hazard a rough guess that about 30% of ESA appellants are completely unfit for work, 55% have legitimate medical conditions but could work in some capacity and 15% are complete chancers. I think the success rate at the appeal tribunals bears this out somewhat. Not really a sign of a benefit that's working. Anyway, the number of jokers who are claiming ESA and have little wrong with them is much, much lower than the general public thinks it is.

Some advice for people who are appealing (I realise that most of you will know this already, but still):

- Get yourself a good representative. The Citizens Advice Bureaux seem to know their stuff (at least in NI). My advice would be to go to them, although I'm sure your local MP will also be happy to help out their constituent. Despite the fact that they probably voted for the current legislation. Anyway, based on anecdotal evidence, claimants with clued-in representatives win their appeal about 80% of the time.

- Request an oral hearing. The tribunal is more likely to be sympathetic to your case if you're there in person, as statistics conclusively show.

- Know the legislation. Identify the activities where you're likely to score points, read the relevant descriptors and try not to say things which will prevent you from scoring points in those areas.

- Don't exaggerate too much. Even if you think you need to in order to meet the descriptors. As I've seen several times recently, it's easy to forget yourself and get caught out in inconsistencies by tribunal panels and it's basically all over for you at that point.

- Provide as much medical evidence as possible. I realise that some doctors charge for information, which is unfortunate, but the more proof you have the better. And try to send in as much information as you can with your appeal. If I have sufficient evidence, I will pass you and you won't have to go through the stress of a tribunal.

I'll stop here for now in the interest of getting some sleep in before work. I could probably spend all night ranting about ATOS and the ESA system though, the sheer level of incompetency from all parties involved is almost incomprehensible.

 

[Meadows]

- a healthcare professional recorded that a claimant could bend his right knee fully. His right leg was amputated at the mid-thigh. He doesn't have a fucking right knee!

---

see I just plain don't believe that would be upheld at an appeal so it's a temporary inconvenience rather than a long term withdrawal of benefits.

Do you have any experience with ATOS cheezmo?

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Do you have any experience with ATOS cheezmo?

Thankfully, not personally. And given their even-worse record on mental health issues I don't think I'd even plan on doing so.

 

[PJV3]

Thankfully, not personally. And given their even-worse record on mental health issues I don't think I'd even plan on doing so.

That is what pissed me off, wife had been sectioned and they had her lifting pieces of paper at the interview.

 

[phisheep]

Do you have any experience with ATOS cheezmo?

I've had a bit of experience with them (at least since a bunch of people left my company to work for them). Seems to me like they are reasonably good on the upper management side (maybe a bit too full of themselves, but what company isn't?) and reasonably good at the lower levels, but they almost totally lack the sensible middle tier - the staff sergeants and RSMs - that make an organisation tick and prevent problems from being problems in the first place by the application of common sense and authority.

 

[PJV3]

I've had a bit of experience with them (at least since a bunch of people left my company to work for them). Seems to me like they are reasonably good on the upper management side (maybe a bit too full of themselves, but what company isn't?) and reasonably good at the lower levels, but they almost totally lack the sensible middle tier - the staff sergeants and RSMs - that make an organisation tick and prevent problems from being problems in the first place by the application of common sense and authority.

The documentary about them wasn't flattering, targets set from above and pressure being applied on the assessment teams, how can you have pre determined targets for illness.

It may have changed since then, it was a few years ago.

 

[Karakand]

see I just plain don't believe that would be upheld at an appeal so it's a temporary inconvenience rather than a long term withdrawal of benefits.

So... it's OK then?

I hope you've never been the victim of a Kafkaesque bureaucracy before, but when you're later exonerated by it, you don't get back the time that was wasted feeling depressed, anxious, or exasperated.