WBC planners Options

[dannyboy]

Council issues a stop notice to Lafarge & not a single post giving WBC a pat on th back!

[Guest_Bill1_*]

Council issues a stop notice to Lafarge & not a single post giving WBC a pat on th back!

How true!

[Iommi]

Whoopee-do, I don't get a pat on the back for doing my job. For me, however, the problem was with the Greenham Trust for letting them build there without planning permission. Mind you, WBC did visit the site and did nothing. This only come about after complaints.

BUT - I do appreciate that WBC did do something, so that is good, so I, for one, am pleased.

[TallDarkAndHands...]

Council issues a stop notice to Lafarge & not a single post giving WBC a pat on th back!

Well done WBC for doing its job.

[GMR]

Council issues a stop notice to Lafarge & not a single post giving WBC a pat on th back!

People don’t pat people on the back for doing a good job; that is what they are paid for. I never got a pat on the back when I did a good job, I just collected my wages at the end of the month. However, if you don’t do a good job then the public will let you know; and rightly so. And I’ve been in that position and I accepted the rebuke. Not only that but I’ve tried to correct the customers dissatisfaction.

[JeffG]

People don’t pat people on the back for doing a good job; that is what they are paid for

And that's precisely why anyone would be justified in thinking "why bother"? Pats on the back are just as important as kicks up the behind, as any good employer would tell you. Maybe more so - then the second option is less likely to be needed.

So good on the planning committee for standing up to big business - which is what it boils down to.

[Iommi]

And that's precisely why anyone would be justified in thinking "why bother"? Pats on the back are just as important as kicks up the behind, as any good employer would tell you.

Yes and WBC needed a kick up the behind before they did anything, but I am glad they did... eventually. As for the "why bother" point, because you are paid to do so would be one reason that springs to mind.

[Guest_Newbury Expat_*]

And that's precisely why anyone would be justified in thinking "why bother"? Pats on the back are just as important as kicks up the behind, as any good employer would tell you. Maybe more so - then the second option is less likely to be needed.

Agreed. I get paid to do a job which I do as well as I can (except when I'm taking my morning cuppa break like now ). Having said that whenever my boss or a client says "That was really great work" it motivates me to do better the next time and I raise my game a little.

However, I am an individual. Whether it applies to an entity such as WBC I'm not sure. Maybe we can find the chap/chapess who signed off and say thanks to them for a form well signed.

[Iommi]

IF the story was that WBC had gone up to Greenham on a tip-off and had issued a stop notice, which led to Lafarge applying for planning, then I would have been happy to 'pat the back' of the authorities. Regrettably, it seems the WBC were slow to react, but fair enough, they have in the end. Please for give me, however, for not wishing to give Greenham Common Trust Chief Executive Stuart Tagg a pat on the back.

[dannyboy]

Whoopee-do, I don't get a pat on the back for doing my job. For me, however, the problem was with the Greenham Trust for letting them build there without planning permission. Mind you, WBC did visit the site and did nothing. This only come about after complaints.

BUT - I do appreciate that WBC did do something, so that is good, so I, for one, am pleased.

What, no bonuses, no pay rises, no promotion? I'd get a new job.

and, again - planning is nothing to do with NGT.

[Iommi]

What, no bonuses, no pay rises, no promotion? I'd get a new job.

I was waiting for you! I only get those things you list if my performance has been commendable, or above that which is expected. In any case, this isn't the type of back patting we were considering.

But I repeat, I am pleased they have acted as they have, I just don't see that we should be bowing in reverence to WBC on this issue.

and, again - planning is nothing to do with NGT.

I never said it was, but their lack of vigilance caused this in my view. I believe NGT have more responsibility than merely filling plots.

[user23]

Whoopee-do, I don't get a pat on the back for doing my job.

You've never had praise for doing your job well? Ever?

Sounds like you've got harsh boss there.

[Iommi]

You've never had praise for doing your job well? Ever? Sounds like you've got harsh boss there.

No because I'm sh*t at it. I also never said that I never get praise, those are your words . I wish there was a derogatory word for people that put words in people's mouths.

I don't get thanks for doing the job that is expected, but I do get praise when I go beyond the call of duty.

[blackdog]

So good on the planning committee for standing up to big business - which is what it boils down to.

No it doesn't.

The planning committee have done nothing. To be fair they rarely seem to do anything as the planning officers make almost all the decisions these days.

In this instance the WBC Environmental Health people stepped in to stop the operation (good for them, pat on all backs concerned).

Planning officers (not the committee) had already decided not to stop the operation in case they were sued (which is becoming their standard excuse for not doing their jobs and enforcing the planning laws).

[JeffG]

So what's the difference between planning officers and the planning committee?

[blackdog]

So what's the difference between planning officers and the planning committee?

Planning committee = group of democratically elected councillors.

Planning officers = group of employees of West Berkshire Council.

More and more planning decisions are being taken by the officers these days.


I see from the NWN that the planners have acted following the Environmental Health people's lead and issued a stop notice on Lafarge.