|
Post by bearhunter on Sept 30, 2008 22:35:54 GMT
Chef is on the Long term Skills Shortage list:
National Certificate in Hospitality (Professional Cookery) Level 4 AND a minimum of five years’ combined experience in establishments offering á la carte, buffet/banqueting or commercial catering, with a minimum of two years at Chef de Partie (Section Leader) level or higher National Certificate in Hospitality (Professional Cookery) Level 4 AND a minimum of five years’ combined experience in establishments offering á la carte, buffet/banqueting or commercial catering, with a minimum of two years at Chef de Partie (Section Leader) level or higher
That's what you need. If you need a job offer, I can probably get you one and I've also got a mate working for Immigration... ;D
|
|
|
Post by bearhunter on Sept 30, 2008 22:36:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Shades40 on Oct 2, 2008 2:30:16 GMT
Cheers bear, I'm just back from a stag night and have 2 12hr shifts ahead and my wee sis is getting married on sat so gimmie next week to get back to you on it, I appreciate you giving me the info, Slan!
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Oct 3, 2008 19:08:59 GMT
Wasp I think your reply '90' was fair enough, and I do not want to excuse or to pretend that those things did not happen. But I feel in general terms and in the overall context, there is a lot of positive attitude. I feel it is unfair to lay the blame for a lack of unionist input on a 'negative republican attitude'. By their very definition unionism and republican nationalism are opposed. So it is inevitable that they will come into political conflict and disagree. While we strive for healthy constructive disagreement, we do not always get that. While the evidence is irrefutable - unionist members are few and muted - I am not convinced that the sole cause is a 'negative republican attitude', I will accept it maybe one contributing factor, but in general and in an overall context, it is not sufficient to be the cause of our small numbers.
We also have very few women, if you use your formula Wasp, it suggests that the reason we have few women is because of the 'negative male (sexist) attitude' that many male members have shown consistently.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Oct 3, 2008 20:17:06 GMT
Fair enough afd, your acknowledgement is welcomed.
There is some positive attitude.
I have been on this forum under various names or rather debated with most of the people on here for a few years now as have other Unionists. I think it came to ahead when things continued and worsened. From what I gather it is the reasons I have stated but not because it only began to happen, but because it has been an ongoing process for the the few years I have been here at least. It is not the case of a few smart words and people are off, far from it.
I totally agree with you here, IMHO we must find common ground and at the sametime we must acknowledge reality. Dismissing and denial is something that from a Unionist perspective chomps at the very bone of Unionism.
While I hold my hands up and accept that I have often been to blame for heated discussions, I am afraid I can only disagree with you on as to the reasons why Unionists left.
That is not a fair comparison afd, first of all we only have ever had 2 female members that I know of and both seem to have left, and it certainly wasn't for sexist reasons. I for one would like to see more members here regardless of sex or their sexual orientation. While I would like to see more Unionist posters here it is not a matter of great urgency, in all honesty I don't care if all new members are from a republican background as I can hold my own and I am more than willing to challenge and be challenged.
When you have admin here referring to you as 'boy' then it certainly doesn't help.
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Oct 7, 2008 21:38:14 GMT
Setanta I have no problem with most things people say to me and that includes you, I do have a problem with being talked down to by being called boy, makes you sound like a headmaster.
So if you are going to insult me or have heated debate etc, do it as though we are equal sides of the debate.
|
|