Originally Posted by
ChicoG
I don't quite see how you drew that conclusion from what Fincastle said, as essentially he said the same as me.
Shall I spell it out? It is my sincere opinion that the reason none of these people are going to employment tribunals is because they would all be thrown out on their arses.
Clear enough?
Do you have any alternative theory? Or do you subscribe to Litebulb's view that the procedure itself, despite being perfectly acceptable to both sides prior to this dispute, apparently has now conveniently become "flawed"?
Quite easily, is the answer to that. You should have noticed I said 'Without commenting on the BA cases'. It was a direct reply to his assumption that because it was an agreed process and HR were involved that it was automatically fair. So if you are saying the same thing then you are also wrong.
As for the BA cases, they may have been unfair or not. That is to be decided by others involved. If the Union lawyers (who make the decision to proceed) think they have a case then they will go forward........Until then, it's pointless stabbing in the dark...