EU employment Laws v PVR times?

[vfr into cloud]

Is it true as a member of the EU we (all members of British HMforces) only require one months notice to leave military employment?. Personally think its not the case or I would have known someone that had done it, and I have not.

Only ask as it came up in a heated crew room debate, with unresolved outcome, and I will be interested to know either way.

sure some of you legal type chaps out there have the answer

vfr

[Justanopinion]

Under that EU directive,

I know of 2 pilots who had not amortised their flying training/OCU costs, pvr'd giving a months notice, and the number of their solicitor should the 'system' wish to speak to them. They left and there was no admin action taken against them - this was 5 years ago.

[Wrathmonk]

only require one months notice to leave military employment

Come October you probably won't need to worry about that.

Wonder how the 'heated crew room debate' will go if exits via compulsory redundancy are at one months notice (or less) ......

[Henry09]

Wrathmonk

I don\'t think for one nanosecond they will need any compulsory redundancies. If it is like the 90\'s people will be queueing up.

[vfr into cloud]

well thats one for the "Yay" corner, its a start but need more from the "nays"
to make it a propper debate

[vfr into cloud]

"the number of their solicitor should the 'system' wish to speak to them"

the name and number would be nice, if MODS allow that is?

[charliegolf]

If it is like the 90\'s people will be queueing up.

They probably didn't resort to statutory minimum terms in the 90s. If they do this time, the queue will thin out sharpish. I think the law demands 1 week's pay for each year served. Maybe the armed forces are different? CS are looking at one month per year UP TO £50k.

CG

[Tashengurt]

Don't know but I had to give 18 months notice! They even made me defer Uni for a year.

[minigundiplomat]

"the number of their solicitor should the 'system' wish to speak to them"

the name and number would be nice, if MODS allow that is?


Yes it would be potentially handy.

[Justanopinion]

At Ease - The Armed Forces Bill 2006 (http://www.atease.org.uk/info_06_03_14.htm)

This organisation may be helpful - they had a go at changing bonding contracts as below

House of Commons - Armed Forces - Written Evidence (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmarmed/828/828we20.htm)

[Wrathmonk]

I don\'t think for one nanosecond they will need any compulsory redundancies. If it is like the 90\'s people will be queueing up

Just because people are queueing up to leave doesn't mean there won't be compulsory redundancies. Despite the "EU(?) rules" that state you can't make someone compulsory redundant if there is a volunteer that is only in like for like posts. So a FJ QFI may not be in the same "pot" as a FJ Line Pilot etc. The redundancies will be targetted at areas that will (may) be savaged by SDSR.

Strictly playing by these rules are, IMHO, the only chance the military has of keeping the good guys and using any redundancy tranches as an opportunity to get rid of the sick, the lazy, the desert dodgers and the 'bed blockers'. Otherwise the average age of those left in will be 40+, all with kids in private education and, amongst the officer corps, will be sqn ldrs and above with no interest in returning to the front line ....:E

[vfr into cloud]

wrathmonk

get ya own thread :=

or RTFQ

ya muppet:ugh:

Vfr

[The Old Fat One]

Since you ask.

well know for their military expertise...

Introduction - Wilkin Chapman Grange Solicitors (http://www.wilkinchapman.co.uk/site/services/)


I think the law demands 1 week's pay for each year served. Maybe the armed forces are different?


That's the legal statutory minimum...its does not apply in most of the public sector, or indeed in quite a lot of the larger companies in the private sector. Nor does it apply in any case where an individual has better contractural terms than the minimum. In essence it's a catchall intended to give basic cover to the low paid in the private sector.

[minigundiplomat]

Old Fat One,

many thanks.

[glad rag]

So much drivel spouted on this thread, the grass is always greener etc.

Well boys IT AIN'T!

[The Gorilla]

Glads speak for your self mate!!

Depends entirely upon which type of grass you are stood on!!

My desk officer spent two years telling me it wasn't any greener, well he was very wrong indeed!!

:)

[charliegolf]

TOFO:

That's the legal statutory minimum...its does not apply in most of the public sector, or indeed in quite a lot of the larger companies in the private sector. Nor does it apply in any case where an individual has better contractural terms than the minimum. In essence it's a catchall intended to give basic cover to the low paid in the private sector.

Absolutely. But it hasn't stopped the CS taking a big hit. The packages they were having at fairly low grades (EO, HEO) were very generous by my modest standards. The latest proposals would mean that an SEO would get in the order of a year's pay, whereas a while back it mught have been £100k+ depending on length of service.

CG

[rusty_monkey]

I found this link in an older post from a couple of months ago worth a read and a little worrying. If I read this correctly then you may only end up with 3 months pay (Ouch).

The Armed Forces (Redundancy, Resettlement and Gratuity Earnings Schemes) Order 2010 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/345/contents/made)

[Whenurhappy]

I think the most significant element is the statement hidden in the explantory memorandum to this order:

The levels of payments are comparable with those more widely available in the public sector, but as a result of HM Treasury requirements, are in most cases, less valuable than existing arrangements. To ease the transition to the new payment levels, interim arrangements will apply to the value of the certain payments. These interim terms will apply to any redundancies falling on 6th April 2010 and ending on 31st March 2013.

For anyone ahveing completed a normal engagement, it reads that 9 months' (basic) pay would be awarded - much better than the 1 week's pay per year of serice (capped at GBP 380 per week).

[VinRouge]

The terms are still significantly worse than the old redundancy package though. :ugh:

[serf]

Only the first £30,000 is tax free.

[teeteringhead]

the grass is always greener etc. ... or as Stephen Fry once memorably put it:

"The other man's @rse is always cleaner!" :ok:

[Jayand]

If your leaving in a few years anyway then the prospect of being forced to go early with some extra cash, albeit less that it use to be sounds pretty good.
Very little is as good as it used to be in the Airforce so the redundancy package likewise reflects that.

[Aeronut]

If you're leaving in a few years anyway then the prospect of being forced to go early with some extra cash, albeit less that it use to be sounds pretty good.


Very true. I suspect if they were to simply relax the rules to allow those eligible for an immediate pension to draw from the Normal Rates table:

http://www.rafcom.co.uk/pay_allowances/pensions/2010/OfficersPensionsonCompulsoryRetirement.pdf

instead of the abated (by between 3% and 10% I think) PVR table:

http://www.rafcom.co.uk/pay_allowances/pensions/2010/OfficersPensionsonPVR.pdf

then many would go quite quickly ahead of their next option point.

Not wanting to surrender what is already earnt and take a hit on flying pay eligibility is a major factor holding folks in to the next option point.

[Hugh FW]

It looks like the impending redundancies have forced a reduction in payouts to 9 months max if you're past your IPP.

I think the last paper I saw (dated 2006?) had 12 months basic for 05 and 9 for 75? Can anyone confirm please?

Also, the new details don't seem to discriminate between the two schemes, am I reading this correctly? Same for both now?

Rgds

HFW

[Hugh FW]

I think I am answering my own previous question. After speed reading the whole of the document that rusty monkey linked us to in post #18, there was the following para in the explanatory notes -

"Articles 3 to 16 in Part 2, set out the Armed Forces Redundancy Scheme 2010, (“AFRS 2010”). This applies to members of the armed forces who were eligible to join the AFPS 1975 and who do not belong to the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 2005 (“the AFPS 2005”). Under the AFRS 2010, different entitlements arise depending on whether service ceases before 1st April 2013."

It looks like the linked document only applies to AFPS75 members and not those on the 05 scheme.

Could someone please confirm this and does anyone have a link to the redundancy scheme for those on AFPS05?

Thanks

HFW

[the_boy_syrup]

I know someone (non aircrew) who came for an interview at the company where I work
He was offered the job and told to ring when he could start as he was at Aldergrove
He rang to say the RAF had accepted a weeks notice and signed him off
He requested another few days to get his stuff back and that was it he started here within two weeks

My bruv (techie Cpl) banged in for redundancy and was gone within a month cash in pocket in fact it was 7 weeks he hung on to do Red Flag

Perhaps an urban myth but there was talk of a pilot at Wittering who just refused to have anything to do with the RAF
Handed back his wages every month didn't come to work
Eventually they let him go

[Pontius Navigator]

TBS, there are so many of these rumours flying around that there must be truth in a lot of them. They probably reason that the hastle of retaining someone who doesn't want to stay is not worth it.

If they try and jump to avoid an OOA then they might take that differently.

I have come across several aircrew who were time serving and quite fairly they were almost a complete waste of space. They came to work, they answered the phones and did nothing else. They were barely functional.

[Blighter Pilot]

Could someone please confirm this and does anyone have a link to the redundancy scheme for those on AFPS05?



At the moment there is no redundancy paperwork associated with AFPS05.

[rusty_monkey]

There is a paper on the AFPS 05 but I can't find it again (Long night shift found it by accident). Quite day in work tomorrow so I shall trawl through and find it again and post a link

Rgds,
R_M

That was easy for those of you with access to the Defence intranet look follow the link:

http://defenceintranetds.diiweb.r.mil.uk/sites/polestar/cs/DocumentLibrary/07/982_20100401%20JSP%20764%20Part%205%20Amdt%20no%203.pdf

For those of you that don't try searching for JSP 764 pt 5

[Hugh FW]

Thanks guys.

The more I read the available documents (previously linked) and the JSP764 pt 5s, I get the impression the 2010 redundacy paper was to fill the void left unresolved for AFPS75 covering Apr 2010 until Mar 2013.

Perhaps the AFPS05 terms are still covered by the 2006 redundancy terms?

I suppose it will all come out in the wash, on 20 Oct.

HFW

[Melchett01]

Incidentally, what is the Reserve commitment for ex-regulars these days? Indeed, is there still a Reserve liability for former regular personnel, and if so, does the nature / length of this commitment depend on how you leave e.g PVR or compulsory retirement with accompanying pension rights?

I would have thought that if the MOD is paying you a pension, they would probably try to argue that they have a claim on you as a Reservist and that change of career might not be as peaceful or productive as you might have hoped for.

Just a question out of curiosity as we were talking about it at work but no-one seemed to know the answer.

[Army Mover]

Incidentally, what is the Reserve commitment for ex-regulars these days?

I believe they have a varying degree of a hold on you that declines as time goes on. That said, I never heard a peep from them since the day I left. I guess if you're in a pinch trade/group, you may have a greater liability for recall than us mere logisticians.

[Al R]

I suppose it will all come out in the wash, on 20 Oct.

Hugh,

John Hutton's Public Service Pensions Commission should publish a provisional review just before that. I imagine that thinking will be formed by a combo of the two reports.

[Hugh FW]

Thanks Al. I wasn't aware of Hutton's report.

HFW

[Al R]

Independent Public Service Pensions Commission - HM Treasury (http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/indreview_johnhutton_pensions.htm)

Existing accrued pension rights will be protected.

The window of opportunity for evidence submissions was just a few weeks.

[vfr into cloud]

let hope John Hutton's Public Service Pensions Commission is all we hope for then,
however,
im not holding my breath for too long, we all now who the winners and loser will be dont we...:ugh:

vfr