On 2017-01-23 17:49:30 +0000, Roland Perry said:

Paid to organise and hold the meeting, which is educating attendees
about things done by others elsewhere.

I'd suggest that is work, because you're paid for that specific thing,
it isn't meetings incidental to being paid to do something else which
is primarily not done in that country.

As per my example - meetings to obtain requirements for and then
demonstrate a piece of software which is built out of country =
business meetings. But I'd say providing paid training or on-site
implementation for said software is work.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In message , at 18:55:03 on Mon, 23
Jan 2017, Neil Williams remarked:
Paid to organise and hold the meeting, which is educating attendees
about things done by others elsewhere.

I'd suggest that is work, because you're paid for that specific thing,
it isn't meetings incidental to being paid to do something else which
is primarily not done in that country.

As per my example - meetings to obtain requirements for and then
demonstrate a piece of software which is built out of country =
business meetings. But I'd say providing paid training or on-site
implementation for said software is work.

I agree. Will this sort of thing require a work permit from the EU
country, post-Brexit?
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 15:54:18 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

The bridged taxiway serves the North terminal. You're proposing to block
the taxiway serving the South terminal

A taxiway serving part of the South terminal

Yes, about 15 gates in the North terminal. And 15 in the South terminal.

So you're suggesting that 30 gates should be seved by a *single* taxiway

The taxi-way under the bridge, as far as I can tell from Google Earth,
serves nine gates of the North Terminal, seven at the South Terminal and
eight at the South Satellite. Plus five on the Pier 6 north face.

Yes, as I had already said, there are 30 gates in the area you want to
blight. They're all accessible via two taxiways.

The taxiway you want to block mainly serves the 15 gates on the south
terminal and the more distant gates on the North terminal; the bridged
taxiway serves some of the 15 on the North terminal. But either taxiway can
be used for any of the gates if needed, so aircraft aren't locked in if one
taxiway is blocked (which is much more likely with the North taxiway, as
it's sandwiched between the terminal and satellite, so aircraft push back
into it).

In effect, by closing the busier of the two taxiways, you'd be reducing the
effective capacity by about 24 gates. At least this slashing of capacity
should dramatically reduce the queues at Immigration!

Though, in effect, you'd be taking out most of the capacity of the North
terminal, so it might as well be closed, which no doubt would please you,
but it does seem to be a drastic solution to the terrible problem of having
to take a two minute shuttle ride!

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 15:54:19 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

In what sense would doing nothing "return control of our borders", which
a slim majority voted for?

They weren't objecting to tourists and casual visitors. They wanted to
limit the number of foreign workers potentially taking jobs from British
workers, and foreign users of the NHS and other welfare services.

What about foreign workers in the NHS? I accompanied someone today for a
minor operation, and of the dozen or more staff we came into contact
with (from receptionist to surgeon) only three appeared (from their
accents) to be born and bred in the UK.

Nobody ever accused the Bexiteers of being excessively rational!


FAOD we have no issues with the standard of care received today.

Good.

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:55:03 on Mon, 23
Jan 2017, Neil Williams remarked:
Paid to organise and hold the meeting, which is educating attendees
about things done by others elsewhere.

I'd suggest that is work, because you're paid for that specific thing,
it isn't meetings incidental to being paid to do something else which
is primarily not done in that country.

As per my example - meetings to obtain requirements for and then
demonstrate a piece of software which is built out of country =
business meetings. But I'd say providing paid training or on-site
implementation for said software is work.

I agree. Will this sort of thing require a work permit from the EU
country, post-Brexit?

I certainly hope not. I'm sure the business lobby is heavily twisting the
government's arm to minimise this sort of pointless 'friction'.

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 20:19:31 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

In effect, by closing the busier of the two taxiways, you'd be reducing the
effective capacity by about 24 gates. At least this slashing of capacity
should dramatically reduce the queues at Immigration!

How busy is it? I don't recall ever seeing a plane using it. Certainly
not the nose-to-tail queue you imagine it to be.
--
Roland Perry

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 20:48:22 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
Paid to organise and hold the meeting, which is educating attendees
about things done by others elsewhere.

I'd suggest that is work, because you're paid for that specific thing,
it isn't meetings incidental to being paid to do something else which
is primarily not done in that country.

As per my example - meetings to obtain requirements for and then
demonstrate a piece of software which is built out of country =
business meetings. But I'd say providing paid training or on-site
implementation for said software is work.

I agree. Will this sort of thing require a work permit from the EU
country, post-Brexit?

I certainly hope not. I'm sure the business lobby is heavily twisting the
government's arm to minimise this sort of pointless 'friction'.

That's "business" (buying and selling) not individuals going to the EU
to do the odd days work.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 20:19:31 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:

In effect, by closing the busier of the two taxiways, you'd be reducing the
effective capacity by about 24 gates. At least this slashing of capacity
should dramatically reduce the queues at Immigration!

How busy is it? I don't recall ever seeing a plane using it. Certainly
not the nose-to-tail queue you imagine it to be.

Again, you give the impression of never having used Gatwick South.

Of course that taxiway is used by planes using any of the 20 or so gates
for which it provides the best route to/from the takeoff and landing
runway. If you'd used the South terminal, you'd know that. And when when
you're waiting in North pier 6, you don't see any planes (eg, Virgin or
Norwegian) from the South terminal passing under the bridge.

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
The only two times I've been to India I had in effect a United Nations
"diplomatic visa", so wouldn't know.

But what if I were to organise a meeting, booking a conference room,
greeting guests and holding a seminar (where I was speaking). Is that
closer to "work" than "business"?

In India, that would likely require a conference visa which is
different to a work or a tourist visa. I have one in my passport.

But I have no opinion as to whether the Gatwick overbridge would
have made it easier to get to the conference.

R's,
John

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 20:48:22 on Mon, 23 Jan 2017, Recliner
remarked:
Paid to organise and hold the meeting, which is educating attendees
about things done by others elsewhere.

I'd suggest that is work, because you're paid for that specific thing,
it isn't meetings incidental to being paid to do something else which
is primarily not done in that country.

As per my example - meetings to obtain requirements for and then
demonstrate a piece of software which is built out of country =
business meetings. But I'd say providing paid training or on-site
implementation for said software is work.

I agree. Will this sort of thing require a work permit from the EU
country, post-Brexit?

I certainly hope not. I'm sure the business lobby is heavily twisting the
government's arm to minimise this sort of pointless 'friction'.

That's "business" (buying and selling) not individuals going to the EU
to do the odd days work.

The rules will be the same for both. The last thing anyone wants is for the
huge numbers of EU citizens passing through UK airports to all have to have
even a two minute conversation with a Border Force officer. And any such
rules we dream up for them will be applied equally to UK citizens in the
EU.