Plus: A £20m home in Mayfair, the growth of "water charges" in London restaurants, another cinema collapse for London's cursed cinema chain, and more questions over WeRBlighty.
I personally don't mind paying for water if it's sparkling - then at least I'm getting something extra. With the tube drivers, the whole situation sounds such a mess... it doesn't leave me any more sympathetic to them. Especially having visited cities like Singapore and Sydney which have great, automated metro systems.
The filtered water thing really annoys me - we have perfectly drinkable tap water in the UK! It's already been filtered as part of the process of putting it into the taps in the first place. Also, it's a little bit shooting themselves in the foot because it decreases the amount I'll spend there. I'd probably normally order wine and tap water with a meal, but if it is clear the water is going to be charged for (and *try* ordering tap water at somewhere that does filtered if you think to can still ask for it - you've got to be really insistent) I'll probably only order the water. It gives the impression that they are trying to take advantage of you, and I don't want to reward that by spending more money there.
I don’t mind paying for filtered water. The restaurant is bearing a cost for both the filtering equipment and their water bill. It is, of course, also a way to extract some cash from customers in lieu of putting up the price of dishes. Restaurants have very very tight margins, I want them to survive and thrive
Sorry to hear another cinema closed, awful for staff who are blameless. Is it really the case that there are no winners? I wondered if Preston Benson has been busy drawing a salary/dividends from the company over the years (I have no idea if he did that or not).
It’s legitimate to charge a small amount for filtered water, as long as you can have tap water if you absolutely insist on it. Yes,UK tap water is safe to drink, but in many places it tastes horrible because of the chlorine and mineral composition, and filtered water from a tap is a more environmentally conscious solution than bottled water. I think of it more as a way of getting bottled-quality water at a lower price and without the environmental nasties. I suppose the million dollar question is how much it’s legitimate to charge to cover the restaurant’s costs in supplying it.
Just seems incredibly selfish on the part of tube drivers causing so much pain and hardship to millions of random people as a pay negotiation tactic. There has to be a more civilised way than turning millions of people in collateral damage every time pay is being negotiated.
If you read the article you'd see that RMT represent all TFL workers, and that the drivers' union ASLEF accepted a lower offer. The bus network moves more people, and lower income people, around London so I'm not sure we should be shedding that many tears for the middle-class WFH crowd not being able to get into the office.
I do shed a tear for people's day to day lives being ruined as collatoral damage in some silly pay negotiation tactic. The tube is used by far more prople than just the "WFH crowd"!!!!
There has to be a better way than "strikes as a standard part of pay negotiation"
Unless your argument is that “essential workers”, however that's defined, are the majority of people then it's irrelevant really. My reply is pointing out that the original comment is vastly blowing the scale of the issue out of proportion: millions of people are not suffering due to the strikes.
I personally don't mind paying for water if it's sparkling - then at least I'm getting something extra. With the tube drivers, the whole situation sounds such a mess... it doesn't leave me any more sympathetic to them. Especially having visited cities like Singapore and Sydney which have great, automated metro systems.
The filtered water thing really annoys me - we have perfectly drinkable tap water in the UK! It's already been filtered as part of the process of putting it into the taps in the first place. Also, it's a little bit shooting themselves in the foot because it decreases the amount I'll spend there. I'd probably normally order wine and tap water with a meal, but if it is clear the water is going to be charged for (and *try* ordering tap water at somewhere that does filtered if you think to can still ask for it - you've got to be really insistent) I'll probably only order the water. It gives the impression that they are trying to take advantage of you, and I don't want to reward that by spending more money there.
Quite. I'm fortunate enough that I rarely have to scrutinise the prices on menus too closely. But nickel and diming just gets my back up.
I don’t mind paying for filtered water. The restaurant is bearing a cost for both the filtering equipment and their water bill. It is, of course, also a way to extract some cash from customers in lieu of putting up the price of dishes. Restaurants have very very tight margins, I want them to survive and thrive
Sorry to hear another cinema closed, awful for staff who are blameless. Is it really the case that there are no winners? I wondered if Preston Benson has been busy drawing a salary/dividends from the company over the years (I have no idea if he did that or not).
It’s legitimate to charge a small amount for filtered water, as long as you can have tap water if you absolutely insist on it. Yes,UK tap water is safe to drink, but in many places it tastes horrible because of the chlorine and mineral composition, and filtered water from a tap is a more environmentally conscious solution than bottled water. I think of it more as a way of getting bottled-quality water at a lower price and without the environmental nasties. I suppose the million dollar question is how much it’s legitimate to charge to cover the restaurant’s costs in supplying it.
Just seems incredibly selfish on the part of tube drivers causing so much pain and hardship to millions of random people as a pay negotiation tactic. There has to be a more civilised way than turning millions of people in collateral damage every time pay is being negotiated.
Driverless trains and cycling.
If you read the article you'd see that RMT represent all TFL workers, and that the drivers' union ASLEF accepted a lower offer. The bus network moves more people, and lower income people, around London so I'm not sure we should be shedding that many tears for the middle-class WFH crowd not being able to get into the office.
I do shed a tear for people's day to day lives being ruined as collatoral damage in some silly pay negotiation tactic. The tube is used by far more prople than just the "WFH crowd"!!!!
There has to be a better way than "strikes as a standard part of pay negotiation"
Do you not think that essential workers also rely on the underground to get to work?
Unless your argument is that “essential workers”, however that's defined, are the majority of people then it's irrelevant really. My reply is pointing out that the original comment is vastly blowing the scale of the issue out of proportion: millions of people are not suffering due to the strikes.
I like restaurants that donate the water money to charity