General Election 2015 - chat, predictions, results and post election discussion

[Louis MacNeice]

ok - minimise it/stop it in so far as it is possible - still worthwhile. Same would apply to elder-abuse.

School teachers, doctors, taxi drivers, police officers, nurses, managers, cooks, sports coaches...?

Cheers - Louis (welcome to the panopticon) MacNeice

 

[articul8]

School teachers, doctors, taxi drivers, police officers, nurses, managers, cooks, sports coaches...?

Cheers - Louis (welcome to the panopticon) MacNeice

So hidden cruelty and abuse of animals/elderly etc is a price worth paying?

 

[killer b]

I’d think the beef cow or elder has more to fear from neglect and cruelty as part of a workplace culture rather than from individual psychopaths – there are many controls and measures that can be put in place to deal with such cultures before we get to the point of needing to film the workers.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

might also apply for old folks homes - but obviously people should be properly paid, and any penalty fines etc should be levied at the bosses not solely at the workers.

You have quite a top-down authoritarian streak, don't you?

 

[killer b]

it's the good kind of fascism.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

it's the good kind of fascism.

The film The Lives of Others wasn't just about the past, it seems. It was also about the future here. We must all be monitored in all we do by the state in case we do something wrong. By the good, benevolent state, of course, like it was in the Democratic Republic of Germany.

 

[Fozzie Bear]

ok - minimise it/stop it in so far as it is possible - still worthwhile. Same would apply to elder-abuse.

What about cruelty to animals and elder abuse in the home? I reckon we could stop that by filming everyone all the time where they live. And we could sell the footage to gogglebox as well to recoup costs.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

So hidden cruelty and abuse of animals/elderly etc is a price worth paying?

So the only way to minimise abuse is through electronic surveillance?

Asking loaded questions is fun isn't it...not particularly useful but fun.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[killer b]

These diverting exchanges are always so illuminating, A8.

 

[articul8]

I never said it was the only way to minimise abuse - in fact I specifically said the opposite. But evidence of abuse has been brought to light by undercover filming. As long as the footage was retained by the regulator and not accessible to company management, what would the workers have to fear?

 

[Santino]

what would the workers have to fear?

Fear itself?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I never said it was the only way to minimise abuse - in fact I specifically said the opposite. But evidence of abuse has been brought to light by undercover filming. As long as the footage was retained by the regulator and not accessible to company management, what would the workers have to fear?

You can't be this naive, surely?

 

[killer b]

we have nothing to fear about the collection, retention and monitoring of massive amounts of personal data by the state, clearly.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

What the fuck? I leave this thread for a couple of hours and when I get back we're talking about compulsory surveillance, monitored by the State, for tens (nay hundreds) of thousands of workers?

FUCK OFF.

 

[bi0boy]

Fear itself?

I'm sure the large numbers of retail workers subject to continuous cctv coverage are quaking in fear, I just have to go into my local Boots to see all the staff refraining from picking their noses.

 

[articul8]

we have nothing to fear about the collection, retention and monitoring of massive amounts of personal data by the state, clearly.

There's a vast difference between detailed records of people's identity/communications/history and the retention of CCTV footage of slaughter procedures.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

There's a vast difference between detailed records of people's identity/communications/history and the retention of CCTV footage of slaughter procedures.

And nursing homes. And care homes. And nurseries. And schools, why not. Hospitals, sure. And factories.

 

[articul8]

And nursing homes. And care homes. And nurseries. And schools, why not. Hospitals, sure. And factories.

tens/hundred of thousands of workers are already covered by CCTV - and in some respects for their own safety - train guards, bar staff, bank tellers, shop workers.... Are you saying this should be stopped?

 

[killer b]

in most cases, absolutely.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

tens/hundred of thousands of workers are already covered by CCTV - and in some respects for their own safety - train guards, bar staff, bank tellers, shop workers.... Are you saying this should be stopped?

We're about the most spied-on country in the world in this respect. Yes, I'd love to get rid of a great deal of it.

 

[articul8]

in most cases, absolutely.

assaults on workers are already high even with CCTV, but sometimes the perpetrators get caught and punished. Obviously CCTV isn't the sole answer to keeping people safe. But do we really want to remove even this basic protection?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

assaults on workers are already high even with CCTV, but sometimes the perpetrators get caught and punished. Obviously CCTV isn't the sole answer to keeping people safe. But do we really want to remove even this basic protection?

Can you see what you did there?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[skyscraper101]

Has this been done yet?

 

[belboid]

assaults on workers are already high even with CCTV, but sometimes the perpetrators get caught and punished. Obviously CCTV isn't the sole answer to keeping people safe. But do we really want to remove even this basic protection?

in most cases CCTV isn't there for protection, it's there to safeguard tills. That is where it is pointed in most bars, it does sod all for workers' safety. There are exceptions, and I'm ambivalent about it in abattoirs, but dont sing its praises up, its just the least shit shit solution even when it is useful.

 

[articul8]

Can you see what you did there?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

As I said, they're not *sufficient" protection - but without CCTV can we be certain that the level of assaults wouldn't be higher still??

 

[articul8]

in most cases CCTV isn't there for protection, it's there to safeguard tills. That is where it is pointed in most bars, it does sod all for workers' safety. There are exceptions, and I'm ambivalent about it in abattoirs, but dont sing its praises up, its just the least shit shit solution even when it is useful.

I'm not especially keen on CCTV - but if animal abuse has been addressed because some animal rights activists have secretly filmed what's going on, then the prospect of people accessing footage on a routine basis seems to put pressure on the employer and workers not to be doing cruel shit when they think no-one's looking.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Something needs to be done.

This is something.

Therefore this needs to be done.

Politician logic

 

[killer b]

assaults on workers are already high even with CCTV, but sometimes the perpetrators get caught and punished. Obviously CCTV isn't the sole answer to keeping people safe. But do we really want to remove even this basic protection?

In most cases, CCTV for safety purposes has replaced someone's job. I'd rather see more bus conductors in work than drivers working alone with CCTV backup and the like. Don't push cost-cutting as a necessary evil.

 

[articul8]

In most cases, CCTV for safety purposes has replaced someone's job. I'd rather see more bus conductors in work than drivers working alone with CCTV backup and the like. Don't push cost-cutting as a necessary evil.

My local council has suggested ending all CCTV as a *cost cutting measure* - is this one cut we should celebrate?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

My local council has suggested ending all CCTV as a *cost cutting measure* - is this one cut we should celebrate?

Yes. There was a time, not very long ago at all, when we all walked the streets without being filmed. I for one would like to go back to that time.