Nice People Thread Number 10 -the official residence of Nice People

LydiaJ

GDB2222 wrote: »

The funny thing is that I am quite envious of Gen! He's survived emigrating to a place with great economic prospects for his kids and a great climate, he's got a great job where he earns well, and he's fabulously fit.

Except that if he hates it then it's not a great job for him.

Here's hoping that in time he can get back to a place where his blessings feel real to him.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Spirit wrote: »

Large organisations are shifting to taking long hours cultures as a problem not an asset .

Some large organisations may be.

However both of us in this household work for large organisations at quite a senior management level and there are no signs whatsoever of such a change across the board.

Common for us to do 60-70 hours a week, and 90-100 hour weeks a few times a year when project deadlines dictate it.

And neither of us have been able to use more than half our holiday entitlement for the last 5 years. Although at least our companies now allow you to sell back some holiday time. As virtually impossible in reality to use it all up.

lostinrates

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Some large organisations may be.

However both of us in this household work for large organisations at quite a senior management level and there are no signs whatsoever of such a change across the board.

Common for us to do 60-70 hours a week, and 90-100 hour weeks a few times a year when project deadlines dictate it.

And neither of us have been able to use more than half our holiday entitlement for the last 5 years. Although at least our companies now allow you to sell back some holiday time. As virtually impossible in reality to use it all up.

Yep, closer to dh's experience......at his level of quality work its not firm particular. The colleague that did vote with feet before Christmas came from magic circle and left within a year because couldn't cope with work load. I am pretty sure magic circle opt out of work hours too......l

LydiaJ

silvercar wrote: »

All inclusive, with lots of kids milling around and a decent range of activities.

Takes a bit of trial and error to get right; nothing worse than being on holiday with loads of kids and kiddies clubs and your kids refusing to join them. Something like centre parcs (here or abroad) where there are a lot of sports activities rather than kids clubs full of arts and crafts. We found the best were all inclusive hotels in Greece where there were sports activities for all ages not just kids.

Unfortunately, since the accident, DS has been extremely selective about what he will join in with, and neither sports nor arts and crafts usually meet with the seal of approval - although occasionally he makes an exception, it's never something I could have foreseen. Still, he's getting a bit more open-minded about joining in these days. When I eventually get to the point where I could afford an all inclusive holiday, I'll have to discuss it with him and see what he might enjoy. (DD loves joining in with practically anything, so she won't be a problem.)

That's why I'm excited about New Wine next summer. DS is happy to be serving on team, and will have somewhere to be busy and to belong without going to the group for his age. (He doesn't like the whole "lots of kids being loud" environment.) If I can get on team too (too early to know, but I'm hoping) then all three of us will get all our meals provided for us by the catering team, which will make life a lot easier for me. If I can get onto the same team I was on a few years ago, then I'll only have to spend 2 x 90min sessions a day doing something I love doing that energises rather than drains me.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

lostinrates wrote: »

Yep, closer to dh's experience......at his level of quality work its not firm particular. The colleague that did vote with feet before Christmas came from magic circle and left within a year because couldn't cope with work load. I am pretty sure magic circle opt out of work hours too......l

In our industry and at our level it's the same everywhere.

WTD is of no relevance as we all opt out, you simply can't do this job and only work 40-ish hours a week, it's not humanly possible.

They pay us well and treat us well, and so long as you enjoy work it's not a problem.

Tahlullah

lostinrates wrote: »

Sometimes though, even when you know you are blessed you feel like a pair of worn knickers, used and screwed up.

This has to be the quote of the day! Love it. Often feel like this at the end of the week, despite acknowledging the good things that have happened.

Sending positive thoughts to you Gen.

Tx

lostinrates

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

In our industry and at our level it's the same everywhere.

WTD is of no relevance as we all opt out, you simply can't do this job and only work 40-ish hours a week, it's not humanly possible.

They pay us well and treat us well, and so long as you enjoy work it's not a problem.

Yep, opt out is standard in the sort of law dh does.....i' don't know aout other areas. i know some of our provincial law feiends don't work the crazy hours, certainly, but its a different job. that's what I was saying, its......not possible not to do it really. They have introduced shorter hour contracts, but they were very clear there would be no progression on them.., and frankly, I don't see how they would work, because I don't see what 80 % of all the time is. (As opposed to people who work more standard hours/ 40 hour weeks).


I just shouted out to DH to ask if any one had taken them up so i could ask how they were working. (Our beat guess is they would work like paralegals with signatures that 'meant something' and he says he cannot think of any one ATM.

lostinrates

Tahlullah wrote: »

This has to be the quote of the day! Love it. Often feel like this at the end of the week, despite acknowledging the good things that have happened.

Sending positive thoughts to you Gen.

Tx

I actually edited. Originally It said twice worn knickers, Then I decided the 'twice' element was just too not nice for the np thread.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

lostinrates wrote: »

Yep, opt out is standard in the sort of law dh does.....i' don't know aout other areas. i know some of our provincial law feiends don't work the crazy hours, certainly, but its a different job.

Indeed.

It's something I've been thinking about lately actually.

Although only early 40's now, and the youngest of my peers, I can see there will come a time in the not too distant future when I need to make a decision, as only a tiny handful of jobs at the next promotion level will come up across my whole industry in the next decade.

So although I'm very comfortable doing what I do now and being where I am, it won't last forever, and I'll need to move up or move out.

Most of the people in these jobs end up retiring from the corporate world in their early 50's and buying their own 'hobby' business. As simply no further progression available and with the hours, travel and stress it's not a game for older people.

Yorkie1

zagubov wrote: »

Any NPs know where I stand on this. Coming back from Ts, I stopped at the lights (monitored by a camera).An ambulance pulled up behind me with lights flashing so me and another car went through and pulled over in front of the other lanes to let it past.
Worried now I'll get a fine and /or points on my licence! :mad:

GDB2222 wrote: »

In English law there's a defence of necessity. I think that would probably cover it, unless you had exceptionally silly magistrates.

Technically you can't go through red lights unless directed to do so by a police officer, so you might get prosecuted. If you receive no paperwork within 14 days, though, you're in the clear.

I'm not convinced necessity would work as a defence but there's no harm in trying it if need be and, if convicted, for using the facts to argue that there should be no endorsement / penalty points added to the licence because of the special reasons that existed at the time.

tomterm8 wrote: »

I'd also be very careful about betablockers. Might be different now but my mum had them for anxiety twenty to thirty years ago... anxiety remained, but the betablockers were addictive and resulted in her losing a lot of energy.

Betablockers aren't addictive like the old anti-anxiety drugs such as valium, tempazepam etc. That's not to say that people can't get psychologically dependent on them - but that's the case for any medication.