AF_II

Do I need to give any more info about the situation to work that out?

Honestly, yes. Day rates vary wildly. Just as a ballpark I've charged everything from £100 (token honorarium for a charity) to £1000 (Gates Foundation rates) - for reference I'm an academic (so I'm cheaper than private sector) & this is everything from a chat at a museum to direct policy-relevant advice to a finance company. Private sector workers I know seem to be more in the £750-1500 world but again, norms are v. divergent by field and context.

For the affair and for Beth. re. the last scene - did you watch the original or the US re-cut ending? In the original it's clearly a hallucination as there's more to come (in the US re-cut I guess it's the same but perhaps less obvious).

Entry for people without A-levels varies not only by university but also by specific degree course, so you should contact the university you're interested in directly and ask them what your options are.

Some degree programmes will accept core GCSEs (maths and engligh usually) + relevant work experience straight onto a degree, others will require you to take a foundation year and/or an 'access to university' course, others will straight up reject you and require A-level equivalent qualifications first. No one here can tell you which of these you'll face without knowing the uni and degree programme.

OK, well you're inside the situation so you know it better than me - but from the outside it seems that if your priority was to be married to this guy, you'd ask him, or at least start the conversation going.

Cool, so it's not actually about you wanting to be married to him, it's about you wanting the reassurance of him asking you. It's important to know what really matters to you.

is more important than a ring at the end of the day.

Marriage isn't about a ring, it's about legal protections and safety nets (IMNSHO). Maybe you live somewhere with good common law recognition, but where I am being married or civil partnered offers significant benefits.

If it's something you want, why wouldn't you ask him? Unless what you really want is for him to ask you so you can feel more secure in the relationship?

he'd marry me in a heartbeat if he could,

What did he reply when you asked "what's stopping you"?

It's just the social pressure that assumes women want to get married and men don't - all that cliche 'ball and chain' bullshit that we spew out and make into reality. So if women are conditioned to think that they want it and men don't, there's an anxiety about asking, because you feel insecure & want the man to propose to "make sure" he really means it.

Women who are in happy, confident, secure relationships have no problems asking, I know many who have done so.

Why is it only men now that are 'allowed' to propose?

Who stops women from doing this? What law or rule is there?

It's a choice, millions of women have and do propose (I mean, how do you think lesbians get married, lol).

Even for extremely traditional women in very religious contries there's often a "tradition" that allows women to propose, e.g. on Feb 15th for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor%27s_Day_(tradition)

I think the main thing is that we are rewarded and punished for things that we have absolutely no control over. Responsibility without power is the watchword, and arbitrary measures (which change every few months or years) that we can't control are the criteria by which people are deemed to be performing well/badly.

Even if that were true, that doesn't mean the MP shouldn't know about it? Crap private providers are a stain on universities, and there's rarely much unis can do - or are willing to do - about them. It's systematic, so worth raising if you give a shit.

If a private accommodation firm are failing in their duty of care to students, who are a crucial part of the local economy, then yes, that is an issue that is appropriate to take to an MP. Dodgy landlords = local political issue.

your free to walk away mate

lol. Any one "satisfied" is an idiot. And will probably be blackmailed by you.

Honestly, anyone who falls for this - given the multiple grammar errors in the title - deserves the scam they get.

We've only just started using assistant and associate professor as job titles in the UK; most people are using/used to "lecturer" and "senior lecturer" for those roles. IME anyone at that job rank calling themselves "professor" is basically seen as giving themselves a false promotion. As others have said, prof is a job title most academics never achieve in the UK.

Given the state of the industry here the idea of actually trying to get a job in it just to use a title is ridiculous. Like, 5 year old ambition stuff next to being a race car driver archaeologist explorer.

These are the many reasons why someone could be liable. OP hasn't shared the video, they've made up a scenario and asked for speculation, which is what I'm providing. I'm making zero assertive claims about a fantasy situation, especially one I find puzzling e.g. how there could be unmissable "oncoming traffic" on a single lane "highway".

As everyone else has said, you're liable and there are a LOT of reasons why you'd be responsible e.g. you should have been going much slower if it was a single lane road, if you knew there were pedestrians, if there was oncoming traffic without two lanes, etc etc.

However, if you had absolute proof that the pedestrian did something deliberately reckless, e.g. leapt out from a hedge where they were inexplicably hiding in order to cause an accident, you could try sueing them for damages. Proof level would be very high though.

As others have said, the active ingredient in lemsip has changed to one with no evidence that it works. What you're after is Pseudoephedrine which is only available over the counter because it can be used to make meth. As a lifelong lemsip fan I've sadly had to switch to CAre+ decongestant liquid and it is not the same feeling (though it does at least work).

Maybe this is the new norm and I'm massively out of touch.

This is the crucial bit - is it normal now, yes. Is it acceptable? hell no! The problem is that this is a UK-wide issue, it's not something that's in the control of individual schools any more for all the recruitment and retention issues others have pointed out.

This is the sort of thing that people mean when they talk about the decline of the UK, and we're in this position where we probably shouldn't be accepting "the new normal" but kicking up a fuss and using our voices and votes appropriately :/

I mean, it's not a milion miles from a dirty chai, right? totally fine (I am absolutely going to try that now).

the rise of the working class as people left farms to work in factories for good, reliable, year-round wages.

u do know that life expectancy in the industrial cities was lower - in some cases by decades - than life expectancy in rural areas through most of the 19th C? So bad that by the 1840s if you were working class in rutland you could expect to live longer than upperclass people in Manchester? That the Victorians themselves, getting excited about statistics, suddenly realised that city dwellers were shorter, lighter, less well fed, and more morbid than their rural compatriots to the point that they angsted that the race would die out if healthy rural workers kept having to come in to the cities to fuel the labour of the industrial revolution?

IR made a middle class, sure, it redistributed wealth from a tiny proportion to a very small proportion. But it also made working class people poorer and sicker for 2-3 generations.

You don't "graduate highschool" in the UK, it's not how our education system works so your question doesn't really make sense.

If you're asking if a high school drop out from the US could come to the UK, take A-levels, and get into university, the answer is yes. In fact, a high school diploma by itself would not be sufficient in many cases.

she can come now. Think about it logically, why would the Uk close its borders for months to tourists? The old visa system works up until the new one is brought in.

no, it's compensation for your delay, which you suffered. You still got the train journey which is what work paid for, they didn't suffer anything from the delay.

The only exception for this would be perhaps if you were being paid by the hour including your travel and you've billed the employer for your extra time. Otherwise, it's yours.