Get the employee to sign a contract. We're a small business with a few employees and our contract is worded such that we would have no legal hassle laying them off easily (not that we ever plan to!)
Put a sign up in the shop and ask around before going onto proper adverts. When we wanted a full time employee we didnt actually need to advertise. We just asked about and pretty quickly 2 of my mates were interested! (and the one who we employed does a great job!)
Additionally - decent contracts are the way forward with anything! All our business contracts are worded hugely in our favour and they are still signed quite happily! (basically nothing is ever my fault and i can quit whenever i like and you still have to pay me!) :)
An earlier poster said that petrol stations were refusing to fill metal containers, frankly I haven't a clue what's 'allowed' or not, I regularly fill jerry cans and have yet to be stopped.
Greg
Which is bloody stupid as a jerry can holds 25 litres. and if the army use em, i dont see why i cant.
Alex
If I could only fill a 5l plastic can at a visit I would have to make two trips a week just to keep my ride-on mower going in the summer, not to mention those silly plastic things have very ill fitting spouts that spill petrol all over the place. Greg
Funny all the jerry cans I've ever seen have be 10 or 20l not 25...
'Cause the army is law unto itself?
In which case that is rule from those particular filling stations. Petrol in 10l in metal and a proper vapour seal cap is legal as is 5l with a proper vapour seal in plastic. These rules don't apply to diesel, I'm not sure what limits apply for diesel.
Not particulary often but I've yet to be stopped as well, mind I don't make a big sond an dance about it and generally to it at the back of the Disco to save humping a full can any further than I have to.
On or around Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:43:51 +0100, "Greg" enlightened us thusly:
very few. and then you get the old places that were wired before there was a wiring code, and have wiring anywhere they fancied it...
It'd be good practice to cap any buried wire... although the determined could drill through the capping..
On or around Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:06:27 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice" enlightened us thusly:
really old ones were 5 gallons, but more recent ones are 20l.
Cause the army are putting diesel in 'em?
Would it were so simple - the FSB news letter has had several example cases recently where the ex, or even prospective, employee has taken the business to a tribunal in seemingly blatant cases, and had the FSB member not been a member and able to get free advice, they would either have to have given in and paid out compensation or risked terrible finacial hardship getting legal help (these were one or two man businesses with one enmployee). The point is the tribunal will hear any case, and the claimant will get aid, you won't! Getting a whater-tight contract of employment drawn up isn't exactly cheap, and the tribunals interpretation of those contracts is often only describable as bizarre since they have a laywer go through it, not someone being realistic.
That's the way I'm doing it - my point is two-fold - first that I have to do it that way because I can get done if it upsets someone, however stupidly, and secondly that it just makes the whole thing far more complicated than is necessary.
Richard
But have they been tested? I though my contracts when being a freelance software engineer were pretty thourough, but when tested they meant bugger all. Obvously, that sort of contract is nothing like a "full-timers" employment contract anyway.
Richard
Exactly the point I was going to make, people think that just because they've got someone to sign something makes it valid, but it doesn't. Any clause in a contract that is in contradiction of some obscure bit of legislation is worthless, and any contract that you can't afford to enforce in court is worthless.
A classic example is the disclaimers that some organisations/companies get you to sign before doing something potentially dangerous, they are absolutely pointless as no one can be absolved of a duty of care. Another is all these "The management are not responsible for..." signs we see, in fact the management are responsible for anything they were responsible for before they put the sign up!.
Then there are these 'no-win no-fee' claim parasites, they'll make claims against employers knowing full well that it would be thrown out of court but gamble that the employer or their insurers will think it cheaper to settle than contest, and in many cases they do. I go on seminars with Zurich as part of my council work so see the other side of the industry, they reckon it costs them at least £4000 to contest one of these claims so regularly settle unless there is a bigger issue at stake, of course we're all paying for this in our premiums.
Greg
Not the ones I have which came with a metal sign attached saying petrol 8-). Greg
Never mind when the sign was put up - one, either as an individual or a company, in either negligent or not. A sign make no adds at all, execpt that probably quite a lot of people will assume it does.
A talk given by the NFU rep a while back said the same thing.
Richard
IIRC, the contract cost about the same as I take home in a month - so it better bloody work! :) I imagine that we shall be having words with the legal company that drew it up ift ever gets contested
Ive been stopped at a local BP garage. Told me over the intercom that i coulnt fill that up and wouldnt turn the pump on. I've also filled jerry cans up very obviously at the same place and been ignored so some of it must be down the the person working there.
It may also be because theyve had a load of pikeys/kids filling up jerry cans and running off or something?
I really did read the 'rules' while i worked at a garage!
Blimey have you ever tried running with a full jerry can? They've got minds of their own!
What the pikeys/kids? Never.......
Richard
I've seen many vehicles (mostly LR 110's incidentaly) pull up to the pumps, and either open the back, or even better take the lid off a 6x4 trailer full of jerry cans (20L ex-army of course) - we're talking 30+ cans, and fill them all up with petrol. This is usually at Tescos in Oban, or morrisons in Fort William. They either live on an island or in a very remote place (I'm in the highlands) and come to fill up once a month or so.
Andrew
beamendsltd wrote:
On or around Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:38:02 +0100, "Greg" enlightened us thusly:
personally, I think that this sucks like an industrial grade vacuum.
Provided you supply sufficient information that the choice is "informed", I honestly think that it should be acceptable to have a disclaimer that actually means something.
suppose, for example, I want to go off-roading in my landy. I go to a site, and pay for the use thereof. The site operator makes it quite plain to me that by driving on his site I may damage either the vehicle or myself. He does this, for example, by having a big notice, drawing attention to it and also by reading the notice aloud, at the time when I register and pay. I sign my name to a page which has the same info on it and accept the risk to my vehicle and person as my responsibility, and absolving the site operator of blame should such damage occur.
Under those conditions, why the hell should the operator be at risk? This is part of the compensation and blame culture which sadly is rife. It all comes down to the fact that half the world is intent on not looking where it puts it clumsy feet, falling over some item in plain sight and then hunting someone to blame, sue, and make a tidy bit of money from.
It's like people walking along the pavement and falling over a raised paving stone. The paving stone is in plain view and if they watched where they put their plates they'd not fall over it. Why should the local authority have to cough because someone's too daft too look where they're walking?
Obviously, there are circumstances where a claim IS reasonable, too: take the pavement, for example: suppose it looks flat and in good condition, but in fact one slab is unsupported and tips when you stand on it, causing you to fall. That's a situation where you could not reasonably be aware of the risk and the authority should really be liable. In the same way, my hypothetical off-road operator could let me onto his premises, take no steps to find out if I had any experience, make no effort to inform me of any risks and say "off yer go". In THOSE circumstances, he'd be negligent and if I were damaged, I'd expect to claim from him. The difference being that the risks were not either inherently obvious nor clearly stated.
But as a general rule, I reckon there's far too much of people wanting someone else to take responsibility for their actions going on.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.