Jump to content

rhino666

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rhino666

  1. And most of them aren't employers....They're agencies!!
  2. Recruitment consultancy is the last refuge of someone with no administration skills!! I've never been able to work out why employers use them so much bearing in mind how useless most of them are, yet they entrust these people to find suitable employees when recruiter can't suitable people to themselves!!! and employs someone with absolutely no knowledge of the subject they're recruiting for.
  3. Have a read of this. http://blog.emptylemon.co.uk/2011/08/why-you-should-avoid-most-it-recruitment-agencies/ http://www.contractoruk.com/agencies/recruitment_agency_tricks.html http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3802177 http://evenitup.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/dealing-with-recruitment-agencies/
  4. They (GEIL ) had 12 months to do their work. That 12 months is now well and truly up! From march 2012 that they had to destroy the IP addresses on their CD evidence after 12 months AND write to the people they'd written to letting them know their records had been destroyed. GEIL have NOT done this.
  5. The positions you've been applying for DO NOT EXIST !!!! They're made up, just like the bogey man and the fairy tales in Narnia. What it needs is a body away from the agencies and the government to police these parasites and have some teeth to name and shame or prosecute. I know it's being extreme what's required is for an policing body to make random spot checks in offices. If that agency can't provide the name of a company that's associated with a job position heads should roll!!
  6. The big jobsites are just as bad if not worse. Jobsite.co.uk, Monster, indeed, CV library and if you do manage to find a genuine job the agency is the next barrier. If they're swamped which they are, the chances of getting a reply are slim to none, You've no guarantee they've even submitted you for the job EVEN if you fulfil the criteria for the job AND the agency has said they're putting you forward for it, if you're unsuccessful at an interview the chances of them( the agency ) wasting any more of their valuable time on you and letting you know the results are slim to none... af
  7. 1/3 !!! I think you'll find its a lot more than a 1/3. Its dominated by agencies they aren't checked and DO NOT have to pay anything to put up an ad. What do they get out of this. It gives them more credibility when approaching an employer to use t when there is a genuine vacancy to say they have 0000's of CV. Most the ads on there are just links to other sites like indeed and CV library which eventually result in.........NOTHING!!! It's a friggin joke!
  8. Sureley a point that should stand for EVERYONE now and in the future is : How are you supposed to know if something is copyrighted if there's no copyright warning before you download or watch something.
  9. Looks like more people are trying to get in on Golden Eyes act. ( from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25347913) Thousands of Germans are reported to have been sent letters asking them to pay a fee for porn they are alleged to have streamed illegally online. Law firm Urmann (U+C) is acting on behalf of Swiss copyright protection firm the Archive, and is asking for one-off payments of 250 euros (£210). It confirmed to the BBC that the letters have been sent but would not say how many. A growing number of affected people are claiming
  10. This is from Wiki. Could someone confirm that this is 100% true: because I'm still confused as to how they're pursuing people for films that aren't theirs. On 9 March 2012, Golden Eye went to court in an attempt to obtain an Norwich Pharmacal Order (NPO) for the details of over 9,000 IP addresses from internet service provider O2 (UK)/Telefónica Europe (an internet provider with previous form of not contesting NPO's) in order to service further "speculative invoicing" letters to alleged copyright infringers. Golden Eye were questioned by statutory consumer organisation Consumer
  11. Could anyone tell me isn't this called black mail which is a police matter. The bill payer is my wife so all court threats have gone to her. today she received a letter giving her just under a month to provide evidence of her whereabouts to prove it wasn't her at the PC. Still to this date we've received NO evidence from them confirming the bill payer is the person behind the PC. I'd the other hand would rather they directed their attentions towards me directly , where I have a nasty surprise up my sleeve for them which can't be denied in court but my other half is won't let m
  12. Doesn't matter , he's still getting paid for it and waving two fingers at the companies !
  13. "They told You and Yours: "Premium rate numbers are not designed to be used in this way and we would strongly discourage any listeners from adopting this idea, as they will be liable under our code for any breaches and subsequent fines that result." Why? how else can it be used ? The lines are being used correctly.
  14. If anyone went on to SELL the film they've downloaded they'd be quite right to sue for a loss. and what also needs questioning is their "INDEPENDENT" expert witness". Independent to who? Not me.... I didn't ask him but they're paying him so how does that make him independent?
  15. So the person a few pages back was wrong!......Not that it's an issue. I just can't see how GEIL can identify a the person at a PC unless they send round people to snoop through peoples curtains.
  16. The remark was meant in relation to the way they are conducting themselves.. e.g films that aren't there's directly when the court said they can only go after people who have down loaded GEIL films, and the rest of what they shouldn't be doing is listed here: http://acsbore.wordpress.com/
  17. They have funding arrangements with the other companies yet they're complaining about a film that isn't even there's when a judge has said they can only take people to court for their own films. So how is this even possible to get this far. In July 2012, the High Court ruled that Golden Eye would only be granted access to data in relation to Ben Dover Production films, not the titles by twelve other production companies that Golden Eye were acting on behalf
  18. The problem I have here is that supplying this info can only be done if the matter is taken to court because it would involve tell GEIL where I was and which which hospital patients I was attending away from hospital premises.
×
×
  • Create New...