Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Bunhill: Answering back

David Bowen
Saturday 20 August 1994 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

DONTCHA just hate those new 'voice mail' machines that are spreading like a virus across the swankier banks in London? The problem is they are too good. You ring up, someone - speaking with bell-like clarity - answers, you talk back and then wonder why the other chap is still talking. Users don't like them either. 'They're terribly efficient,' says a Warburg's man, who has been afflicted for two months. These monstrosities should be abolished, taxed or, at the very least, stuffed with cotton wool so the voice sounds distorted like a proper answering machine.

THE letters page of the Gazette, the weekly magazine of the John Lewis Partnership, is a gold mine. Partners, as the employees are known, write in with their every moan and sign themselves 'Fish in the Mainstream' or 'Burt Reynolds' Double'. Here is a sample from the sartorially stringent 'Only making plans for Nigel'.

'Also,' OMPFN writes, 'I have noticed in this branch that a lot of females are not wearing tights. How often is this checked? Is that a professional, business-like standard of dress? Or what about section managers and department managers who wear black underwear under what can only be described as a see-through vest? Is that being well- groomed? I think not.'

(Photograph omitted)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in