Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
by amber_fluid » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:11 am
Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
by Booney » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:14 am
amber_fluid wrote:Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
by amber_fluid » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:18 am
Booney wrote:amber_fluid wrote:Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
Mrs and Jnr have both been tested, Mrs said the nose was the worst, Jnr said the throat.
Pretty sure it would depend on how rough the person doing the swab is.
by tigerpie » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:23 am
Booney wrote:Daisy and I might not see eye to eye but I will not sit here and have anyone say day drinking is wrong, no bloody way
by Lightning McQueen » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:26 am
amber_fluid wrote:Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
by Magellan » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:43 am
Lightning McQueen wrote:amber_fluid wrote:Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
What about the swab?
by amber_fluid » Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:54 am
Lightning McQueen wrote:amber_fluid wrote:Jim05 wrote:Yes and it’s not that bad. Maybe a 2/10 for uncomfortableBum Crack wrote:Has anyone on here had a test? That thing up the nose looks bloody uncomfortable.
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
What about the swab?
by Smashed Crab » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:13 pm
by Lightning McQueen » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:17 pm
Smashed Crab wrote:Geez the figures Josh Frydenburg is spinning off this morning, gonna be a long time to pay back all this deficit. I still cant fathom how they thought it would be a good idea to double people on the dole. Don't get me wrong, some people really deserve it and need it and do the right thing, but F#$% me, there are plenty who don't even ever intend to do a days work in their life to help our society.
by mots02 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:23 pm
amber_fluid wrote:Lightning McQueen wrote:amber_fluid wrote:
Down the back of your gob was probably worse.
No dramas with it though.
What about the swab?
What swab?
by Bum Crack » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:26 pm
Smashed Crab wrote:Geez the figures Josh Frydenburg is spinning off this morning, gonna be a long time to pay back all this deficit. I still cant fathom how they thought it would be a good idea to double people on the dole. Don't get me wrong, some people really deserve it and need it and do the right thing, but F#$% me, there are plenty who don't even ever intend to do a days work in their life to help our society.
by Bum Crack » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:27 pm
Lightning McQueen wrote:Smashed Crab wrote:Geez the figures Josh Frydenburg is spinning off this morning, gonna be a long time to pay back all this deficit. I still cant fathom how they thought it would be a good idea to double people on the dole. Don't get me wrong, some people really deserve it and need it and do the right thing, but F#$% me, there are plenty who don't even ever intend to do a days work in their life to help our society.
Yep, that's one bit that I couldn't understand, the doley's loved it and took the piss.
by Booney » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:47 pm
Smashed Crab wrote:Geez the figures Josh Frydenburg is spinning off this morning, gonna be a long time to pay back all this deficit. I still cant fathom how they thought it would be a good idea to double people on the dole. Don't get me wrong, some people really deserve it and need it and do the right thing, but F#$% me, there are plenty who don't even ever intend to do a days work in their life to help our society.
by whufc » Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:57 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:03 pm
by The Bedge » Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:06 pm
whufc wrote:Yes legally we can terminate them if they refuse to work shifts but legally it's almost impossible to enforce especially being regional where reasons such as 'im in Adelaide', 'im helping out on the family farm' are legitimate regardless of whether we see otherwise on their social media etc.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
by amber_fluid » Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:08 pm
The Bedge wrote:whufc wrote:Yes legally we can terminate them if they refuse to work shifts but legally it's almost impossible to enforce especially being regional where reasons such as 'im in Adelaide', 'im helping out on the family farm' are legitimate regardless of whether we see otherwise on their social media etc.
Have a work restructure, make their roles redundant.. then bring the roles back under a different title and advertise.
by Dutchy » Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:08 pm
whufc wrote:Working in rec centres and whilst Job Keeper is helping with our P&L's its killing us at any operational level.
We have primarily a casual staff force. We had staff who were previously working 10 hours a week roughly $250 a week who are now getting $1,500 a fortnight whether they work or not.
Do you think the casual staff are making themselves overly available at the moment or will to pick up shifts etc when in 'their minds' they are working for free.
Yes legally we can terminate them if they refuse to work shifts but legally it's almost impossible to enforce especially being regional where reasons such as 'im in Adelaide', 'im helping out on the family farm' are legitimate regardless of whether we see otherwise on their social media etc.
by whufc » Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:16 pm
The Bedge wrote:whufc wrote:Yes legally we can terminate them if they refuse to work shifts but legally it's almost impossible to enforce especially being regional where reasons such as 'im in Adelaide', 'im helping out on the family farm' are legitimate regardless of whether we see otherwise on their social media etc.
Have a work restructure, make their roles redundant.. then bring the roles back under a different title and advertise.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |