On Sun, 12 Jul 2009, Roland Perry wrote:

In message ,
at 14:18:39 on Sun, 12 Jul 2009, Willms remarked:
In the UK, "professional" implies reasonably or very well-off people,
such as lawyers and accountants.

I am sure that many carpenters, engineers, and other not so well
paid workers perform their work in a much more professional way than
those named above.

Both descriptions above are a little off the mark.

"Professional" implies that the person has passed an academic qualification,
and is a member of some "body/association" where the public can go to check
up upon their qualification if necessary.

To that extent, whatever a CORGI engineer is called this week may well
qualify.

That's not the traditional meaning, though, is it? The traditional meaning
is basically a group of upper-middle-class jobs which have come to be
called 'the professions' through custom - law, medicine, architecture,
accountancy, the priesthood.

They were once the only jobs that required qualifications, and i think
there was also a meaning that they involved being a freelance contractor
rather than a salaried employee, but i don't think you can carry that old
definition forward and include plumbers and gas fitters - or indeed
consulting software architects such as myself. No disrespect intended to
plumbers or gas fitters, but that's just what common usage of the word
means.

The complaint i'd make against the use of the word in this context is that
i don't think it includes bankers or managers, who i imagine make up a
larger share of the Ashford commuter market than lawyers, architects, etc.

tom

--
these are my testing supplies

On Jul 12, 5:05*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009, Roland Perry wrote:

In message ,
at 14:18:39 on Sun, 12 Jul 2009, Willms remarked:
In the UK, "professional" implies reasonably or very well-off people,
such as lawyers and accountants.

*I am sure that many carpenters, engineers, and other not so well
paid workers perform their work in a much more professional way than
those named above.

Both descriptions above are a little off the mark.

"Professional" implies that the person has passed an academic qualification,
and is a member of some "body/association" where the public can go to check
up upon their qualification if necessary.

To that extent, whatever a CORGI engineer is called this week may well
qualify.

That's not the traditional meaning, though, is it? The traditional meaning
is basically a group of upper-middle-class jobs which have come to be
called 'the professions' through custom - law, medicine, architecture,
accountancy, the priesthood.

They were once the only jobs that required qualifications, and i think
there was also a meaning that they involved being a freelance contractor
rather than a salaried employee, but i don't think you can carry that old
definition forward and include plumbers and gas fitters - or indeed
consulting software architects such as myself. No disrespect intended to
plumbers or gas fitters, but that's just what common usage of the word
means.

The complaint i'd make against the use of the word in this context is that
i don't think it includes bankers or managers, who i imagine make up a
larger share of the Ashford commuter market than lawyers, architects, etc..

Common usage changes over time. These bankers and managers would
commonly be called "professional people", even if they aren't
"professionals" in the old school sense. And anyway, one doesn't have
to subscribe to any of this "professional" versus 'other' (by
implication "non-professional") malarkey anyway - I don't. And if
enough people disregard it, the commonly understood meaning will
change. (It comes across to me as somewhat pompous and status seeking,
at least if one places an emphasis on it.)

Viva the (plumbers) revolution.

In message . li, at
17:05:36 on Sun, 12 Jul 2009, Tom Anderson
remarked:
"Professional" implies that the person has passed an academic
qualification, and is a member of some "body/association" where the
public can go to check up upon their qualification if necessary.

To that extent, whatever a CORGI engineer is called this week may
well qualify.

That's not the traditional meaning, though, is it? The traditional
meaning is basically a group of upper-middle-class jobs which have come
to be called 'the professions' through custom - law, medicine,
architecture, accountancy, the priesthood.

But you've just listed jobs that fit my definition.

i don't think you can carry that old definition forward and include
plumbers and gas fitters - or indeed consulting software architects
such as myself.

Is your qualification registered centrally? Maybe not, but CORGI
engineers are.

The complaint i'd make against the use of the word in this context is
that i don't think it includes bankers or managers, who i imagine make
up a larger share of the Ashford commuter market than lawyers,
architects, etc.

And then you have the property programmes' "young professionals" whoever
they are.
--
Roland Perry

Recliner wrote:
"Willms" wrote in message

Am Thu, 9 Jul 2009 23:57:05 UTC, schrieb Tony Polson
auf uk.railway :

You have made some very good points regarding the (un)acceptability
of using colossal sums of taxpayers' money - vastly greater sums
than the already huge amounts spent on rail - to subsidise
professional people's long distance daily commute.
You think that only unprofessional people should commute to work?

In the UK, "professional" implies reasonably or very well-off people,
such as lawyers and accountants.


Not necessarily. It sometimes refers to moderately paid people like
teachers and quite low paid people like nurses.

Mizter T wrote:
On Jul 12, 11:51 am, "Recliner" wrote:

"Willms" wrote:

Am Thu, 9 Jul 2009 23:57:05 UTC, schrieb Tony Polson
auf uk.railway :
You have made some very good points regarding the (un)acceptability
of using colossal sums of taxpayers' money - vastly greater sums
than the already huge amounts spent on rail - to subsidise
professional people's long distance daily commute.
You think that only unprofessional people should commute to work?
In the UK, "professional" implies reasonably or very well-off people,
such as lawyers and accountants.

Which is pretty stupid usage, as my plumber is genuinely a
professional (unlike many!). It's perhaps something of a foil for
talking about class, which we're still to obsessed by.

In teaching it used to be a scam to fool non-graduates, but it is still
in use, for some reason.

"Martin Edwards" wrote in message

Recliner wrote:
"Willms" wrote in message

Am Thu, 9 Jul 2009 23:57:05 UTC, schrieb Tony Polson
auf uk.railway :

You have made some very good points regarding the (un)acceptability
of using colossal sums of taxpayers' money - vastly greater sums
than the already huge amounts spent on rail - to subsidise
professional people's long distance daily commute.
You think that only unprofessional people should commute to work?

In the UK, "professional" implies reasonably or very well-off people,
such as lawyers and accountants.


Not necessarily. It sometimes refers to moderately paid people like
teachers and quite low paid people like nurses.

No, I don't think so -- maybe headteachers, but not your average junior
teacher, and certainly not nurses. I'm not saying they aren't dedicated,
hard-working professionals, just that the colloquial British use does
have a status/class/wealth implication. I was just trying to correct
Luko, who seemed to think that anyone not in this vaguely defined this
category is therefore being insulted in some way. I also made the point
that this was UK usage; it's different in the US.

On Jul 12, 8:39 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message . li, at
17:05:36 on Sun, 12 Jul 2009, Tom Anderson
remarked:

"Professional" implies that the person has passed an academic
qualification, and is a member of some "body/association" where the
public can go to check up upon their qualification if necessary.

To that extent, whatever a CORGI engineer is called this week may
well qualify.

That's not the traditional meaning, though, is it? The traditional
meaning is basically a group of upper-middle-class jobs which have come
to be called 'the professions' through custom - law, medicine,
architecture, accountancy, the priesthood.

But you've just listed jobs that fit my definition.

i don't think you can carry that old definition forward and include
plumbers and gas fitters - or indeed consulting software architects
such as myself.

Is your qualification registered centrally? Maybe not, but CORGI
engineers are.

The complaint i'd make against the use of the word in this context is
that i don't think it includes bankers or managers, who i imagine make
up a larger share of the Ashford commuter market than lawyers,
architects, etc.

And then you have the property programmes' "young professionals" whoever
they are.
--
Roland Perry

There's also the distinction between those on a salary (annual) and a
wage (by the hour). Somewhat diluted by the growth in self-employment
and freelancing, but still a common mindset, I think.
Tim

In message
, at
09:30:54 on Mon, 13 Jul 2009, TimB remarked:
There's also the distinction between those on a salary (annual) and a
wage (by the hour). Somewhat diluted by the growth in self-employment
and freelancing, but still a common mindset, I think.

I'm not sure how well that maps onto real life. Last week I was
discussing an issue with someone with a manual job on not much more than
minimum wage, but they were paid a salary, not by the hour.
--
Roland Perry

"Willms" wrote in message

Am Sun, 12 Jul 2009 16:05:36 UTC, schrieb Tom Anderson
auf uk.railway :

That's not the traditional meaning, though, is it? The traditional
meaning is basically a group of upper-middle-class jobs which have
come to be called 'the professions' through custom - law, medicine,
architecture, accountancy, the priesthood.

Originally they were called "the liberal professions", i.e.
professions which were exercised by people with a higher education
hanging out shingle and working on their own, not as part of a larger
organisation.

Freelance, self-employed, private practice are other words
applicable in this field.

The German word is "Freie Berufe", the adjetive or adverb
"freiberuflich". This is of relevance for VAT -- those who are working
"freiberuflich" don't pay VAT. In some professions, one can chose if
one works "freiberuflich" or as commercially as a business. In the
latter case, one has to pay VAT, or rather, charge VAT to one's
customers.

In Britain, you don't get the choice if "taxable supplies" (revenue)
exceed £67k.

In message , at 18:05:57 on
Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Recliner remarked:
The German word is "Freie Berufe", the adjetive or adverb
"freiberuflich". This is of relevance for VAT -- those who are working
"freiberuflich" don't pay VAT. In some professions, one can chose if
one works "freiberuflich" or as commercially as a business. In the
latter case, one has to pay VAT, or rather, charge VAT to one's
customers.

In Britain, you don't get the choice if "taxable supplies" (revenue)
exceed £67k.

I wonder if an MP has to take account of the monies paid to him to run
his office, as a "taxable supply", or whether they are entirely exempt
from the VAT system.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'll assume all the "expenses" are valid
ones.

Looking down the list and picking the first person as my random example:
Ms Diane Abbott claimed around £131k, *none* of which was for a second
home. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8044207.stm
--
Roland Perry