MoD causing more unrest. Sneaks in instant dismissals

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by NotmeChief, Jun 15, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Quote from PCS

    Over the last few months a disturbing new approach to cutting jobs in MoD has emerged where rather than do its own dirty work MoD is 'contracting out' the job of sacking its own staff.

    In April staff at Pembroke Dock and Llangennech were transferred to the private sector where on their first day of employment, they were made compulsorily redundant by the private sector.

    In the case of Pembroke Dock, six of the members - who had over 100 years loyal service to the department between them - were forcibly transferred to Serco Denholm. On the same day they were given a compulsory redundancy notice and told to go home by their new employer! At Llangennech 40 members were transferred to the private sector.

    Again members were made redundant on the day of the transfer. In both cases MoD was fully aware that this would be the fate of these staff and yet chose to go ahead.

    This is by order of the government and is another of the dirty stealth tactics used by Brown and goes with the more than 100 stealth taxes introduced.
  2. Treachery, more like
  3. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Probably to do with the disbanding of the RMAS; other MOD ports/dockyards moved to 'Serco Denholm' years ago, so it was hardly a surprise... 8O
  4. I find this hard to believe - never heard of TUPE?
  5. When have anyone or anything in this government abided by any rules, especially rules they made up.
    The police pay fiasco is probably the best example.
  6. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    NMC: Different subject for a different thread. Scattergun opinions are reckless and pointless. Have an opinion on a specific topic then exhaust it, to try and convice us you are right. At the moment you are firing accusations in various directions to try and justify your bitterness, but at the moment I am not entirely convinced by your argument.
  7. Doesn't TUPE only work if the job still exists and they will employ someone else to do it if they make you redundant?

    On a tangent does the RN "Salvage expert" still work from Pembroke? I remember a long conversation with him ref the Brazen running aground and how the second error, in his opinion, had very possibly saved the ship.

  8. O'Rly?

    This is the only mention of Serco on the PCS website. fwiw I'd be very surprised as the TUPE legislation is quite tight about that kind of thing.
  9. TUPE is about carrying forward employment rights following the handover of personnel, and it cascades in any subsequent mergers or acquisitions, so can end up quite complicated.

    Essentially former civil serpents are entitled to the same rights they had with respect to redundancy; consultation periods and the right to transfer to an alternative role.
  10. I'm not sure I understand what your saying. If you mean my reference to the police pay, that was put in to enforce the point that even negotiated and agreed procedures are not adhered to.

    To quote some more from the June 2008 News brief:

    As well as the dubious morality of treating staff in this manner, MoD has also ignored the new agreement on privatisation negotiated by PCS nationally with the Cabinet Office.

    The agreement on managing the people consequences of privatisation came into force on 1st April 2008.

    The agreement, won in 2007, expressly prohibits all government departments from transferring staff to be made compulsorily redundant. MoD has been aware of the ongoing talks for many months and know it is binding on them.

    In a further attempt to avoid conflict we have written on three occasions to the personnel director, Richard Hatfield, seeking formal negotiation on the new agreement and how it will be implemented in MoD.

    We have also expressly asked how it will be applied to our members at Pembroke Dock, Llangennech and in the AS IPT. On each occasion we have been rebuffed and finally advised to raise the agreement at the MoD TUPE stakeholders forum.

    In addition to our anger at the disgraceful treatment of our members, both the MoD GBC and the NBC believe that should our members working in AS IPT be subjec to transfer in the private sector and compulsory redundancy then our employer would knowingly commit a fundamental breach of the national agreement on privatisation.

    We are therefore raising our concerns as a matter of urgency with the Cabinet Office.
  11. Currently work for Chief of Material (Fleet) and last seen in Foxhill.
  12. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    NMC: I meant the usual random references to other stealth taxes by the Government. I'm not against you, but you have failed to convince me entirely; there may be a genuine and realistic reason for why Pemboke has done this?
  13. Got a link to it at all?

    The PCS website doesn't appear to have it.
  14. I was trying to make the point how a lot of this governments legislation is brought in by stealth ie when parliament is in recession or when there is a major crisis hogging the main news headlines.
    I have no reason to believe otherwise that this is the main reason for the privatisation.

    The following is a good example:

    "Changes to vehicle excise duty (VED, or plain old car tax as it's more commonly known) were spelled out in the small print of March's budget.

    But they weren't widely publicised until a row kicked off a few weeks ago, leading to accusations that the government was imposing yet more stealth taxes."

    The stealth bit here is that the increases were mentioned, but the fact that they will be retrospective on cars built from 2001 wasn't mentioned.

    The PCS website is not yet up to date with the June newsletter.

  15. As civilians working at RAF Oakhanger we came under the TUPE system with our company. We were led to believe that if another company took over, one would be safe in their job unless they brought in some one with them. Could be less salary, whatever. I do not think it is safe as some make out to be.

    Regards, Chris

  16. I have to deal with TUPE as part of some of my projects, although I usually get a commercial lawyer who specialises in HR to come up with the detail.

    The TUPE consultation period would normally include any discussion of redundancy in the short term, and there is usually a protected period, free from redundancy if it's not being discussed as part of the negotiation.

    Any further M&A activity would involve another TUPE consultation period, it all gets a bit messy because Civil Service conditions cascade through just about until the end of time whilst private sector entitlements need not. There is also some consideration of changes to roles in the intervening period.

    The Oak example is qite a good one as the Paradigm takeover did have a planned date when the two SGSs would go dark, so the negotiation was predicated on Serco finding alternatives for the staff at the SGS.

    It's not as simple as the quotes presented above, in fact it can create a real burden.

Share This Page