A tale of barclays... one honest man in a company full of lies

will-in-estoril

BarclaysManager wrote: »

Not really, I don't place nearly enough store in the words of an anonymous on an internet forum to be offended by them. Sorry.

There is really no need to apologise!

My name is Will, and I do live in Estoril. I'm hardly anonymous, either on this forum or in Monte Estoril. Sem d!vida! Freedom of thought is not taken for granted here: freedom of expression was fought for and won 35 years ago.

Perhaps the biggest difference here is that we find the idea of subservience to an employer, particularly outside the office, to be abominable.

The amount of annual leave is written into our laws: we do not have to doff our hat in gratitude. As the Reformation preferred to spread north and west we have an extra dozen days of feriados on top!

We seldom boast about how much we earn, as it is a matter of public record.

Cars are probably a bit cheaper than the UK: they are a bit of metal, which we prang with worrying regularity.

We leave our corporate baggage at the exit of the office; serviles belong to an era prior to the 25th April.

Everyone has a final salary scheme here: it's the one the state provides, based on 40 years of service. We scratch our heads in disbelief as the myths of such a scheme causing collapse and ruin are peddled.

Our constitution guarantees paid paternity leave; again, it is nothing to brag about.

Martin has led the debate about challenging the interests of big business; he is beholden to nobody. (In Portugal we have only 'O Deco Proteste'. He champions the rights of the ordinary person.

Those of free thought are to be supported; those who dance to the tune of their paymasters whilst operating under the guise of helpers, should be challenged at all stages.

Extant

Did you ever consider a career in socialist propaganda?

Portugal is far from a utopia. I see you've neglected to mention Portugal's spiraling public debt, poor GDP growth, or the fact that it's simply one of the poorest countries in Europe in the first place.

You mention a pension, but fail to take in to account what an aging population means for it. You also ignore the fact - and this is from two minutes of Googling - that the Portugese pension system is prone to turbulent changes - in 1993 they increased the number of years required before being eligible by 50%, and in 1999 increased the female age of retirement from 62 to 65. I'd hardly be confident, if I were you, that such a scheme is long going to be as marvelous as you think it.

Trying to brag that you are some how "freer" is pointless: we all live in the first world, and none of us are any freer than the other.

I am not "servile," I am passionate. I studied business and I've worked in it all my life. That's all I have to say on that - if you'd like to continue any discussion, I'm more than happy to; but leave out the ever-present personal judgments. You've know idea who I am outside of here, so why presume? The ad hominem is boring.

Inactive

whitevanwoman wrote: »

Thank you for the reply, much appreciated. I was worried because someone had said that customers would have to opt out rather than opt in.

That is correct, it is an " opt out ", however the banking staff on here do seem to sideline the issue.:rolleyes:

never-in-doubt

Inactive wrote: »

That is correct, it is an " opt out ", however the banking staff on here do seem to sideline the issue.:rolleyes:

Mentioning no names of course.... :rolleyes:

savagej

BarclaysManager wrote: »

Did you ever consider a career in socialist propaganda?

Portugal is far from a utopia. I see you've neglected to mention Portugal's spiraling public debt, poor GDP growth, or the fact that it's simply one of the poorest countries in Europe in the first place.

You mention a pension, but fail to take in to account what an aging population means for it. You also ignore the fact - and this is from two minutes of Googling - that the Portugese pension system is prone to turbulent changes - in 1993 they increased the number of years required before being eligible by 50%, and in 1999 increased the female age of retirement from 62 to 65. I'd hardly be confident, if I were you, that such a scheme is long going to be as marvelous as you think it.

Trying to brag that you are some how "freer" is pointless: we all live in the first world, and none of us are any freer than the other.

I am not "servile," I am passionate. I studied business and I've worked in it all my life. That's all I have to say on that - if you'd like to continue any discussion, I'm more than happy to; but leave out the ever-present personal judgments. You've know idea who I am outside of here, so why presume? The ad hominem is boring.

Did you ever get to the end of your history lesson about Barclays Bank in Africa and state you were incorrect when you stated they were not racist etc.? I am not judging you for making a mistake, I just feel when people do make mistakes they should go away check the facts and come back with an apology for the mistake and pointing out what exactly did go on, in this case in the name of your employers in Africa.

never-in-doubt

savagej wrote: »

Did you ever get to the end of your history lesson about Barclays Bank in Africa and state you were incorrect when you stated they were not racist etc.? I am not judging you for making a mistake, I just feel when people do make mistakes they should go away check the facts and come back with an apology for the mistake and pointing out what exactly did go on, in this case in the name of your employers in Africa.

LOL, you're asking a lot for this buffoon to come an apologise! You've got more hope of Barclays Bank not being racist in Afrikkkkkka than getting an apology mate :beer:

will-in-estoril

BarclaysManager wrote: »

Did you ever consider a career in socialist propaganda?

Portugal is far from a utopia. I see you've neglected to mention Portugal's spiraling public debt, poor GDP growth, or the fact that it's simply one of the poorest countries in Europe in the first place.

You mention a pension, but fail to take in to account what an aging population means for it. You also ignore the fact - and this is from two minutes of Googling - that the Portugese pension system is prone to turbulent changes - in 1993 they increased the number of years required before being eligible by 50%, and in 1999 increased the female age of retirement from 62 to 65. I'd hardly be confident, if I were you, that such a scheme is long going to be as marvelous as you think it.

Trying to brag that you are some how "freer" is pointless: we all live in the first world, and none of us are any freer than the other.

I am not "servile," I am passionate. I studied business and I've worked in it all my life. That's all I have to say on that - if you'd like to continue any discussion, I'm more than happy to; but leave out the ever-present personal judgments. You've know idea who I am outside of here, so why presume? The ad hominem is boring.

There is no desire on my part to reduce this debate to xenophobic or chauvanistic levels. Nor do left/right ideologies come into it. (Mario Soares and Cavaco Silva fought over the centre ground long before Tony Blair and David Cameron.)

The point I was making is that the tit bits thrown to us either by big business or the state should not take away our independence of thought, particularly outside the office. We are not paid by the office to toe their line on this forum, or are we?

This forum is about transparency and clarity, not about opacity or obfuscation. There might be a necessity to echo his master's voice during work time, but MSE was not set up with that purpose.

Inactive

will-in-estoril wrote: »

The point I was making is that the tit bits thrown to us either by big business or the state should not take away our independence of thought, particularly outside the office. We are not paid by the office to toe their line on this forum, or are we?

That thought had crossed my mind.;)

Extant

savagej wrote: »

Did you ever get to the end of your history lesson about Barclays Bank in Africa and state you were incorrect when you stated they were not racist etc.? I am not judging you for making a mistake, I just feel when people do make mistakes they should go away check the facts and come back with an apology for the mistake and pointing out what exactly did go on, in this case in the name of your employers in Africa.

Barclays National Bank Ltd, as it operated in South Africa, had no racist policies. It merely operated in a state with racist policies. These are not one and the same.

If you really believe that Barclays operated racist policies during this time, you might look to the other operations of Barclays Bank Dominion, Colonial and Overseas (the majority of which is now BB East and West Africa, and will be transferred to the Absa brand). Barclays Bank Uganda began operations in 1927 and offered accounts to black Africans from the very start, the same can be said of Kenya, etc.

Extant

will-in-estoril wrote: »

This forum is about transparency and clarity, not about opacity or obfuscation. There might be a necessity to echo his master's voice during work time, but MSE was not set up with that purpose.

My opinions are my own. I don't espouse them in the name of Barclays, nor do I "toe the line" - at no point have I tried to sell their products, etc. In fact, I've commented on internal policy and procedure that they'd rather I didn't.

Please cite examples of how I supposedly echo my master's voice.

I note that you are also unable, or perhaps unwilling, to address the direct criticisms of your heralded pension system. Instead you try to hide behind the veil of such discussion being xenophobic.