Bantamzen
Established Member
Has this thread morphed into some RailForums alternative to TripAdvisor?
Given the very nature of these forums, people discussing travel arrangements isn't really that surprising?
Has this thread morphed into some RailForums alternative to TripAdvisor?
I meant something slightly different actually.
For example, if your hotel has 4 floors, you could have the odd numbered floors as "late", with something like check out at 12.30 and check in from 5, and the even numbered ones as "early", with check out at 9.39 and check in from 2. When you book you could be asked if you want a late room or an early room.
I was on a Stagecoach bus this weekend; I've run out of mobile data this month so I was delighted when I saw I was on a Wifi-enabled bus. I connected, only to see this message:
"We are temporarily turning off wi-fi on this bus. We're working hard to continue to connect you with the people and places that matter most and making sure our services are safe and clean. We will review the wifi decision at a future date".
What on earth does keeping a bus clean have to do with wifi provision? Surely it's just switching on a button? (though do correct me if I'm wrong!)
The second sentence of the message is a statement in general which is not justifying the first, merely a piece of information.I was on a Stagecoach bus this weekend; I've run out of mobile data this month so I was delighted when I saw I was on a Wifi-enabled bus. I connected, only to see this message:
"We are temporarily turning off wi-fi on this bus. We're working hard to continue to connect you with the people and places that matter most and making sure our services are safe and clean. We will review the wifi decision at a future date".
What on earth does keeping a bus clean have to do with wifi provision? Surely it's just switching on a button? (though do correct me if I'm wrong!)
They're rather obliquely alluding to the fact that they've done this to cut costs.The second sentence of the message is a statement in general which is not justifying the first, merely a piece of information.
The implication being that keeping the services safe and clean is being paid for by not supplying wifi?They're rather obliquely alluding to the fact that they've done this to cut costs.
Quite why they feel it's better to pretend that it's about something else... I don't get.
Indeed. I'm surprised they ever introduced WiFi if it was as expensive as they're making out.The implication being that keeping the services safe and clean is being paid for by not supplying wifi?
As much to the point, fewer people are travelling so discretionary costs are being cut.I suspect the thinking goes that in a pandemic few people are going to use public transport if they have the option of driving, so there is little point in spending money on gimmiks to attract people out of their cars and onto public transport.
Here in Wales( not sure where you are) this continues too-I believe reading newspapers on buses was illegal here -although services run by Newport bus and Cardiff bus have WiFi.Not sure if they ever turned it off.But Stagecoach must be putting out some sort of signal in order to relay that message.I was on a Stagecoach bus this weekend; I've run out of mobile data this month so I was delighted when I saw I was on a Wifi-enabled bus. I connected, only to see this message:
"We are temporarily turning off wi-fi on this bus. We're working hard to continue to connect you with the people and places that matter most and making sure our services are safe and clean. We will review the wifi decision at a future date".
What on earth does keeping a bus clean have to do with wifi provision? Surely it's just switching on a button? (though do correct me if I'm wrong!)
But your GP gets paid regardless. Dentists get paid for the treatment they actually provide, so not seeing people hits them in the pocket. It would also be quite hard to do a filling by video!My local GP practice. Getting an appointment is very difficult as they are limiting face to face consultations "because of Covid," yet I can see my dentist for treatment with no problem and that's about as face to face as it gets.
Top doctors today fought back against calls for face-to-face GP appointments to become the default again, claiming that it was 'undeliverable'.
The Royal College of General Practitioners, which represents more than 50,000 GPs, said practices were battling staffing issues and increased demand due to delayed diagnoses during the pandemic.
Martin Marshall, chair of the RCGP, also warned there was still too much Covid in the community for practices to return to having packed waiting rooms.
Boris Johnson last night piled pressure on GPs to offer more in-person consultations, with his spokesman claiming every patient had the right if they wanted one.
But Professor Marshall told MPs on the Health and Social Care Committee today: 'There's no point in having a right if it's undeliverable at the moment because of the workload pressures.'
He defended the widespread move to virtual GP appointments, claiming it was a 'positive' and more convenient for the majority of patients.
On virtual appointment maths, perhaps because some of those 57% would have preferred their face to face appointment to have been virtual?Because of Covid is still being used as an excuse to avoid face to face GP appointments. Seeing a GP was an ordeal long before Covid. The actual consultations were fine in my experience but trying to get through on the phone at 08:00 to make an appointment was a nightmare. Can they not put in a queue system rather than make people redial dozens of times?
Prof Marshall doesn't seem to have a basic grasp of maths. He claims that the majority of people find virtual appointments more convenient even though 57% are still face to face. How does that work?
Prof Marshall doesn't seem to have a basic grasp of maths. He claims that the majority of people find virtual appointments more convenient even though 57% are still face to face. How does that work?
As with working from home, both extremes are wrong.I don't think you can say one is better than the other. Virtual appointments are very convenient, and for some things they're perfectly fine. If they mean people don't have to take time off work I'm all for them.
But they are not suitable for every situation. There are times you need to see the doctor in person.
So I guess I could say virtual appointments are more convenient, but I would still be in the 57% of people wanting a (less convenient, but more useful) face to face appointment.
As with working from home, both extremes are wrong.
You should be able to state what kind of appointment you'd like - whilst obviously for some kinds of issues, remote appointments aren't suitable anyway (like WFH).
To be fair, that doesn't bother me. I'm happy to use the same towel for a few days. Occasionally I ask for the coffee supply to be topped up but I don't use it much because I'm not a fan of UHT milk.A lot of hotels are using it as an excuse to not clean rooms daily and to not provide fresh towels daily unless you ask for them. Must be quite a cost saving in laundry for them.
I’m not massively bothered by it, it’s just that they pick and choose where Covid is an issue, and funnily when they can save money it’s an issue but when it would cost them money it’s not; ie in their restaurants, bars etc. If they took a consistent approach to the ‘dangers of Covid,’ I’d have no issues at all.To be fair, that doesn't bother me. I'm happy to use the same towel for a few days. Occasionally I ask for the coffee supply to be topped up but I don't use it much because I'm not a fan of UHT milk.
A lot of hotels are using it as an excuse to not clean rooms daily and to not provide fresh towels daily unless you ask for them. Must be quite a cost saving in laundry for them.
The hotel I used recently seemed to have gone back to their previous routine of tidying up the room everyday (I asked as one of the cleaners knocked on my door and asked if I needed anything).
Morrisons.
Absolute chaos the other Sunday, there were queues up every aisle so couldn’t shop properly. The duty manager was visible on the shop floor so I had asked him what was going on, and why it was so bad. He happily told me that head office had used covid social distancing requirements as an excuse to cut his Staffing budget. He said he had budget for a total of 12 staff on duty, to cover checkouts, cigarette counter, stocking shelves, the cafe and a security guard. And just for good measure head office had put on a half price breakfast deal that weekend adding more unwanted pressure to the cafe. He also told me the entire management team bar him had recently quit that store and he was serving his notice.
And Morrisons are being sold to a private equity firm... Covid is a convenient figleaf for a completely different corporate decision.12 staff? That's crazy. When I worked in Sainsburys we'd have 20 - 30 staff just on checkouts on a Saturday. Admittedly we didn't have self-service in those days, but there's no way you can run a supermarket with a team of 12.
And Morrisons are being sold to a private equity firm... Covid is a convenient figleaf for a completely different corporate decision.