OK, it’s for Austin, Texas, and was posted on the Rush official website back in April, but it summarises a Rush gig on the Clockwork Angels Tour perfectly.
I don’t often watch this show (UK version) because I’m not usually at home when it’s on. I usually don’t even try to watch any of the non-UK variants. The 
American one in particular is smothered in saccharin and seems completely out of touch with reality (they cover horse racing stadiums and other minority concerns, though perhaps in the US people like that).
But I have a day off today (until tonight, anyway), and I was flipping channels and caught the start of this episode of Undercover Boss Canada. Mary Brown’s is a fried chicken chain based exclusively (as you’d expect, though they appear to be expanding) in Canada.
For anyone who doesn’t know, the programme structure involves an executive – usually the CEO – going undercover at various branches of the business in question to see what problems exist at the sharp end. In the UK version (where the format was developed), there are usually fundamental problems with the business (e.g. fast food outlets with appalling hygiene issues), but the franchised overseas versions tend not to cover such problems (again, the US version could often have been lifted straight out of Dallas or any other TV soap).
At the end of each episode, the CEO calls all the people featured up to head office and hands out various tokens. It might be an upgrade of facilities at the branch they work at, or a promotion or pay rise. In the UK version, it might be a paid weekend break for someone. The overseas versions tend to award much higher-value gifts to employees – full-length holidays, paid-off debts, and so on.
But the CEO in this case – Greg Roberts – topped anything I have ever seen (even in the US version).
He came across as a decent and pretty normal guy right from the start. During the show he travelled to various outlets and worked with some of the people. As usual, the people had various personal issues to deal with. There was a woman who didn’t get to see her father often, a deaf guy working in a real backwoods branch, and a woman who’d got other family problems.
But when he called them into the office, he arranged it so the woman who didn’t see her father often would get a twice-yearly paid trip to visit him. He paid for the schooling of the kids of another worker. Another woman was given an all-expenses holiday to “anywhere in the world” and assurance that her retirement finances would be sorted. And the deaf guy, who was due to get married, was given a house! Mr Roberts was clearly moved by the stories he’d heard, and even more moved when he handed out these gifts.
The trailer for it is on YouTube. I’m sure you can find it online if you want to watch it.
I know one thing. If they expand to Britain, I’ll go there for food just on principle.
This came through via the DSA newsfeed, although it has been covered by all the main media today. The problem is that no one in the media (or 
anywhere else) seems to quite understand what it is they’re getting themselves all excited about. The BBC headlines the story by referring to “middle-lane hoggers” only, but tailgating is also involved.
Let’s just clarify what “middle-lane hogging” is, because the Audi drivers out there have already convinced themselves that this is going to keep at least two lanes open for their sole use in future. If you’re driving at 70mph on the motorway in the middle lane you are not hogging it if there is traffic to your left, or if you are likely to get boxed in behind that traffic if you were to move over into every gap. Unnecessary lane changing is probably more dangerous than moving steadily past slower traffic – and what motorway these days carries so little traffic that the left-hand lane isn’t fully occupied by slower-moving lorries and other vehicles most of the time? Let’s face facts here: if you’re driving along at 70mph, anyone who is travelling faster and catches up with you is breaking a much clearer existing law themselves, irrespective of which lane you’re in.
“Middle-lane hogging” is when (for example) someone is driving below the speed limit unnecessarily in the middle lane, perhaps (for example) going slower than the left lane, or maybe (for example) if they’re in it when there is nothing in the left lane at all – whether they’re driving at the speed limit or not. The term applies equally to people who drive in the third or outside lanes unnecessarily. The Highway Code is clear on the subject:
261
You MUST NOT exceed 70 mph (112 km/h), or the maximum speed limit permitted for your vehicle (see Speed limits table). If a lower speed limit is in force, either permanently or temporarily, at road works for example, you MUST NOT exceed the lower limit. On some motorways, mandatory motorway signals (which display the speed within a red ring) are used to vary the maximum speed limit to improve traffic flow. You MUST NOT exceed this speed limit.
Law RTRA sects 17, 86, 89 & sch 6
264
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past. Slow-moving or speed-restricted vehicles should always remain in the left-hand lane of the carriageway unless overtaking. You MUST NOT drive on the hard shoulder except in an emergency or if directed to do so by the police, HA traffic officers in uniform or by signs.
Laws MT(E&W)R regs 5, 9 & 16(1)(a), MT(S)R regs 4, 8 & 14(1)(a), and RTA 1988, sects 35 & 186, as amended by TMA 2004 sect 6
“Tailgating” is technically any time when you are driving so close to another vehicle that you wouldn’t be able to stop safely if they braked hard (i.e. if you’re closer than two chevrons, where chevrons are painted on the road, or if you are not following the “two second rule”). However, even though driving too close is dangerous and anyone doing it deserves to be pulled over, the type of tailgating being being referred to is specifically the deliberate and aggressive kind intended to intimidate people and make them move out of the way. This aggressive form is a serious problem.
Another thing we should clarify is what these changes actually involve. At present, if the police saw someone tailgating or middle-lane hogging (which are already offences), they’d have to pull them over and then report them for processing by the courts. The process is slow and bureaucratic, and judging by what you see on Road Wars and similar shows, the police could have HD video footage from twenty different patrol cars of the guilty party driving within centimetres of another car, forty witnesses, and yet the case might still be thrown out as a result of “lack of evidence” or because some over-worked plod had spelled someone’s name wrong on a form.
But from July, instead of going down that route, the police will be able to issue roadside fixed penalties of £100 (with three-points attached) for careless driving offences such as those mentioned. Drivers will still be able to appeal through the courts. This is the only real change – as I said, all the offences mentioned were already offences before the change.
But it doesn’t mean that people need to start jostling to get into the left-hand lane every time they pass a lorry when there’s another one a few hundred metres ahead. Nor do they need to slam on their brakes and move over if they see a patrol car. Whenever we get a new law like this, everyone starts going on about the police trying to meet quotas for fines. But the simple fact is that you have to be doing something significantly wrong to get pulled over. Even now, the police can pull people over for using mobile phones and fine them/issue points, but they seldom do. All that’s happened is that tailgating and middle-lane hogging are now on the same list as mobile phones, and under the jurisdiction of the police.
Well, that’s what the Daily Mail appears to be saying, anyway. I saw their headline yesterday and couldn’t believe that even the Mail could be so stupid. 
Basically, after all the crap they’ve been publishing about fast food and pre-cooked meals being bad for you (the Mail has a food section which goes to town over this several times a week, comparing the poor health implications of each product), they are now warning people off fresh meat – and not for any health-based reason, but because in Britain we are apparently riding the razor’s edge, with food shortages.forever only a hair’s breadth away.
Of course, blame is laid at the feet of MPs, though it is done in such a way that the reader doesn’t have a bloody clue what was actually said and has to rely on The Mail’s interpretation. The story meanders through the comments made by various farmers’ associations and unions, apparently in response to The Mail’s headline, and proceeds as though somewhere, someone had actually spoken the exact words of that headline. And yet nothing in the bulk of the report confirms that this is what was said, and reading between the lines you can detect some cack-handed political machinations, suitably mangled by The Mail’s hacks in their typical amateurish way.
Can you even begin to imagine how or why any politician would want to make such ill-informed comments about an industry which is already suffering due to the economy and the recent weather?
…Sir Malcolm Bruce, the Lib Dem chairman of the Commons committee, said: ‘With the UK never more than a few days away from a significant food shortage, UK consumers should also be encouraged over time to reduce how often they eat meat…
Actually, that has always been the case, and it isn’t – as The Mail’s creative cut seems to imply – a new development. Britain is a small island with a high population density vying with what cultivable land it possesses, and it relies heavily on imports. It has to, and has had to for a very long time now. In the Glorious Imperial Age (that the UKIP would see us return to in its dreams), we just took what we wanted and shot anyone who argued. When that approach was no longer viable – and we’re talking more than a century ago now – we had to start buying it in. And that’s where we stand right now here in the 21st Century.
We couldn’t just “pull up the drawbridge”, as many of those who are leaning towards the UKIP from the LibCons would have us believe.
The farmers are right to be worried. If some idiot politician stops people from buying a certain food – even a few of them – then farmers will have to stop producing so much of it. That will then send prices sky-high (and meat isn’t cheap even now), which will cut demand still further. Farmers will turn over even more land (if they can – the land used to raise meat often can’t be used for crops) to things like Oil Seed Rape, and the nation will get ever more unhealthy on poor quality ready meals, most of which are imported, or use imported meat products.
A cynic might see a purpose in any government involvement in such stupid advice. Oil Seed Rape has a high value – and making more money would fuel economical growth in the (very) short term. Of course, it is also used in the production of bio-diesel, and any country which produces a lot of it might win whatever “green” badges are up for grabs at any given moment.
But any economic benefit would undoubtedly be short-lived. High prices can only be commanded when there is a demand, and the bottom could fall out of the Rape market overnight. All it takes is another European country to start getting decent crops (by foolishly getting rid of the ones people actually need) and we’ll be having pointless “buy British Rapeseed Oil” campaigns before you could sneeze. Mind you, that’d suit UKIP down to the ground.
However, longer term the loss of a meat industry (and all the other things that are “unhealthy”, like eggs) would cause massive and irreversible damage to the economy.
When I was in the rat race, one of my favourite TV shows was The Office. The reason for this was that it was an almost perfect documentary record of 
what working life in a large company is like, and apart from a bit of extra cringeworthiness the characters were true to life.
For example, in one episode (the series is being repeated on UK Gold at the moment) Gareth insists on using the speakerphone to conduct all his calls. I sat within spitting distance of a woman in the Buying Department who did exactly this, day in and day out. She’d listen to her voicemail on speakerphone, and she’d dial out repeatedly using it (Buyers spend most of their working hours on the phone) – even when it was obvious no one was going to pick up at the other end.
I recently saw a discussion in a BBC article, where someone was claiming that the British workplace was nothing like The Office. Trust me, they are totally wrong. The Office was an EXACT representation of the British workplace. Perhaps not every individual workplace, but certainly a highly detailed composite picture across all of them. The only reason people try to deny it is that they’ve been inured to it and don’t realise how bad it is – particularly young people, who have no other experiences to draw on.
I was reminded of this again as I watched a new series on BBC3 tonight. It’s called The Call Centre, and I initially registered it because I worked in a call centre for 18 months while I trained to be a driving instructor. Mine was engaged in technical support, whereas the one on this new show is sales oriented, and it only took a few minutes to realise that there was little similarity between this one and the one I worked in as far as the job itself went. However, anyone who believes that The Office was far-fetched really should watch it. It’s hard to believe that it is a real place – if you didn’t know you’d think it was just another fly-on-the-wall spoof documentary.
It’ll be on iPlayer soon, but the live feed announces the show as follows:
Series following staff at a call centre in Swansea. CEO Nev Wilshire plans to improve the performance of admin assistant Kayleigh by finding her a new boyfriend.
You have to read that twice to make sure you saw it right the first time! The CEO in question is the loudest, most irritating bloke you could ever want to meet. He loves yelling, and laughing at his own jokes – just like David Brent in The Office. A “staff night out” was Speed Dating – compered by him, of course. He even warned off a bloke who’d been sniffing around the “Kayleigh” mentioned in the announcement.
It’s one of those reality programmes (like The Apprentice) where all the characters drive you mad – but you have to keep watching.
Someone sent me this. I reproduce it as my duty to report on things people send in.
I have no comment on it.
This is an old article. Look at the date.
An alert from the DSA (DVSA from2014) informs ADIs that from 27 June 2013, tests will be conducted from a new test centre in Beeston. They did the right thing this time and waited until it was all sorted out before telling people.
The important thing to remember – and I guarantee that this will be too complicated for some people to understand, or impossible for some of them to accept – is that you cannot go into the test centre to practice. Access is controlled by a barrier and a security guard. And it looks like bay parking will be an optional manoeuvre now.
There’s no mention of when tests at Watnall will cease (from late 2014 tests recommenced at Watnall to cover for the closure of the Clarendon Street trial). It is possible that they will continue for the foreseeable future given the horrendous waiting time that has built up (no available tests are shown before the end of September).
A new DVD is available from TSO aimed at those wishing to become driving instructors. I should clarify that it is firmly aimed at Part 1 of the qualifying process, although there is a bit of other stuff present.
If you’re just starting out, there’s no harm in getting this because it has all the necessary questions for you to study for Part 1. However, I still prefer the Focus Multimedia option because it’s cheaper and of proven quality.
An email alert from the DSA advises that from 17 June 2013 only the driving instructor will receive a copy of the criminal records check (I still refer to it as the CRB, though I suppose CRC ought to be used instead).
The DSA will still be informed electronically if there is anything on the check, and if that’s the case then they may ask to see the actual hard copy – the original, not a photocopy or scan – which they will then return to you.
The alert also indicates that from 29 may 2013 “certain old and minor offences” will be removed from the CRB check. I should point out that people shouldn’t get their hopes up, because use of any kind of drugs is one of the ones that will never be removed, and it is up to the DSA to decide if you’re fit to be on the Register or not.
I haven’t seen anyone whinging about this yet – probably because no one has been able to concoct a suitable blame formula to have a dig at the DSA!
The Sun is making a habit of this! The second time they’ve mentioned Rush in the last 30-odd years (can you remember the Time Machine Tour, here?)
The review of the O2 gig says:
“IT has long been a source of wonder how Rush produce such a huge sound with only three blokes.
“Bolster the headcount to nine and it’s overwhelming.
“Their new mini-orchestra is essential for the epic arrangements of 2012’s magnificent Clockwork Angels album, but the wondrous marriage makes you wonder why they weren’t recruited in 1976.
“The Canadian legends’ three-hour O2 show was their most spectacular in 40 years.
“On a beautiful steampunk-themed stage set, they played their best Eighties synth-rock, much of Clockwork Angels and Obligatory classics.
“Despite dodgy sound, a world-class performance.”
I have to say that I didn’t find the sound at the O2 that bad – though The Sun isn’t the first to criticise it. I think it depended where you were standing.
Having noted that, The Sun’s reviewer goes on to score the gig as 4 out of 5.