What's made you grumpy today?

[Cheest]

It ran, badly, in August. I replaced the shaft seals, along with the crankcase, cylinder, and head gaskets on Monday. Installed the new electronic ignition module on Tuesday. Rings are good and plenty of compression. Coil resistance should be 5100 ohms, plus or minus 20%. In spec there. I had spark, then I didn't. On/Off switch is suspect now as my Dad said the no spark thing was why he got the sled for next to nothing over forty years ago and he rebuilt the switch.
The carb is also suspect. There is no rebuild kit or new carb available. The fix there is a carb from a 7 hp Tecumseh engine with minor mods.
I got tired of messing with it today. I'm going to bypass the switch tomorrow and see if I have spark. If I do, I'll come up with a different switch and get a new carb.

 

[Cheest]

Well, hell. Installed a new module on the engine this morning. It lasted five seconds before it failed, too. Did another resistance check on the coil immediately after the second module failed. Way out of spec. So, with the Kawa engine coil being unobtainium, the engine is now a door stop and being replaced with a 79cc ohv Predator 4 stroke.

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

Well, what do you all think of this? A family member has been asked by their employer to take a basic one day first aid course. The nature of their employment is such that refusing to take the course will most likely be a limiting factor for promotion so there's no reluctance to attend the course and in fact the person concerned is quite enthusiastic about it all. So this person came home with a type written sheet which I was asked to give my opinion on as concerns were expressed.

Separating out the "wheat from the chaff" it boils down to:-
Acceptance of the offer to attend the course means that:-
1. Cancellation or failure to attend requires the candidate to repay the course cost, in full, to the employer
2. If a pass is not achieved then repayment in full will be required.
3. If the employee leaves the job within 12 months of the course for any reason then repayment in full will be required.

There were other minor conditions I won't bother to detail.

Having read it I was asked what I would do if it were me. My advice, bearing in mind that this person is actually keen to do the course, was to go in in person to their line manager and state that they would very much like to go on the course but that they were not prepared to sign the agreement form.

I was an "enhanced" first aider at my work (before I retired) and the course I did was several days long with a yearly refresher all paid for by my employer - including lunch in the local pub each day. I was also required to hold an Enhanced Disclosure Scotland Certificate as I was involved with vulnerable people. There was never, at any time, (I was there for over 15 years) any suggestion that I might be liable for any of the costs incurred and I find what our family member is being asked to stand liable for to be completely out of order. What do you folks think? I've been retired for a number of years, maybe things have moved on and this is now normal?

 

[Rocinante]

Well, what do you all think of this? A family member has been asked by their employer to take a basic one day first aid course. The nature of their employment is such that refusing to take the course will most likely be a limiting factor for promotion so there's no reluctance to attend the course and in fact the person concerned is quite enthusiastic about it all. So this person came home with a type written sheet which I was asked to give my opinion on as concerns were expressed.

Separating out the "wheat from the chaff" it boils down to:-
Acceptance of the offer to attend the course means that:-
1. Cancellation or failure to attend requires the candidate to repay the course cost, in full, to the employer
2. If a pass is not achieved then repayment in full will be required.
3. If the employee leaves the job within 12 months of the course for any reason then repayment in full will be required.

There were other minor conditions I won't bother to detail.

Having read it I was asked what I would do if it were me. My advice, bearing in mind that this person is actually keen to do the course, was to go in in person to their line manager and state that they would very much like to go on the course but that they were not prepared to sign the agreement form.

I was an "enhanced" first aider at my work (before I retired) and the course I did was several days long with a yearly refresher all paid for by my employer - including lunch in the local pub each day. I was also required to hold an Enhanced Disclosure Scotland Certificate as I was involved with vulnerable people. There was never, at any time, (I was there for over 15 years) any suggestion that I might be liable for any of the costs incurred and I find what our family member is being asked to stand liable for to be completely out of order. What do you folks think? I've been retired for a number of years, maybe things have moved on and this is now normal?

I wouldn't expect to have these conditions on something like a first aid course, especially if it is the employer asking them to go on the course, rather than the employee requesting it.

Having said that I believe these stipulations shouldn't be there, my assumption is that the employer has had experience of employees just not showing up for the course, not bothering their shirt once on the course, and leaving the company shortly after the course, and the employer has got tired of paying to put people on a course with no benefit to the company, and instigated these rules for everyone due to some bad apples. (maybe this is being generous to the employer).
If the course was required as part of their current duties, I would have said the employer would have to pay(and not have these stipulations), but it sounds the course isn't actually required to do their current job, so the employer could just withdraw the course from them and then it would only negatively impact your family member.

It seems it's worth the chat with their line manager, but I'd be waring of saying they weren't prepared to sign, as it sounds like they won't have a choice if they want the course, I can't see them changing the rules just for your family member, they may just have to take the risk if they want the course.

I am not a Lawyer.

Citizens Advice, may be able to give you the actual legal position regarding this, but you then you start getting in to the age old thorny issue of rocking the employment boat, by getting 'legal', especially if they hoping to advance in the company. I assume Union advice is unavailable ?

 

[StevenRB45]

Figured out the thing stopping the gauges in the car doing a full sweep when you switch on is the electronic child locks being active.

How those two things are related in any way...answers on a postcard..my guess is battery voltage isn't high enough to do both in the same moment and start the engine. Either that or the act of sending the message to the screen that says "child locks active" stops it from sending the message to the clocks to do the other thing.

It's pointless fluff anyway...I was just wondering why one day it had stopped when previously it had done it.

 

[portland_bill]

Well, what do you all think of this?

Separating out the "wheat from the chaff" it boils down to:-
Acceptance of the offer to attend the course means that:-
1. Cancellation or failure to attend requires the candidate to repay the course cost, in full, to the employer
2. If a pass is not achieved then repayment in full will be required.
3. If the employee leaves the job within 12 months of the course for any reason then repayment in full will be required.

I think those terms are unreasonable. As suggested, the employer has had people do the course, then use it to get a job elsewhere, so they have to pay agian for someone else to train. My experience is those course are very expensive for what they are.
The employer must have first aiders on duty at all time when there are people working, or customers in the premises. By asking someone, this suggests they are struggling for volunteers.
My first thought, is say yes to the course, but no to the conditions. Call their bluff.
Second thought. Once a qualified first aider, I'd expect a small salary enhancement. A possible suggestion is, no to the conditions, but defer the enhanced payment, payable as a bonus after 6 months, so the course cost is covered if they leave.

 

[portland_bill]

Sometimes training 'qualified' drivers is more exciting than it should be.
One of the courses is for drivers from other countries, new to the UK and its road rules, mostly form LHD countries, but sometimes from RHD countries with significantly different standards.
So yesterday was difficult. A guy from India, passed his test there, but only driven for 6 months. The test consisted of two roundabouts about 200 yds apart. From midway, set off, around the first, down to the second, around and back to the start. Passed.
Lane discipline - No. Just head where you want to go.
Give Way junctions - Optional. Look one way only, keep moving regardless, but slowly for maximum risk and inconvenience. Or stop when all is clear, and risk a rear shunt.
Too fast into all hazards, very slow out of all hazards.
After 4.5 hours, very little improvement. Not ability issue, all about attitude. Deep inside his head, there is no need to drive differently, so no incentice to fix these issues.
Coming to a road near you, now. Lots of these, all driving on their Indian licences with permit for 12 months, spread all over the country.
Be afraid.

Another one tomorrow, and again next Wednesday. Really looking forward to it - not.

 

[s130]

Reminds me when I used to live and drive in Belgium and their "priority to the right" https://traffic-rules.com/en/belgium/traffic-rules/priority-rules

Too many accidents because

1) people on the right *think* and *assume* they will be given priority
2) people on the right **take** priority and just drive in at speed

This rule applies to many European countries but the Belgians were masters at the *take* regardless. Now in Belgium I gather there is a campaign / pressure to abolish this rule.

When you think about the UK where there are many rigged accidents to make insurance claims the "priority to the right" rule would be a license to print money and kill off motorcyclists and cyclists!

 

[DaveMcT]

This is why in car cameras are now so important. Not just covering the front but also sides and rear.

 

[pooroldcodger]

A friend of mine moved here from Pakistan legally (and very expensively) several years ago. He is a devout Catholic and grew tired of his kids being in danger just going to school every day because they were the "wrong" religion.
He is a good driver but asked if I would do him a favour and point out anything he was doing that he shouldn't be, or vice versa.
Obviously I am not a driving instructor but I do take driving seriously so I was happy to help.
But the fact that he could drive for 364 days without any scrutiny at all is terrifying.

 

[Rocinante]

Reminds me when I used to live and drive in Belgium and their "priority to the right" https://traffic-rules.com/en/belgium/traffic-rules/priority-rules

Too many accidents because

1) people on the right *think* and *assume* they will be given priority
2) people on the right **take** priority and just drive in at speed

This rule applies to many European countries but the Belgians were masters at the *take* regardless. Now in Belgium I gather there is a campaign / pressure to abolish this rule.

When you think about the UK where there are many rigged accidents to make insurance claims the "priority to the right" rule would be a license to print money and kill off motorcyclists and cyclists!

I don't see the issue with this, is this not exactly how roundabouts work ? Why shouldn't people assume they have priority when that is the rules of the road, that's the whole point of the rule. It's like saying if you're on a roundabout, you need to stop at every entrance in case the person joining the roundabout doesn't give you priority. I also don't see how it would rig accidents. It's clear who has priority, so a deviation from that, and it's quite apparent who's fault it is.

I'm must be missing something in the practicalities, especially given there is a demand from those with experience saying it is an issue.

 

[Paddynabs]

Whilst driving I couldn't select 6th gear. I slowed down and found I couldn't get 3rd or 1st. Eventually rammed it in. Got going again. Still couldn't get 6th. After 30 mins or so the gearbox got better as it warmed up. Took it to the garage thinking clutch is going. They seem to think my gearbox is about to let go instead. What are peoples thoughts? In my last Fiat the same thing happened and the clutch went a few days later. I've had a few suggestions about changing gearbox oil or looking at the mechanism.

 

[StevenRB45]

Not had a good dadding it day today...

First my son wet himself this morning...literally as far as we could be from somewhere to change his trousers. No warning either, just turned to me and said "You help? Wet..." Then a large patch started spreading on his pants.

This was about 30 mins after I'd manage to trap his chin in the buckle on his cycling helmet leading to tears...and 20 minutes after he'd got off his bike and abandoned it on the path so I had to drag it back to the car.

Fun had by all..as you can imagine, got back to the car. Apparently we no longer have a changing mat in it so he was changed on a rubber floor mat.

But we persevered and I thought we'd take in the discovery museum...reckoned without Xmas shoppers though. Went through 2 car parks including a 14 level multi story with no spaces...by which time he'd fallen asleep anyway, so back home.

Multistorey in particular was an absolute farce..someone in an Audi Q7 blocking everyone to put stuff in their boot, They'd had to move it into the middle of the bay to open the boot because obviously a Multistorey isn't designed for a truck and they saw nothing wrong with blocking the entire road. At least he was leaving on my way back down...and had left his back pack beside the car next to him. If he hadn't been a knob I may have pointed that out.

Then spending a further 5 minutes waiting for someone to finish mooring an xc90. Then getting stuck behind a Mazda 3 oddly enough all the way down from the top floor who had literally no spatial awareness.

If you've got no spatial awareness..get a bicycle not 4.5 metres+ of car..honestly was ready to launch the lot of them. Little counter on the stop start reached 10 minutes stopped in one trip.

 

[Popitinpete]

The new modena booster jab makes you feel like cr@p

 

[Cheest]

The new modena booster jab makes you feel like cr@p

The Moderna booster was the only one the sent me to the sack early. The previous two had me wondering what all the fuss was about.

 

[Pugglt Auld Jock]

The new modena booster jab makes you feel like cr@p

Yup, same experience here. Got the Pfizer for my first two but had to go to a different centre for the booster and got the Moderna. First Pfizer had virtually no effect at all. Second gave me a few hours of feeling just slightly under the weather but didn't hold me back at all. The third (Moderna) pretty much decked me for a day and a bit. Mrs J was able to get the Pfizer for all 3 of hers and had no reaction at all to any of them! Worries me just a wee bit as to whether her system is working with it though? We're both in our 70's and she is less robust than me.

 

[portland_bill]

On the 8th December 2020, I sent a friend a list of parts, with links, to buy for a service on his 2005 Clio.
At last, a year later, he has bought them, and today is the day for the service, if the oil will come out. I suspect it might be a little gloopy.
"Be here as soon as possible after 9am" said my text. He lives an hour away, or a bit more with his route planning, and at 9:25 he called to say he was just finishing his breakfast.
Won't be doing all the necessary jobs today then.

 

[Popitinpete]

Yup, same experience here. Got the Pfizer for my first two but had to go to a different centre for the booster and got the Moderna. First Pfizer had virtually no effect at all. Second gave me a few hours of feeling just slightly under the weather but didn't hold me back at all. The third (Moderna) pretty much decked me for a day and a bit. Mrs J was able to get the Pfizer for all 3 of hers and had no reaction at all to any of them! Worries me just a wee bit as to whether her system is working with it though? We're both in our 70's and she is less robust than me.

EXCACTLY same here puggit, two normal astrazeniker (sic) no real problems then the modern booster two days felt like rubbish, well if that's the price to stay say its nothing really, stay safe puggit

 

[Popitinpete]

The Moderna booster was the only one the sent me to the sack early. The previous two had me wondering what all the fuss was about.

Strange isn't it, at least the actual injection didn't hurt this time lol, keep safe

 

[Cheest]

Just learned from my wife that we are hosting her family for Christmas this year. Bah. Humbug. Apparently, I am smoking a turkey to feed these people, too. Out of the two sister in laws, their spouses, children, and grandchildren, I like one brother in law. I tolerate the rest to keep the peace. The likable brother in law and I will probably find somewhere away from the chaos and enjoy a product of Scotland. Or two.